Earl Aelfheah

Is this what you wanted Mr Falkes: http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRkEKdsE8eRn8GuhHdT51tu692XcLKI5N4vUhkXAq5yrZWEeu5w

You say that Guy Falkes was a great citizen, but what did he ever do for the chinchillas?

My familly all sleep in the car, engine running... just in case.

If you read through this forum, it is clear that there are a significant number of people with a real resentment, general dislike and intollerance of children. I go to the pubs in the evenings and don't see them full of children. During the day, it's perfectly reasonable for famillies getting something to eat, or maybe having a drink to take their children along. Most of the pubs round here are not traditional old man boozers, they are gastro pubs / cafes. They are set up for famillies and low and behold, they attract famillies. If the pubs were full of toddlers at night that would be a problem, but they are not. If you want an old school boozer, try the CPT or the Castle. The Victorian 'seen and not heard' attitude is pathetic.

This thread is fairly indicative of a wider problem with how children are viewed in our society. Check out this report by Barandos.

Business as usual then. Would be more notable / post worthy if the trains were running at the weekend.

The only way to make those struggling to park outside their houses happy, would be to provide them with an allocated space. Well you don?t own the street outside your house, It is not private property. This is fundamentally the problem with a CPZ- You pay for a permit and then struggle to find a parking spot anyway. It is not going to satisfy anyone. What it will do eventually, is result in everyone having to pay for the privilege of parking their car on the street. As others have pointed out, CPZs once introduced, have a way of expanding until entire areas are covered, which has a negative impact on local businesses.

Just too, too sad and depressing. Something has to be done to tackle our gang problem. But what? I just hope that someone has an answer, because I cannot even begin to comprehend the mentality of these criminals.

Isn't this thread in the wrong section. Just saying. Any more info on the home furnishings store? Are we talking Mrs Robinson style boutiuqiness? Or Dfs?

I for one am delighted to see the back of the bendy buses. They were an absolute menace on narrow london streets.

The one in shepherds bush is called Westfield London.

I wonder how much this little bit of vandalism cost?

Plough lane (the short and very picturesque little alley next to the plough pub has had two 20 miles an hour signs put up at it's entrance. In addition there is a large stark white 20 painted on the road surface itself. Visually it is quite striking for both it's ugliness and absurdity. You couldn't actually accelerate up to 20 using the full length of the road from one end to the other. What is this all about? Is it meant to be some kind of ironic street art?

Southwark council do love a speed bump.

Otta Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > We don't really fund this stuff. Council Tax is > not the council's only income, and at times like > this, when SEN kids are no longer getting > transport to school (for example), I think we > should be pretty grateful that some money has been > found for play areas! > > Sometimes it's like people think Southwark Council > starts and ends with (the relatively wealthy) East > Peckham isn't a relatively wealthy area, not that this is particularly relavent. One shouldn't be grateful simply because money is being spent, when it may not be getting spent wisely. Southwark council is funded by the taxpayer, So yes it is our money being spent.

My 5 month old daughter will not sleep unless being held. As soon as she's put down she starts crying. Have tried leaving her to cry (in the absence of any alternative). She'll howl for 2 hours at which point I have to give in. During the day she'll only sleep for 20 min at a time. I don't know anyone whos baby completely refuses any sleep in this way. Please tell me it's not just us.

I'm sorry you've had these issues. In my experience, if they're council tennants then the Southwark antisocial behaviour unit may be able to help. If it's private or housing association then there is very little accountability. Good luck.

For the record I think they're an eyesore.

By the way, this isn't about ingratitude for the facilities we are 'gifted' by the council. We fund this stuff and as long as the money is being spent, it should be spent thoughtfully.

I really don't like the oversized metal frame on the swing. It's a real eyesore and supports a single, very small swing (compared to the usual ones made to this design). The random poles are odd, especially the larger of them and enough has already been said about the water feature and the lack of seating and fencing. Why didn't the council use the money to extend / improve the exiting play area?

Unless a school is so vast that it never turns anyone away, you have to have some way of deciding admissions. Sending kids to their nearest school is just about the fairest, most inclusive way of doing it IMO. If this were the policy across the city, then schools would be a focus for the local community, reflective of that community and we could drop all the false rhetoric about choice. People with energy, drive and time, may be more inclined to direct some of it into improving their local school, rather than focussing on getting their ?first choice? and playing the admissions game. It would be more sustainable (in terms of environment and health), with presumably more children walking to school rather than being driven to the faith school (for example) a couple of miles away. As for the ?those with money would move so this makes it a selective admissions policy' argument - When people move they consider a whole number of factors and schooling is only one of them. In a city such as London, where rich and poor often live alongside each other, such a policy only means a school which reflects the city?s diversity, or at least that of the local area. To suggest that it makes the school selective when compared to the alternatives, is pretty weak.

Hi JMT. If you could let me know exactly where it is that would be great.

ClaireinSE22 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Not exactly,....the new play area has actually > reduced the space available to the One O'Clock > Club I really don't 'get' the new play area that has been built just outside the 1 O'clock club premises. It consists of a massive (and ugly) metal frame supports a single, very small swing. Some random poles, the larger of which no child could actually climb on to and 'wobble boards' (which are OK I guess) and from memory, that's pretty much it. It's one of the worst thought out play areas I've seen. Why didn't the council use the money to extend / improve the exiting play area?

@James Barber - Clearly it takes a long time to get a school built. However, as toast points out, there is going to be a severe shortage of secondary school places in the coming years. ED has seen increasing numbers of young families moving to the area and there is already a shortage of primary school places. The flattened part of the hospital wing is a publicly owned, brown field site that has been left undeveloped and unproductive (extremely wastefully) for some considerable time. If you start from the premise that there is a need to expand the number of secondary school places for the future, then in identifying a potential site it seems a natural contender. In terms of the model ? well it would depend on the level of interest, the skills of those willing to get involved, and the amount of time they were able / willing to commit. It might simply mean teaming up with an existing provider, or even working with the LEA. Out of interest, is future secondary school provision in the area an issue that the council is looking at?

There's a free school opening in Camberwell as I understand it, so not sure that Southwark would (or could) actually block it.