malumbu

Good reference to climate change denial. This surely also applies to many motorists who will either pretend that climate change doesn't exist, or don't consider that they have a part to play, and continue their usual behaviour, I know that many of you active on this thread don't drive, or rarely drive; I'm referring to the majority of motorists.

Wow, Rocks, with getting on for almost 8000 people posting on this thread you have managed to expose the hypocrisy of many opposed to LTNs. Firstly, on the question of how to get people out of their cars, you look to the utopian world of road user charging, better public transport, improved road infrastructure, and segregated cycle routes. I agree with the first three but all road users should be better prepared to share space - a separate thread. Segregated cycle routes just reinforce the view of many that motorised road transport takes precedence. But whilst we wait for this to happen what are the hard measures that should be taken to reduce motorisd traffic? And even when we get there how do we drag those who still fail to see the benefits to get out of their cars?? But then to say that the Southwark restrictions on side roads entering the South Circ are irrelevant to the thread takes the biscuit. Many are saying clean air for everyone. Yet when I point out restrictions that mean more pollution past a primary school you infer that this does not matter... Anyway, not quite an olive branch but you are engaging with my points, and I expect that most posting on this thread are not entitled monists and many will not own cars. I've never posted about the details of this and other LTNs, just the praecipe of having hard measures to deter some journeys.

OK Rocks, here's another question. Stopping vehicles turning right into and out of the South Circ on the junctions with Wood Vale and with Underhill increased traffic flows on Honor Oak Road, including passing a primary school, Fairlawn. Should Southwark reinstate those restricted turns, and what would you say to the citizens of Wood Vale and Underhill? Some consistency would be great.

We called them LPs until it became trendy to say albums, and then el pee became trendy again. Vinyl is fine, my fave was real to real - some would tape their vinyl and then put the original record away for prosperity.

So Rocks, the question I posed, which as you know I have done fairly regularly over many months, is how would you reduce traffic? Ask people nicely?? No matter how good you make public transport and the alternatives many will not switch; it has to be a hard intervention unless you or others know better.

I agree too. Hmm, on what? Let's haves a look, ah Red Post's comments about how shocking the government was freezing fuel duty, and reducing tax on short haul flights. Really really rubbish, shame on you. Anyway, there has been over 7000 posts on this thread and few acknowledge that we have to reduce the amount of motorised transport. Nigello was going down the right path talking about the school run but this has to go to other journeys. I doubt if many schools restrict teachers' parking, and similarly there will be businesses, mostly outside London, with free parking for employees. An obvious start is taxing free parking, where this is a perk, and organisations rewarding more sustainable choices, including lift sharing. Pfizer tried this in their production plant in Sandwich before most of this was closed down. Big site, with most living in the nearby towns helped. But without this, and government doing more serious things (back to gesture politics) it is left to the local authorities. To get people out of their cars you have to inconvenience people. There will be winners and losers, certainly as schemes bed down. Businesses still operate in the central congestion charging zone, despite this and the high cost of parking. So I hope that most agree that you need this big stick. How exactly that is done can be debated but in the 7000 plus posts so far I've not seen a proper alternative - either fiddling around at the edges or worse still reversing LTNs. I posted about the impact of Southwark stopping right turns onto the South Circular from Wood Vale and Underhill Road. You could argue that this was because they were in the pockets of the rich people in their big houses on thee streets. The outcome was sending traffic up the glorified farm track that is Honor Oak Road. Stand on the Fairlawn School playground and just listen to the roar of traffic passing the school. But nobody said a thing when I posted this.

I agree too. Hmm, on what? Let's haves a look, ah Red Post's comments about how shocking the government was freezing fuel duty, and reducing tax on short haul flights. Really really rubbish, shame on you. Anyway, there has been over 7000 posts on this thread and few acknowledge that we have to reduce the amount of motorised transport. Nigello was going down the right path talking about the school run but this has to go to other journeys. I doubt if many schools restrict teachers' parking, and similarly there will be businesses, mostly outside London, with free parking for employees. An obvious start is taxing free parking, where this is a perk, and organisations rewarding more sustainable choices, including lift sharing. Pfizer tried this in their production plant in Sandwich before most of this was closed down. Big site, with most living in the nearby towns helped. But without this, and government doing more serious things (back to gesture politics) it is left to the local authorities. To get people out of their cars you have to inconvenience people. There will be winners and losers, certainly as schemes bed down. Businesses still operate in the central congestion charging zone, despite this and the high cost of parking. So I hope that most agree that you need this big stick. How exactly that is done can be debated but in the 7000 plus posts so far I've not seen a proper alternative - either fiddling around at the edges or worse still reversing LTNs. I posted about the impact of Southwark stopping right turns onto the South Circular from Wood Vale and Underhill Road. You could argue that this was because they were in the pockets of the rich people in their big houses on thee streets. The outcome was sending traffic up the glorified farm track that is Honor Oak Road. Stand on the Fairlawn School playground and just listen to the roar of traffic passing the school. But nobody said a thing when I posted this.

When I were a child we could buy loose fireworks everywhere. It was great fun to let off bangers, one fave was to put it in a cow pat (not sure why). 1000s would be injured each year, and then nanny state started restricting both they types of firework on sale and how old you needed to be before you could buy them. Surely people should have retained that right to self harm (and harm friends and family). And it was also unreasonable that you would then be forced to go to an organised display, even if it was much better than having one in your garden. We are not going this year, stopped going to Brockwell Park once it became ticketed (and it was getting too busy), Blackheath is too busy, Victoria Park was great but no money this year to hold an event. And to be serious for a second (a) not sure why people would have their own events when organised ones are cheaper and better (b) It's the letting them off at silly hours which is annoying. When we were kids we'd be tucked in bed before News at Ten © not sure how you resolve the stress to animals - having had dogs as a kid and a cat now - we give him that stuff to calm him down. I'm probably the only one on this forum to have made their own fireworks - yonks ago, and illegal, but a phase I was going through (and had access to the chemicals). I was looking for a clip of the 1967 film Thoroughly Modern Milllie when China Town erupts (firework factory) but couldn't find one, and it is probably casual racism too.

When I were a child we could buy loose fireworks everywhere. It was great fun to let off bangers, one fave was to put it in a cow pat (not sure why). 1000s would be injured each year, and then nanny state started restricting both they types of firework on sale and how old you needed to be before you could buy them. Surely people should have retained that right to self harm (and harm friends and family). And it was also unreasonable that you would then be forced to go to an organised display, even if it was much better than having one in your garden. We are not going this year, stopped going to Brockwell Park once it became ticketed (and it was getting too busy), Blackheath is too busy, Victoria Park was great but no money this year to hold an event. And to be serious for a second (a) not sure why people would have their own events when organised ones are cheaper and better (b) It's the letting them off at silly hours which is annoying. When we were kids we'd be tucked in bed before News at Ten © not sure how you resolve the stress to animals - having had dogs as a kid and a cat now - we give him that stuff to calm him down. I'm probably the only one on this forum to have made their own fireworks - yonks ago, and illegal, but a phase I was going through (and had access to the chemicals). I was looking for a clip of the 1967 film Thoroughly Modern Milllie when China Town erupts (firework factory) but couldn't find one, and it is probably casual racism too.

DKH - thanks for posting the earlier thread, it was good to re-read and note the interesting discussion but I wonder where many of the posters have gone.....

This is all coming across as the groups that shout loudest should dictate how policy is developed and implemented. Now that would be undemocratic! I expect a retort that this is exactly what the militant cyclists are doing, in an unholy alliance with the militant Dulwich villagers living in their leafy/gated communities. It reminds me of the coalition government, big society, and proposals that government policy could actively involve citizens through the cloud. I don't think that ever saw the light of day.

How very dare you Seabag. I have been known to watch the other side (memories of when we only had two sides as our telly couldn't get BBC2). Tour de France is on ITV4 and you can have guilty pleasures of Midsomer Murders and the like on ITV4. I occasionally flick on to ITV2 at night to catch Family Guy - but after 20 odd years it is no longer a must see. I'm not sure about ITV (1), if I recall correct much of the cutting edge was lost when it became one company and Thames, Granada and the like became (often good) production companies. And I come from an age when Lew Grade and ATV/ITC ruled the air waves - Saint, Prisoner, Man in a Suitcase, Avengers, Gerry Anderson, Muppets etc etc (although looking back on Wiki one has to agree it seemed like many programmes were made for Birmingham Alabama not Birmingham England. Shame about BBC4. Quality. Quite happy to access the trashier BBC3 programmes on I-player. Used to enjoy Channel 4 more for quality programmes but I don't know what happened to this channel. Did it go down market or have my tastes changed. Like most got drawn into the early series of BB, and the Beeb did some good fly on the wall stuff such as Paddington Green. Listen more to Radio 4 now, but not really a convert.

It appears as if many have been asleep (at the wheel?) over the last few years. The ULEZ was proposed by the last Mayor in 2014, with a planned introduction date of 2020 which was confirmed following consultation in 2015. The last Mayor and his team talked about the possibility of extending to the North and South Circulars, and a tighter zero emission zone in the central Congestion Charging Zone. https://www.london.gov.uk/press-releases-6364 https://www.london.gov.uk/press-releases-6364 He'd talked about this a year earlier in 2013 and in part this was a response to the government not giving him the money he requested for tackling air quality. The current Mayor brought forward implementation in the CC area to 2019 https://www.london.gov.uk/press-releases/mayoral/mayor-plans-to-introduce-ulez-in-april-2019 and then following consultation announced in 2018 extension to within the North and South Circs https://www.london.gov.uk/press-releases/mayoral/ultra-low-emission-zone-to-expandhttps://www.london.gov.uk/press-releases/mayoral/ultra-low-emission-zone-to-expand There has been much media coverage over the last seven years, leaflets sent to most households (many no doubt went straight into the recycling), local radio ads and publicity on bus shelters. So 43% of motorists weren't aware? Where on earth do they get their information from?? Does half the population not watch or listen to the news, look at news websites, read newspapers?? I've got little sympathy. PS DKH please tell me you were joking - the upper case suggested that you were being ironic in a "shock horror" click-bait manner. I'll assume so.

I caught an interview on the BBC London news with two of the stars. Sounded interesting characters. Thinking about Peckham, Only Fools and Horses wasn't representative. Desmonds was great. There was a programme ten or 15 years ago where posh young ladies spent time with Peckham locals, which was quite fun. I can't normally watch ITV2 so will give the new series a miss. What a snob eh..... I don't know about Peckham of 40 years ago, and never watched the gnomes of Dulwich, or listened to the Penge Papers (from the 60s/80s) http://www.crystalpalacefoundation.org.uk/shop/novels/penge-papers https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0063903/

Wow, I haven't heard that, or certainly danced to that, for decades. After the earworm, da da da, some respite!

Well I am conflicted as you do seem to pick on every opportunity to have a go at the government. And I feel duty bound to defend them. As with every pub discussion. But bally hell they are useless. I just think that you need to consider all angles, including the popular hang them and flog them views [and Cat]. I've tried to get a thread going on climate change and net zero (I've worked on this sort of thing so doubly frustrated). Three years ago a strategy was published on how we would get to zero emissions from transport, it was short and sweet with lots of commitments. But that was under the previous Johnson government. So it all starts again under the new one. They seem to have repeated this earlier succinct strategy under the long winded wider strategy, that lacks substance. Hence the comment on gesture politics. I'm as frustrated as you are I expect. Edited to bring in the Cat, who has been far too quiet recently.....

I've been a few times and they are quick, and start early on week days.

Do you think that the posts I referred to stuck to the brief (ie the thread)? Have a think about it. Happy to hear your arguments that they did rather than turn your attention to me. My reading was yet another opportunity to have a cheap snipe at your councilors. And just agreeing with a previous post..... Please show a bit more independent thought. This is why I try not to post on this thread as it is difficult to have rational debate. I see you ganging up on others that don't agree with your views, so it is not just me.

Wow, you have a spectrum of topics to bash the government on. The government quite openly say that they want to cherry pick the best of EU legislation but go beyond it in other areas bigging up the UK. On the natural environment proposals were ambitious such as paying farmers for rewilding; I worry that just like the Zero emissions strategy it will be bluster with limited substance. Gesture politics means it is front page one day, then drops like a stone to be regurgitated on Question Time/Any Questions as spending zillions on this, that and the other. I'd like to add does anyone hold this government to account, well they do, Select Committees, PAC, NAO and the like, but it seems to make sweet FA difference both to the arrogance of the government and the majority of the electorate. If only there was a credible opposition.....

rupert james Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Probably for those that have adopted a polar bear. Rather than scoff about climate change and the impact it is having, perhaps you can do something about it. Bicknell - no, I didn't find it funny. 40 years time "granddad/grandma what did you do during the great climate crisis of the mid 20th century" - "Oh sunny Jim/Jan, I made facetious remarks" Anyway, laid down the gauntlet - would be interested to hear what you are both doing to reduce your CO2 emissions including your transport carbon footprint.

I'm looking back on my previous posts for one where I was defending the government's handling of Covid once we came out of lockdown. It was along the lines of they promised us a return to near normal whilst we lived with/coped with Covid. This is what the people wanted and what the people got. I can't defend it any more, they have been pretty useless. We are an outlier in Europe having virtually the worst rates, the lowest mask wearing etc etc. I've been on a Zoom call with former colleagues including a mate who now works for the UN in Vienna. We all worked in another health related area twenty odd years ago. This is a topic for another thread.

Nigello, perhaps you are thinking about the rest of the country where buses are seen as poor man's transport. When Livingstone took over the running (the deal with government to privatise the tube gave the Mayor greater powers over the franchised bus network), introduced Oyster etc there was a renaissance. Sadly use had started to decline before Covid, but we are still blessed with a pretty good network. Not sure why you are aiming comments at Councillors, rather than TfL and the Mayor. Perhaps we could all try to think positive thoughts today rather than have more goes at Southwark which is getting tedious!

Been using economy car rentals for years - user front end is not great, usually involves getting a voucher, but has worked very well and 95% of the time the cheapest https://www.economycarrentals.com/en-us

Thanks Legal Alien - I was aware of the spine, but never heard it being called that or the 'parallel' route. If you are cycling down to the canal path then straight through Rye Lane remains the best way if you are coming from, say, Forest Hill Road. Not sure what it is like during morning commute with the delivery vehicles. There would often be two trucks parked around Khans narrowing that section to one lane. Ommissus - you seemed to have had a sense of humour failure - surely use of terms like "smart Alec" or "Clever clogs" can be viewed as a little light banter. I've attached a clip - the sarcastic priest - from Father Ted - for you to enjoy. I certainly do.

Just amended this thread so in time there may be more interest - ie in the run up and holding of COP26. Yeterday's story died a quick death although I didn't catch up on the papers - some were excited by our PM (ie the right leaning ones), Indie and Guardian were sceptical, and one (I think the Times) talked about the PM's one trillion pounds gamble and the possibility of raising Taxes (Chancellor is leaving his mark). From the Guardian: Prof Kevin Anderson from the University of Manchester, tells the paper it is "a story of subterfuge, delusion, offsetting and piecemeal policies - all dressed up as a shiny new strategy". Sad with climate change clearly happening there wasn't more engagement in this announcement. I've cut from the government's press release and would love more substance on where the spending is going. ?3.9 billion of new funding for decarbonising heat and buildings, including the new ?450 million 3-year Boiler Upgrade Scheme, so homes and buildings are warmer, cheaper to heat and cleaner to run