Penguin68

I have reported on this site before of an incident witnessed by my daughter when a cyclist was attacked by a car driver (with his car) as a clear road rage incident - which the police only responded to with a questionnaire sent to my daughter several days later, her having reported the incident to the police on her phone as it was happening. The cyclist was slightly injured and his bike totalled. However this incident as described may well be a car driver responding (probably ill advisedly) to a phone or similar snatching incident - we do know that goes on and in spades recently. The (very probably) later arrival of the police cars may well have been a response then to a report of a crime (and not dangerous driving) - but here, please note everyone, I am just speculating.

Well, let's just hope, then, that the cyclist wasn't one of those who are phone snatching, and the driver not someone trying to make a citizen's arrest, otherwise this narrative would be stood on its head.

I'm sorry, but this is an entirely rubbish analysis. The numbers of people who were either residentially qualified to, or were aware of, this' consultation' were only a few streets in East Dulwich and not the whole of the area, which is made up of more than one ward. We know that those (well, at least one) who back the council's agenda participated in the consultation, although not even Southwark residents. Making an assumption that those who didn't say 'no' to a CPZ would have said 'yes' is statistically unsound. When there was a wider consultation a few years ago which involved those on both sides of Lordship Lane, as I recall, those registering against a CPZ were still equally and proportionally as high.

... So a very credible and immediate risk, then...

Standard Marxist entry strategy, and yes, he initially self identified as a Marxist before later removing that detail. His evident hatred and disdain for the Kulak class probably suggests Bolshevik leanings. Even Momentum, I've been told, considers his clique too left for them. But then, as Trots they probably would.

That logic would suggest that, taken to extremes, if I was the only one in a road who wanted a CPZ, a liitle one outside my house would be created, just for me. Which is probably the mindset of those who did vote for a CPZ and will be livid when someone else on the street parks outside their house. Which they will. The CPZ logic has always been to reduce the parking space in CPZ roads to fewer places than residents cars need to spread the pain to adjacent streets. That's how it works

Sunday working is very expensive... Why would they care anyway? It's not as if we have an option to go to an alternative supplier.

I do know that the bin men are tasked to empty the relevant bin to their round and to move on, so street collection bags won't be covered by them. They are given quite demanding routes daily which they have to cover. Street sweeper bag collections I think are done by those lorries with cages.

Actually probably paid for from all the traffic fines and CPZ revenues, but that money could have been used more clearly for the public benefit on road repairs etc. But almost nobody in Dulwich actually asked for this expenditure. All they have ever wanted was more effective traffic management through the centre of Dulwich for improved safety and traffic flow. Which they ain't got!

But this collection is not a function of the bin men who work demanding hours, they start very early, in an unpleasant job. You have attacked them when you should be attacking, if anyone, their managers in either Veolia or the council who are failing to schedule timely pick up of street collected rubbish. Or perhaps paying for it. You have moved from saying the rubbish is poorly collected household rubbish to saying they are street swept rubbish,not collected quickly. Very different things.

The shots are mainly of Melford Road and the rubric suggests that the street cleaner bags on 'Thursdays'. The general rubbish collection is on Tuesdays. If the bags haven't been collected on Friday, but have been left for general disruption over the weekend then the bin men will see simply a rubbish strewn road with this rubbish not in any bin. They don't have time to street clean themselves so will not collect it. I reiterate that the crews I see for general rubbish collection, the 'bin men' are careful and considerate in their collections from bins, some of which are indeed very full, to overflowing. They don't collect bagged rubbish left on the street away from bins, nor have they the time or are tasked to clean the streets of scattered rubbish.

I had not realised your photographs were of the road I live in - which I must admit I do not recognize. I had though they were not Underhill Road but elsewhere. Apologies. I had thought I was writing of my own experiences in Underhill Road but obviously I don't know my own streets. When the men I watch tip rubbish into their lorries they do not seem to spill out into the road, but obviously my eyes aren't good enough to see this.

And, if some feedback results are true, work not required, asked for or wanted by a majority of those who are deemed to be 'benefitting' (and I may be using that word quite wrongly) from this scheme imposed during lockdown against the wishes then of the majority, who had resisted earlier proposals before the then government gave councils the right to ignore local opinion during a perceived medical emergency.

The Veolia teams that have serviced Underhill for the last few years (certainly before lockdown) have generally been very tidy. A few spillages but not noticeably many, and often from very overfilled bins. I have seen them take brooms to sweep up real accidental spillages. There are problems with fox or cat scattered rubbish from accessible bins, and from food wrappers discarded by passers bye, but that is neither Veolia's nor the council's fault.

Do you mean when you say 'right headlight' driver side or passenger side? Right from inside the car or as it comes towards you? My car was recently stolen by accessing the electronics via the nearside front headlight, which stopped that working. This may be a simple hit and run or it may additionally have been a stolen car.

Kettle? Black?

In so far as the Act was resisted (and I remember that smog) it was resisted by those who had no other form of heating - space and hot water - available. And we had a number of terribly cold winters around then. Most people welcomed it. Nobody who lived through the London Smog would do anything other. There were coal merchants who weren't keen, of course, but these aren't the people you were attacking to make your anti-car argument.

It may be that the power network work is part of the junction build, in which case the appallingly poor planning and allocation of work is even worse than I'd feared, or it may just be coincidental. All that appears to be holding the full opening up of the junction is the new traffic lights to be made operational, which should have been the first thing planned. If these works were being undertaken by a commercial company it would be bust by now. As, probably, are TFL and the council, but they can just go back to the money tree. (Wait for the council's cheerleaders to weigh in now...)

Nobody actually in real life uses that definition, other than astronomers. That places the start of winter at the winter solstice, and spring running until yesterday. Normal people don't think like that. But that, I suppose makes sense.

What planet is this man from? June 21st it literally the height of summer, from tomorrow the days get shorter. If people are looking for a 'first day' the general choice is either 1st May ('hooray, hooray, the first of May, outdoor f***ing starts today') or 1st June (assuming the summer months are June July and August).

Are you talking about Timothy grass - which is terrible for hay fever? In which case it's wind dispersed and a nightmare.

But this is one of those 'my journey is unnecessary to you', or rather 'your journey is unnecessary to me' moments isn't it? You have no rights whatsoever to judge the necessity of my, or indeed anyone other's journey, only your own. It is this totalitarian arrogance of the council and it's cheeleaders which annoys others. We already have laws which restrict us, often quite properly. But these are actions which further restrict us no doubt in your mind 'for our own good'. Well hang that. The council is using powers to pursue an agenda that very many did not sign up to, and don't give me nonsense about 'we elected them'. They were only once overt in their declared hatred of private motorists, and that was several elections ago. Oh, and local electors in a local election very stupidly used their vote most recently to attack a national government they didn't like. More fool them.

I think more likely is that people keep a car for journeys that public transport doesn't offer, or at a price they are not prepared to pay, and use their cars possibly just at weekends or for special trips. The idea that car traders are using all our streets for stock is simply wishful thinking for those who hate car owners.

... Or cyclists. I do not believe 'the active travel lobby' are particularly made up of proselytising walkers, the mode of active travel most common, it would appear, in Dulwich.

Actually work has been done on that. People accept taxation as necessary for a modern state to work. However if you allow people to choose what the tax would be spent on you do get different aportionments from those HMG (of whatever nature) chooses. You can even get people to opt in as it were for tax rises if they get the opportunity to allocate that rise. People are not actually against taxation per se. So, all work done that I know of says the answer wouldn't be no. Except yours, apparently.