first mate

I do not think you are being paranoid. There appears to be a deliberate agenda throughout ED and surrounding areas to make changes that place ever greater pressures on traffic flow and parking- both Labour and Lib Dems would like to see a massive reduction in cars and everyone out on bikes and they will use fair means or foul to achieve that. The sudden appearance of yellow lines everywhere, the imposition of restricted parking where there was none before and odd experimental junction changes, like Townley, all seem to point to one thing. Changes are also being made to Northcross Road and every time you ask why a different explanation is given ranging from 'safety' to making the junction 'nicer and more appealing for users'. What is not apparent is the evidence to support the need for all these exepnsive changes. I don't know where the Tories are on this. It seems though that no councillor of any party is prepared to stick their necks out on the issues above, we are simply being told what will happen. The process of consulation seems dodgy on a variety of issues and, in my view, is merely window dressing to meet certain statutory requirements.

Well there remains the question, as you say, of them seriously and legitimately considering all objections. If the method is flawed and inadequate how can that be done? You said you agreed the consultation for this was not fit for purpose. Those in charge have thus far resisted this notion. In the name of democracy I would have thought this issue alone would be worth a bit more fight...perhaps not lying down in the road but more than simply meeting the terms of your job contract.

James, is that another way of saying that there is little you or anyone else can do to stop proposed changes to unrestricted parking? I thought you objected to this change, is that not the case?

Hi James, not sure if you saw my question a few days ago, re the latest on changes to parking:- Will you be calling the decision in to O&S Committee within the required 5 days, as well as objecting at the issue of TMO's stage?

Well, just wait until all the new restricted parking is introduced on Lordship Lane and beyond. There'll be plenty more of this to come and what with the new school, new M&S and the new cinema, there'll be lots more visting cars too. Kerching.

In teresting to note that despite a steady stream of complaints for a number of year this practice has not not inspected by the Quality Care Commission http://www.cqc.org.uk/location/1-565650623/registration-info A quick google reveals this http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2063458/Family-doctors-firm-raking-1-8m-YEAR--patients-say-surgery-appalling.html Whatever one's reservations about the Mail, this article has the ring of truth about it. Odd, this is 2011- 4 years on no progress, no intervention from the powers that be, nationally or locally. The system is not working. Another snippet http://www.dmchealthcare.co.uk/team/helen-greengrass/ giving an insight into the wonderful future of healthcare by super GP's and their workmate- as you see a background in IT and finance is all you need.

I just wonder about the point of any kind of consultation if the response to objections is to state that in the eyes of the council there is no problem...as seems to be the case here. Thanks Woodwarde for keeping on with this. I hope others are also taking note as before we know it there will be big changes on the high street and it will be too late to change things.

Hi James, Will you be calling the decision in to O&S Committee within the required 5 days, as well as objecting at the issue of TMO's stage?

Hi James, Thank you. Since you are probably much more aware of process than are we, and of the most likely routes to get a change on these proposals, could you advise the likelihood of getting a 'result' by waiting for the next cycle and TMO's? Additionally, as per Woodwarde's email above, will you challenge the proposals after going as an IDM to the Cabinet Member, within the 5 day limit?

@Woodwarde, thanks. That last point is in itself ridiculous. Changes to unrestricted parking will affect everyone living in the area. It is not as though the only people using LL or Dulwich Village are those at a distance of 50m from the parking. The areas serve the local community. May I ask, once this decision goes to the Cabinet member for decision, who would be able to call it in? Also does 5 days means 5 working days?

hi James, has there been any movement/ response to objections to proposed changes in parking. Was there a response to the objection you lodged about proposed changes to unrestricted parking on Lordship Lane?

I was wondering if James Barber had hears anything more about this?

Ednewmy, which is exactly what certain powers want, because that urban look can be used to justify further urbanisation. This is a link to a great article explaining precisely how London is being sold up to developers and to what extent councils and politicians are in the pocket of developers, who hold the whip hand in the planning game. Note the bits about Peter John our own Labour Council leader, and the ongoing Heygate scandal. Read and weep. Remember that the likes of the Harris Federation, who are accruing schools and land faster than you can say primary, are arguably just another developer. http://www.theguardian.com/cities/2014/sep/17/truth-property-developers-builders-exploit-planning-cities

If you look at Southwark's forward plan for March here http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgListPlanItems.aspx?PlanId=316&RP=153 you'll see that a big meeting is coming up on management of Southwark Leisure. It is a closed meeting, reason given why. Click on link, then click on March and scroll down a few pages at page4. You'll see that that coming up too are meetings on primary school strategy and cycling strategy, amongst others Although the leisure meeting is closed perhaps a kind councillor can advise how dissatisfaction of locals can be made clear, especially at that meeting. Perhaps a selection if photos, or even a video, showing the scale of the problem? The reason the meeting us closed from the public is cited as Reason 3. Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information)

I 'm sure I noticed in one of the forward planning documents that Southwark leisure management is coming up. Perhaps James Barber could find out more, so at least you can have input. This link should take you to the Southwark Forward Plan for March 2015. You'll see that management of all borough leisure facilities is to be looked at....primary schools are also on the agenda for that month.http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgListPlanItems.aspx?PlanId=316&RP=153

@Woodwarde, many thanks. It is quite extraordinary the degree of effort that is required to try to get some movement in what is termed a consultation. There are so amny issues on here where people are feeling thwarted and viewing/experiencing the consultation exercise as a barrier, where neither structure or process are transparent or helpful. If each consultation was pursued and challenged, in a way that certainly seems necessary to get any kind of voice, there would not be enough hours in the day to do anything else. This cannot be right.

@woodwarde it is [email protected] or [email protected] Sorry cannot remember which right now, but one of those

Hi James, Has there been any further news/ movement on the one hour parking consultation? It would be disturbing if it just gets pushed through. For your information I tried to send an objection to parking services on the link you provided and it just kept getting sent back, so yet another seeming hurdle in the window dressing exercise the Council laughingly calls consultation.

Something like this should be held at the weekend when the bulk of the population might have a chance to attend. What earthly point i. Having it in e middle of the day mid week. That is a rhetorical question, of course.

That's decent of you. There are a number of products out there. The key thing is that it takes time, sometimes a long time. Everyone should take the time to do it with pups. If the dog already has a problem then desensitisation work may need to be done with medication and probably best to do with a behaviourist.

The point is you clearly do recognise the potential downside to something you love and are prepared to take that into account, others do not. I think nothing after 9 pm is good ( except New Year) and giving neighbours plenty of notice. I'm sure you'd agree that planning is vital around fireworks anyway, so plenty of notice should be a given. I try to encourage pet owners to use desensitisation CD's for their pets, and advise them on how to act around animals that show mild anxiety, as you are right some owners can inadvertently increase anxiety by being overly anxious about their pet's anxiety. However, you may not be aware that some dogs are born with super- sensitivity to loud noises, especially the multiple frequencies of fireworks, so the problem is genetic and innate and these animals and their owners do suffer terribly around firework periods. If there is enough warning to get medication into the animal that can relieve some of the terrible fear but you'll never be able to desensitise that dog to firework noise, in the way you might with one that is fearful but does not have the super sensitive gene ( it's to do with a specific type of non- habituating neurone, if you are interested).

JackRCH, my concern is for pets who develop an extreme phobia to the noise and lights, it is distressing to see an animal in an extreme state of fear. The pet can be kept inside, so the visual effects can be controlled. If the fireworks used are low noise that is also going to help. A few days notice allows the owner to get anti panic medication from the vet, but since it must be given a few hours before the event to be effective a clear timeframe for start and finish is also really helpful. That said, you'll appreciate these drugs are strong so you don't want to be giving them more than a few times a year. Bear in mind some animals, for medical reasons, will not be able to tolerate these drugs at all, so every firework event close by induces a state of abject terror, the sort that causes non-stop shaking, vomiting, as well as loss of bowel control. On my own account, I don't have a problem but would prefer to know when stuff is going to happen so I can prepare my animals. I do though object to being woken in the early hours by random bangs, or by someone who wants to celebrate an event by letting off a few bangers...the louder the better, it seems. I accept the right to have large organised firework events, professionally managed with plenty of notice to neighbours, but random stuff, any time someone fancies, no.

Hi James, What reasons are given for non-withdrawal, and can the cabinet councillor be more vigorously encouraged to reply/comment?

And I quote: "DMC Healthcare Anil Gupta is the co-founder of DMC Healthcare and DMC Healthcare International. Having been raised in a family of GPs, Anil has combined his love of medicine with valuable business skills gained through working as a chartered accountant and in the audit and tax teams of Pfizer and BDO Binder Hamlyn. Having successfully brokered a deal with his father to manage the family practice, Anil and his brother, Ravi, have transformed the family business from a small single-site operation to a successful international operation that is embracing change by bringing new primary care services and walk-in centres closer to people?s homes. Ravi Gupta Managing Director (Clinical), DMC Healthcare Alongside brother Anil, Ravi Gupta is co-founder of DMC Healthcare and DMC Healthcare International. As clinical director he is responsible for ensuring patients receive safe, quality care. Ravi has extensive experience of redesigning clinical care pathways to bring better health services to the doorstep of patients, introducing physiotherapy, dermatology, ophthalmology and COPD services. With brother Anil, Ravi has successfully grown DMC Healthcare primary care services and currently operates five practices and four walk-in centres across London and the South East, treating approximately 45,000 registered patients and over 90,000 walk in patients per year, employing 200 staff and clinicians." Pity they cannot be sued under trades description!

James, has there been any response to objections to the parking consultation? Will this consultation now be withdrawn?