Earl Aelfheah

I'm surprised these stores are still viable, what with online delivery services. I haven't been to a supermarket for years - can't be the only one.

They're looking to redevelop that building anyway, extending it and putting flats at the back, so the mural may not be there for long.

twinhunters Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > My friend had same brand new car seat still in box > as she?s pregnant, police told her to wrap keys in > silver foil until she gets pouch recommended above > . Mine was also done twice last year :( . Surely the car manufacturers have some liability for this? The keyless locking system is clearly not fit for purpose.

seenbeen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Heber is the same- all through the holiday > periods, every weekend, all night- lights left on, > windows left open. There is also now a 'double lamppost' outside the school. Literally two streetlights less a foot from each other, which are also opposite two illuminated street signs. The council said one of the lampposts was going to be removed, but there is little sign of it happening two months on. Opposite the school it's permaday.

I haven't followed the story closely, but as I understand it: Andrew was close friends with Epstein and spent a lot of time with him at his various properties / on his yacht, where young girls (we are told), were a bit of a fixture. Many of these girls were coerced / controlled by Epstein and at least one says she was paid to have sex with Andrew whilst she was still a teenager. Andrew defended Epstein despite clear evidence of his crimes. Andrew's attempts to address questions about his own behaviour left a strong impression in the minds of many that he had things to hide. This is why some people don't necessarily want to be associated with Andrew. Andrew has not been charged with anything, but he has been asked to retreat from the limelight as a result of all this. It seems pretty fair enough to me. He seems to be under less sustained pressure than Meghan Markle, whose main 'crime' seems to be the fact that she is mixed race and has the temerity to come from the US.

Everyone's a critic

rollflick Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Other tremendous examples mentioned like Barcelona > or indeed closer to home in London did not take > this bizarre approach of residents mini-referenda > on each traffic restriction that Southwark seems > increasing driven towards. It's a silly way to > design area wide traffic measures that won't > deliver the radical changes we need to breathe > clean air or enable 8-80 year olds to feel safe on > foot or cycling. Plus without holistic area > measures like emissions based CPZs, you risk > ending up with more pollution on through roads. I couldn't agree more with this. Why don't Southwark come up with a radical, area wide plan? Create a low traffic neighbourhood.

prit Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I don't understand why they don't widen their > front gates and park the coaches on that big > semi-circular drive they have. They don't want fumes and congestion inside the gates, effecting all the fee payers. No, better leave to gift that to local residents as part of their charity work.

PM the people whose posts you're referring to. They may be able to elaborate.

Give them a break, they're working for a charity, charging huge fees to help advantaged children.

Monkey Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Worldwiser, the current arrangements in Southwark > are designed to cream off the top pupils and > exclude the children of chaotic families. Nothing > else. It?s a disgrace. ^this

pk Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > hpsaucey Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > pk Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > But as rahrahrah says, the simpler the > > better. > > > I don?t agree You think the more complex the system the better?

That's how it used to work for most. The introduciton of fake 'choice' has done nothing to make the system fairer, it's just wasted a lot of energy and increase anxiety for all involved.

It's possible Johnson's government may win a large majority, but Johnson himself lose his seat.

No system is perfect. But the simpler it is the better. The more complex you make it, the more you create opportunities for (primarily those with resources) to game the system.

Don't much like Corbyn, but Johnson is even worse.

I like it.

The whole system is too complicated and frankly, then more complicated it is the more it tends to advantage those with the resources to navigate that complexity. Why not just have a simple system of kids going to their closest / neighbourhood school and then put all that wasted time and energy into making each school the best it can possibly be?

Encouraging electric cars over petrol or diesel ones is good. But discouraging car use generally is better.

I wholehartedly support the installation of more charging points. I just think they should be distributed more widely / across different streets where possible, where the demand is (rather than in banks away from people's houses). If it's a private enterprise however, then I guess it's up to them. I can't imagine many people are going to park too far from their house though, so seems like a weird approach.

Sue Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > rahrahrah Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > When are the council going to properly > > pedestrianise North Cross Road? Would be great > > with some street furniture and planting etc. > > > Well, the people who live there may not be too > happy about that .... > > Nor may the shops and restaurants which need > deliveries ..... That is a manifesto for never reducing car use anywhere and is why we need bold leadership. Look at what they have done in Barcelona with the introduction of 'mega blocks'. It was vociferously opposed by residents and businesses before it was brought in. It's now almost universally approved of.

intexasatthe moment Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I think the point being missed is that if you have > views on this subject ,as well as debating them on > the EDF,if you want them considered by S'wark you > need to post them on here > https://ohs-dulwich.co.uk/road-safety-hotspot/53?m > ap=true I don't think North Cross road is in the highlighted area.

When are the council going to properly pedestrianise North Cross Road? Would be great with some street furniture and planting etc.

I walk that way regularly and am yet to see any of them in use. Glad that they're part of a private scheme and not tax payer funded (i would hope council ones would be more sensibly distributed).

fishbiscuits Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The story about the potty in the shop has been > told a few times before (and I actually think the > perpetrator might be a friend of a friend sort of > thing). > > But let's not start pretending that this sort of > behavior is the norm when it obviously isn't - > I've never personally witnessed a child peeing in > the middle of a shop, or having a nappy changed on > a restaurant table, etc. Most parents are > admittedly pretty clueless, especially with their > first kid, but they're usually trying their best > and I don't see the point in dwelling on the worst > examples of ineptitude and guilelessness in order > to push some sort of anti child/parent agenda. ^this