LondonMix

Do you really think other professionals you named aren't held accountable for performance and get it measured? I'm guessing you work in the public sector Aristide. Anyhow, the UK is ranked around 18th in the world in numeracy and literacy. The education system is not terrible but its hardly exemplary and it creates a real skills gap that needs to be filled by foreigners, particularly within maths and science. Would London be able to grow as it has without these imported skills? Not likely. The same is the true for the US. These are real problems that need to be addressed if the UK wants to remain competitive in a global world. I'm not saying the current regime is the best to achieve this but pretending like no measurement of how different approaches are working and having no accountability mechanisms is the right path is misguided at best. Aristide Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > London is the most successful city on the planet > at the moment, our creative industries, the envy > of the world- we must be doing something right. > London's economy is a tribute to the education > system of the past. > > Testing and bashing of professionals whilst > marginalising the value of the arts and sport and > the privatisation of one of the most important > public services doesn't seem a very clever way of > building on what, as the article stated, was a > system on the up. > > The problem with education as that everyone has an > experience of it which makes them think that they > know more than the professionals. You wouldn't do > it with dentists, lawyers or engineers, why do it > with teachers?

The cost charged includes paying staff and hiring premises. You can't possibly analyse it based on the ingredients. The ingredients are the least expensive part of most restaurant costs. Louisa Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > *Bob* are seriously comparing cooked eggs with > chicken breast/lamb/king prawns? Honestly, I know > you're having me on now. > > Louisa.

Don't really agree. I have a lot of friends that live in other parts of London, North and South of the river who think ED is great-- they always want to come here to hang out because they think there's much more to do. You should see what most of London outside of zone 1 is like. Besides the handful of quite famous and expensive neighborhoods (Richmond, Hampstead etc), ED stands out from most of London both for its high street, the nearby museums, and the nearby green spaces. Whether the houses are worth what they are selling for is a different matter (most of London is over valued for various reasons) but ED is definitely not an average quality neighborhood even at first glance. The quality of the schools (private and state) only increase its appeal to families. ED station isn't terribly useful but the reality is that most people who live in ED are within walking distance of either Denmark Hill, Peckham Rye, Forest Hill Station or Honor Oak (and for many some of these will be there closet station as ED station isn't central to ED). With the extension of the East London Line to all of these 5 years ago, I'd argue that the transport links here are some of the best south of the river excluding areas on the tube. I bought ages ago before ED was trendy so I'm not trying to justify high prices or anything. These are simply the reasons why in an overpriced city, there is greater demand (and hence higher prices) to live in ED than many other places. rahrahrah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The truth is that the whole of London has gone > completely loco. ED is nice enough and Penge > probably is too (I don't know it that well). But > these aren't notably beautiful, exciting, or > remarkable places. The fact that small terraced > houses sell for huge amounts of money here is > absurd and deep down we all know it. I suspect > that a lot of the naval gazing about what's > 'great', or otherwise about our local areas, is > the result of the inevitable dissonance caused by > spending ridiculous sums to live in fairly > unexceptional places. It's an attempt at > rationalising what in many ways is an irrational > situation.

I don't know if the current accountability regime is the best it can be. I'm sure it could be improved. However, the UK skills gap is real. 37% of London residents are foreign born and despite a lot of the rhetoric surrounding immigration most of those come because various industries need their skills to grow. In the financial services sector, immigrants dominate all the sectors requiring math skills. I would say typically in the city Brits account for less than 20% of front office staff and even accounting staff. That as much as anything is indicative of a problem. Anyhow, I think the link below from National Numeracy is informative. The US has similar problems (our economy needs to import math and science skills in high numbers too to staff the economy). http://www.nationalnumeracy.org.uk/children-issue

Not really. They started as a pop up in Peckham a few years ago and while they have a few branches now, they are a small business. Most of the long-time businesses in the area have more than one branch including Blue Mountain, Blackbird Bakery, Lordship Lane Carpets, Just Williams and countless others. eastdulwichhenry Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Sad news about the Sea Cow. Lordship Lane is sadly > losing its charm as a haven of independent > businesses, and becoming chain central. I assume > these Meat Liquor guys are a chain.

Peckham Rye is very gentrified. Bellenden rd is very similar to ED and its spreading to Rye Lane and surrounds at a fairly rapid clip. The fact is Rye Lane does not just serve Peckham, its one of the major hubs for the wider Afro-Carribean community in London. People come from all over to get food and hair etc there. That means the demographics of Rye Lane don't really match the demographics of the Peckham Rye area though each new scheme that's proposed is tossing out the existing retailers and brining in a more up-market offering. There are two such planning schemes in the works at the moment. Also, even without specific redevelopment, the South End of Rye Lane is quickly transforming becoming a food hub that is a far cry to what it was before-- in two years Rosie, Mr Boa, a new Vietnamese place, Spike, Peddar, Blue Tit (which is hair but still) have all opened in less than 2 years. The only thing I wonder is if there is enough demand to keep all the shops in Bellenden open if Rye Lane were to only offer upmarket fair as well. That would be a lot of shops in addition to the ones sprinkled throughout Peckham Rye already like Ms Tapas, Artusi, Peckham Refreshment Rooms, etc.

I didn't say anything about how happy people would be- just that it shouldn't get worse than before Charter opened. There is a long discussion up thread on the single sex issue. New schools can't be opened just because parents don't like single sex even if there are sufficient places in the system. That would be disastrously wasteful-- we asked Renata about some of the existing single sex schools converting to co-ed. Some of the co-ed options locally are the most undersubscribed so the case for that isn't crystal clear... Anyhow, if 8 local primary schools have ever budged simultaneously it would be interesting to know when that happened. I don't remember it ever being the case but it might pre-date before I started paying attention.

Yes, by 14 you should be snogging in the bushes, skipping the occasional class and getting into normal teen angst and rebellion.

Dalston is unchanged. I was there a few weeks back and it still looks fairly shabby (that's not a criticism). I was in Shoreditch this past weekend. It was full of tourists and Spitafields felt like a suburban shopping mall. Could barely recognize Bricklane either after not going there for ages. I haven't been to Hackney in a couple of years but I don't remember it feeling nearly as gentrified as Shoreditch back then. Things change very quickly though. Peckham has changed more in the last 2 years than the previous 10 I've lived in this general area.

Yes, any guidelines would surely require time guidelines as well. When I was 10, my parents were leaving me alone for hours not days. I wasn't expected to cook for myself or anything like that. I think common sense should rule. I doubt that authorities are arresting parents for popping out for a pint of milk. Unless the cases in question really suggest some of the judgements were on the line of what most people consider within the realm of reasonable- creating a law seems like overkill.

I should add-- I wasn't even remotely unusual in this respect among my peers. Granted I lived in a very safe area but virtually all of the UK is as safe (possibly safer) than suburban America... ETA: By the time I was 14 I was babysitting for other people's kids for extra pocket money. I also had summer jobs I had to commute to at that age.

I think the cut off as a minimum should be 10! By the time you are 11 you'll be in secondary school, presumably making your own way to and from school etc. If you've never even been trusted to be home alone before that point, I think you won't be at all prepared for the responsibility. I would cycle to middle school on my own at 11 and would hang out outside of my house with my friends after school etc by that age (mostly in the park). The idea of having never been left alone before that age seems crazy but I know once I have kids that age, they'll inevitably seem younger to me than I remember myself at the same point in life.

Good luck. Personally, I think it surely depends on the child and the circumstances.

I was left at home from age 10. I would come home after school (which was across the road from my house). I had a key and was there in the afternoon by myself until my mom was done with work. This was similar to my friends at the time living in the suburbs in the US. It seems like nowadays that would be considered young but it was perfectly fine for me. What age were the kids whose parents were arrested? Were the children extra vulnerable in some way?

That would be the greed argument. If its down to that an investigation should be launched as its simply not on to take on huge amounts of additional patients without increasing staffing levels. Also the receptionists are poorly trained and they don't follow certain NICE guidelines for first time mothers. I've had phone appointments booked, the doctor has failed to call on time and then refused to call back after follow up. Honestly, there is a lot that needs sorting out there. I would say before 2015, I never had any issues with the practice. To me its been a sudden change in quality as I've been signed up to them since 2007. Penguin68 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Why can they not take on more doctors to see > patients or extend the surgery opening hours? > > Cost? > > GP practices are private business or partnerships > - they are paid on their NHS contract for the > number of patients they have and for undertaking > specific health care procedures (such as > vaccinations and inoculations, certain types of > health check etc.) This money arrives regardless > of their costs - more doctors or longer hours open > mean that the surgery operating costs go up, but > their revenues are fixed (or at least, not > associated with their costs). All practice staff > are contracted to the practice (not the NHS - > although some types of primary care NHS staff may > work out of doctors' surgeries - such as Health > Visitors and Psychotherapists in the IAPT > programme).

I have no insight what's happening at this surgery. I am only speculating based on experiences at my own place of employment. During moments of personal crisis for employees, we have temporarily been understaffed as we've given the person time off / flexible working to deal with whatever is going on. If its unclear how much time they'll need (family illness etc) then it can be hard to bring in temporary staff. In the end, everyone works a bit more to cover for the person but less gets done overall. Its a tough situation but often the humane thing to do. I'm really playing devil's advocate because while the level of the service recently has been exceptionally poor, it seemed to change radically over a very short span of time. The doctors also seem fairly caring. With that said, if this situation is caused by them simply taking on more patients without increasing hiring, that would be totally unacceptable. That's greed at the expense of patient care. I suppose complaints should be made either way so the situation can be investigated.

Sue-- how did you guys get one for your road. Did someone request it or did the council just come and ask if you wanted one via consultation?

I don't think anyone has said the area is short of places. The new secondary will ultimately be 8 form entry. I don't believe we've ever had 8 primary schools bulging simultaneously in this general area (before all the new openings and expansions). So the new Charter School should at worst maintain the status quo catchment sizes from before it opened and probably expand the catchments of the other schools moderately despite the bulge in secondary demand that is coming.

first mate Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Looking at the consultation for various roads at > the last Community Council meeting there seems to > be very little support for cycle hangars, with the > majority against. Wow, that's surprising. Can you post a link that that information? Personally, I'd love one on our road.

I wondered the same. Surely surgeries stop taking on new patients when they've reached capacity. Much of GPs funding is tied to the patient roster so taking on more patients that you can adequately service would be pure greed. I hope instead that they are trying to support a GP who needs temporary flexible working for personal reasons or something and that's causing the extended chaos. I wouldn't expect them to confirm this but I would be sympathetic to that situation. Alan Medic Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Phoned this morning to be told they are having a > meeting today to try and resolve the problems. I > was told what a nightmare it is to organise 9 > doctors who work different hours. I suggested it > can't be that difficult and was invited to spend a > day with the lady who answered the phone. > > No appointment available and not even a suggestion > as to when it would be worth phoning to make one. > I had phoned last week and was told to phone this > week. Now there is nothing available until 2nd > week in April but you can't yet book anything for > then. I can only guess the surgery is over > subscribed with patients.

I made a claim via smalls claims court and the other side after initially saying the would defend, agreed to settle once they saw the list of evidence I intended to produce. My brother in law has been twice because of inappropriate behavior by landlords and won both times. If you can prove the installation is faulty (getting another expert to write that down), that the fault caused the damage and you can clearly document the costs to put everything right you should be in a very strong position. The burden of proof is much lower than in criminal cases so as long as the judge feels your more likely correct in your assertions than the defendant, you'll win. If you are insured for the damage, your insurance company will handle the case for you typically so its well worth double checking your policy. Good luck-- I hate scumbag firms that try to wriggle out of putting things right in these types of situations.

We've got wet underfloor heating under wood and its incredible. You can use concrete or sand as the conductor. The floor is super cozy. I wish we'd done it in every room in the house. prit Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Can I ask to those who have suspended underfloor > heating what kind of flooring you have on top? I > am thinking of doing this and want wooden floors. > > I have a friend who has done just this in an > previous house (so can't go to see it) and swears > it's great but I just can't imagine that it works > so well under wood. > > Also can anyone give any ideas of how much it has > cost? Want to do whole (3-bed edwardian) house.

How can the NHS influence people's diets with more funding. I'm not sure there are a lot of people who are obese because they don't know what is healthy and what is not. Taxing really unhealthy food and subsidizing healthy choices might be the only thing that makes a serious impact on the choices people make.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euro_health_consumer_index This is an interesting list. Like all lists it can't be perfect but at least it breaks down the components on which the country's are being scored. The UK ranks 14 out of 37 European countries. It mostly loses points for waiting times and to a lesser extent for health outcomes. Waiting times for non life threatening illnesses in the UK can be quite astonishing. My husband needed knee treatment and the NHS sent him a letter several months after being on the waiting list that stated if they didn't hear from him within two weeks they'd remove him from the waiting list. We were luck we got it in time as we'd been on holiday when it initially arrived. Its one of the ways the NHS tries to reduce its lists. Eventually, we just used my private insurance and paid the deductible.

The Swiss system is also a private model in which everyone has compulsory insurance. It is still individual policies that can be supplemented. Of the fully publicly funded systems, I'm not sure which ones are the best-- ie who gets the most quality of life / extended life for dollar spend. Some analysis by York University to complement NICE cost benefit analysis showed that every circa 20k of expenditure equals one QUALY currently in the NHS. I'm not sure how other health systems compare.