Penguin68

and he was not responsible for the tfl deficit Choosing as a political gesture not to put up fares for 4 years - when rail fares were rising by RPI and more - was clearly a Mayoral decision which left, in retrospect, the service comparatively underfunded (by I think about ?600 million - happy to stand corrected on that). Clearly the fall away of revenues as a function of Covid economic downturn could not have been forecast - but then intending to run the whole service unchanged is probably also a mistake - empty trains are fine now, when infection rates support that, but not in a post-Covid (or at least a 'living with Covid because of a vaccine program' world).

To be fair, KK, that's not likely to be Conway's fault. More likely due to things like clay soil and trees, surely? Conway cannot be blamed for e.g. newly planted trees after their work is completed, but with existing conditions - such as existing trees and existing subsoil a good contractor should be working with these in mind. Since biblical times ('houses built on sand') the importance of foundation work has been understood. In some areas which are otherwise paved the areas around trees are left either clear (with e.g. gravel) or are tarmacked, to allow root movement without disturbing paving stones. Displacement in under a year is clear evidence of shoddy work.

Once again (sorry) I make my point that the creation of a long thin north:south borough out of Southwark and Camberwell was a huge mistake - world view from flat and well served by public transport (including the tube!) Tooley St is very different from hilly Dulwich - a long(er) way away from the centre, infinitely far from a tube system and served by trains that are often out of service over weekends and by buses that consider East:West travel is something to be achieved only over hours. And everything isn't accessible easily and safely by bike for us, particularly given age, infirmity or the presence of children. And we are about to be hit by a congestion charge to pay for TFL services we hardly even can access - unlike the rest of the area covered between the North and South circulars. 'Our' (and I use that word quite wrongly) local politicians hate and despise us, lie to us, obfuscate and dissimulate. Their only god is the policy of the apparat - and their policy only makes sense in the old borough of Southwark.

tommyboy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Anyone seen the proposed new signage about this? > Walking along Townley earlier today and couldn?t > see anything. Why sign when you can fine?

My experience is that between 2% and 5% of tube/ train users don't wear masks. At Green Park this time last week (having got there seeing no transgressors) there were 3 middle aged women, two young (20's) women and one middle aged man - all white - happily not wearing any face covering. Two of the middle aged women and the young women were talking closely to each other. One woman brushed past me as she rushed to catch a train. At least 4 of those I saw, by their age at least, were in at risk groups. Coming back there were a couple mask-less and several who clearly don't think that both mouth and nose need to be covered. But the vast majority of travellers were complying. Remember, it's because of the mask-less that hand-washing or sanitising is important.

2500 Londoners will be much more representative than the unscientific snapshot on this forum It all depends on how the respondents are recruited - undoubtedly the ED forum is self selecting (but with quite a wide variety of views, political and social, represented) - but the sampling process for a survey is key - is it random, is it weighted, and if so how? etc. What are the confidence limit? Any statistical poll with a result around 50%, even with a sample of 2,500 is likely to have a confidence range of +/- about 4% - 52% plays 48% essentially means 'evenly balanced'. or may. The metadata (recruitment criteria, how the poll was conducted, over what time period etc.) is key in interpreting the results. And a London-wide poll will include areas which are probably not so impacted by the actions, which are by no means uniform across all the boroughs.

Penguin68 wrote on October 17, 09:52AM: -------------------------------------- > You can be fined (and people are) for > moving into a bus lane to allow an > emergency vehicle on 'blues and twos' > to pass (either from in front or behind) Where does this information come from? A quick search:- https://www.thesun.co.uk/motors/3558862/drivers-could-be-fined-up-to-1000-for-giving-way-to-emergency-services/ https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/can-you-fined-driving-bus-13004158

This is entirely charming (and wholly mad and eccentric) and changes (grows) every time I visit. The owner/ artist is a wholly lovely man, and his vision compelling. There are bits I'm less fond of (dismembered dolls), bits I love and all enchants. The garden in spring and summer is a delight.

Paying for bus fares also encourages people to look closer to home for a school so that their child/teen can walk Well, absolutely, convenience and the cost of a bus fare trumps the schools facilities, teaching quality, 'fit' with your children's needs and reputation any time! At least it means the employed middle class can afford to send their children to the best state schools, regardless of the bus fares. Which is only right.

You can be fined (and people are) for moving into a bus lane to allow an emergency vehicle on 'blues and twos' to pass (either from in front or behind). Better people die than an empty bus lane is momentarily blocked. That's the world we live in.

I don't think the Tories have much of a base in Southwark but you never know these days. Maybe it's another red wall due to fall, but I suspect that the wealthy middle class socialists who live in London will be the last to give up on 'never vote Tory'. On the other hand, I would certainly consider voting for an independent standing on a 'Dulwich for Dulwich people' ticket. Or indeed a Camberwell ticket, since joining the boroughs was in my view a huge mistake. Indeed, any candidate who was prepared to put the wishes of the majority of their potential constituents first, and not a party ticket, might get my vote. Should we ever be allowed to vote again. Or will our councillors now be councillors for life, as the Mayor appears to be?

Interestingly, if we are to have a daily congestion charge imposed on us willy-nilly if we live within the North and South Circular (and keep our cars there, and why wouldn't we) and if we are to have our travel concessions removed, and if we are to live in an area so poorly served by public transport, hilly and far from town - well I suspect I will be using my car (as a pensioner) a great deal more than previously, when I tried to use public transport a lot. If it costs me no more (other than petrol) to get to a station than it does to get to Central London - then I will be driving. At my age and vulnerability sitting in my own car, even in a jam, will take no longer, and be a lot safer, than travelling with the mask-less public (today I estimated between 2% and 5% of passengers had no mask, or didn't think noses counted). If you need a car at all, and I do, then you may as well make full use of it, if you are to be charged for using it at all. Why would you do anything else?

first mate and KidKruger you are both very kind. P68

The roads aren't closed though, they are filtered. Every street can be driven on and to. Residents can also use their cars, get deliveries etc., it?s just not possible to drive straight through from one main road to the next. I'm sorry, this is the definition of a cul-de-sac - often marked with 'No Through Road'. True - it's not actually what we often refer to rudely as ' a gated community' but it is the next best thing. THE ROAD IS CLOSED TO THROUGH TRAFFIC (pardon for shouting). A 'filter' suggests that you can pass through, but although pedestrians and bikes I suppose can - 4 wheeled vehicles can't. They are not 'filtered' they are blocked. The road (as a road, as opposed to a pavement or cycle track) is closed.

The south circular was completely closed in both directions due to a burst water main. Nothing to do with LTNs. Confirmation bias much? The whole point of a local road system is that closures can be anticipated (they will happen, just don't know when) and if roads are open the traffic can be diverted/ divert itself. So the gridlock is a result of, yes certainly, the primary cause of closure but also the secondary effect of enforced (not accidental) closures of many of the relief routes. So the gridlock (or the worst of it) is absolutely a function of LTNs. I have lived in this area for over 30 years and some closures caused by force majeure have been a regular feature - up till now relieved (at least for 'locals' by the use of alternative routes through the 'Dulwich's'. These (well some of these) have now been cut-off by fiat not accident or incident.

Decimilisation in the UK is a lot older that the EU. The florin (2 shillings) was introduced as a first step to this as a tenth of a pound in...1849! Metric measurements were legalised in 1896 and a draft bill in 1910 proposed compulsory metrification but was dropped due apparently to "war and depression" Off topic, I know, but (I'm old) I was taught to calculate in base 10, base 12, base 20, (base 21 - for guineas) base 8, base 16, base 14, base 112 (and don't get me talking about rods, poles and perches) modern children get base 2 and base 10 only. Whose was the more searching education?

I have also in the past used BT and didn't find any difference in the router performance, though I was expecting to. Why? BT owns Plusnet and they use the same kit in the exchanges. Plusnet is a no frills version of the BT offer in effect.

coming on standard visas from overseas Visa type isn't an issue - if arriving from (most, now) overseas territories (I believe Italy and Eire are still OK) visitors (or UK citizens) must quarantine for 14 days - there are some exemptions (i.e. cabin crew) but not many. The countries on the OK list change regularly - normally on Thursdays.

35% of all car trips are shorter than 2km.... You have to be a bit careful about these figures. If you set off on a long trip, stop at a garage locally for petrol, and then continue, that's 2 trips - once under 2km, and one longer. It depends very much on how they are being both recorded and reported. Broadly (and it makes sense) the figures give a reasonable view - mostly (60% of the time) you travel within around 5kms of your starting place before returning - though who you're with, what you are carrying and the purpose of your journey are ignored. As is the state of the weather and the time (you're more likely to take a car if you plan some part of your journey out or return when public transport you could use isn't running). And if you're running a relatively (or completely) 'clean' vehicle - electric or hydrogen (eventually) the number and length of your trips will be completely irrelevant when it comes to issues of pollution. Which is the future that many people are looking to - but if the cycling brigade get their way, and we are forced out of having cars, the necessary economies of scale for an electric or hydrogen future will be lost. If people don't or can't, buy sufficient numbers of the cars, they will be generally unaffordable - so the only motorists left will be the wealthy. Considering the socialist (indeed Marxist) background of so many of the campaigners surely an unintended consequence?

Well LL, EDG and the South Circular are all designated as A roads and have been for decades They can be designated as arterial roads till you're blue in the teeth, but compared to the real arterial roads in North London (just compare the North and the South Circulars) or West London, or even in Bromley and Croydon they are clearly no more than local roads with an unearned title. Just because they have a title doesn't mean they're in the House of Lords. To pretend that forcing local traffic from one set of local roads to another is justified by calling them A roads is just playing with language.

As stated, if you remove the filters and allow cars to use side streets as cut throughs, it may create some temporary relief to main arteries, but it won?t last more than a few weeks and you?ll end up with both congestion on the main roads and traffic on back streets. But this rather begs the question, what are side streets and what are 'main arteries'. There are NO 'main arteries locally - even the South Circular is no more than a 2 lane highway for much of its length - and many of the 'side streets' are no less wide than the 'not' side streets. Furthermore, if you're driving about SE London the 'obvious' way to get somewhere is through the 'side streets' which are direct links - and, as I've said, hardly less wide, sometimes the same width, as the 'main' streets. If we had something like the North Circular running past I'd direct all through traffic onto that, but, of course, we don't. That's both the charm and the drawback of where we live. A picture is being drawn by the pro-closure people of medieval side streets leading into dual carriageways - but it ain't like that at all.

The 'slab' - which looks complete, is about 2ft by 3ft - if the actual measurements are in cms than it's likely to be well post war - but if it is 2 x 3ft it's really quite small (even with a brick surround). I can't imagine the markings are anti-slip - if only because it can't be more than 2 paces long and probably less. It may well have been recovered from some other use and then re-used in the garden. It could be the base for a burner of some sort, for instance for use in a greenhouse. The cross hatchings could be decorative, or could be to wick away moisture, so whatever was standing on it didn't get waterlogged.

Attenborough, and the other climate champions, are clear that what we need is not more cycling, but a third fewer people, worldwide. Trump is doing his best towards that, but the idea that these half hearted measures will result in a climate benefit is laughable. All they will do is to make life less comfortable for many, but to no long-term global climate benefit. Fewer cars isn't going to cut it. We need billions of fewer people. So what all these road closures are really about is an attack (class based) on car ownership and virtue signalling that 'we're the right and thoughtful ones'. As regards climate change and the forecasts of the 'climate experts' this really isn't worth a hill 'o beans. But people will be made to suffer a poorer quality of life so that some (often young and fit) middle class socialists can feel better about themselves. Clever middle class home owners who can create an enclave for themselves have capitalised on this - knowing their short-term benefit is just for them, and won't actually help anyone else. But why not, if they can?

It may already have been repurposed as e.g.hard standing for something kept in the garden. It would make a good stand for a barbecue or possibly one of those aluminium dustbin burners.

We are Underhill/Melford which is now bumper to bumper at peak times (which it has never been before in the 15 years I've lived here) I can go back twice as far (32 years) and can confirm that traffic jams outside my house were not 'a thing' unless there were skip lorries delivering. Not certainly just through weight of traffic (and poorly road positioned buses). It is inevitable when you close local roads to through traffic (much of which is actually itself local) that this will displace to other local roads. There is a myth promulgated by e.g. Southwark that all traffic problems are caused by filthy foreigners trespassing into our hallowed halls - actually the majority of traffic in my experience in local roads is local traffic (or people in adjacent wards and districts) moving around what they see as 'their' patch. I live in ED, but see Herne Hill, Forest Hill, Honor Oak, Brockley, Ladywell, Lewisham, Catford, West Dulwich, Camberwell etc. as 'my' area.