Rockets

But it is a gotcha moment for your previous comment suggesting your "evil adversary" Richard Adwinkle had supplied the photo. Maybe with the lack of fact-checking you did before posting that comment you could get a job on The Guardian! 😉 But in all seriousness I am glad your ire is now being directed at Southwark News.....

March46 - here you go...the picture was also used in an articles in: July 2022: https://southwarknews.co.uk/area/around-south-east-london/lambeth-handed-out-22-million-of-ltn-fines-last-year/ December 2021: https://southwarknews.co.uk/news/shocking-filler-ltn-outrage-in-dulwich/ And prior to that in May 2021: https://southwarknews.co.uk/area/southwark/dulwich-demonstration-as-council-reviews-low-traffic-neighbourhood/ This is how file photos get used!

Maybe the council/s should make these based on referendum rules and get a definitive answer to whether they are supported or not. Would those happy to repeat the "a consultation is not a referendum" support a simple one person one vote definitive consultation that the council guaranteed to action the outcome. I am presuming yes because you are so confident it is only a "small minority" who oppose the way the council is going about things and you are confident the result would go your way?

March46 - nope, sorry you're wrong. Southwark News often sends reporters (especially Herbie) to Dulwich to cover stories. I have spoken to him in Dulwich Square when he was doing an article on the latest money-wasting vanity project. He had camera in hand and was offering to take pictures of those with whom he spoke to (not many did for fear of retribution and interestingly he said he has received threats after posting articles deemed critical of the council's LTN plans etc) I bet if you call Southwark News and ask them where the picture is from they will say it is a file photo taken by one of thier reporters. They'll probsbly even let you buy a copy. I reckon if you look back at their stories on LTN protests you will find the article where the original picture appeared a few years ago. You might really, really hope Richard had sent that picture in but that's not the way newspaper publishing works I am afraid. "Sends them a news piece".....send me a private message if you are keen to learn how the newspaper industry works and how stories get generated.

And that's all great and is positive for everyone but we have seen so, so, many times before that these measures are implemented without any common sense and it is interesting that he is flagging that as the u-turn on much of it happens. It is the lack of common sense that has created the "culture war" that so many supporting their implementation bang on about and once you have created that monster you'll never get people back on-side. At local, regional and national levels it is the lack of common sense that so annoys so many and is why we are where we are. LTNs, CPZs and 20mph all suffer from the same challenge - implemented in ways that didn't take the majority with them. The moment anyone dare to suggest common sense had not been used the protagonists would stoke a culture war by trying to demonise them "small minority, right-wing, taxi drivers etc etc" and instead of working with the community actively worked against them - just look at the thousands of messages posted on this forum. From day one I was saying that the lack of common sense was doing massive long-term harm to the fight against climate change as people were not being engaged and taken on the journey and so it has turned out to be. And that lies solely at the feet of those responsible for implementing them.

BBC News - Man behind Wales' 20mph limit admits mistakes https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c70j0gv5xpdo Common sense.....more of that please!

Dogstar, gig at the Academy followed by rum in the Brixtonian....now that was a night out!

It certainly used to be great but now has become prohibitively expensive for many and this has led to many people having to move out and the folks moving in are more monied than their predecessors and have wants for different things. I do feel the community buzz is gradually eroding and it's all starting to go a bit Islington...fine if that's your thing but not the area I fell in love with over the years.

March46 - nice try but no cigar. Far more likely is that the photo used is a Southwark News file photo from when they sent a reporter down to a lot of the protests some years ago. I very much doubt Richard Aldwinkle had anything to do with the selection of the image to illustrate the Southwark News article......

Sorry, can you point out where I condone the behaviour? You might struggle because I don't and I wouldn't. You're trying to deflect and distract by making things up - again! And what point are you (struggling) to make about a parent who can afford to send their children to that school....you get idiots across the whole spectrum of people. Or are you suggesting such behaviour is only expected of less wealthy people - because that is a prejudiced trope path you probably don't want to venture too far down?

Yup so let's expel the kids...that'll learn them! Head: "You may be an exemplary student but I am afraid you are being expelled" Student: "Why?" Head: "Because your parent parks badly and is an angry idiot and Dulwich Roads thinks it's a good idea and they used two exclamation marks in their tweet because they are so angry about it".

Dulwich Roads' posts are becoming more and more extreme and irrational. Their call for pupils to be expelled from schools if their parents park badly is extreme, slighlty bizarre and a weird type of justice. Such a great idea ruining a child's education and future prospects because their parents parked badly.....but this probably speaks volumes about the person posting this nonsense.

Glad you agree. Common sense has prevailed...just a shame Dulwich Roads seems to be lacking in the commonsense department.

Nonsense. They corrected the location. Nothing in that post does anything to address the rumour they created that someone died. Any rational person would have removed the first post alluding to someone being killed. But they didn't, why? They chose to leave it up.

What this "correction"....which is correcting the location....? The only person being misleading is whomever is behind the Dulwich Roads account.... Their first post is clearly designed to imply someone died which then forced the police to issue a statement that there were no fatalities - probably because of the understandable concern from parents with pupils at the school. Utterly, utterly irresponsible and quite sickening from Dulwich Roads. But they have previous as they never bother to find out the facts - just excitedly post anything and everything to try to make their point.

https://southwarknews.co.uk/area/southwark/council-investment-in-ltns-and-cyle-lanes-has-failed-as-fewer-people-walking-and-cycling-data-suggests/ It will be interesting to look at the underlying data supporting this.

Dulwich Roads have been up to it again, posting (deliberately?) misleading post to suit their agenda which actually led police to announce there was no fatality. "A Met Police spokesperson: “One male has gone to hospital for treatment; we await confirmation on his condition but no fatalities." Whomever is behind this account really needs to engage brain before posting, this is outside a school and would terrify any parent that may have seen this. They circulated incorrect and erroneous facts and did nothing to correct it - disgusting. It's almost as if they are wishing for a far more tragic outcome to suit their narrative.

Err nope...you're the only one confused....perhaps deliberately so... What is consultation? Consultation is technically any activity that gives local people a voice and an opportunity to influence important decisions. It involves listening to and learning from local people before decisions are made or priorities are set Ha ha, the only deranged ones are the ones who think the way Southwark behaves is anything other than wholly unacceptable. Deranged, blinkered and easily led! 😉 A politician's dream.

A consultation is only not a referendum when the result goes against the people running the consultation and they need an excuse for doing what they wat rather than what the respondents to the consultation wan! Plenty of occasions where the council has lauded the results of a consultation when the result goes the way they want it to!! Southwark did not mention LTNs or CPZs in ANY of their local election materials so by that measure do not have a mandate to roll them out. They were very, ahem, selective.... They are bending the rules and creating an uneven playing field to suit their agenda - I know it, you know it, everyone knows it - if it was something you didn't want you'd be up in arms as well as this is not democracy in action.

Has anyone asked who runs it yet....;-)

Favourite them on Rightmove and watch as, over the months, they get gradually reduced, switch agents (normally from a big name to some "boutique realtor" no-one has ever heard of) and then, if they do ever sell console yourselves that a fool and their money are easily parted, start moaning about the good old days of house prices and pondering why it is starting to feel like Islington whilst you enjoy an over-priced orange juice in Joe the Juice after buying something in Sweaty Betty....;-)

Unfortunately this is not the way council's work. They only ever present data that supports their agenda to get what they want. Representing the views of the community is a hollow soundbite and actually, in many areas, not part of their agenda from the outset. Ha ha...there we go again....everyone knows the "not a referendum" argument is just a weak smokescreen to try and spin away from the fact that residents have rejected their proposals - it's the pre-cursor for ignoring residents. And it is not a minority - it was the majority of people who responded to the mechanism the council initiated to gauge, and then listen to (which they are obliged to do), the thoughts of those most directly impacted by the plans they are proposing. How many times have we seen it where the council mailshots residents they, in the majority, respond saying "no thanks" and the council and their supporters then say "yeah, but, yeah, but, no...that's not a referendum". It's called moving the goalposts. And as the Local Government Association https://www.local.gov.uk/our-support/communications-and-community-engagement/resident-communications/understanding-views-2 describes consultations as this - something a long way from anything these councils have been doing: What is consultation? Consultation is technically any activity that gives local people a voice and an opportunity to influence important decisions. It involves listening to and learning from local people before decisions are made or priorities are set.

Dismissing results of a consultation on the basis of a "small subset of the actual number of residents" is a path walked by those who don't agree with the outcome. A bit like the "a consultation is not a referendum" claptrap - only ever used when the result you want isn't delivered and you need something to justify why you are ignoring the views of residents.

Given the delegation of powers from the Mayor's office to TFL over e-scooters I am very surprised no-one thought that e-bikes might need some sort of co-ordination/guidance. It is ludicrous that neighbouring councils could have different suppliers and different approaches to e-bike rollout - I know it is one of the things that the operators have complained about that a bike can be geo-fenced to a council boundary and cannot cross it. The lack of joined-up thinking is astounding and has been a big contributor to the mess there is.

I don't think anyone is asking for them to be banned - it's pretty clear that the thread is about the problems they are causing for other pavement and road users and how councils and the companies rolling them out need to get on top of this because it is clearly a big problem and I suspect the banning of e-scooters in some places is being used a trojan horse to say to the companies "get your house in order". Longer term I do think there needs to be pragmatic analysis on whether they are having a positive impact on active travel or merely replacing journeys that used to be walked - a la my unscientific child use-case example! Yes but would it not have been good for someone to try and co-ordinate at the London level for e-bikes? Seems to me from the London Councils website that everyone was left to their own devices and that is one of the reasons we have got ourselves into the mess we are in because each council did their own thing and they now want to co-ordinate which feels like bolting the door.....the challenges with e-bikes are global and not unique to any one city so why no-one thought this might happen is anyone's guess. The rental market for e-bikes is unregulated at the national level but some boroughs have agreements in place with one or more operator(s). Following a discussion at London Councils' Transport and Environment Committee, TfL, London Councils and London boroughs will now be exploring the design of one coordinated future scheme to manage dockless e-bikes and e-scooters in London, through a contract, to improve parking, while increasing the quality and sustainability of services in London.