Penguin68

Veolia do not have any way of handling Kitchen and Garden waste separately locally (they do in some other parts of the country). They compost all organic waste. Where they do have separate facilities they would anaerobically digest Kitchen Waste to provide a fuel source rather than compost. That is why our organic waste is combined on collection. There would be no point in separating them.

1. There is a legal requirement to limit sales of knives, alcohol etc. to those over 18 and to demonstrate that you are doing so. Such questions are not thus an identity theft scam 2. Where there are sales made to households of items considered dangerous to small children (but not otherwise forbidden) such as small batteries, carriers and sellers may wish to protect themselves from litigation by showing that the goods have been handed over to a 'responsible adult' by doing an age check. If injury then follows they can argue they did not hand something potentially dangerous to a minor. This is not unreasonable in this litigious age. 3. It is much easier (and cheaper) to 'steal' personal data from internet searches, to then steal identities, than it would be door-to-door.

Council tax increase is I think limited to 5%. That is why the council is looking for revenue streams that sit outside the council tax envelope. Which they can hike (broadly) how they like. Such as charges against motorists. Or for non statutory services.

I note that the questionnaire lists a range of actions the council could take as regards streets etc. - you can not complete these but you cannot confirm that there is nothing that you wish them to do to your e.g. local street. That means in interpretation that every action called for will be listed (e.g. wider pavements, more crossings etc.) but there will almost certainly be no listing for the %age of respondents who don't want/ need changes to their streets. Equally all the actions are posited as effectively cost free. Nowhere can you say that you'd prefer what are (in effect) wholly discretionary actions to be substituted for others, which might indeed be statutory. Nowhere can you say that you'd want potholes addressed before pavement widening, or education to be better funded rather than more crossings. Or sealed off streets. This questionnaire is written to licence more interference along the lines we already know - and it gives no space to say 'things are broadly OK, for me, in my neck of the woods'. It is therefore just a charter for change, and sticks to the agenda we already know about. I'd have liked to ask for better speed control in Barry, for instance, but there's no option for that. I'd like cyclists kept off my local pavements, but ditto!

I had a blood test last Thursday and the results were available at the weekend on-line, and I got a text promising a follow-up letter from the FHRG Practice on Monday (this week). So there is some activity going on.

I suspect the first we will ever hear of the council 'reconsidering' their LTN policy will be in the year that income from fines finally falls away. Until then income will always trump democracy. This was never about 'safer streets' and always about an income stream. And, considering the way that legitimate calls on council expenditure are increasing, whilst their tax base is effectively frozen (or at least increases are limited to below inflationary (recently) levels) it is not wholly surprising. It is the fact they feel driven to lie and obfuscate which is saddening. And, of course, there are still 'true believers' out there thinking it's all to do with air and life quality.

Sainsbury's uses social media - both Facebook and X I believe. How about reposting your exchange with them on that and seeing their response. I have found that companies tend to be much more sensitive to that - it has the danger of picking up press interest on a slack news day!

It seems to be a common theme across a number of GP practices in ED (and, I'm sure, elsewhere) that the actual medical staff are in the main fine, indeed helpful and sympathetic, but that the admin people and processes seem to go out of their way to be awkward and unfriendly. They seemed focused on cost optimisation and resource rationing without any thought to issues such as Quality Of Service. They are in a sellers' market (as I have said before) and we stand as no better than supplicants (despite their mouthing towards 'customer service'). Their ideal day would be if no patients at all, ever, bothered them, so they could just focus on collecting their capitation fees. Hence they've made little move to get medical staff back in surgeries. Or to think at all about effective contact strategies with patients on their list (they may shout (on line or text) instructions to you, (do this, collect this form, supply this information - where the NHS rewards them for doing so), but they block, so far as they can, any inbound communication into them).

Only for those roads in ED still regularly supplied by postmen. Which seems a very variable feast at the moment. Although in the last few weeks we have had deliveries (but none yet so far this week) there were (literally) tens of months where a delivery a week was as good as it got - going back the 3 or 4 years since the real ED DO was closed (and not the outsourced DO in Peckham which is still called the ED DO, quite wrongly). Amended to add - this covers those services where the Royal Mail is the delivery agent, I don't know whether other methods are used by some suppliers.

The reason there are different boards on this site is to allow different types of communication to be filtered to those who want it. This seems very specific to those with children who want to discuss issues to do with their children's well being. If you want to make a big political issue of it, it still isn't appropriate to a board which discusses Dulwich Specific problems, or Dulwich specific taken on those. Should local schools take unique sets of actions to address these issues, for instance, then discussion on a Dulwich specific board might be appropriate.

Not terribly ED specific... (admin edit - moved to family room)

That, of course, is shared with a number of different NHS outlets, including the outsourced Kings phlebotomy unit.

Just to clarify, all GP practices are run either by 'private' companies, by private partnerships (still most frequent) or by single, private, individuals. In general companies can frequently be better providers of administrators, and a large private company can amortise the costs of effective IT over a larger business. Private companies providing GP services don't have to be incompetent, those that provide private hospitals are often, in my experience, better administered than NHS hospitals. All are in GP doctoring to make money. The NHS contracts with them to outsource primary care for the NHS. Direct NHS services are supplied mainly by hospitals (hospital trusts) and some other services (such as psychological services) - although these may also be tendered for by private suppliers. For these we in Dulwich are covered by SLAM (South London and Maudsley Trust) which is an NHS operation - covering Lambeth, Southwark and Lewisham. We are unfortunate in that our experience of GP administration by private companies is dire, but no more so, frankly, than our experience of admin by (some) partnerships - the tales told here of a very tiny time window to make appointments is also currently true of Forest Hill Group Practice, which is a partnership. Edited to add - At the moment Primary Care is a sellers' market - there are too few doctors prepared or trained to work in Primary Care, so those that are prepared to do so have the commissioners over a barrel - it really doesn't matter how poor their Quality of Service is - so long as they still treat those patients they can get round to treating properly, the fact that getting appointments is a nightmare doesn't really cut it. Nobody is going to close a practice which isn't actively killing patients when the alternative is no cover at all!

As others have said, the Openreach fibre is carried to a terminating box on your outside wall (in my case) and linked to a second terminating box, with an Ethernet port inside your property (which must be powered). The Openreach engineer drilled through the wall to link the two boxes. From the internal box I have run an Ethernet cable to my existing hub/ router - which gives me WiFi and a number of Ethernet ports. This Ethernet cable, not much larger than internal phone wiring (but less flexible, sharp right angled turns aren't really possible) can be happily run along skirting boards etc. The hub/ router also has an ATA port at the back into which I have plugged a single phone (with 5 slave phones) - each of the slaves has to be plugged into the mains (as does the master) and receives wireless signals from the master phone - which also offers answerphone capability (there is quite a wide choice of compatible phones on the market). As I already have a BT 'landline' that number was ported to my digital system. Most vaguely modern phones (those which require direct power) are capable of handling digital (packet switched) conversations. However, any old fashioned phones (exchange powered) will need to be junked. The key data distribution point is the hub/ router - the in-house box installed by the Openreach Engineer is the equivalent only of the old 'Master socket' for copper landlines, although unlike that it cannot be exchange powered. The job of this box is to convert electrical signals to light signals to pass through the fibre network. Although there was a cock up initially in the installation (because it wasn't properly surveyed) I found both BT people and Openreach people quite helpful - which wasn't always true of the contractors Openreach employed to undertake external works. Obviously the neatest distribution would be under the floor (or through ceiling ducts) around the house, but mostly our telephone wires weren't distributed that way in any older house (say pre war, and probably most 1950s and 60s houses as well) - so Ethernet can follow the same route as your telephone wires. Remember also once you have signal to your hub, you can use your home electric wiring (within any one circuit) to port data signals through your own electricity supply (with the right kit, not too expensive) without having to run more Ethernet cables. There is some signal loss, but hardly noticeable if you are moving from 70Mgb to a Gigabyte.

The images are of tables of data and graphs, appearing in other research and manipulated to exclude some elements etc. So same stuff really, just in visual form.

Actually I think you'll find it is about the way that visual images of data were presented and interpreted by 'researchers' using these images (drawn from other research) as part of an argument of their own. The author does not impugn malign intent on these researchers, specifically, but it is suggested that the way people choose evidence to support arguments may well be challengeable. This supports arguments which suggest that papers, even where presented in reputable and peer reviewed journals, may well be flawed as regards their use of findings to support a case. The fact that the examples chosen to illustrate the problem were drawn from use of data images in other research does not detract from the underlying thesis that research as presented can be fundamentally flawed - in a manner which a casual reader would find difficult to determine without access to the original research papers from which these images were drawn. Indeed it is probable that basing this paper on the use of third party sourced data images (where the originals exist and can be accessed) might be one of the few ways in which this can be addressed. How researchers use data they have originated and which they only have access to is far more difficult to judge, where full data results are not presented (and indeed how can one trust that these are full data results?).

This was at a time when even the rapacious Mayor was letting people enter central London freely.

I have just seen, at lunch time today, on my raised ED terrace, a large dog fox with a large (dead) grey squirrel in its mouth - it then took it to the middle of the lawn to start on it. I have never seen a fox with a squirrel before, indeed I assumed that an alert fox wouldn't be able to catch a squirrel in a well-treed garden. I know they take mice and rats but I thought squirrels would be too nimble. Clearly wrong. Presumably this was ambush predation. In 35 years of living here this was a first.

I'm sorry, but there is absolutely no evidence that CPZs contribute to clean air or any of the Green shibboleths. What CPZs do is to counter parking issues in areas where parking spaces are contested to the disadvantage of residents. The ultimate aim of Southwark is to drive out privately owned cars from Southwark (and grab loads of money on the way to that) but to pretend that CPZs are in any way green per se is rubbish. If anything they encourage additional car miles as people drive around looking for somewhere to park, or drive around whilst a passenger shops or whatever.

Also please note that you do need to check Faraday pouches regularly, the wire mesh inside can fail. I now keep my key in an aluminium foil pouch inside the Faraday pouch, and check at least daily it isn't compromised. I have had 4 pouches fail. So far my belt and braces approach has worked. Together with using a steering wheel lock. Fingers very firmly crossed!

The sign erectors were acting as their agents, they are the principal. I imagine the sign erectors and the estate agents both carry public liability insurance. You must communicate, ideally in writing - (hard copy -not just a phone call or email) - for the record. I would take photographs, as evidence of what your property looks like now - and see if you have any pictures 'before'. Set out clearly what you expect - if the gate is actually broken then you might reasonably expect a new, not just a repaired, gate, to the same style as the old one.

You are not, when the light is 'stolen' by trees, (with special exceptions for certain types of hedging). . You are as regards a neighbour building e,g. an extension.

I assume the trees are not on your property? If they are not, then you have a right to cut (or have someone cut on your behalf) overhanging branches (offering to return cuttings to the property where they originated). You have no rights to natural light as such, as regards trees, although there are restrictions on the heights of certain types of hedging. You may not cut neighbouring trees in a way which would permanently damage them (cause them permanent harm) - for instance by severing roots. You can ask the owner of the trees whether they have been assessed for safety, pointing out that where they have not been, and where subsequent damage to life, limb, or property occurs, they may be fully liable. (Of course, trees even when assessed can subsequently be brought down by, e.g. high winds, but regular assessment would avoid claims of negligence against the tree owner).

Money, more particularly a revenue stream not capped by central government. Oh, and they don't approve of private ownership of cars. So 'hitting' car owners and users for money is morally OK for them.

I think 20 years, rather than 10. Though could be next week!