Maurice

Ah thanks Sean for taking my side on this. Anyone else agree with us the Conservatives would've been treated differently on this board?

I can assure you if the Conservatives were the worst offenders you'd all sing a different tune.

Ah attack the source if you've no defence. I think it says quite a lot actually.

I read today the Green Party Headquarters is the least energy efficient of all. Well done!

You did indeed - and I've since paid you back about 20 fold (probably more). I'd say it was a very wise investment. Well done!

My experience in such matters has taught me often our micro view of something pails a bit when seen in the macro. It doesn't lessen the impact on our daily experience, but seen as a whole, there is solid reasoning for proposing such changes. Consultation is about ensuring the macro view isn't missing something important seen by those of us on the ground, as it were. I hope the service is retained - even expanded. But as much as we can blame Network Rail for not seeing our view, they can probably make a very solid argument (without using words like 'stupid') that the greater good will be served.

No Chav. I'm more than happy to have funded your education, children and now subsidise your home and daily live, which allows you to sit and post here with brilliant insight all the day long. See? I can live in others shoes with a bit of empathy. If I were horrible, I'd demand you visit the job centre every once in a blue moon or actually train as a lawyer.

I'm all for pointing out the incompetence of Gov't and similar. But Frisco, can you just clarify, you believe Network Rail is doing this just because it is bored and wants to deal misery? Honestly. You believe there is absolutely no rational thought devoted to this? I don't disagree but it just seems a bit farfetched.

I would absolutely agree Bob and Frisco. They must certainly are. And it is not my fault.

I love Chav's clever way of describing anti-social behaviour of the working classes at its very worst - then blaming it all on the middle classes and excusing those who misbehave.

I've no care either way actually. But do believe 'mighty roar' had a valid point earlier that no one has addressed.

And your blind acceptance of 'BARA bad' is as we expected it would be Chav.

Ko it takes a top man to admit such a mistake. Kudos. I think anyone being faire handed would read this post and realise BARA has responded sensibly and with great professionalism. The scaremongering either way has come from other sources. I've no idea who BARA are but salute their (no doubt all volunteer) efforts to bring an important issue before the entire community for conversation and hold public bodies up to high scrutiny. Those throwing grenades from the sidelines and supporting the medical chain profiteering off the vunerable aren't worth acknowledging.

Answers on a post card please. None of this flash in the pan whizzy stuff.

For my sins I had to attend a charasmatic circus once. Can you tell me where there is one causing issues locally that is predominately white or non-black? Perhaps that would give Southwark a broader issue. Times and addresses of such churches causing havoc please. I will write today and complain. I'm familiar with the Catholics. They are many things but hardly loud.

I do not have a problem myself. But as clearly explained, it is a huge problem in South London. Trying to resolve it has already led, and will lead, to cries of racism. I'm merely stating that. And inevitably, the people who complain defend themselves with similar arguments to yours. Leaving the Council in a pickle. They've even formed a task force and can't figure a way to resolve it. As I said, I'm only playing 'devil's advocate' (ahem) to explain if you take matters further, you could be branded with a red 'R' on your chest. It is a bit ironic that I'm being branded a racist but I'm not the one complaining about black churches. People here will get their back's up and say they aren't either, they are complaining about loud churches. But those churches (here) are all black. That will lead to some friction. It already has.

I am not anti-black. I'm trying to point out that pursuing your claim against this church will likely result in you being lablled anti-black. Be careful. It's a real problem and the facts I detialed are why nothing is being done about it.

And name calling is a way not to deal with facts.

Fact: lots of people across the region have lots of problems with loud and anti-social (parking, litter, etc) churches Fact: all those churches are african congregations. Not some, all. Fact: they council can't cope. What to do? Crack down? Fact: if they do, it will be considered discrimination because (see fact 2) all of them are african. So I would suggest it is both here and there. You have a similar problem to many: african churches are loud and anti-social. It won't sit well for conflicted liberal types to admit such, so they'll construe arguments that make it appear otherwise. But thems the facts.

Macro you should first call the noise team when it gets bad and file a complaint. It is the easiest way, assuming they are violating noise laws. I think Sunday morning, the earlier the better, is your best hope to get them out. Let's not evade the race issue here. These are African churches everyone is talking about. I say this because, as I noted earlier, it is a very sensitive topic with the Council right now. You may find it difficult to get action. It always amuses me how the most liberal can't quite bring themselves to admit they are complaining about a race-based issue. All who are upset should be upfront: black churches are too loud.

No one addressed my original point that was confirmed by the bloke from Network Rail. Denmark Hill seems to have a poor case in the 'competition' to secure the very limited spaces on offer at London Bridge. I don't think the emotive arguments to date can overcome that obstacle. Especially Alan's true argument, which is simply 'I don't use Denmark Hill myself but limited service will impact on my house price'. Then again, it may be a winning argument for the Syringe palava...

Down in Brighton a Council took action against similar for same noise laws governing clubs. They were fined. In Southwark, they've formed a task force for this according to my dear friend who works in 'regeneration' (I constantly rib him for the title). They have churches violating planning laws and noise issues but they have to walk softly so as not to upset the peace. They try and find them alternative space instead of cracking the whip.

I agree about Camberwell but can you source where Jenny has said she lives in East Dulwich?

Ah so she does live in The Grove. For ease call it East Dulwich. We like that. Jenny did do her bit for the Camberwell Baths so she's already paid her dues.

Out of the 'more than slightly dodgy bit of Camberwell'. Oh my. What they must thing of the rest of it! I'm inclined to agree. Another one bites the proverbial dust.