Earl Aelfheah

Sazzle30 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Just popped into neighbourhood vets, they have > confirmed they are NOT closing their practice near > Barry road. The HSBC site is in addition to the > original. > > This info came from their receptionist They told me the exact opposite. Confirmed that the Barry Road practice is closing.

I was looking around for my phone the other days, starting to get annoyed that I couldn't see it - only to realise it in my hand.

Really sorry to hear about that Andrew. Sounds terrifying. Hope you're getting the necessary support and that the shits who did this get caught soon.

jimlad48 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The cost of Southwark parking permits have gone up > ?5 in about 10 years. > > These sort of consultations never make everyone > happy, but in the case of a couple of the streets > that wanted to be left out, then the salutary tale > I'd offer is that the council did just this back > in 2012 when it last consulted the toastrack area. > There was a split so they created a split CPZ, > which in turn resulted in everyone not wanting to > pay parking their cars a few streets over, and at > the same time increased pressure happened when all > the commuters started parking there too. Demands > for a new consultation quickly began, and by the > time this one came about all the streets that were > most anti last time were now leading the way to > see a CPZ in place. > > I can see why the Council is keen to avoid this > happening again, particularly for only a couple of > streets which voted no when its experience is that > these will quickly become parking magnets, and > will almost certainly ask for one quickly after. > Its merely predicting the inevitable result and > bringing it into play. > > I for one welcome the peace and quiet that will > begin, will look forward to not being stalked by > commuter drivers, the end of arguments and > violence and constant cars driving dangerously to > race for a space, and look forward to being in a > street that is much quieter again. At roughly > ?2.40 a week, thats a bargain. This is exactly the problem with CPZs. They just displace traffic onto (usually a smaller number of) streets just outside the area. So they cause more acute problems in surrounding streets. I don't see it as so community minded myself.

Anna Soubry, suggesting that many MPs are afraid to speak out against Brexit: ?People are not prepared, with a few exceptions, to put their head above the parapet, for fear they will be shot down by the four newspapers that appear to be running the country,? she said, referring to the Sun, Daily Mail, the Daily Telegraph and the Daily Express. ?People have gone to ground. Where?s the voice of business?? Read this in the FT and thought it was spot on. Despite half the country voting to remain, there seems to be very little opposition to May's apparent course of 'hard brexit'.

... except for their neighbours just outside the zone

TheCat Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > M&S at King College Hospital have advised > customers to see their local off-licence for minor > shops, and to only visit Kings College M&S for > major shops, where you will be served within 4 > hours. As always, If it is a real emergency shop, > please dial Ocado. Local off-licences aren't seeing new customers at the moment though.

What everyone has already said - glad you're OK. Sending you good vibes over the interweb ~~vibes~~

Too many cats, tits and dodgy eggs

M&SNHS

This isn't just a hospital, it's an M&S hospital.

KidKruger Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Pedantry. > > > > > > > (Sorry. Just had to) I'll line them up, you knock 'em down. :-)

I'm a 5 star passenger. At last something I excel at.

There is a difference between their 'foodhall' (which is effectively a supermarket) and their 'simply food' establishments (which is effectively a sandwich shop). The latter makes perfect sense in a hospital where people need to grab something to eat / drink.

The idea that the UK will 'do regulation' better than the EU is pretty dubious imo. Sometimes I'm sure we will (it would be hard not to do better policy than in the example of CAP), but occasionally we'll do it worse, or no differently. We will still have to sell into overseas markets and so largely, I suspect many regulations, including food regulations, will remain the same. All the stuff about bendy bananas and what constitutes free range etc is petty stuff, beloved of tabloid newspapers, but largely misreported and / or an irrelevance. The fact that people can get so enraged by these stories, amazes me.

Blimey, astonishing amount of pedentry on this thread

I'm just waiting for him To be given an afternoon slot on LBC.

red devil Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I read somewhere that EU immigration accounts for > less than half of total immigration to the UK. If > immigration was such a big deal to this > government, in theory they could reduce it > significantly without leaving the EU. But that > wouldn't have won the referendum. Extreme > Brexiteers like Gove and Fox wanted to leave the > EU at any cost, hence they were happy to play the > immigration card for all it was worth... The argument that we were being prevented from bringing immigration down to 'the tens of thousands' because of EU immigration, completely ignores the fact that immigration from outside the EU is well above that level. The truth is that we can't bring immigration down that far because it would be wreckless and would have a major economic impact. Brexiteers were deliberately misleading about this IMO. The fact is that immigration is unlikely to drop much as a result of Brexit. As for people who claim that Brexit wasn't about immigration - you need only look at the Leave campaign's change of focus and track it against their polling numbers. Leave were behind Remain until they decided to focus relentlessly on immigration is the later stages of the campaign. Conflating the two issues and speaking to people's fears on immigration is what won it for them.

There needs to be a massive investment in northern cities.

Quids, your obsession with some sort of tabloid caricature of 'the left' (vaguely defined and used as a pejorative, capable of shrinking or expanding as necessary to encompass anyone with views at odds with your own), is just a way of avoiding engaging in reasoned debate. Add in constant whataboutery, insults disguised as analysis and the use of strawman arguments and I wonder whether youre really only interested in talking to yourself.

jimlad48 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > rahrahrah Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > The CPZ won't calm traffic, it may well have > the > > opposite effect. > > Camberwell Grove reopening will improve things. > > > Genuinely curious - why do you think reducing the > number of vehicles on the streets by about 60%, > and removing all the daily commuters fighting for > spaces make it busier for traffic? Because fewer parked vehicles generally means higher average speeds and more 'rat running'.

???? Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > rahrahrah Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > > This is fine - but do you or would you willingly > accept that many people who say vote Tory do > exactly the same thing? Because they do - but most > people from the left are completely unwilling to > accept this. Tories are all selfish, > self-interested, not believing in society etc Errr, yes. Where did I say otherwise? I was responding to the suggestion that people only vote in their narrow self interest and pointing out one obvious example where that's not the case - of the wealthy person voting for a party that would generally raise taxes on them. I could easily have used another, perhaps a less affluent person voting against redistributive policies, but thought the former more interesting because it's often, strangely portrayed as dishonest or unprincipled somehow.

Again (and at risk of being accused of 'virtue signalling') - I genuinely vote (or at least consciously I do - I'm sure there are all kind of bias' that come into it) for the policies I think are best for the country and the society I want to live in. I think it's not unusual to be honest (hence the notion of 'Champagne Socialists' - which while meant as a pejorative, could also be seen as quite a noble position).

Refurb

The CPZ won't calm traffic, it may well have the opposite effect. Camberwell Grove reopening will improve things.