DuncanW

Surely the other party needs to pay for your professional advice, which would most definitely need??

Agree - we have had induction for a while now and wouldn't switch back. Pros: Massively easier to clean, much safer if you have children, super-responsive - eg bringing a pan of water to boil faster, more energy efficient, so more environmentally-friendly. Cons: The heat only transfers when the pan is flat on the hob, so less good for wok style stir frying etc - still possible, but you won't get the flames licking up the side of the pan, obvs You may need to discard some of your old cookware - increasingly, pans are induction-friendly, but we had to throw some away that weren't. Electricity is still more expensive to buy than gas, so probably slightly more expensive to use, despite being more efficient

From the Southwark Lib Dems website: "By trade Raghav is an Entrepreneur & an Executive Life Coach" - this is one of their candidates for DV His LinkedIn profile has him leaving University and going straight into being a self-employed life coach. You might wonder who would feel the need to engage a life-coach who has no experience of life barring three years at Oxford Brookes. He has some testimonials on his website, but they mainly appear to be from people with no LinkedIn profile or online footprint. That's quite unusual for successful business folk. And as he doesn't ever seem to have registered a company or employed anyone, I do question the use of the word, entrepreneur... This is out in the first round of The Apprentice stock, surely the LibDems could do better than that.

I received a glossy circular from the LibDems yesterday. No mention of rolling back the LTNs in there. It does say they would listen to people more, but for any anti-LTN voter looking to them for a reversal, they are a long way off from committing to that.

Roughly a third of it is produced by road vehicles, so any move to reduce that is a positive. Particulate Matter pollution is only one form of harmful pollution caused by vehicles. Hope that helps

Still going strong, it's a *bit* like one of those films set in New York where the kids bust open the fire hydrant in a heatwave

It's sad that you would take that view. I think it's a solid step forward in reducing the deadly, life-limiting pollution we are all breathing - albeit, I am sure, in unequal measure. The Green Party agree Lib Dems agree Rosamund Kissi-Debrah agrees Asthma + Lung UK agree Even the RAC have issued a statement supporting the move

Do you mean 'has Petticoat Lane Market survived'? Yes, as far as I'm aware. I work round there and there is a food market in the week. They have food from around the world and it's pretty cheap - certainly cheaper than the food market in Spitalfields. I think the traditional Sunday market is still in full swing.

That's a bit of a mischaracterisation of what I said. You can't hold a large-scale event without there being some 'externalities' and that is true of much economic activity. So we need to make decisions about what we will and won't put up with. And, as you say, how we manage them. We could decide that, as there will always be social costs (noise/litter) when large scale music and sporting events happen, that we don't allow any of them - I believe this is what the Taliban did in Afghanistan. We could potentially decide that these events are okay, as long as they are not in our back yard. There's a name for that. We could allow any and all events to go ahead with no control or regulation - who cares if people are making money and having fun. I'm not in favour of that. I could not agree with you more that the organisers should hold responsibility for cleaning up after the event - and minimising disruption/litter etc during the event. They do that already - albeit via a slightly different model in that Gala are responsible for the clean-up and they pay a hefty deposit to LB Southwark that they only get back if they uphold the agreement. Have a read of the sustainability document I posted earlier. If we are going to have events in public parks, I think we could do a lot worse than this lot.

https://thisisgala.co.uk/fullSite/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/GALA-Sustainability-Report-1.pdf They have just released their sustainability report. It's more around macro issues than local nuisance type issues tbf. Trigger warning: it does include pictures of people enjoying themselves :)

Hi DKH, Sorry, I was just addressing the contention that sectioning off a segment of PR for use by one particular section of the community to the exclusion of others is a precedent which would lead to privatisation of that and other public space. I don't agree that is the case and gave examples of areas of PR that can't be used by all as they are reserved, sometimes with a cost attached, sometimes not for specific groups. Of course, any large scale event will bring some noise, disruption and litter with it. That is for each individual to weigh up whether or not they think the enjoyment the event brings to x1000s of folk is worth it or not. I think it is, others evidently disagree. In response to your questions, we don't tend to hear the play play-park, but 100% can hear the Aussie Rules people - why can't they play that game more quietly?? GALA/This Is The Fair have a contract with the council to leave the site as they found it. The council keep a deposit from them to make sure this happens. If you've ever been out on the Common the morning after any balmy weekend evening - you'd be well aware that people sadly leave quite a lot of litter behind them, with or without Gala.

It's three days - my point was more in response to the 'privatisation' of public space posts A couple of other posts came in as I was typing. I also see that the music/noise is attractive to some and annoying to others

Peckham Rye Common and Park is already significantly subdivided for different sections of the local community to use and by definition to the exclusion of others - some temporary, periodic, some permanent The Common gives over a large amount of space to Aussie Rules Football in the summer Zippo's Circus and Carter's Steam Fair are regular vistors There is a cafe that is for paying customers only Friends of Peckham Rye fold an annual fete There is an annual 10K running event A play park A car park The Park has ParkRun every Saturday morning and marked out football pitches where local teams play A bowling green - not currently in use A gated off picnic area An adventure playground and a younger kids' play park Changing rooms for the football A skate park An outdoor gym The point being, none of us have free rein to use all areas of this wonderful open space at all times as it stands, and it's been this way for long time. Why can't we live together?

I follow David Allen Green and normally think he is spot on. Didn't agree with that take particularly. There may always be Boris Johnson types floating around, but in common with another bete noir, Jeremy Corbyn - I would argue it is rare that these types ascend to lead their respective parties. As much as I don't have any particular fondness for any previous Conservative prime ministers, Boris is a one-off when it comes to his personal moral compass and conduct. Cressida Dick, apart from her personal characteristics, was very much in the mould of those who preceded her. She held the remit for changing the culture within the Met. From the outside looking in, it very much seems she has failed to get to grips with that. For me, the parallel is probably closer to Jeremy Corbyn and his handling of antisemitism within the Left of the Labour Party. There just seems to be a complete denial on the scale of the issue.

About time too!

Ken, I'm really not sure that was what SpringTime was getting at. It's not clear, and ST hasn't taken the opportunity to clarify.

I'm still not sure, if I'm honest.

His actions are disgraceful. Not sure what his religion has to do with it. Maybe you would care to expand on that point?

Sorry Rockets, perhaps not the best choice of phrase. I don't suppose you'd care to respond to the substance of the post and walk me through how you saw a cyclist trying to smash a car wing-mirror in that clip... and how an angry slap on a car window is much the same as throwing a glass bottle at someone.

No, not as far as I can see. The cyclist kind of slaps the car window. You represented that as him trying to 'smash the drivers door and mirror' - that is patently not true. The cyclist then gets back on his bike to ride away and the driver throws a glass bottle at him. I think it's perfectly reasonable to assume there had been an incident prior to this exchange. You can argue that doesn't excuse the cyclists behaviour but if you think that slapping a car window in anger is on parity with throwing a glass bottle at someone, quite frankly you need your head looking at.

"No compulsion to use it" is not a narrative - it's written into the Highway Code. I get that you don't like it though. There are all sorts of reasons why a cyclist may not be in the segregated cycle-lane - none of them excuse dangerous driving, do they?

From memory, it's normally 10:30pm

The road *is* safer when there is a dedicated cycle-lane. They separate vulnerable cyclists from heavier and faster road traffic. That doesn't equate to dictating that cyclists must use them all the time. When I am on my bike, I use them when I think it's better to, and there are occasions when I feel safer, or safe enough, using the main carriageway.

Once in the road, did she not have priority over a car under the old version of the Highway Code anyway? It seems like the OP certainly afforded her that consideration. I'm assuming the OP was the driver of a car that had to stop for her. Had they seen her in ample time to stop, which I take to be the case, but not done so, they would have been at fault anyway. My understanding of the change regarding 'People Crossing the Road at Junctions' is that now 'when people are crossing or waiting to cross at a junction, other traffic should give way' - it's the waiting to cross part that is significant. So if a pedestrian is stood at the side of the junction between NX Road and Lordship Lane wanting to get from The Palmerston to Superdrug (maybe to get some Alka Seltzer) cyclists and drivers wishing to turn into NXR from LL now need to stop to allow them to cross.

I agree with you. It was an awful thing to say and only served to make him look desperate.