El Presidente

I was late for work. Thanks for your cooperation.

Blah Blah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > El Presidente Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > The thing with housing is that people always > > support it being built in principle, but when > in > > practice a proposal is put forward they these > > principles are easily abandoned. > > This is not true. What is to be found though are > plenty of objections of the type of housing being > built. London needs a mix of tenure, from social > to luxury and it needs strong communities too. > These are being destroyed by the rush to profit > from the boom, the result being a social cleansing > of whole areas of the capital. This a classic example of muddled, leftist trope. If London 'needs a mix of tenure' why are you opposing it? Peckham has lots of social housing and virtually no 'luxury' housing.

The thing with housing is that people always support it being built in principle, but when in practice a proposal is put forward they these principles are easily abandoned. You don't get the hundreds of thousands of homes this city needs by objecting because of some middle class sentimentalism about Peckham's gritty allure.

It's great that people want to build luxury flats in Peckham. Good luck to them.

ratty Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Why should private sector salaries be higher? I > would prefer it if my public services were run by > the best minds and leaders, not the rejects. Because public service is an end in itself.

Agree Henry. Plus this is public service. Salaries should be lower than the private sector.

I think ?120k for the CEO is reasonable. ?100k for a director. These salaries are way out of step.

According to FOI investigation in Mail today this is the pay of our top council employees ?198,295 E Kelly Chief Executive ?169,906 Dr R Wallis Director of Public Health ?162,489 D Whitfield Strategic Director of Finance and Corporate Services ?155,945 G Scott Strategic Director of Housing and Community Services ?154,171 D Collins Strategic Director of Environment and Leisure So the person in charge of Environment and Leisure at Southwark Council is paid more than the PM. Hmmm....

A party?! you couldn't make it up. Can't pick up my stinking, overflowing vermin attracting rubbish more than once a fortnight but boozy parties to celebrate something no one in the real world cares about - no problemo!!

it's an exercise in wooly minded wishful thinking that confuses everyone. Either make it the limit and enforce it or don't bother. another waste of time and our money by the council.

what a waste of our council tax! Shoddy job that should have been done in a month not nearly half a year. And in the end, almost completely pointless. What a great council we have.

You're both really annoying.

the last time i saw these workmen doing anything was when they were standing around watching two blokes fighting in Northcross road. That seemed to pull them away from their well worn seats in the local cafe...

buddug Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Call me a conspiracy theorist, but it's strange it > should be happening now, when the voting for > Labour leader is still open. Southwark is after > all Blairite New Labour and they are getting > desperate.. This is so dumb

DaveR Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Reflecting the above, I think its important to > distinguish between the development of the site > per se, which seems to me to be an obviously good > thing, and the specific proposed development, > which people might object to. The impact on > current businesses is a red herring in planning > terms. It would be if there was an alternative proposal floating around. Not seen many though...

oh yeah. much better to have a row of empty shops covered in graffiti. That really fits with the area....

these works are quite substantial yet there doesnt seem to be any clear explanation of what they are actually doing anywhere. You could definitely interpret them as closing off northcross road from LL permanently, but i assume this is wrong because surely they would have consulted on that?

Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Oliver Bonas, White Stuff, Gourmet Burger, Franco > Manca, Sainburys Local, Cafe Nero. All relatively > recent IMO. Not loads, but not negligible either. > Seems to me like a slow, gradual change. > > Also not sure why chains taking over non-retail > premises should be exempt from the equation. It > still affects the chain-vs-independent balance. of these only franco manca is actually recent. Unless you have an intergalactic concept of time and space that is.

Agree. Excellent pasta but just a bit too expensive.

This cinema is just great. Great location, great seats, great look, great movies (most of the time...), great coffee and great snacks. And great loos too. That anyone can moan about this place defies logic.

Sledgehammer. Nut. Lol.

what is unreasonable about asking for descriptions of a group of people who have been aggressively abusing women in a public place?

If as described, these little turds should have got more than a metaphorical clip round the ear. Disgraceful bullying and abuse. They are 12 not 5. What did they look like?

was wondering about this yesterday too. Nothing happening but significant disruption.

this pub is in a terrible location and will always fail