dc

Yes, what is now Iceland was definitely a Sainsbury Freezer Centre until.... around 1984? Very similar to Iceland - lots of freezers full of frozen food. Freezer centres were a bit trendy in the 70's and I guess Sainsbury's were adapting to the market in the same way as they are now with their 'Locals'.

Peckhamgatecrasher Wrote: And Roger Bannister would be turning in his grave! ------------------------------------------------------- I imagine he would given that he's not dead yet: Dead or Alive? Roger Bannister On a slightly more serious point, buying petrol in litres allows us to realise that it is now more expensive in France that it is in the UK and that there is therefore no point in 'filling up' before heading home through the tunnel.

DH = Denmark Hill - still there and recognisable from the photo.

sidll Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > i heard that the old man from franklins wants to reopen it as a retro spit and sawdust boozer Well if Franklins are involved I'm sure it will be good - wouldn't want them to overstretch themselves though. As siddll implies, young Rodney's not getting any younger.

The Adventure Game! It was so Doogy Rev. Let's hope the new bar is half as entertaining.

Thought you might come back on that: 'your' not 'yer' (!) - actually I thought it was 'stuff' not 'stick' but that was just my failing memory.

Recent changes mean that owners of commercial premises are unable to claim what amounted to an effective exemption from business rates simply because they are not operating a business on those premises. A sort of 'sell up or shell out' requirement. The idea, I think, is to make it much harder to leave business premises dormant and suffer no penalty. In the current climate that might seem a little harsh but in the longer term it seems like the right thing to do.

I think Alan was (mis)quoting Roy Keane's parting shot to Mick McCarthy when he stormed out of the 2002 World Cup.

The survey referred to above by 'brendapermaul' was in connection with last year's, later withdrawn, planning application whilst the survey referred to by the Chair at the meeting on Wednesday was one carried out in connection with this year's application. Two surveys - two applications - different results - hardly surprising. And believe me, it wasn't the councillors who were being abusive at the meeting on Wednesday. A handful of people - certainly by no means the majority - really did their case no favours by their thoroughly obnoxious behaviour.

Macroban - you seem to have a one-man mission to keep this thread going. I PM'd you in April to point out that, contrary to your assertion above, Tessa Jowell had raised concerns over the 10p tax rate: "It was all over the papers 10 days ago. For example: [www.sundaymirror.co.uk]" As for your latest 'Big surprise' - as an inner London MP Tessa Jowell doesn't even qualify for the additional costs allowance so I'm really not sure what point you're trying to make here.

As mikese22 says you can use Oyster on national rail if you have a ticket for 7 days or more but you can't use the Oyster for pay as you go. There was a recent planning application (in April from memory) for Oyster card readers at North Dulwich Station which will allow pay as you go to be used - the national rail fares from local stations changed to a zonal system earlier this year in readiness for this. When introduced it will obviously be for the whole Southern route into London Bridge including ED. I think it's meant to be up and running by early next year at the latest.

An "npower Man" came to our door and my wife told him that we had just switched to npower via Uswitch the week before - which we had. He was very understanding. Now I'm not suggesting that you do this if you haven't actually switched to whoever calls at your door but......

The Charter is a larger school - 900 pupils (11 to 16) plus a sixth form. Only one bus passes the school - the single decker P4 - although the 37 and the 42 come close. The catchment area is so tight that most pupils walk. I expect the same would be true of the new boys' school. In any case, given that it will take five years for the school to get up to capacity, it should be possible to make adjustments to bus routes within the time frame. Since the death of a student on Peckham Rye (the road) a number of years ago, two speed cameras and a pedestrian crossing have been installed. Interestingly, a significant driving force in the design of the new school was the need to keep external road noise out in this "quiet and peaceful" area so that pupils would be able to study in a suitable environment. Indeed, I imagine that pupils will be coming from all the surrounding areas including the local housing estate across the park - in the same way that many pupils at the Charter come from the housing estates along Denmark Hill etc. That's because it will be a community school that serves the local community of which we are all, whether we like to acknowledge it or not, a part. Some people think that local children mixing in this way is a good thing.

Actually, I don't think he was saying that it is up to a new set of politicians to take on the burden that he, rightly after a lifetime of struggle, deserves to be relieved of. I think he was saying that it is for all of us, in everything that we do and in every choice that we make to take up the challenge that we all face in the future. It is very rare that a colossus such as Mandela emerges. He truly is a unique individual born to lead a nation to freedom in a unique struggle. Sadly, the parallel with our own politics is that he would have been pilloried by the Daily Wail for failed domestic policies and a high murder rate. In the end politicians are a reflection of ourselves and the society we live in who, in an increasingly prosperous society, deal in nuances of policy based on what they still hold as a principled view of the world and how they want to change it. I offer you Stephen Fry - admittedly from a little while ago. His message is - it's not them - it's us - and I think he's right: Almost the whole of my text at the moment, in my head as I fall asleep, is summed up by the word "contempt". Contempt, in politics, for the hypocrisy, the double standards, the double dealing, the corruption and the moral suasion. It's almost impossible for me to explain just how deeply I feel contempt. I want to go into detail - and I think you'll be rather shocked, and I hope rather edified, by what I have to say. So who are these terrible hypocrites? Who are these double dealers? Who are these liars and fraudulent corrupt people? Well, you're listening to one of them: that's me. And I'm talking to millions of them: that's you. It's not the politicians, God bless them. Sexless, uninteresting, graceless and very often styleless people as they may be, it is we who are the problem in politics. We expect a very high standard of living. We expect food to be cheap and available. We expect energy to be cheap and available. We also expect to be able to mouth off at parties about how terrible it is that the ozone layer is being eaten away and the glaciers are melting and how awful it is that people are starving in other countries. And we pay this group of styleless sexless people whom we call politicians a small amount of money in order to lay off our own guilt. Our own cant and hypocrisy is laid at their door. And apparently, it's they who are the hypocrites. It is they who are corrupt. It is they who refuse to solve the problems of the world. Well, it isn't. It's us. It's me, and it's you. They can't win because they've got us to serve, and we are filth. Edit: to make clear the extent of the Stephen Fry quote with the use of italics

Are you sure it wasn't Hollyoaks?

Keef Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Lets stop mentioning the bar that was there before, I too was a big fan, but if it was being > replaced by a book shop we wouldn't be drawing comparisons Agreed - whilst the Cheltenham & Gloucester was a fine building society, I marginally preferred Inside 72. The music was certainly an improvement, as was the choice of alcoholic beverages. Who knows we (or some at least) may be pleasantly surprised by the newcomer. Probably best to give them a chance instead of burying them in ordure before they've opened.

According to the search thing there have been 177 instances of the word definately in the last year (178 now I guess) on this Forum and ZERO uses (well 2 now) of definitely. This compares unfavourably with Google where 31.5m plays 211m. The End. Sorry. Edit for: my mistake - the search thing appears not to recognise definitely. How odd.

Marmora Man Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > OK - hands up - a very poor example! > > I should stick to the bigger picture and not devil in the details! But I think my original point was that if you actually bother looking at the details (which david_carnell has further illustrated) you actually find out that your argument has no basis in fact? Unfortunately, slack-arsed journalists also don't bother with such trivialities. Why should they when it's just easier to add one para of 'analysis' to the stuff that the 'independent' Taxpayers Alliance excrete into their inbox? Frankly, I think you should spend a lot more time on the details and a little less time regurgitating what is effectively propagandist rhetoric or - for want of a better word - shite. I would never argue that government does not need to be improved - who would? - but I certainly wouldn't approach any reform wielding a sledgehammer rather than a notebook.

Penalties are always good if they go in and 'stinkers' if they don't. No penalty is easy to save (although it helps - as in Terry's case when the keeper goes the wrong way and you miss anyway). Chelsea were unlucky - they hit the post and the underside of the bar. I don't like Ronaldo's jinking at pens so some justice that he missed. When I used to read "You are the Ref" in Shoot (incorporating Goal) doing a dummy at a pen was always marked down as 'ungentlemanly conduct'(!)

dc Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > What price for dog turds(?) > > ?50 apparently - if you pay on time. Otherwise ?75 I hate to quote myself but it now appears that, after all, a stogie's the same price as a steamer.

Marmora Man Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Question - do you think the country will really miss or suffer if the British Potato Council or the West Northants Development Corporation were to be disbanded? The British Potato Council is one of a number of 'Levy Boards'. It's an industry organisation paid for entirely by producers and wholesale purchasers of potatoes. So, no, we wouldn't suffer if it went but, as none of our taxes are being used to pay for it anyway, we're not suffering now are we? The British potato industry just might be a little bit miffed I suppose. As for the West Northants Devt Corporation - I know nothing about it. I assume it is basically a Planning Authority covering a number of Council areas in the same way the London Docklands Development Corporation used to be. Usually they are set up for a particular purpose (often regeneration and economic development) with a limited shelf-life as was the case with the LDDC. If the best the 'Taxpayers Alliance' can come up with is distorting the truth by encouraging people to think: 'I can't believe my taxes are being spent on (pause for quick chortle) The British Potato Council' when they plainly aren't, well..... it's just a bit crap really.

Here's a picture. Must be a view from London Road looking northwards with the Horniman walls in the foreground to the right: http://www.ideal-homes.org.uk/images/southwark/dulwich/lordship-lane-station-00635-640.jpg

On a bridge. The line was on an embankment which ran beside Wood Vale. You can still see that part today which makes it clear that the track approached Lordship Lane in an elevated position and then passed over it.

There's a map and lot of pictures here Lordship Lane Station. The line ran to the south-east of Wood Vale and crossed Lordship Lane where it becomes London Road. The station was situated to the west of Lordship Lane between Sydenham Hill and the site of the barracks that has recently been redeveloped for housing. You can't see Lordship Lane itself on the painting. The row of lighter brown houses - about eight of them immediately to the left of the station on the painting are still standing on Wood Vale. It would appear that the reddy-brown building closer to the station in front of the lighter brown ones would have stood on Lordship Lane.

Some of the houses on Wood Vale that are visible on the painting are still there - about what is now 25 Wood Vale onwards I would guess. There's a public image available so I assume it is ok to post this link: Pissarro - Lordship Lane Station