ianr

Two 10 Sept 25 reports happened upon in https://southwarknews.co.uk/area/southwark/more-cyclists-were-injured-in-southwark-than-anywhere-else-in-london-last-year/ === Over 400 cyclists were injured in road accidents in Southwark last year, according to data from the Met Police – more than in any other London borough. An FOI submitted by Accident Claims Advice revealed that 411 cyclists reported being injured in Southwark in 2024/25, including 111 serious injuries and 300 minor injuries. The same FOI also found that 227 pedestrians were injured in road accidents in Southwark during the same time frame, including 2 deaths, 76 serious injuries and 118 slight injuries. Westminster had the most pedestrian accidents (423) followed by Croydon (284) === PLUS Exclusive: Collisions have almost tripled on Lower Road since cycle lane was installed, data suggests This is premium content for subscribers only ... ===

There's a ?new Radio 4 short documentary programme, The Cat Killer Detectives, that might be of interest to some. It talks to the couple who ran SNARL, and provides something of their account of how the project began, developed and ended, and the effect it had on their lives then and subsequently. https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m002j5nr

Crossed w P68, to whom thanks for the input.

From the whois record: Domain Status Registered And No Website

I see that there was a government consultation started in July 2024, a response, and then a revision to the National Planning Policy Framework, and then to the Green Belt guidance in February 2025, https://www.gov.uk/guidance/green-belt . It includes the updates but doesn't give the nescient much clue of what was materially changed. There will probably be some good, and less good, summaries to be found.

> The change of use of the green belt to call it brown belt for building Has there been any reclassification?

On your last point jazzer, no. I've been reading around various aspects of them today. The majority of them appear to be not much more than whey obtained from milk. That makes them about 75-80% protein. Have a look at the H&B products. They list all constituents. On the 18+ issue, OP, I suspect that what you noticed was probably at most a recommendation that they not be used by under-18s. Even then, I only came across it on one website, by chance, when seeking for evidence of prohibitions: https://ultimatesupsg.com/blogs/nutrition/whey-protein-should-individuals-under-the-age-of-18-take-whey-protein-to-build-muscle.

I'm not sure it's sensible to presume any agreement from interlocutors, but if you do, then I do agree that it's the right thing to say so. My own guess -- it's nothing more -- is that the officers were acting just to effect an arrest on arrival, as requested, quite possibly without any knowledge of the content of wretched tweet at all*, and that their being armed was absolutely incidental. But I don't know any reliable facts. I do think the turning up (5?) en masse to do so was possibly complacent and unthinking, if there was no reason to believe the arrestee was a threat. If they had been doing so for good reason, I guess they could have had at least one weapon trained at him, and had him hands above head or on the ground in no time. But I know no reliable facts of the incident whatsoever. Perhaps they were Father Ted fans -- seriously -- and trogged along, on a quiet afternoon, to see the man himself. Perhaps they and/or their CO will get a severe bollocking from above. I don't know. * But even that with some reservations. The last time I looked up cases on wrongful arrest, years ago, I think I remember there being held then to be at least some onus on the acting arresting officer to be satisfied that the required grounds for a lawful arrest did exist. And I don't know any of the facts of the present case.

I think you need to say here what specific preparation and brand it was. I can't even find any protein powder on the H&B web page https://www.hollandandbarrett.com/shop/sports-nutrition/protein/ at £13.50, only one item reduced from £13.50 to £8, and doubt it was that Also, please, link/s to whichever article/s it was that mentioned kidney damage.

The Met Commisssioner is quoted in today's Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/sep/03/met-police-chief-calls-for-review-of-law-after-graham-linehan-arrest “Most reasonable people would agree that genuine threats of physical violence against an identified person or group should be acted upon by officers. Such actions can and do have serious and violent real-world implications. “But when it comes to lesser cases, where there is ambiguity in terms of intent and harm, policing has been left between a rock and a hard place by successive governments who have given officers no choice but to record such incidents as crimes when they’re reported. Then they are obliged to follow all lines of inquiry and take action as appropriate. “I don’t believe we should be policing toxic culture wars debates and officers are currently in an impossible position. I have offered to provide suggestions to the Home Office on where the law and policy should be clarified.” [end] In this case, even taking into account the "obliged to follow all lines of enquiry", I do wonder whether initial enquiry could have been satisfactorily conducted (and then maybe concluded) without arrest. Hopefully, whatever, his input will help tuning the system. There are circumstances that come to mind -- perceived over-enthusiasm of police in one force to crack down on travel during the early Covid days, or excessive reaction to a tweeter in earlier days -- where their responses have, after public reaction, shown signs of becoming better informed, restrained and regulated. I think that'll likely always be a possible pattern.

Noted

Are constituents not allowed to ask council officers for information? Are they not allowed to ask a councillor for clarification?

.

If you've not had any invitations I think that's probably a good decision.

I was looking at used trainers/running shoes there a couple of weeks ago, and I think clocked them as in the £10-15 range; might even have bought a pair if they'd had my size. Perhaps they have a clear eye open for the known brands with their ? premium prices and presumed high technical quality.

Recently on a bathroom shelf I discovered an old tube of Boots Insect Repellent Gel. So old it doesn't even list any constituents. But presumably such things still exist. How the critturs distinguish attractants and repellants heaven knows. Perhaps there are Influencers.

Before I start reading it, can you please confirm that this it: https://www.southwark.gov.uk/sites/default/files/2024-09/Fairer, Greener, Safer Delivery Plan 2022 to 2026.pdf It's all right, I think I've found it. https://www.southwarklabour.com/manifesto2022/

Pieta

That seems more like the initial reports, where the beeping appears to be clearly heard but difficult to locate. I don't know what experiments would then be useful. I'd suggest something like: go to the area at night when there's little other noise. Have with you any of (a) a stout tube -- apply to one ear, block the other; (b) some electronic recording or audio-sampling device(s). In both cases they could be used in different locations and/or orientations (principally rotation about a vertical axis), with a view to finding variations in perceived or received intensity. Maybe take someone with you to video the proceedings. 🙂

But how then to explain how you could easily locate this one, when no-one else had previously been able to?

Did you perhaps use the wrong width driver, and strip off just part of the screws' internal spline? Whatever, do you think there's enough spline left for a driver to get purchase? I've a driver with a set containing T4 to T9, T10 and T15.

Is that opening hours as well as off-sales permitted hours?

When Southwark send you a letter turning down your initial written representations, what does it actually say then about the penalty payable, and any time limit?

I don't think it necessarily suggests anything. It looks like a standard boilerplate formula, conveying just minimal basic known facts. https://www.london-fire.gov.uk/incidents/?initialLoad=False&borough=&type=1251

The papers are at https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=172&MId=8334. I had thought of watching the thing myself online, but my diary secretary let me down.