Spartacus

Malumbu What most people want is a proper consultation that takes local views and needs into account. Not the current council whitewashing to deliver something that clearly has massive impacts on so many. There's no point in anyone suggesting alternative ideas unless the council is open to them.

It's nature, whilst the weather is warm Mr and Mrs fox are busy producing new young ones. Hopefully when it's cooler their ardor will also cool down.

Glad it's in America with all those Beans🌬

BBC News - Residents complain of side-effects after waste fire https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-66762971

Maybe, just a suggestion mind, file a claim for the extra cost of the penalty with a small claims court against Royal mail Not convinced you will win but it is an option.

Never Assume, it makes an Ass out of u and me. Regardless I'm a realist

I loved his reply below "Slow moving vehicles Your follow-up email states: “Data is based on ATCs which cannot measure traffic travelling under 10km/hr, so do not record stationary traffic (in other words, heavy congestion).” Is this a reference to this Times article: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/flaw-inroadside-counters-for-low-traffic-schemes-j6wbwvzjn? A number of others have sent this to me but the criticisms in it are directed at MetroCount equipment, which Southwark Council does not use. Instead we use more expensive but more reliable counters." It doesn't admit or deny if the counters used are adversely effected by slow moving traffic just that they use more expensive but more reliable counters. The wording feels like avoiding giving an answer on accuracy at low speed. The full response is here https://www.onedulwich.uk/s/OD-email-re-BB-holders.pdf

I always remember when supermarkets first started expanding (70s) and prices were at a point that was lower than local greengrocers, Butchers, fishmongers ... to tempt people in, then, when the competition from local businesses was quashed, slowly prices went up. Similar model to how Amazon operates and let's look at UBER who tried to undercut black taxis and minicabs and now we are programmed to think "I'll get an uber" they aren't cheaper. The point of my discussion Sue is that we have all shunned local businesses, including vets, for what advertised itself as cheaper and more convenient and when small businesses are gone we whinge about corporates over charging us because they have little or no competition. There was a time when local vets who knew your pet were everywhere, but they were forced out of business by the bigger brands who are now not the cheapest.

Talking of second hand books, see if you can get The Cranks Bible oldie but goodie

Oh dear Hope you lot don't start to look at other large companies that you all use. Amazon, apple, just eat, uber, tesco, m&s.. Unfortunately, we've all sleep walked into larger companies selling stuff to us, killing off smaller businesses in the process and the vet industry is no exception.

I can still smell it in the air

We need the old fashioned wind down windows that were on the original routemasters. They let air flow freely through the bus and no design since has matched them. Best of all kids could pretend they were steering the bus using them 🤣

I did, they couldn't Next

You can see the smoke in the air from the top of Dog Kennel Hill and as you decend into ED you start to smell it too.

They have already started by building small huts. 🤔🤣🤣

Malumbu quietly removes bricks from roads where an extention was to be built to add 87k to flat price. "If it wasn't for those meddling kids I would have gotten away with it" is all people can hear being mumbled

Earl I've been thinking about your skip. Currently, if you are not in a CPZ, all Southwark charge you is for a skip licence costing £93.60 per month. (source https://www.southwark.gov.uk/business/licences/roads-and-highway-licences/skip-licence?displaypref=large) Yet if you are in a CPZ, in addition, Southwark will charge on a daily basis you to suspending a bay for the skip plus your monthly skip licence. "Parking place suspensions are charged at £45 per day, per one car space. A one off £79 admin fee (which is non-refundable) is also charged regardless of the number of days requested for suspension. An admin fee (£79) is also payable when amending the start or end date or cancelling the suspension requested." (Sourece https://www.southwark.gov.uk/parking/guide-to-parking/suspension-of-parking-bays) Now, if you are having building work done, require a skip plus a guaranteed bay for a builder, that's an addition £90 per day inside a CPZ. If builders are like my sisters ones, where they have been on site over 6 months, then that's an eye watering amount to add to any building costs unless you can get the skip on your property (drive or garden) Is your anger over a local business worth that much to you? Also think about other people who will.want skips in the future and how much a CPZ will cost them compared to now?

Okay Earl, have you discussed your issue with the business ?

Earl, you seem to have a particular axe to grind there and as a result you want to make everyone suffer just to stop a business that's operating nearby.

calmdown.MP4

Sooooo, if I live in a CPZ, own a car that has a permit then providing the bay isn't suspended (much like Parking in a non CPZ street can be now) then I can leave my car there as long as I like because I have a permit... it is just that I've paid to park there rather then it being free parking. 😉 Interesting so that kind of sinks your storage concept like the titanic meeting an iceberg.

Loving your narrative using Storage in place of Parking to try and justify a point. Even introducing a CPZ is a charge for Parking (hence the name Controlled PARKING Zone) Parking has been allowed since the invention of the motorised vehicle, and the alternative is people pave over their gardens to park there.

And when the electric cars are taxed, will you also advocate that a form of road tax be levied on e- xxs and cycles too or as a cyclist are road taxes not on the agenda. Saying everyone pays currently is not quite the whole story as motorised vehicles are expected to pay ved (with the exception of electric currently as a drive to boost numbers) so why shouldn't e bikes and scooters also pay when the time is right and all motorised vehicles pay?

Free car parking in streets (sorry earl NOT storage) has been around since the invention of motorised transport. If everyone nationally paid to park in the street from day 1 then it wouldn't be an issue but councils are selectively using it as a revenue generator which is where the issue lies. Personally I think all road users, including e-xxxs , cars and bikes should pay towards maintaining the roads as we all use them.

Ahhh ExDulwicher has put us all right using his mastery of spin from the council book of doubletalk. Baseline data that isn't the same as counted result data is like comparing swedes with apples, both are round but different contents and one will leave a bitter taste in your mouth. The TFL report caused quirte a stir internally at the council if I remember so not quite as low key as you try and suggest.