Huguenot

Excellent idea. It could sit in a cylinder of brackish green water with it's hair waving in the current.

A revenue-raising trap being presumably non-profit making, and Sir Humphrey was famous for the sincerity of his recommendations? Sure Loz.

Camberwell would do well to consider itself as having got off lightly with something as benign as a disallowance. Imagine if they'd been retracted? Paperwork everywhere.

Well why don't we just quash France, and save cancelling for somewhere smaller, like Denmark. We could prohibit Wales and revoke Stoke Newington?

Just read the article Simian, and it quite clearly states that it's not a party political issue, but they want it to be one. I don't have an anti-civil liberties perspective, I'd just like all those out there doing the j'accuse bit would put at least as much time into proposing alternative cost effective solutions. Often as not they don't, because it's easier to criticise someone else than it is to do something yourself.

What about cancelling, can we cancel things? What about cancelling France?

Some silly blighter would probably vandalise it in the name of civil liberties.

You're still persisting Loz? After calling our hardworking councillor a profiteer, you now appear to be calling him a liar? What's next? James has made clear that he's concerned about safety near the school, about the impact of a particular piece of topography, about the apparently inconsistent views on speed limits, and that he needs to walk the road before he comes to a firm conclusion. Then you start calling him names. Greeeeaaaaat! Way to go!

While someone somewhere is attempting to disallow it, I don't think that's necessarily being judgemental about quality. I'm sure there are many things that are very high quality, but disallowed. They might have actually said "Camberwell's got very nice houses and an art college, unfortunately it's disallowed", whilst looking sympathetic.

"If safety rather than income generation was the real priority for traffic enforcement we should see school zig-zags enforced more rigorously." I just don't see why people think that they can cast such sweeping and insulting aspersions. It says more about the commentator than the council. Everything has a cost/benefit equation attached. I suspect people sneering about a lack of enforcement would scream blue murder if safety officers were present, and would accuse them of being an ineffective waste of taxpayers' money if they penalised with points on the license instead of cash fines. Cookie you're even accusing them of profiteering at the same time as saying they don't hand out enough tickets. Is this a logic bypass?

I think James has made abundantly clear what his considerations are. For someone to continue to accuse him of underhand motives they would need to be wilfully and cynically denying the fairly obvious. It's a shame that by accepting that the school is the only concern for speed reduction, not an attack on car drivers in general (along the full length of Bazza Road), that this is used as a weapon against him.

There's a few more places need disallowing, mainly near Lewisham. Is there a limit on the number we can disallow? What are our options? Can we disallow Deptford? Poplar? If we've got a limit on Electoral Wards can we just disallow certain boroughs? Can we just disallow everywhere reached by the DLR? Would that be one choice or many? What about air, can we disallow air? It seems dreadfully needy. Questions, questions.

What a brilliant idea! Acoustics would be a bit poor, so you'd need radio mics.

P&L - Profit and Loss. Short hand to say it would become a self-funding commercial endeavour, rather than a public service against thugs.

Lol. Mindy you, Hillary's offered to help us all out now! Thank God for yanks.

This would be great regulation if it was used to target slack-jawed thugs out walking their weapons. My cyncical bet is that once it was enacted it would become a P&L with targets, and they'd end up tormenting grannies.

What, Camberwell? I think it was more of an accident than a decision of the local population. They just happened upon it. I think even if you changed it's name and 'allowed' it to be Tunbridge, it would still really be Camberwell. I think regarding the Church, the population has a track record of making decisions in the short term that are demonstrably against their long term interests. They simply can't be trusted unless someone's made the effort to keep them properly informed. The Germans are still apologising for the last time they voted in a 'stong leader'. See 'California state funding' or 'Climate change' So "if that's what the people want, that they should get" is the worst argument I've ever heard.

I don't think you can aim 'not to start a party political slanging match', and then say it will influence your vote. If you're not voting on local issues, then you're voting on a party (political) manifesto. I think the Lib Dem's position is that kind of wishful-thinking 'I ain't going to get voted in so will never get pulled up on it' balderdash. Here's a few obvious questions.... If they 'scrap ID cards' how are they going to counter benefits fraud? A more practical proposal would be to make ID cards voluntary (probably through NI cards), but the entitlement and receipt of taxpayer funding conditional on proof of identity that's cross-checked nationally. Every penny these guys get is money directly out of your pocket. You have a reasonable right to impose an obligation on government to make sure it's going to the needy instead of the criminal, or else it stays with you. On DNA databases, well fine, but what they going to do if the crime figures start to go the wrong way? You can't tie police hands behind their back and then ask them to do a better job. The question of 'innocence' is highly relative. We agree as a nation that once a person's done their time they shouldn't get punished again - hence they are 'innocent' of any new crime. We also know that 90% of crimes are by repeat offenders..... CCTV is already regulated, they're just going to propose 'different' regulations - what are they? For protest at parliament, what alternative plans do they have so the seat of democracy is not subject to security threats that would undermine democracy? I don't see how they're going to 'stop councils spying on people' when they don't meet this ridiculous cloak and dagger characterisation at the moment. What councils do have is entitlement teams ensuring the recipients of funding or school places are not fraudulent. How do they intend to deliver on this with no 'spying'? Unfair extradition to the US is attractive, but part of a broader bilateral arrangement. If we reduce a US 'benefit' what 'cost' are they likely to impose on us? If the Lib Dems don't know, then they're simply bullshitting. Anyway, you get my drift, these are 'easy' non-binding commitments. However, they hold very little consideration or intelligent planning.

I love the absolute paradox of people voting for resolutions that may take away their right to vote for resolutions. The church is demonstrably not a democracy. It's a unilateral dogma enacted through a tyranny of unaccountable self-appointed, well, tyrants. This should not be a vote, it's a demonstration of defiance. But that shouldn't really impact on a question of whether Camberwell is allowed. Camberwell, after all, is.

Very very scary. Beware the Lion City.

Where's the growling cat emoticon when I need it. You know the national symbol is a Merlion? (Don't ask).

I'm still here MrBen. ;-) Was that a serious question??

Well I was only forelock tugging in the sense that there are clearly worse things than bullshitting about a W-hotel to increase your house price. I've also come under a little flak and thought making my criticism a little less obvious wouldn't be a terrible idea. For long-termers like yourself Louisiana I'd imagine that the irony would be apparent. ;-)

What a fantastic initiative. Is this referring to guys like Streetcar, or is this a public service?

I know, I know, plenty of forelock tugging. :( If you can find it within your heart to attend that meeting, please please do. If not for Alan Dale (who probably is more concerned with house prices ;-)), then at least for the secular future of our community services.