first mate

gabys1st Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Have hears that Aldi sells silent ones. Great if that is what most people people buy. I believe even the quiet ones are still quite polluting though. I was just thinking in terms of things we do purely for pleasure that have a proportionately negative impact.

Of course, anyone concerned about polluting the environment will be against all fireworks on principle.

Hear, hear. Lot's of convenient misconceptions about Blue Badges...it does not in any way represent a ticked box meaning all those with some sort of disability affecting ability to travel are therefore sorted. Hitmyhat Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The Blue Badge exemptions are only available to > Southwark residents so any Blue Badge holder > living in Lambeth, for example on Rosendale Road > or the Lambeth side of Croxted Road cannot get an > exemption! The same applies to Blue Badge holders > from anywhere other than Lambeth who need to visit > someone within the LTN. Just because a Blue Badge > holder doesn?t live in Southwark doesn?t mean > their disability magically disappears when they > enter Southwark. And what about all those with > considerable mobility problems who don?t quite > qualify for Blue Badges? The criteria for Blue > Badges are very strict and people can have severe > mobility problems but not be able to get a Blue > Badge.

Already started round here. When did Halloween become a reason to let off fireworks?

Not only that, this council has demonstrated before that they are prepared to use minority support at consultation to justify actions...remember the CPZ consultation? The opinions of a small minority certainly counted then. I think the only possible conclusion is what we thought all along, consultations are viewed as a necessary evil by councils but actually do not count for anything, unless the results can be shown to support council actions.

Otto2 you are careful to use the word "appears" to qualify your statement which renders it an empty attempt to skew perceptions of those who are anti LTN. Please desist from this sort of nonsense. As we all know "appearances", especially on social media, can be deceptive. Spartacus Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Otto2 Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > A great deal of > > social re anti-ltn appears to come from Nigel > > Farage party members. Who I think are keen on > > dividing and conquering and creating political > > divisions over environmental issues. > > WOW > > That's a leap and pretty slanderous as you are > making a sweeping statement about other people > without any evidence > > The pro lobby seem to be reaching the bottom of > the barrel now.

Because what is needed is to stop the current model, step back, consult properly and come up with solutions/ a model that is not purely driven by ideology but that takes local knowledge and views into account.

Malumbu has implied they might be a woman...

I second that.

Sorry Mops, not my intention.

Mops, for the benefit of others on here who would suggest you cycle or walk your dog to the park or take public transport, can you explain why those options will not work? Please be clear, I am not criticising you, I just think that detail of individual circumstances is useful and revealing.

Sally, do you know what a Ridgeback looks like or are you trying to divert into another issue? A dog leaving puncture wounds in another is different from "poor control" not sure what you mean by that vague statement? Perhaps you should start another thread?

I think you know the point I am getting at though Otto. Is it the case that those using cars less, cycling more and virtue signalling, are more reliant on online deliveries and online shopping. I don't know that answer but perhaps there is some research? Seriously, how many people could really truly do a house move by bike? If you are young with few possessions and moving within the same area then yes, otherwise...hmmm.

I wonder if there is any research looking at potential correlation between those that use cars less and increasing reliance on delivery and online shopping? legalalien Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > This was in my mail today (along with the DA > thing). I?ll say it again - it?s the deliveries we > need to focus on. There was someone on Sky this > morning reflecting on how many HGV drivers have > switched to more local Amazon, supermarket, > gourmet food box type jobs.

You'll probably have to wait for any reply until our councillor is back from the Labour Party conference, where he is a delegate and reporting for the Labour list blog.

Slarti b2 I agree with you and the notion that we can trust the council in any way on consultation is laughable. slarti b2 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > @DulvilleRes > Pure whataboutery. Repsondents had the > opportunity to say they would like to "retain the > measure but modify\enhance it with other features" > which would cover what the council is proposing to > do. But only 10% wanted that option. > > Based on the previous behavious of Soutwark > council, selecting any option other than removing > the current closure of the junction would have > been claimed as support for the measures. What > OneDulwich couldn't anticipate was that, > following the many promises of the senior council > menbers to listen to local voices, Southwark would > ignore and bury the results when they turned out > "wrong " from the council's viewpoint. > > A scandal for local democracy, abetted by our > dreadful local councillors who don't care for > their constituents.

Well apparently we live in a democracy, so if a democratically elected representative seems to be avoiding engagement with a majority of residents on a major local issue it seems likely residents will seek some more direct ways to access the rep and address them with their concerns. It's the democracy bit that is important, you either support that or you don't. But if you do then you have to concede that something needs to be done about LTNs in the Dulwich and Peckham areas...the model is not working here and the majority do not support the way the measures have been imposed. The weather has turned today. How I wish we could do a cyclist count over the next week.

We are told there are simply not enough GPs to cater for everyone. On that basis an online system makes sense but if it is sensitive information this will put people off going this route, I'd think. I guess scenarios like having a backache that won't go is okay but others not. Plus, in terms of practice small print and shared care records, who can access this info, where is it kept etc... Bear this in mind https://www.totalhealth.co.uk/blog/nhs-patients-given-until-23rd-june-prevent-sharing-their-medical-records Nigello Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > You can go online to book an appointment with > minimum effort and little time spent. You fill in > all the usual details and then are prompted to > write your ailment, etc. You then get a message > back saying you have an appointment later that day > or the following day. It may not work for all > patients all the time but in this case, and in > others, I have found it easy and worthwhile (so > saying it is ridiculous for one patient doesn't > paint the whole picture, however irksome that is > for the person for whom it failed).

Malumbu, Agree with you. We need everyone to take a step back and let those that really, really need fuel have priority. I think people are generally feeling insecure and unsure what the future holds and survival instinct kicks in.

Excellent post Artemis. legalalien Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > This. > > > Artemis Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > What the LTNs do not address is the massive > (and > > ever increasing) number of online deliveries. > Are > > we surprised that roads are clogged when > several > > billion parcels are despatched every year? > When > > the expectation is that you can order your > > groceries, clothing, household goods etc. and > they > > will turn up at your front door the next day, > > traffic is not going away. I would hazard to > > guess that a significantly high proportion of > > traffic clogging the roads is made up of > delivery > > drivers, rather than local drivers doing short > > journeys (which seems to be the assumption of > many > > people). And that traffic is not going to > > ?evaporate? - it is irrelevant to the consumer > > sitting at home whether the delivery driver has > > sat in traffic for three hours or not -they > just > > have an expectation that their consumer goods > will > > arrive. The narrative ?you need to get out of > > your car and walk/cycle and we won?t have a > > problem? is failing to address one of the most > > significant reasons for increasing traffic, in > my > > view.

I thought Rockets qualified his statement by saying not a single petrol or diesel car "launched". Is it the case petrol and diesel cars were launched? You've just referred to cars "at" the show...not the same thing. Anyhow, I guess the point is it may be more accurate to say the majority of cars were electric. I don't know, I wasn't there and do not follow car events, but to incorrectly quote Rockets and then on that basis accuse him of talking cobblers is a bit much.

Any feedback or comment, yet?

And the sole purpose of this is to try to shoehorn in CPZ to MG South and get their ED-wide CPZ rollout underway again.