Penguin68

Leaving the building effectively derelict (even if 'boarded-up' with sheet steel) will make the case for complete demolition simpler. Its position (with garden and parking) and near a school with a boarding house and thus parents visiting who weren't local could well have made it a viable 'pub with rooms' - for longer-term visitors to Dulwich (the route the Dog is taking) - although the worry was that the estate (where its drop-in punters in the old days came from) would have given the wrong tone to a more up-market establishment. But I do feel its very sad to see the 'big' local pubs ruined or closed - most in the Dulwich Estate portfolio.

I just know what debtors are in accounting terms and can't think of any reason a small retail business would have such a significant amount. It could be something to do with their payment system but it is odd. It very much depends on their year end and how e.g. regular prepayments work - if they pay rental quarterly in advance (many commercial companies do) then a year end at the end of month 1 would leave two months rental prepayment as a 'debtor' - i.e. prepayment. Equally the 'rental' element of utilities (as opposed to usage charges) is also an up-front payment - e.g. telephone services. Where retail businesses have regular commercial customers (not an issue here) they may deliver goods in advance of billing (or the bill being paid).

and the students get whatever counselling they need Counselling should not be forced too precipitously on anyone who has suffered a traumatic experience - to be shocked and to grieve is natural - students should be aware of where they can obtain counselling of course - but to engage students (or anyone) in counselling sessions too early may be to fix the event rather than to allow it to dissipate naturally. Most people who do have traumatic events thrust on them do not suffer from post-traumatic shock - some do, but to assume all do may be to actually exacerbate, rather then alleviate, future problems. Sometimes a shared formal grieving process can be helpful, as long as it does not become 'counselling' too early.

I assume the early start on leaf clearance would benefit those going to work/ school in the morning who thus avoid the perils of wet slippery leaves and hidden obstacles previously complained about on this forum. If I was the official in charge of leaf clearance, with complaints being urged on this forum to complain if it isn't, or if it is, being done, I'd probably think - well what I would think is rude.

In general (restrictive covenants and e.g. Conservation Area issues and listing aside) it is a good thing that we cannot generally impose our personal aesthetic tastes onto third parties. One man's 'scruffy' is another's 'lived-in'. At a certain stage there may be issues of danger (to health, to others structures etc.) - but where these aren't an issue then we should learn to live with other's choices.

I think that a security system which over-wrote footage as part of the design (except where that footage was of a malefactor and was intentionally retained) would escape any censure - that is the effect of cameras used on cars to record journeys in case of incident. I do not believe that anyone should be discouraged from installing a camera security system (CCTV) which overlooks the areas outside their dwelling and which may additionally overlook public highways or footpaths. Nor do I believe that having such a system would require registration under the DPA. The UK is the most heavily CCTV covered country (it is reported) - had this been a real issue we would have heard of it by now. Public use of footage gathered by a CCTV system, for instance by posting on the internet, may in the future be an issue, but I doubt it.

Wasn't it once a Military shop selling army stuff... badges, medals etc. I can only remember Target Arms, On Lordship Lane in the block next to the police station. Was there another?

But, that butcher shop with the old car outside, (near o the cemetery) is NOT my favourite It's by far the best butcher locally - and the most wonderfully eccentric shop - internally in very good order - the owner collects classic cars, the ones outside are settling into gentle decay perhaps, but it's not everywhere you can find a car in NY taxi livery.

I shopped regularly in the Brixton M&S at the time of, indeed on the Saturday of, the Brixton riots. It was then a well-used store. And, that Saturday, still untouched by the riots, which had started the night before, although the rioting on Saturday was more intense. It shows something of our own insecurities that we see M&S as a middle class destination store. It was just a store, in Brixton, way back then (and the go-to place for socks and knickers).

Please - I am NOT suggesting Southwark is in any way exceptional, just noting that (indeed like Lewisham) it has a mix of needs. And it is quite possible, based on population, that the south end of Southwark may end up with fewer councilors than previously - if so, again entirely fair (allocation of councilors should match population) but may mean that the voice of the south end is even more muted than before. That is part of what is behind potentially no longer operating an automatic 3 councilor per ward allocation, whilst still sticking with the same overall number of councilors.

I think you'll find no London borough is homogeneous - they all have more and less deprived area in them, even Westminster! I am not suggesting anything other. But it is Southwark, not other boroughs, we are looking at here - and it is clear that the priorities of the northern end of the borough are significantly different from the southern end. As the northern end is more populous it is (entirely properly) their needs which are first addressed. The topology of the borough means that whilst technically inner London we in the southern end have some similarities with outer boroughs. I doubt whether any of the fiddling at the margins which this review will in the end deliver will make any positive impact on us at all (possibly a negative one if our 'tail' becomes even more representative light and the dog even more influential).

Wards (ideally) should reflect communities of interest, the numbers of councilors per ward should have some tie-in to the ward electorate (to reflect case-loads). A 'ward' which covered all those areas which think they are East Dulwich would be much larger than the current ED ward, and probably should have more than 3 councilors. However some communities of interest actually go across borough boundaries (the houses on either side of Wood Vale have much more in common with each other than with either Lewisham or Southwark as a whole, for instance). It can never be got completely right. There are some odd corners in the current ward boundaries which look gerrymandered (the little intrusion of Peckham Rye between College and East Dulwich, for instance) What is broke is the clear difference in needs between north and south Southwark - and that's the one bit which ain't going to be fixed.

I've noticed that the mild autumn has considerably extended the period of leaf fall - I still have deciduous trees where leaves haven't even started turning yet. Maybe the recent strong winds will help - but the longer the period of leaf fall, the more costly it is to continue to sweep up. I recall when bonfire night saw the bulk of the leaf fall burned in bonfires - now this looks to be continuing through to December. 650km of roads will now need sweeping perhaps 4 or 5 times to clear them - whereas in the past that might only have been twice or three times. Hence the time taken to sweep particular roads. And the apparent ineffectiveness of the work done.

on behalf of Southwark labour Councillors Really? Not on behalf of the people of Southwark, or on behalf of Southwark Council, but on behalf of Southwark Labour Councilors only. Seems a bit excluding. First time I have heard of a partisan Remembrance ceremony.

Passengers should use local buses or London Underground to complete journeys if travelling to/from stations between London Blackfriars and Herne Hill/Streatham. Like to see them try...

The pile of tarmac and paving rubbish dumped in Langston by Conways over a month ago is still there, blocking across one lane. As Langston has no houses (or voters) fronting on it, and is, I believe, a ward boundary, it doesn't really have a councilor who 'cares' for it, so nobody really bothers. Conways have always used that road either as a dump or somewhere where they can park-up their kit, but this is beginning to get beyond a joke. If the council's own contractors can fly-tip, why would anyone else not just join in?

This is not a 'shed' but a 1940s pre-fab - post-war housing meant to last 10 years but (some) still sound after 70. They are well proportioned and soundly built (although out of asbestos sheeting, frequently) - my grandparents lived in one after they were bombed out of 3 houses in the war. They were built on a decent sized plot (with gardens) and, for the time, were well appointed with good indoor plumbing etc. As bungalows they were ideal for older occupiers. With asbestos cladding they were warm (and, of course, fire-proof!). They are part of our London heritage - although use of the site can now be 'improved' - in terms of occupancy rates - these 'sheds' provided real comfort to many, and a limited few still do. There were quite a number in Underhill 20-25 years ago, sadly most (bar one, I think) now gone.

In practice (and assuming the police were not otherwise engaged) it would be possible, using police helicopters as spotters, to 'kettle' the riders, blocking roads to channel them somewhere where they can be stopped. This avoids the dangers of chasing them. Even where they are split up rather than wholly kettled, the impact of their riding will be much reduced on the neighbourhood. There have been numbers of accidents arising from police pursuits - and these would be exacerbated where riders (although more fool them) do not have helmets.

I think you will find this is a regular patient participation meeting - not called specifically in response to 'complaints' (though I am sure these will be addressed) nor a meeting which is offering mediation. I have found occasional processes problems here, normally immediately and effectively addressed; have not had problems getting appointments at appropriate times (I am prepared to wait to see a named doctor on non-emergency issues - i.e. annual medication reviews) and have found their telephone consultation services effective. Maybe I have been lucky (and I have been a patient for nearly 30 years at this practice, and have grown old with the doctors).

... and recycling is factored in in our Council Tax. So we pay twice.. At least the council doesn't get the second charge - unlike its proposals about charging for large item removal - and it has great hopes (now) to roll out lucrative CPZs into the rest of the borough. If the turkeys are still keen on voting for Christmas.

Yes - (1) they are not in the ruling party (some of them) and (2) nobody in the Southwark council apparatus cares a tuppeny damn for the posh gits in the south of the borough.

A cynic might suggest that this sudden breakdown of a service which hitherto has worked well is an expected precursor to the introduction of charges, when, no doubt, more items will be discovered to be suitable for collection, and when there is a back-log of items (and hence revenues) to be collected.

To be fair to Mr Barber (something regular readers will know I am loathe to do) for him to complain would be the equivalent of North Dulwich councilors complaining against the decision NOT to have a CPZ around ED Station - a decision (as was the one to have this CPZ) based on the collective wishes of residents. The reason many campaigned against the ED CPZ was precisely because of the domino effects of CPZs spreading through neighbourhoods - the ant-car brigade work hard to start the infection on one locale knowing that like a plague it will spread its evil across the land. This CPZ is of course 'caused' by the Herne Hill CPZ. And it must be remembered that Mr Barber is actually pro-CPZ - so to ask him to interfere in another ward - against the declared wishes of that ward's residents and against his own conscience - is perhaps an ask too far. What we in ED must to is to continue to resist the evil blandishments of CPZ-ers as the consequences of this latest intrusion into our freedoms spreads its poison. I suspect it will not be easy.

What, and spoil a win-win?

Whose best interests are served by arguing for increased tariffs to 'pay' for necessary infrastructure improvements - and who can use age as an excuse for breakdowns and leaks. It is possible that all the ancient infrastructure left in the country is concentrated in SE London (which would at least be consistent with the failures to invest in roads and mass transport south or the river) - however I can recall programmes of replacement locally leading to road disruptions which would suggest there is some new infrastructure here, at last for gas.