Marmora Man

R&A Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > This is fantastic news - many thanks indeed > > Just a quick question, and sorry if this is a > stupid one, but has the funding been guaranteed > i.e. already in Southwark council's bank a/c or is > there a chance that a new government could reverse > this decision? > > Thanks As it's Gordon Brown's money it has probably already been accounted for at least twice over and is no longer in any bank account anywhere.

And a couple of more general points. Peckham Rose - you know I yield to no one in my atheism - and I can assure you, and everyone, that Andy Stranack does not wear his religious interest on his sleeve or use it to publicly or privately justify his political stance. He does however live up to the standard he has set himself of living a "giving life" - which may derive from religious belief but can equally be a rational humanist response to the experiences he has had. Whatever the initial driver I would argue it has been a brave step, to move outside of the material comforts of life, that few would take - no matter how strong their desire to help others. LuLu 2 - Andy is not advocating christian / charity intervention in place of big government - but he is arguing, from personal experience, that big government has failed and that other options, ideally locally based and bottom up initiatives are more likely to make a successful difference. I cannot comment on your other assumptions - except to say that Andy has lived in church funded properties for the last 10 years - usually sharing with 4 or 5 others. I don't see how this can be taken as a failing or as taking advantage?

I don't recognise your description of Conservatives as vile, self serving and wealth seeking. Your response reads as a rant rather than a balanced political argument. I'm a Conservative and believe in the proper provision of health and social care. I don't happen to believe that centralised, monolithic bureaucracies are the best way to deliver effective services but I recognise the need and the benefits of having a decent healthcare system and social care. I also work in healthcare, I have seen the negative impact of government interference on effective provision of healthcare - I am certain that society can do better and that conservative policies would free up individuals to do more. It would seem that you don't believe in the possibility change at an individual or group level - which is both a disappointing and limiting view of human nature. Your view of Conservative Policies is incredibly skewed and prejudiced, not to say plain wrong - but even it were a fair description of policies up to 1997 surely it's sensible to consider the possibility of change, genuine concern and commitment on the part of the Conservative Party? I would recommend listening to Andy Stranack, reading the various policies being put forward by the Centre for Social Justice, review the outcomes of current Government policies over the last 12 years and compare.

Ted Max Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > MarmoraMan, you've never really squared this > circle of appealing for reasoned debate about the > issues, and then pushing Stranack's background at > us versus privileged Harman. Do we play > personality and class politics or not? In this case I believe in the man and am not looking at the wider General Election and policy debate. I simply consider him to be, potentially, a far better constituency MP for Camberwell & Peckham than the Right Honorable Harriet Harman QC. Not a class thing - more about Andy possessing real, direct experience of poverty & deprivation and thus realistic ideas for improvement, rather some lofty, ideological and distant commitment to help that is HH's way. I am more than happy to debate wider conservative policies and ideas on a different thread > That notwithstanding, I asked a question a long > time ago which I'm still interested in. What would > be a decent result for Stranack? That question in > full here. A good result would be to grow the conservative share - realistically he's unlikely to win - but if he manages to raise the profile of conservative policies in Camberwell & Peckham that would be good. If he can help raise the level of debate about these polices beyond the knee jerk "Tories bad, Left good" that would also help. I believe it is possible to up the share of the vote toward 20%+ and even to 25% - I think the labour vote will, to a great extent, remain at home, that the Lib Dem vote will flatline and that, with vigorous campaigning Andy can lift the conservative vote to a higher plain. Secretly we'd love to see a "Harman Moment" to rival the Portillo Moment of 1997 - but that's probably the stuff of dreams, particularly as the Association's fund's are limited to what we as a group can generate, we have no access to outside funding nor, as yet, any generous donors. The Constituency association all live in the constituency - me in my own home at the southern end in Marmora Road, others their own homes in Choumert Road or Camberwell Grove, others in social housing on different estates, some in rented and shared flats, and others dotted around but everyone, including Andy Stranack are within the constituency. We have a mixed make up - gay & straight, men & women, recent immigrants & long term residents, black, brown & white, professional & blue collar, ex CND & ex military. The Lib Dems are fairly disorganised at Parliamentary level - tho' they have a fairly strong council campaigning base.

ratty Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > not the tory....... Deep analysis there ratty - how about answering the question posed? Compare and contrast with our sitting MP - Harriet Harman and ask yourself who is the better person and more attuned to representing an inner city constituency.

Andy Stranack - featured in the Guardian, picked up for the Spectator and photographed for Care International for their Stand up Take Action Campaign. Compare and contrast with our sitting MP - Harriet Harman and ask yourself who is the better person and more attuned to representing an inner city constituency.

Reports of my demise have been exaggerated (apols Mark Twain). I am bewildered, but secretly chuffed, by the compliments from readers. However ????? has it right - overall I felt the level and quality of debate had deteriorated. A swift glance at current contributions does little to change my mind. I may glance at EDF occasionally in the future but I've weaned myself from it's dangerously addictive allure and have learnt to "just say no".

The m ain aim of political leaflets is to encourage people to contact the local party association - then once you're on the database you can be invited to talks, fundraisers, be asked to deliver further leaflets. At a local level most political parties are broke - relying on coffee mornings, bring & buy stalls, raffles and the like. The more members they have the more money they can generate and the more activists they can attract to canvas come elections. There are very few "walk ins".

Overhanging trees on Marmora Road (No. 4 I think - almost derelict house) and on Forest Hill Road opposite Old Camberwell Cemetery

SeanMacGabhann Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Did she deliberately break the law or was it a > technical oversight? > > Putting a process in place to vet every single > employee for immigration status is one thing - but > the country would grind to a halt if those checks > were run every single time. And I'm not that > bothered about it anyway - I bet a lot if not most > of the cleaners in a lot of Dulwich homes aren't > strictly above board. Is she differenet because > she is responsible? Depends wether such checks are > a sop to a rabid press or not - I really don't see > her as some villain, She didn't break or disregard > the law - a minor step in a process was overlooked > - she is holding her hands up and accepting the > punishment. She put the law in place by leading it through Parliament. She has created a law that, as she has discovered, is difficult to follow. Just how many people were aware of all the additional regulation the law created? Clearly not Baroness Scotland. She should resign - not for failing to obey the regulations but for failing to think clearly about legislation and introducing an almost unworkable law. All too often governments, and this Labour government has been by far the worst offender, believe that by simply passing a law behaviour will change. Wrong! Laws seldom change anything - changing behaviour requires more coherent thinking and a raft of different actions.

Seen at a wedding recently And the "guests" at this top table were all recognisable caricatures of the wedding party

A great series - Ponting was magnanimous in defeat. Both sides evenly matched but, as Strauss said "when England were bad they were very bad, but when they were good - they were good enough". NOw summer may end and the b****y football may commence.

The Film Begins Last night was good fun. Did certainly get cold but we'd taken rugs for everyone and kept warm. Crowd enjoyed themselves and the film. They were taking ideas for next year's films - my vote was for Casablanca.

Sounds good - will bring appropriate clothing

Did anyone go to this last week? How was it? The idea of sitting on a warm summer's evening sipping wine and watching a classic Audrey Hepburn movie sounded great. I was away - but am going on Saturday 22nd with two teeage children to watch Back to the Future - can anyone answer the questions posed above? Are seats allowed?

Andy Stranack - the Conservative PPC for the Camberwell & Peckham constituency has started his campaign to win the seat at the next General Election. His You Tube Video is worth 5 minutes of your time. NOTE: Andy has also organised two events for the autumn: 1. Ian Duncan Smith will give a talk and answer questions on his "Broken Britain" theme on Tuesday 22 September at 7.30pm at the All Saints Church Hall - drinks and buffet supper provided. Tickets ?10.00 - all welcome. 2. Damien Green will be talking about his experiences and thoughts on immigration on 27th October. More details available at the Ian Duncan Smith event.

Not a good outing at Headingly - but us long time England supporters have been thru' this so many times before. I'm betting that the team will lose Bopara to be replaced by, in order of likelihood - Trott, Key, Shah. Ramprakash & Trescothick are not likely bets, despite the chatter. No other batting changes - tho' Bell remains flaky, only I can't see an obvious replacement. Harmison will have his radar retuned by playing county cricket and if they opt for a second spinner for the Oval we'll see Monty back - and lose either Harmison or Anderson (if he really does have some kind of fitness / illness issue). Personally I'd drop Harmison, Anderson would be playing for the future - Harmison as one last fling. PS: I'm still interested in any Oval tickets going spare??

Switch off lights and see the stars.

A further question - are folding seats allowed / customary or frowned upon? Or should we all plan to sit on rugs & cushions (my aged limbs prefer a seat, tho' I recognise that might obscure others views).

The essence is not to be the "top dog" a la Steve T but to engage and get the crowd on your side thus ensuring that public opinion makes clear to the "wrong doer" that the action is socially unacceptable.

fjd - quite right - when describing numbers one should always use Zero no Oh.

I personally wouldn't get a tattoo - tho' came close once on a drunken 21st run ashore in Singapore. I have seen some brilliant tattoos on sailors - including the classic and very rare foxhunt - starting on the upper chest with horses, huntsmen and hounds going over one shoulder and down onto the back, which is tattooed as an English country scene with the fox disappearing into the only available cover - the bum crack.

Nashoi, I was using the GUiliani ideas as an example - I think the principle of "look after the small irritating things and larger irritating things become fewer" still stands.

I think Moos point is well made - like the "broken window" theory put in place by Mayor Guiliani in New York. Look after the small time crime and vandalism to prevent the area / society from degenerating further. Having solved (?) the smaller problems areas / society starts to move in a more positive direction.

MP - while Santerme is correct that the military do not involve themselves in politics the Chief of the Defence Staff and his service chiefs (Army, Navy & Air Force) will want to know and understand the rationale for the military action and, on occasions if it is not clear, be assured that it is legal. I understand that the last time this occurred was prior to Iraq 2 - when the then Chief Of Defence Staff asked for legal assurance, which resulted in the legal stitch up that will be reviewed in the course of the Iraq enquuiry.