Borderlands

That's usually with a view to salami slicing and partial development: this is exactly what happened in the 1980s and the Mid-Southwark Plan tried to separate off areas like the top-edge of Sydenham Hill Wood for development. I think that's why the London Wildlife Trust chased Local Nature Reserve status for the areas, because it presumably offers stronger protection for green space than MOL. The then GLC published a sort of "Domesday" series of green sites for every London borough - well worth looking out for as they show the same pressures that now face London's captive countryside (including former farmland that became cemeteries and parks)and gave in-depth information on the need for open spaces (preferably with wildlife potential) throughout London. It's what makes London different from many other densely inhabited cities.

Aren't the cemeteries, Sydenham Hill Wood, Dulwich Woods, the golf course, Peckham Rye Common (and park), Honor Oak all designated Metropolitan Open Land and thereby protected to some extent in planning terms? All have amenity, social, habitat and landscape importance arising from their history (and some of that will pre-date their use as, say, burial plots.

Just taken a quick look through the papers about the proposed new Southwark Plan having read a short piece in this week's South London Press. This mention the possibility of building on MOL that's included in it and the consultation papers. In one paper there is a proposal to alter DM57 which presumably protects MOL to allow school expansion. Even supposing that precious MOL (which has this designation because of regional and local importance) can be shaved off in this way because, say, local parents are keen for expansion, the larger document isn't so clear cut. There is no reference to such a restriction and importantly no listing of any of the particular MOL designations so this can be checked. This is just like in the 1980s with some Southwark councillors and most officers scared of opposing building in the face of a Tory-developer led government. Then too they were scared of financial punishment. There was a ton of greenwash in the Southwark plan of that time, when community and civic societies (from the riverside to Sydenham) combined with the London Wildlife Trust and the GLC to protect Sydenham Hill Woods and other green spaces in the borough. This took years of campaigning. Does anyone have any further information about what is proposed? An MOL designation is extremely important in terms of planning - it's our long thin borough's townscape/landscape at stake here. The designation protects our historic woods (captive countryside), the cemeteries, the parks, and the greens and playing fields. Once a way is found to circumvent this protection it will become a precedent even if no-one wants it to : a little bit taken away here or there eventually means it becomes less and less viable especially as habitat. BTW, whatever happened to imaginative refurbishment, tracking the number of empty properties and so on rather that demolition and building on green space? This kind of LB Southwark supported development in the north of the borough particularly (around London Bridge) goes to show how little they are really interested or passionate about our borough's specific character.

Don't know if any East Dulwichers go anywhere near Peckham but the threat to the "townscape" is very real as Southwark Council gets further in a mess with the need to raise money by downplaying any desire/need to protect what we have and relying on resident apathy. They appear to be completely at the beck and call of developers who may offer thin community benefit (but not social housing which can easily be forgotten during the process. And the councillors/council officers seem to be scared to protect or object to the destruction of our local character on their electorate's behalf. The plans for despoiling Peckham Station with a high rise are just the start. The Croydon town centre style now ruining Lewisham could be just round the corner. Please take a minute to sign the petition to try and stop this- or at the very least get plans reconsidered: http://www.change.org/p/protect-peckham-s-rooftop-view Thanks

I thought it might just be me, I'm desperate to leave MGMP because I'm being forced into the hands of Dr Barnwal who is utterly incompetent, arrogant and someone who, but for the intervention of Dr Zhang (who has now left the practice), would have precipitated a personal health crisis because she refused to do a repeat prescription - aren't these people supposed to have taken an oath to 'do no harm'?

My opinion of Melbourne Grove Practice has never been high but it is now at an all time low, if this practice and Concordia represent the future of medicine in this area then God help us! The reception staff, with the occasional exception, are moronic and they DON"T LISTEN to what is being said to them. All I needed was a repeat prescription renewing but ended up with an appointment to see someone I had never heard of two days AFTER the renewal date of the prescription in question, nothing I said seemed to change their view that this was the solution to my situation. And the communication between the front-of-house staff and the doctor was conducted by tweets! What I would love to know is who can this appalling standard of service be reported to? It appears any complaints have to go through an internal 'Customer Services' manager, this is plainly hopeless.

Just noticed this NHS choices noted one star operation (doesn't even deserve that) is promoting a Self Care week from 18 to 24 November. Thought it must be some very poor joke - but suppose the way most of staff behave there (docs and others) most of the time, this must be really what they would prefer. Might even be better, more professional, more caring, more effective... Wonder how long Concordia can continue allowing this practice to act as some kind of flag-sinking-ship in East Dulwich. And apparently they have the brass neck to expect (and probably succeed) in getting the contract for a health centre in the area suggested by the proposals from the CCG last year under the new even more uncaring privatised NHS. And - piling on the doom - the idea of this centre is that all other GPs practices in the vicinity will be forced to stop duplicating the services provided there. And isn't that chap from Concordia on the CCG? Funny that..... Be afraid, be very afraid.

Wouldn't normally post this kind of thing on EDForum but I hope East Dulwich residents will want to try to help Keiron. He is a Peckham based journalist who was merely reporting on the Greenpeace activists now all under arrest in Russia. No matter what you may think of Greenpeace campaigns it is not illegal, even in Russia, to be a journalist. He needs our support. Just look up Keiron Bryan on google and see what you can do.

EDers should be aware that proposals restricting what GPs can offer so that health centres have some purpose was a key aspect of directed discussions at the local consultation. The reason for this was that duplication is being portrayed as equalling pure waste.... Anyone who has read my posts before on the NHS deforms will guess what I think of that: surely we want duplication? And why would any one be a GP in future if there is a threat to offering a particular area of expertise because a healthcare centre might offer it in that locality. And what if the healthcare centre is staffed by cheaper, insecure and under-trained staff, who can be replaced at the snap of a manager's fingers? Is this the future vision for our health provision in Southwark? We are simply not worth as much as patients in rich boroughs: we're just iller but, hey, that's our choice. If GPs are actually not allowed by the CCG to offer patient services they want to, because if could be portrayed as wasteful and inefficient, this is what I would see as rigging our healthcare in favour of another kind of service. Presumably meaning the "innovative" business-orientated GP providers like Concordia or Harmoni - no flies on either of them - ever (just sack the unprotected staff). Look at the way groups of established GPs cannot get a foot in the door on this all round London. And by the way, the consultative meeting I went to did not begin to address the interface between hospital and GP care at all - a key concern for most of us. Not once. Got the feeling it wasn't allowed. So, it seemed to me that the consultation is pretty much, even if unintentionally, grooming us to accept that instead of referring patients to hospitals (too expensive, and full of private patients in future) GPs will just provide triage for the new healthcare centres instead (untested, money down a blackhole, staff of unknown quality and status). Why would anyone become a GP in future unless it was purely for the dosh? And don't say that's the case now - it's frowned on now which is, for the most part a good reaction. This is all about money folks - not health. A&E anyone?

This is just the kind of "abuse of the system" the government is keen to exaggerate for propaganda purposes - as if the failings of medical treatment and chronic compassion fatigue (which can and does lead to pretty much criminal neglect) can all be put down to health tourism instead of real terms cuts in our money going specifically to medical care rather than black-hole pfi deals and private company set ups for formerly locally run and appreciated GP surgeries (Harmoni anyone?). It's very helpful for the government to have a cartoon like approach to this kind of thing added to a steady drip-drip diet of bad news (and twisted "stats") to an increasingly cynical public (especially those already at the bottom of the pecking order). I remember a fantastic C4 news piece comparing the NHS with continental systems showing how amazingly successful it is... Of course, the reason Branson and Harmoni are getting involved is theirs far more gold in siphoning off tax-payer money (and then out the country into off shore accounts) than investing in manufacturing. Branson's carefully constructed persona has been managed this way for the purposes of hoovering up formerly public sector services. Yes, some of the moneys no doubt will go towards new balloons adventures or perhaps rockets to Mars....so we'll be in the space race again (the space being our lost public services).

How about only usin the "Other" option and filling in your reasons?

Agree with what you have written - the total re-organisation idea has been stewing in the brains of Oliver Letwin since he as young-fogey in the 1980s, but of course, other administrations have toyed with various models of healthcare provision because that's what politicians do, and I can't even remember who was responsible for introducing the godawful internal market which began the grooming which has ultimately prepared the public to accept (or at least not protest against) privatisation....a service here, a service there..... But I don't believe any of this would have got this far (even with Andy Burnham's former stance of permitting some privatisation there was no intention to wound the NHS mortally this way) if the Liberal Democrats hadn't kidded themselves that they could and have prevented the potential worst excesses of the Tory lead coaltion by agreeing to a slight rewording of the repellent Social and Health care Act. They have compromised our health knowing illness can make some people very rich indeed. That's the bottom line. And there are an awful lot of ill people in London, and Southwark - TB anyone? Look at the furore over failing hospitals now - instead of being taken back out of trust status (re-nationalised) and allowed to get the finances and staffing sorted out free of utterly spurios competition, these hospitals and their de-moralised insecure staff will be "reformed" perhaps offering very few services in future and at some point hived off to the private sector (who will offer some public provision if they can make money out of it). The foundation trust and pfi farrago is just replaced by another... I will try to go to St Barnabus's although I can see it looks as if they are limiting who can attend. And hope others will come along too.

Know what you mean - I did it in any case because I've participated in several campaigns over the last couple of years and so far nothing alarming has occurred...but understand what you are saying. Hope this doesn't put you off the consultation questionnaire which is also online. Worth putting fears, doubts. protests on this.

From the fuller documents it is clear that the hospital is doomed. The idea is that a new build, presumably PFI, healthcare centre will be put there, following a skewed consultation that does not allow those of us who do not want this to say no. See my other post on this. Then the land left over from this will be offered to another public sector user for something else to be built (rather than much needed green space in our increasingly over-developed borough) - AND, of course, there is no money for public sector provision at the moment (and what would be appropriate). Then when this doesn't work out presumably SOuthwark Council will be asked to rule on selling the land off to a landbanker (say a shopping mall or large office or housing development) - and they won't be able to refuse as they would be too scared of the financial ramifications if challenged by a developer -look at the fiasco over the selling off of the land that was the estate at Elephant & Castle to an Australian developer who is in trouble presumably for similar deals in the US. Peter John doesn't seem to have been advised of this by council officers - but presumably this is the kind of thing we should get used to as market rules take over former publicly owned facilties.

You can easily sign this petition on 38 degrees web site to add your tick to mine and others. If you just put in your postcode it will automatically connect you to the Southwark petition: http://action.38degrees.org.uk/ccg_postcode

Yes these two outfits are just the kind of firms I mean - if you look at Concordia's web site I think it mentions some awards it has in an attempt to impress the unwary - but they weren't from any health body that rang any bells - so just the kind of meaningless self-regarding and deflecting propaganda you would expect from such a generally loathed provider. But here's the really frightening thing: I think the doctor behind Concordia might be on the clinical commissioning group and was on its near predecessor. So you can guess pushing the engorged new healthcare centre set up proposed in the consulation document would be right up Concordia type bodies' street. It would mean more insecure, over-stretched, overworked, inexpert, salaried GPs who will come and go rather than build up a rapport with the area. This is because there are plenty of GPs who do not have the experience or desire for the increased admin and business-style responsibilities: they want to treat patients. But if our entire experience is of unmotivated, fearful and overworked GPs (as we will never get referred to expert and multi-disciplinary care in a hospital)this will feed into the perception that we need a healthcare centre...how convenient for Concordia, United Healthcare and similar set ups. Heads they win and tails we will continue to loose if this is what is forced on us. What me and many other patients will end up doing is always going to A&E wherever it can be found - which if health supremo Bruce Keogh has his way could mean getting a friend to drive me to one of a handful of hospitals left in the entire country....probably somewhere slap bang in the middle of the countryside. Let's go down fighting!!

The proposals for changing healthcare provision throughout Southwark are out for consultation and you will need to respond PDQ if you want your voice to be heard - even if they commissioning group don't really have to take any notice. There are a couple of opportunities to actually say something. Here is a link for those of you who are interested, and those of you who should be interested....which is all of us. http://www.southwarkccg.nhs.uk/GetInvolved/ImprovingServicesConsultation/Pages/GetInvolved.aspx For what it's worth the only options A and B you will find in the consultation document amount to almost exactly the same thing - and this is to direct patients away from hospital as much as possible into "local" healthcare centres. Sounds excellent - but be careful what you wish for. This the preferred set by commercially orientated gps, their private companies (and not-conpletely obviously-for profit arrangements) and or international (usually US based) private companies who are gearing up to promote themeselves to leech off NHS funding who view the NHS as simply a mostly trusted brand. The other idea the document is trying to sell is that hospitals really should only be for specialist care - which seems such a good and obvious idea until you realise the full implications in the light of the proposed changes: that the clinical commissioning group plan is to marginalise effective general hospitals (including teaching hospitals) in contrast to feathering their own nests using an unproven style of delivery of healthcare. This will inevitably mean that hospital funding will decrease or become unpredictable and therefore they will more and more rely on income private customers ....oops I mean patients - this is the basic idea of US giant McKinsey who advised the government on how to dismantle the NHS. By the way your value as an NHS patient in Southwark is only ?82 per annum (very low) - this is part of the marketising of health that is underway which means that those in rich boroughs are valued more highly and their health will be better funded....funny how the government has forgotten diseases don't respect these boundaries (look at the measles epidemic in Wales). The consultation document asks for your opinion, not your experience, not your expertise - and the questions are set up deliberately to force answers that the CCG seems to want. You need to be on your guard while filling it in either online or on paper - or just write in your own questions: like why we can't keep what we have and improve on this and co-operation between hospitals, gps and the local authority. Still, even if you are even slightly concerned about what might happen it's important to respond to the consultation - even if it is to say it is spurious and/or rigged for the outcome the CCG's desire.

So sad to see what has happened to my favourite building on Walworth Road. Used to use the library up there and the museum is simply delightful - even used the one-stop shop. Southwark doesn't have a very happy recent history of protecting their building stock from fire.... Really hope this is not the end for this magnificent structure and that whatever is left can be protected, restored, conserved or whatever is possible. It's a real cultural landmark and that it has survived as long must mean something - look at the appallingly badly-designed and plain ugly new builds (and trophy building) that now is allowed to overwhelm our borough. And, of course, pleased that the London Fire Brigade has not yet been decimated by Boris Berlusconi Johnson's plans. Anyone witnessing this fire and how incredibly dangerous this situation can become so quickly should object to his proposals RIGHT AWAY via the London Fire Service website - especially as he is trying to prevent local consultation. And yes Southwark fire stations are in the firing line.... Doesn't bare thinking about.

Just seen all the postings on your situation and this latest takes the biscuit - given the history this sounds entirely spiteful and unwarranted. Did you have any photos of the hedge before she destroyed it? If the hedge is/was growing on your side of the boundary then I think technically she/her contractors has committed trespass and the razing could also possibly an offence. Email your councillors straightaway to find out what they would recommend to stop what is in effect harassment from your neighbour...you could write to Southwark's legal department. May be what's needed is another clear delineation marked on the ground, and she should agree to leave alone: what she is doing is becoming weird and unhealthy. I've heard, of course, of neighbours cutting down vegetation intruding into their gardens: and the cuttings belong to the garden the plants grew from so this should be given back to the "owner". Sometimes the desire to prune is understandable. But we had a dreadful experience years back, when we had been away and came home to find half the width of our hedgehad been cut down without permission and entirely secretly, and we asked the neighbour if he knew anything about it? He was very cagey and then said he had arranged it and we pointed out he had never once complained about it to us. And then at the rear of the house we found he must have climbed into our garden to cut down whatever he didn't like. When we asked him about this too, he glibly claimed it was his mother (!) and he had told she probably shouldn't have....we suggested if this happened again we would consider a legal remedy. The whole thing was a horrible experience - and we simply replanted wherever he/his mother had damaged our garden. And not long after he departed the property. By the way this time of year is a fantastic time for replanting hedges. Just pop along to Marsden Road Wildlife Garden and see what they have.

Hi I've a friend who is trying to register via his laptop (which I gave him) and has tried umpteen names and passwords without success. I then had a go on my current computer using the name he provided (and he typed in his preferred password and confirmation of password). This looked as if it was accepted and he looked on his email (google) to check whether confirmation has arrived - but nothing has appeared. How long does registration normally take? And surely it can't be computer specific - I can log in from my workplace. Advice please.

Just wandered down to buy Sundays snoozepapers yesterday and noticed yellow notices tied to railings in the estate about proposals to build new blocks within the estate off Pytchley Road. My concern is that these were date as 24 December and comments need to be in by 13 January - but I am absolutely positive that these notices were not there until some time last week - they definitely weren't there on Christmas Eve or any time during the following week. I don't know if I will actually object to the proposals but the dates quoted, and the placing the notices strikes me as an utterly cynical approach to the need for public consultation. By the way, apart from really liking these well-designed old LCC estates, my main concern is the possible loss of the fenced playg area in Pytchley Road: it's not particularly busy right now but for most of the year this a really popular informal space for kids to let off steam within sight of where they live and the road. It would be appalling that this is lost without a thought - yes, it's not a sport centre, or a park but it's where teenagers play around and seem to simply be having fun on their own terms. Also I am concerned that there has been no refurbishment of Badminton House (beside and above the shop on Dog Kennel Hill) or the derelict block at the bottom of Bromar Road. Surely these should be dealt with first? Or is this a case of LB Southwark giving themselves outline planning and selling on to a developer. Thoughts?

Weren't there attempts to extend from Elephant and Castle in the 1980s but the complex geology of the area made it impossible/prohibitively expensive. And I vaguely remember Sainsbury's proposing around tha time to build a new store in Camberwell near the bus station, and suggesting the community would benefit from their agreeing to also provide some housing and also providing a new overground station in.....Camberwell Station Road (where it used to be many moons ago). BR probably wouldn't play ball, and the whole thing never got off the ground. Presumably the Dog Kennel Hill store put paid to the whole idea...and I remember that when it was green fields (Crown Estate?). Not that long ago really....

On the Sunday morning before Christmas at about 10.30 am a man turned up on our doorstep with several parcels asking for any cards we had for those that couldn't be delivered in the days before so he could see if any he had were ours! As far as we could tell he was in a private car, was friendly but panicky, had no identification on him and did not seem to know what he was doing. And he had no machine for parcels that needed to be signed for. Fortunately for us none of the parcels we were expecting were presents and we could tell from the packaging which one in the clutch he had was ours. And, of course, we grabbed it. Needless to say he wasn't out normal postie who seems really good and reliable. Stupidly we forgot to contact Royal Mail to question this. Next time it happens - and we're sure it will with privatisation - then we will report it and complain.

I know, you're right - it's just the tone of the proposals were all about the requirements of the City. Anyway here is a link to a Peckham site: http://www.bellenden.net/srug/news/save-south-london-line-latest-news-0 Let's keep the pressure up to make sure some replacement/additional service is made available.

As a daily commuter using Denmark Hill, I am absolutely dreading the reduction in services to Victoria. I used to cycle (for about 10 years) but the route to work was simply too filthy, frightening and tiring so I stopped. Then I used the bus - It was entirely down to luck whether I got to work on time - it was so slow and awful - sometimes it would take me around an hour and half to get to West London from Camberwell, and sometimes 30 minutes (never ever predictable). AGONY. Then cottoned on to the trains from Denmark Hill to Victoria: brilliant. Even when trains are packed (most rush hours) at least it takes generally between 9-16 mins and you arrive at Victoria ready for other connections. But most of us realised early on during the "consultation" that the decision had already been made to undermine a really useful route, so that the City is favoured for train travel, and the rest of us are made to use buses (so the moneyed don't have to mix with hoi polloi/workers). Don't know what I am going to be forced to do. I have come in occasionally via Clapham Junction - a total nightmare of crossing platforms, missing connections and of course, it's mad to force commuters further out to get back in to central London.