Shaggy

Mrs Nicklin Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I can't believe this is happening. Cycling is not > really an option when you have to get 2 small kids > to get to school and there is literally no other > way that the South Circular and a car, electric or > not. > > The standstill traffic is horrific for pollution > and traffic AND not all the schools have even > gone back yet. We might have to take ours out of > their school as we just cannot afford a 1h 45 min > round trip twice a day when we're both working. > > Totally mismanaged and selfish by the looks of > what I've read. You cannot just do this to people. > It stinks of NIMBYism This is clearly causing chaos, and inconveniencing many people. However, what exactly is selfish or NIMBYish about this situation? Inconvenient, yes. Annoying, yes. But selfish? Who is being selfish?

Yes ? thanks everyone. It was only a tiny under-desk freezer. God knows what it would have smelled like if it had been a chest freezer.

Hi everyone.... I?m afraid I?ve done something rather stupid. I?ve just come back from two weeks holiday to discover that I must have accidentally turned off our small freezer that we keep in the spare room. So, in the heat it has totally putrefied and the smell is awful. Does anyone know of any companies or any remedies that can help me sort it out and get rid of the smell?

Yes, lockdown is over, because after today the ?rules? have become more of a set of guidelines that you should break if you love your children enough.

There are shades of grey here. I clap because our NHS staff are being sent to work in dangerous conditions with inadequate protection and they deserve our appreciation. But I would rather they were doing a difficult job, in safe conditions, with the full backing of the state, and being properly paid to do it. But the Tory lauding of the NHS after years of attacking it is distasteful. And to see Johnson "leading the nation" clapping a few weeks ago made me not want to take part. I am clapping for them BECAUSE they are going above and beyond the call of duty, NOT because the government hypocritically now says we should support the NHS.

Hi Forum, The legality of electric scooters has been discussed elsewhere. That aside, how well do they work in relatively hilly East Dulwich? I occasionally see electric scooters travelling at a good speed up Dunstans Road, which is a significant incline. Is that something you can do with a normal priced scooter like a Segway Ninebot or an E365?

sjf1 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > At A J Farmer we currently have plenty of loo > rolls ,soap and most other cleaning products. > There is maybe a dozen or so lines in total > that we have sold out of, but on the whole we have > alternatives. Our supply chains are still > in place with deliveries arriving 5-8 times a > week, all standard for us. Demand is up , but you > will > find most of what you want. I?ve been in my local > independent convenience store today, they also > seem well stocked. Just try some of the > independents you might be pleasantly surprised at > what?s on the shelves > > Sophie > > Edited to add apologies for the layout of the > post. Written on my phone without wearing my > glasses. But I think you get my drift. Look after our small(er) shops and they will look after you.

hellosailor Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It?s as the crow flies yes. > I believe one of the main reasons that we?re in > this ludicrous secondary school situation in ED is > that when Haberdashers Asks bid for the contract > of the new school on the hospital site, they > pledged to make their nodal point further up LL > near the location of what is now Harris primary. > This being highly pertinent because it?s the roads > north of LL up past Barry road that are in a black > hole and desperately needed provision. My > understanding is that when Charter put in a rival > bid they made the same pledge if they were to win > the contract and having secured it immediately > went back on their promise and made the nodal > point their entrance, thus shafting the scores of > families living in the secondary black hole and > creating a catchment that hugely overlaps with > Charter North. How fortunate to live on one of > those roads who now get to choose which Charter > tickles their fancy rather than my road where my > children may well be offered a school we don?t > want several km away. Appalling. It is with also mentioning that the Charters are now trying to gerrymander sixth form entry by giving Charter N priority at Charter E, and vice versa. Although many of us have just got through secondary allocation, sixth form will come round all to quickly.

Most of the schools use 'as the crow flies', *not* walking. It is true that some of them, for example Charter North, used to use a 'safe walk to school' measure, but now it uses straight line distance from a nodal point. All the schools that I have looked at over the last three years used the straight line from the nodal point measure. It is worth noting that the nodal points can change, and are not always obvious. Harris East Dulwich, for example, moved its nodal point about 100m towards Nunhead for 2020 entry, and Charter North also recently fiddled with theirs.

They really are revolting, pathetic creatures.

That makes no sense whatsoever. Are you drunk or ?special??

Close to the Upland Road, Lordship Lane intersection. Anyone any ideas where EXACTLY they came from?

No. The main thing is to stop this ridiculous proposal which has the effect of stopping people in East Dulwich from using public roads to drive to work, but gives North Dulwichers beautifully empty roads for their two minute drive to Alleyns. ollflick Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > rahrahrah & Monkey > The council does not have the staff capacity to > consult and deliver on large parts of the borough > all at once and is also busy doing lots elsewhere, > e.g. around Rotherhithe. Separate plans are being > brought forward for the Lordship Lane area in a > few months: > http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgIssueHistoryHo > me.aspx?IId=50021892&Opt=0 > > The main thing is to get strong support for this > ambitious Dulwich scheme so that officers and > councillors get used to proposing, supporting and > delivering effective schemes - rather than just > surveys and studies that lead simply to (cycle) > symbols painted on rat runs. That sadly seems to > be the situation still in the Bellenden area.

The Coal Rooms by Peckham Rye station. They have a dedicated room for working.

Hi. Anyone else not getting water on the Goodrich School end of Dunstan?s Road?

450 litre capacity. ?15 Please pm if interested.

I second BYO in Nunhead too. I get a lot of stuff there. In fact, I think Nunhead is a great place to do lots of shopping. There is a good butcher, a good greengrocer and a good fishmonger. We've cut down our plastic use considerably by shopping in Nunhead rather than Sainsburys.

The laminated book of dreams.

Load of old cobblers. There are plenty of local shops you can have your online orders delivered to. fishbiscuits Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Monkey Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > If you?re not at home to collect parcels, use > local shops. > > Load of old cobblers. > > Nobody should buy anything online unless they plan > to be at home all day... for several days in a > row?

That's great to know. Thanks James.

Yep, Rendelharris, you are quite right. I am presupposing that point, though I'm presupposing it because that is what Lord Thomas also presupposed at the start of the hearing, prompting the three judges hearing the case to ask for submissions on the issue. It was a logical assumption on their part, but not a ruling. You are also quite right that had the (now clearly sensible) issue of reversing A50 been addressed in Miller instead of deliberately being ducked by the Government, the case could have taken a different route to the same result. The act of leaving the EU still destroys domestic law. But we all would have know three years ago that A50 could be reversed.

The quote is an interesting summary, and one that assumes much prior knowledge: "To reiterate, for the avoidance of any doubt, the Supreme Court proceeded in the Miller case on the basis that Article 50 would not be revoked but did not rule on the legal position regarding its revocability. ?Once again, I am grateful to this House for the opportunity to make a statement. I recognise that my comments have caused confusion and I apologise to the House.? This is true because, on day two of the High Court hearing, the court agreed to proceed on the (untested) basis that Article 50 was irreversible because neither side chose to argue the point, despite the judge asking them to do so. So the case proceeded, from day two, on a false premise. I'm not raising a major new point. On day two of the hearing, all of us in court were incredibly surprised to see the government duck a vital point in the case. They were told, pretty much in terms "If A50 is reversible, you win. Would you like to argue that A50 is reversible?" And the gov said "no thanks". JohnL Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > rendelharris Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Shaggy Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > ----- > > > > > Of course, if the UK government had accepted > > this > > > obvious conclusion in the first place, Gina > > Miller > > > would have lost her case. > > > > Why do you say that? Her case was to establish > > the principle that the UK government could not > > implement Article 50 without final approval > from > > the UK parliament; this ruling states that the > UK > > government may abandon Article 50 without > approval > > from the EU parliament. Two entirely different > > cases, one related to internal UK procedures > and > > one to international EU law. > > Looks like this (retracted) comment by a Lord last > November > > https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/bre > xit-minister-lord-callanan-apology-article-50-irre > versible-supreme-court-ruling-david-davis-uk-a8065 > 591.html

Miller's case was entirely predicated upon Article 50 being irreversible. If Article 50 is irreversible, triggering it destroys laws passed by the UK Parliament such as those governing UK elections to the European Parliament. The PM cannot make laws and and cannot destroy laws. Therefore the PM cannot trigger A50 without Parliament's consent. That was Gina Miller's case, simply put. The government's argument was that the PM makes treaties, not Parliament. So the PM can trigger A50 as part of the powers the PM has usurped from the monarchy. At the end of the first day of the hearing, the judge stated Miller's case hung on the reversibility of A50. The judge requested to hear submissions on that point and suggested that Luxembourg might end up being the final arbiter. The government asked to take instructions overnight. On the next day of the hearing, the government stated that it would not make submissions, and the court should proceed assuming A50 can't be reversed. Now we know that, had the Government addressed the point about reversibility, this case would have been heard in Luxembourg much earlier as part of the Miller case, and the outcome may have been different.

Not a hint. The court follows the AG in the majority of cases, and this ruling isn?t even controversial. It would be very surprising if the full court found different. Of course, if the UK government had accepted this obvious conclusion in the first place, Gina Miller would have lost her case. https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2018-12/cp180187en.pdf

KidKruger Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Well, not for kids that can read Hindi / Punjabi > swear words translated into English script, true. > I hear the culprit was wearing a 'crash helmet', I > guess that could have been a bin liner. A trash helmet, perhaps?