Blah Blah

And how do you explain your number belonging to a guy called Steve in another post? Your account name is Peter Preston Stock.

Dude, you posted that your name is Chris. Either that's your name or it's not! If it's not your real name then you shouldn't be touting for work under a false name.

'All I said was that Sublime didn't seem to have any recommendations on the forum. I clicked on the name, and couldn't find anything.' Really? Because I just typed in sublime in the search window and can see at least threee mentions of that company and Pawel on the first page alone! So your assertion that Sublime and Pawel have no recommendations is wrong.

Dogs also have a tendancy to do that too. Bells on the collars anyone? :D Then there's kids on scooters, or just running with a ball even. The path needed repairing. Good on the council for that. There is a pavement that runs all around the park so no real upheaval to moan about. Cyclists will be no more of a concern than some poeple find them on any path that runs through the park, and most cyclists likewise will do what they already do elsewhere, slow down if they see people up ahead. But no doubt this thread will run on and on, reporting every perceived near miss as though someone's lfe was at risk.

Are Will and pps the same people too ?

So pps is also Prestige Property Services? I think trading atandards would be interested in this one as it is a crime to falsely advertise. http://www.tradingstandards.gov.uk/cgi-bin/glos/bus1item.cgi?file=*BADV042-1011.txt If proven, William and his various aliases could face up to two years in prison.

Is this a new clique Louisa ;)

So I'm woken at 3.40 am by a fight outside my home. Do I start a thread about it?

And to be fair the galleries accounts are posted at companies house and it can be seen from those that something has to change. It's also worth taking a look at the annual review as well for a more detailed breakedown of employment costs including pension schemes.

For goodness sake, it's just a path and it's not like there's no alternate route whilst the work is being done. There are far more worthy causes to get outraged over.

Yeah it's flashing up for me again when I post something.

Indeed Gardenman. I think Greece reched that tipping point of the haves and have nots some time ago. And most Western governments operate a system which is about not getting to that tipping point, rather than tackling poverty and unemployment. Corruption is commonplace in all economies, including our own. We have a political party in power for example, funded by the very institutions (ie the banks) who created the recent financial catastrophe. When government and corporations are in bed like that together, there's very little the people can do but take to the streets and withdraw labour. If they happen to live in a 'democracy' (whatever that actually means anymore) they can also elect radical parties into power. The outcome will be most likely that Greece is allowed to renegotiate repayment terms. The last thing the EU wants is a collapsed economy on it's doorstep, and bang in the centre of the mediterranean.

BN, on a clear road the journey time will be much more than 20 seconds a mile. So at night it's going to add considerably more time to journeys. Tfl's own figures for the last ten years show that traffic in the congestion zone has only decreased by 10.2% with no increase in journey times since 2007.

Your maths are a bit out there BN. 100 miles at 30mpr takes 3hrs 20mins. 100 miles at 20mph takes 5 hours. That's an extra 1hr and 40 mins.

Bawdy-nan, the congestion charge was supposed to reduce congestion. Not only is congestion still there, excess congestion was simply displaced to outside the zone. People are far more attached to their vehicles than you might think. Some of the evidence you refer to is anecdotal. The truth is that Southwark doesn't know if and by how many, accidents will reduce until the scheme has been in place for a measure of time. Traffic calming measures already exist in areas where young people are most likely to be at risk, like outside schools, residential areas etc. The only strong evidence is that of the seriousness of injury vs speed, because that can be tested, in a controlled environment. What can't be tested though is how a given driver will behave in a given situation.

Mako does make a very good point about people who drive for a living and the extra cost to industry. Taxis will cost more. Anyone who drives as part of their job will be spending more time on the road and accross the day that could add up to hours extra.

Pickle makes a good point though. There is nothing and no-one to enforce these speed limits. And wreckless overtaking will be the result. Hard enough getting all drivers to stick to 30mph.

Check the spec on your phone Sue. If it's a smartphone and you can get an 8gb or 16gb media card in there, that is going to hold a lot of mp3s for you. The other thing you could do is use your laptop, and use some DJ software like virtualDJ on there. It has an automix feature too so you can just list the tracks you want to play and it will mix them for you. I think virtualDJ lite is free as well. You can then store all your tracks on an external drive if you don't want to clog up the hard drive.

Pursuasive data there Bawdy-nan, I have to admit. But I still feel the compromise was in making residential roads 20mph and keeping main roads at 30, although during peak times many of them move slower than that. That in turn, as someone has pointed out above, was the incentive to stay off the residential roads, whereas now? There's nothing wrong with spending money where it makes sense to. So accident spots, junctions, outside schools etc. One of the worst design features has been the sinusoidal road humps, which are ineffective at slowing many vehicles and tend to crumble at the edges, requiring regular and costly maintenance. I'm sure some of my feelings on the subject come from the fatigue of constant moves to change the rules of our roads. Whatever happened to 'drive according to the conditions' for example? There was another thread recently regarding a lady who was knocked down at the junction of ED Grove and LL. It has made me look at that junction since and there's no doubt that the crossing installed to make pedestrian crossing safer on LL has made the traffic turning right off LL less cautious when those lights are on red. So road planners don't get things right all of the time.

The vast majority of drivers never hit anything, but we never seem to consider that. I stand by my earlier points that emphasis is in the wrong place. Unless something is done to imrpove the standards of driving by those drivers who fall short, no amount of speed limit tinkering is going to address the real cause of the problem.

We'll have to agree to disagree Wulfhound. Henry, that would make sense as it is residential roads that primarily have been made 20mpr. What we are discussing here though is main roads being reduced to 20mpr.

But Wulfhound, there are many times of the day when there are no jams, like night for example. Most accidents do not happen at 4am in the morning and by your own admission, at peak times the average speed is below 20mpr, so no need for lower limits at all. Traffic already travels slower at busier times, and most accidents happen at slow speed, during manouvres. To force someone to crawl accross the borough in the dead of night at 20mpr, is just riduculous. And to your 'drunk' analogy, I diasgree. No-one is to blame but the drunk. He has to take responsibility for the choice he made. The stupidity is found in the people who make these decisions in thinking we are all too stupid to behave in a reasonable manner.

I think we all pretty much agree on this. Arms and oil. That's all there is to it.

It's not about oil as such, it's about arms sales. We are one of the world's biggest producers and sellers of arms (in the top four no less) and Saudi is our biggest customer. This homage to the king's death is about business, and business doesn't care about human rights.

But accidents are up in 20mph zones, so the data doesn't support the theory. Only the data on consequences (namely serious injury and fatalities) supports the theory, and yes, that is a reason for doing something in areas where that is an issue (so accident black spots) but to take action on roads where no-one is ever injured is just overkill from the increasingly bureacratic nanny state we live in. Rural roads are some of the worst for serious injury from accidents/ collisions, and for obvious reasons. But it always comes back to us townies being treated like we can't be trusted to drive/ cycle/ cross the road in a reasonable manner. So we have to throw common sense out of the window, stick road signs and restrictions up everywhere, instead of tackling the real issue, which is changing the attitudes of those that use the road, and improving the driving skills of motorists.