alex_b

The problem is that the anti-lockdown brigade have framed the argument as health or the economy. They?ve been supported in this in the media due to the drive for ?balance? in arguments rather than nuance. What we can see now, with the benefit of hindsight, is countries such as New Zealand, Australia, and numerous Asian countries is that locking down earlier and harder shortened the restrictions and reduced the economic impact. Of course those countries also got proper test and trace and quarantine procedures in place to support the easing of lockdowns which we failed to do.

TheCat Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I understand finances are stretched, and Kahn is > trying to balance the books... but it does seem > like his 'go to' is raising taxes/charges (10% > council tax increase, a congestion charge for all > of greater London of 5.50 a day, and the > 'temporary' increase of the existing congestion > charge to 15quid a day last year), rather than > cutting waste/improving efficiencies/increase > borrowing (at least for the short term).....if > times were normal, I might prepared to be more > accepting, but a 'tax first' attitude in the > current environment is a real kick in the nuts for > a lot of people. That does rather presuppose that there is a lot of waste to be cut or a significant amount of efficiency that can be driven in the short term (as opposed to say automation that will take investment and time). Since the GLA is only really responsible for two really significant things: Transport (60% of the budget) and police (25% of budget); it seems tricky to see where the big savings could come from. Perhaps short term borrowing is an answer, but they did take on an additional ?1bn of debt for crossrail and as part of the TfL shortfall on passenger revenue. They may also be looking to keep their powder dry in case passenger revenues don?t significantly recover this year (which I doubt they will).

Most obvious one is at the top of One Tree Hill. There is a plaque there next to the concrete base.

We have used buggy pitstop https://buggypitstop.co.uk/ and we?re really happy with the service.

A few thoughts: Don?t over schedule your time, give yourself time and flexibility. This also sounds like a huge trip, I?d expect a month to do that properly. You might think about dropping the GC/Vegas leg as that?s a big big detour. On the other hand you shouldn?t stop at LA but should carry on down to San Diego (stopping at Disney in Anaheim on the way). I?d make sure you?ve booked pitches for Yosemite (and Grand Canyon if you go) very early as they fill up quickly. For the National Parks buying an annual membership will be cheaper than paying individual entries if you go to more than a couple of National Park/Monument (Muir Woods in San Francisco is also a National Park/Monument). Also if you want to do overnight camping away from the Valley in Yosemite you?ll need a wilderness permit (again apply early). Half Dome I think also requires a separate permit these days. I grew up spending summers in SD and have family throughout California. We were going to go this summer too but I?m thinking it?s unlikely to be possible.

Do you have a source for that claim as this FT article (https://www.ft.com/content/9a3af55e-c66c-4451-a34e-7110ce005cd0) says ?Brussels has provisionally secured more than 2bn doses of candidate vaccines from a range of drugs companies?

Today was the last day of holiday club so hopefully you?ll have some luck spotting the conjunction tomorrow (though I thought it was close to the horizon so I think we?re too low around here).

There?s holiday camp happening there til 6pm this week until today so it might be that.

The only place in East Dulwich I can think of with a reasonable view to the South West is on the back part of One Tree Hill towards Honor Oak Park.

I have been using Starling as my main account for over two years and also have my joint account with them. I find them excellent, the app works really well and is reliable. The few times I've had to contact them for something they've been very responsive. For personal accounts the opening process was a breeze, less than 15 minutes from downloading the app to having an active debit card in Apple Wallet. I haven't used their business product, but it's on the same underlying infrastructure so I can't imagine it'll be that different.

Thanks K. We?ll absolutely be trying to engage in other ways than just online.

The Council have said they'll consult in January, but are still intent on selling off the building. Selling off the house to private developers is a safeguarding risk to our children, will be disruptive to the life of the school and removes a building from public ownership that could be better used for educational and community purposes. For example there is a lack of space for provision for children with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) in Southwark schools, the school currently lacks sufficient space for music and arts, and local community groups need space to meet. A group of parents have started a petition at https://www.change.org/p/southwark-council-save-the-belham-school-house. Please sign to tell Southwark there are better uses for a house that has been part of the school site since the 19th century than selling it to developers.

Trinnydad Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Whatever the outcome of the current hiatus, the EU > is unlikely to exist long term in its current > form. > > The fringe countries ( read less prosperous) such > as Poland, Hungary, Greece etc will be gradually > squeezed out and the industrialised North-West > founder nations (Germany, France, Belgium, > Netherlands) will progress towards a tightly knit > federal system. Likely dubbed the FSE - Federal > States of Europe. My understanding is that polling shows support for the EU at pretty much an all time high across the remaining 27 members.

Thanks Kate, I?m glad so many of the community rallied round on short notice to force the council to back down. Now comes the hard work of maintaining the pressure on Southwark and permanently stopping a residential development in a school playground.

Thanks everyone for their support. This is only the beginning and we?ll need to keep the pressure up on Southwark.

richard tudor Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Was was the Cabinet Member for Children's and > school Services and also local Cllr not aware of > this last minute auction, if they were why did it > take a thread on this forum to bring it to > residents and parents attention. I don't know. I've written to all three ward councillors (including said Cabinet member) but as is typical they haven't responded. > Perhaps instead of "the expectation was" something > should have been documented in legal form to all > so they were aware of how things stood re the > school and caretakers house. I completely agree, unfortunately we are where we are. It certainly doesn't excuse the council starting to sell it without any consultation or communication with the school or community. > As it stands it is a empty leasehold property the > council can sell for cash or bring back into use > for a homeless or needy person on the housing > waiting list. I'd have more sympathy for this view if a) they hadn't left it empty and decaying for 18-months while ignoring a proposal from the school to bring it back to use and b) it wasn't inside the walls of a Primary School, on top of a small playground.

Nigello Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > So, the council needs to do better in cleaning > streets, providing shelter, etc. etc. yet it can't > sell off stuff to do that? I agree it would be > preferable for the property to be used in school, > but right now, that's a luxury. In the hierarchy > of those with needs, people without shelter or in > unsuitable accommodation trump the offspring of > already well-housed parents who want their kids to > be able to do some in-school finger painting or > recorder practice. The school (with support from the parents) submitted a proposal to the council over a year ago. The expectation was to raise external funding to convert the building to educational and community use (not just finger painting and recorder practice). Unfortunately the Council never responded to that proposal. By arranging disposal in secret during a pandemic, it has given the school no opportunity to raise the funds necessary. rupert james Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > When the Belham was rebuilt as a school why did the Cllrs not > factor in repairing and upgrading this building when the original > works were first mooted and a budget worked on. At the time the old caretaker was still living in the house and had security of tenure. The expectation was that when it became vacant the school would be able to make use of it. The building became vacant last year and the school imediately made a proposal to the council which was ignored. Twelve months later the council arranges a last minute auction to prevent the school responding.

Councillor Lury ([email protected]) is the cabinet member responsible. She?s probably worth contacting too.

I?d encourage those of us who live in neighbouring wards to write to their councillors too. If Southwark get away with this they?ll do it to other schools too.

rupert james Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Out of interest what purposes does the building > serve? > > If it remains empty unused and costs to remain > sound why should it not be sold? The school put forward a business case for educational and community use (particularly for small group music and art space which the current school building doesn?t have). The school had routes to funding this but couldn?t start until the council had agreed to lease the building to the school. Instead the council ignored the business case, left the building empty for over a year and then decided to auction it off in a secret decision during a pandemic. I agree if there was no use for the building selling it would make sense, but this is a building that was built as part of the school, is incorporated into the playground and has a viable business case for being returned to being part of the school.

redpost Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > because they > use satnav that routes them down side streets just > like a lot of other private traffic. I think this is a massive part of why side street traffic has risen so much in recent years and therefore why it?s entirely reasonable for Southwark to take some action.

James, the council is selling off The Belham Primary School's Caretaker's House by auction next week without consulting the school or putting in place a safeguarding plan. Although the school is in Rye Lane ward, many pupils come from Goose Green ward. Can you investigate and urgently intervene please?

Southwark have arranged to auction off the Caretaker's House in the corner of The Belham Primary School's playground next Wednesday. They've arranged this in secret, without consulting the school and without responding to the business case the school put forward last year to use the house for educational and community purposes. There is also apparently no safeguarding plan in place for a building that sits inside the school grounds (50% of the windows are over the playground and the school's bike store is under the building). Nor any consideration for the disruption to the small playground that the inevitable building works will bring. Please write to your local councillors to put a stop to this. If they'll do this to The Belham they'll sell off other school outbuildings and outdoor space too.

Abe_froeman Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Surely it's quicker to the south circular to go > via consort rd / e dulwich rd / Peckham rye / > Barry rd / lordship lane than any possible route > via Bellenden > > And even if it isn't, Consort Rd is a residential > road with a park on it. Bellenden is a commercial > road with numerous car yards, industrial estates, > railway siding and other commercial outlets that > is more appropriate for commercial traffic. Well they coaches and HGVs are definitely coming/going somewhere and weirdly seem to be in higher volume South rather than North. It certainly a regular run for ubers and taxis too. Where do you think it?s coming from/going to.

Charles Notice Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > What you do not seem to have addressed is that > these alterations have been put in with no > consultation or plans to comment on. They were > just started. I think those pavement extensions were proposed as part of the quietway plans which was consulted on ages ago. In my opinion the consultation was flawed and ignored 99% of the feedback the community gave, but there was a consultation. > As regards your mention of the Belham meeting, the > one the Jasmine Ali attended, minutes of the > meeting were asked from her but nothing was ever > produced nor did any other attendee produce such > minutes. What was discussed and agreed on? Again a > few people deciding what the rest of we residents > want and Southwark listen to those few who shout > loudest. Cllr Ali was only there for a few minutes at the begining, she didn't say much and left before any of the discussion got going. I never saw minutes either, although it wasn't a formal meeting. I recall there were requests for more information and there was supposed to be some follow up by email for those of us that signed up. I haven't seen anything though. What I would observe is there was a broad range of residents there and seemed a) to want something done and b) had no faith that the council would listen to them. It's sad that the Rye Lane councillors don't seem able to get much done in terms of the traffic. > I am all for safety change but I would like to be > consulted on how it is effected. There must have been half a dozen consultations in the last 5-years about Bellenden Rd and the surrounding areas. The problem is the council don't listen to the feedback. The quietway is a prime example, all that's happened is we've lost a load of parking spaces and the roads are just as unsafe for cyclists and pedestrians as they ever were. > As regards gridlock outside the shops this comes > mainly from people not being sensible, you stop > not me.Ok we will just sit here and shout. Me Me > Me. I think that's partially true, but it's also weight of traffic and the fact that that section of road cannot take two-way traffic (especially not HGVs) as it is currently set up. With the Maxted Rd junction so close too, it's almost inevitatble that traffic will lock up. > Traffic is worse now because of Southwark's ill > thought out road plans. People who have lived and > give their long term history of the area are in > the main ignored in favour of views from new > residents. One of my neighbours has a box of files going back 30 years complaining about this particular rat run and her ideas are pretty closely aligned with mine I think. Without systemic diversion of through traffic away from Bellenden/Lyndhurst and the surrounding residential streets, you'll just push problems to other roads (like happended with Ogglander and Ondine). What would you suggest is the right approach? > If one consults properly and listen to the > majority view you would be surprised at what can > be achieved. I wont hold my breath for the council consulting properly or even addressing the issue seriously.