robbin

Ha, JL - you are so wrong. Disliking a crap supermarket chain hardly makes you a snob. Disliking all the reverse snobbery spouted by a few on here doesn't either.

Next to a butchers? I won't be going there! Imagine sitting outside on a nice warm day having a coffee with the stench of death wafting over you. Mmmm lovely. I suspect it won't be a coffee shop - or at least not for long.

More abject chip-on-the-shoulder, chippy, reverse snobbery nonsense DF.

BHG - sounds like you have never bought veg from SMBS or Prettys if you think Iceland's onions, potatoes and carrots are as good as is gets.

No they are not. You should try Lidl in Peckham, or Aldi, or(although I wouldn't recommend it) that Asda on the OKR.

Unhelpfully.

So much old guff spoken about Iceland by the usual suspects (one in particular). Complaints that its "community spirit" will be lost to ED. Complaints about how awful it would be for it to be replaced by a big soul-less chain store. Both are manifestly ridiculous. Iceland has a turnover in the BILLIONS (?2,700,000,000 last year to be more precise) and is a massive retail chain with more than 850 stores in the UK. So let's drop all the guff about community spirit being lost. I quite accept that the staff in Iceland might be friendly and well trained in customer service but it's not Iceland that carried the community spirit - it's a retail behemoth like so many others. Why suppose the staff in a different chain store would be any less friendly and engender any less 'community spirit' by being chatty with the punters? Or is there yet more reverse snobbery at play here?

It costs 3 quid to get an office copy entry - if you are really nosey.

I don't know what James Barber posted (as it appears to have been removed), but assuming it was the name of the registered owner of the land then I think you should lay off him, because that would not be confidential information - it is in the public domain, available to all on any search at the Land Registry. I could find out online in 30 seconds who the registered proprietor is, provided the land is registered.

And again James the "offence" you refer to is to be a 'street drinker' or to be anti-social with your consumption - not consuming alcohol in public. You use the term too loosely, I think, and that could be apt to confuse (as it has some on EDF already). I think if you ask any Police officer what a street drinker or nuisance drinker is you will get close to the same answer and it wouldn't include a family having a reasonably quiet picnic. The suggestion that it might is bonkers. It's an arid debate because in truth the answer to this is plain and obvious! Drinking in public is not an offence even where there is an alcohol control order - they only give a discretion to the Police to intervene to stop anti-social street drinkers or others causing a nuisance.

But James, the interpretation (discretion) is solely for the Police officer concerned - it is inapposite to judge the likely exercise of discretion by reference to the views of some of the nutters and/or wind-up merchants you get on here!

So, a person having a quiet drink (or several drinks) in the park is not (without more) acting illegally in any shape or form.

The Alcohol control area does NOT make drinking illegal. Nowhere in the governing legislation or the Regulations does it render the possession or consumption of alcohol illegal per se - it merely gives the police a discretion in the event of anti social behaviour and is aimed at street drinkers (as the Southwark website makes clear) or people creating a nuisance.

Farewell Iceland. I can't say I'll miss you in the slightest.

Bouncy castle. Bring your own sick bucket.

Why on earth do you think it is a grey area? I haven't seen anything that suggests it is! Everything in this country is legal - unless there is a law (statutory or common law) against it. There is no law against drinking alcohol while having a picnic in a park. Drinking is not illegal unless there is an Order banning it, which according to the Southwark website there is not. References to "street drinkers" do not include those having a picnic or casual drink - they are references to habitual, heavy, out of control drinkers (usually alcoholics) who sometimes hang about drinking on the street. Just because James Barber made a comment in passing, about drinking in public, does not mean it is against the law. I suspect James did not intend to say it is illegal to have a casual/social drink during a picnic in Peckham Rye Park. I suspect if you asked 100 coppers whether it was a criminal offence to have a drink with your picnic in Peckham Rye Park - 100 of them would laugh at you!

Posted by robbin Today, 01:31PM "Dulwich Fox wrote: "Yes it would be nice to have a picnic in the park with a bottle of wine or a few chilled beers, but who dictates who can and who can't. As long as they are of drinking age there cannot be any discrimination. So as it stands there is no public drinking.. " You seem to hold a very firm view on the whole illegality issue DF. Can you enlighten us as to the basis on which you contend it is (such) a crime? Or have you held such a staunch view on the subject just for the 45 mins or so since you read James Barber's comment?" So, Dulwich Fox, can you enlighten us? No, I thought not.

Indeed, Sue. I agree. If it's one can of beer (a half pint or so) then plainly you would not be incapable. If you are on a binge, then that's plainly different - wherever you are.

A street drinker is generally defined something like this - "a person who drinks very heavily in public and, at least in the short term, is unable or unwilling to control his or her drinking" Not a mum or dad in a park.

Ah, so you just object to people saying on a public forum that they LIKE things. They may only say they DON'T like things. I get it.

Dulwich Fox wrote: "Yes it would be nice to have a picnic in the park with a bottle of wine or a few chilled beers, but who dictates who can and who can't. As long as they are of drinking age there cannot be any discrimination. So as it stands there is no public drinking.. " You seem to hold a very firm view on the whole illegality issue DF. Can you enlighten us as to the basis on which you contend it is (such) a crime? Or have you held such a staunch view on the subject just for the 45 mins or so since you read James Barber's comment?

DF - really? That's your level of debate? Oimissus - it's not illegal to drink (if over 18) in parks, so far as I'm aware. Only if there's a CPPO designated for that area. I know there is one for Coventry City Centre because of all their probs (it was all over the news at the time - because it was new). I am not certain, but would be extremely surprised if it is illegal in PR or Dulwich Park.

Dulwich Fox wrote: "That's something gone from our New E.D. Respect. ..Or is Respect something only Sad Miserable Old Gits have ? " Answer: If it's the sort that starts with a capital R - yes. Oh and by the way, I'm pretty sure my 7 year old (and probably every other child of that age) wouldn't even know that in Southwark, drinking in public is illegal, so you needn't worry too much about people setting an example of illegality to children of the age that use the GG playground!

We never used to worry about such stuff. When I first lived in ED long before the GG playground was renovated with that 'fun' stuff - (like the new-fangled netting and high wire walk - and with soft tarmac, would you believe), there used to be 3 or 4 regular drinkers hanging out there for most of the day (Tennants Super, or equivalent thereof). They would pee against the wall by the entrance - that only added to their charm. Of course, those were the good old days, before the blow-ins with their poncey ?1 coffees and their specialised micro-brewery beverages. It was sometimes a bit scary being shouted and spat at by a swearing hallucinating alkie, but we respected each other, and we understood the importance of 'community'. That was proper ED back then ; )

???? you forgot 'sanctimonious'. But otherwise, I agree - the endless repetition has become boring in the extreme. ???? Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Louisa Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Speaking in riddles again quids? And people are > > supposedly bored of me and to a lesser extent > > foxy, for speaking the truth, whilst remaining > > happy confident and well rounded individuals. I > > rest my case. > > > > Louisa. > > > I am not sure taking out your insecurities and > stereotyping everyone whose moved here in the past > twenty years under lazy unpleasant labels is > either truth telling or the sign of a well rounded > individual to be honest but all you come over as > nowadays is boring and immensely chippy and quite > unpleasant to be honest but you martyr on.....