legalalien

At the risk of derailing my own thread, I don’t think it’s specifically about scooters - see https://www.scootschoolrun.org/dulwich-wards (idea will be that if no parking near schools people will be forced into active travel I guess).

Here’s the full list of all the proposed new charges. Actually quite a good way of identifying the services the council provides. https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s117646/Appendix F Draft Fees and Charges Cabinet report - 5 December 2023.pdf

The council’s budget is on the agenda for the next Cabinet meeting, they are struggling a bit to make ends meet although have managed to reduce the budget shortfall from what it was last year. It’s quite interesting reading - worth having a look at this document to see where we can expect to see increases in council charges in the next couple of years https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s117577/Appendix C Income.pdf Garden bin collection, planning fees, PCN charges, leisure services charges, car parking in parks and leisure centres all proposed to increase and there’s a big chunk called “savings from investment in active travel” which I’m wondering about, as an income item - it can’t be reduced investment? All the other items seem to be income streams. Surely it’s not fine income (that couldn’t be described as “savings”)? You can also see proposals on council rents/ heating/ charges for garages here, also on the agenda for the meeting. https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s117444/Report Housing Revenue Account - Indicative Rent and Charges Report 2024-25.pdf Full agenda at https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?MId=7680&x=1 - meeting’s at 11am on 5th and I imagine it will be streamed online.

Just reading through the proposed council income stream adjustments in the budget going to next week’s Cabinet meeting. They are struggling to balance the budget. Looks like garden waste charges are going up to £80 next year if approved. https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s117577/Appendix C Income.pdf

Tonight’s overview and scrutiny committee meeting is shocking, relating to another major works project. The interim chap had apologised profusely, disciplinary investigation /action is underway and auditors are involved. There’s not even an attempt at defending the incompetence/ poor behaviour etc. Just to add the council officer who is the inter person in charge has just described this as a catastrophic failure and has also said that if fraud is shown it will be referred to the police. And that he’s struggling to understand how this has happened when residents have been raising issues to staff and councillors over a period of several years. He’s shocked as well.

On that note the Environment Scrutiny Commission have the issue of EV charging cables to the kerbside on their agenda for next week with some providers of cross-pavement gully infrastructure coming in to talk I think. There’s a desire to avoid people paving over their front gardens so that they can park next to an EV charger close to their house. Good to see it’s being thought about. https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?MId=7858

Apologies if these have been posted on here already as the consultations opened more than a week ago. Couldn’t spot them after doing a cursory scan. Consultation on Southwark Cycling Plan https://consultations.southwark.gov.uk/environment-leisure/streets-for-people-cycling-plan/ And Electric Vehicle Plan https://consultations.southwark.gov.uk/environment-leisure/streets-for-people-electric-vehicle-plan/ And Walking Plan (hooray!) https://consultations.southwark.gov.uk/environment-leisure/streets-for-people-walking-plan/ close on 31 Jan 2024. Haven’t read them yet so no idea what they say/ask. Also a whole lot of Streets for People consultations which close at end March. Ignore these kind of things at your peril as you will end up with the kind of borough wide CPZ plans that stem from the previous Movement Plan consultation. (but not a referendum etc)

Interesting report prepared for the Environmental Scrutiny Commission about whether / what steps the council can take to prevent / charge for applications for dropped kerbs / people paving over their front garden (presumably anticipated in response to roll out of CPZ zones). Answer seems to be not much can be done without risk of breaching relevant law. https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s117311/Vehicle Footway Crossovers.pdf Hopefully this heralds a new approach of taking legal advice before announcing policies.

What I take from the response is that the council has taken legal advice which has confirmed that they can only put in controlled parking where there is a demonstrable need for it in a particular area, and not to pursue a blanket “no/ reduced cars” policy. In my view it’s important to hold onto the point that this is not just about the quality of consultation or whether the residents of a street want a CPZ in their street or not. The question is whether the CPZ is NEEDED to achieve the regulatory objectives of the road traffic act. The point of consulting properly is to ensure the council has sufficient info to form a proper view on the need for the CPZ, and the residents of the street are obviously very well placed to provide that info (and are more likely to want a CPZ if there is parking congestion in their street). But consultation is still not a referendum (!)

Just had an email saying the deadline for that funding has been extended to 22 October which suggests there is funding available. I’m away on holiday next week but happy to try and help put in an application- if people are willing to post on here some info about the previous Physic Garden and what would be involved, where the suggestion is that it goes and I think there would also need to be agreement consent from the school or TJ depending on where people think it should be. If there’s a week to put in an application it shouldn’t be beyond the power of the folk on here and perhaps we could work together instead of arguing with each other for once?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=aI_RBnQ4pvk

No suggestion of that. Seems the council’s housing lead departed recently, as one of the other senior execs was at the meeting doing the apologising notwithstanding he’d only been covering the post for about a week. I think he usually covers the child/ education portfolios. Anyway is not relevant to this thread so I guess continue any discussion in the lounge ☺️

There’s a licensing application for a wine shop /wine bar where Forest plant shop used to be, I think. Not sure whether they’ve started work / moved in yet? https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?MId=7824

Following on from the comments about graffiti above. Looks as though Southwark is planning to provide ground height graffiti removal services to private property / infrastructure without charge going forward - proposal on website awaiting formal sign off with service to commence this month. https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgIssueHistoryHome.aspx?IId=50033380 Might be something that everyone can agree on for once?

Good advice FM, I used to try and keep up but have fallen out of the habit. Just logged in to watch tonight’s meeting - watching a very impassioned speech by an estate resident about Southwark’s failures in relation to its housing estate. Really interesting. edited to add - this has turned out to be incendiary. Although the council have admitted getting everything wrong with this housing project the guy from the tenants association is making a lot of allegations about the council covering up fire safety info. Everyone in the meeting looks shocked.

I think this was the original timetable but the deadlines have been missed, obvs

I googled Southwark and 15 minute city and this was the first thing that came up. https://londonlivingstreets.com/2020/10/25/the-15-minute-city-a-london-case-study/#:~:text=Going further and supporting the 15-minute city.&text=Following the initial lockdown%2C Southwark,west of the Walworth Road. The COVID lockdown all seems a distant memory but I’m pretty sure that Living Streets’ Jeremy Leach was acting as a de facto councillor for a bit and the Environmental Scrutiny Commission was all over the 15 minute city (as that’s where I heard about the idea)? Waltham Forest have a cabinet minister for 15 minute neighbourhoods and I doubt she’s an imaginary character invented by the right wing press https://walthamforestecho.co.uk/2023/06/02/new-council-cabinet-role-to-oversee-15-minute-neighbourhoods/. (Everything always seems to lead back to Waltham Forest. I keep thinking of it as a sort of Christiania of London, might have to do a field trip one day. Is it nice?) I personally find I have plenty to moan about without being drawn into some sort of “socialist conspiracy” theory, the fact there are people out there who are drawn into that stuff isn’t a reason to stifle sensible debate. (Mind you they probably think they’re sensible….)

What I find interesting is how many things Sunak’s team think can be achieved by changing guidance rather than having to amend statute/ regulation. Why? IMHO because local government have been pushing the boundaries by using statutory powers for improper purposes - and that’s not too hard for central govt to rein in if they are so minded. If anyone has a hotline to Conservative HQ can they suggest they focus on Southwark 😂😂

I doubt Rishi’s going to mention cycle infrastructure - isn’t he supposed to be close to Andrew Gilligan? And see https://cyclingindustry.news/sunak-stays-the-course-on-cycling-policy-truss-yet-to-offer-stance/ I do think that the overarching direction of transport policy should be more centralised as (no surprise) I think local government should be largely focused on delivering a discrete set of services (and frankly I find it very odd that schools are included in those, but I grew up overseas where things were different). Given Keir Starmer is likely to be in charge of central govt in the near future I imagine his instincts might favour centralisation as well… not sure where things stand in the Labour Party in terms of the relative leftist vs centrist stances of councils vs the parliamentary party (not just in terms of transport but more generally?)

I see in this morning’s Guardian article that “Councils in England have since been instructed by the DfT to return lengthy questionnaires by the end of September on any LTNs they have installed since 2020, including the consultation process used before they were built.” I wonder what the DfT plans to do with that info (apart from send it out to loads of people in response to the inevitable FoI requests)?

Guardian and Times now both saying that Rishi is going to give a speech about restricting local govt powers to curb car use, including restricting powers to impose ANPR fines in some unspecified way. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/sep/28/rishi-sunak-expected-to-limit-powers-of-councils-in-england-to-curb-car-use-20mph-speed-limit-traffic-camera-fines Rishi Sunak expected to block new 20mph zones. https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/1804b89e-5e57-11ee-a0fe-c89e2badddf3?shareToken=761316ee846d235bca6f0ae4f0a3f087 Also in the Telegraph I believe but I don’t have a subscription. That Guardian statement at the end of the article where they ask for a financial contribution seems to have got a lot longer and angrier at some point!

I meant onto something in terms of the conservative strategy. Whether it works or not is a different thing altogether!

Turned on the TV to see a Welsh conservative rep talking about the problems with the new Labour imposed 20mph limit in Wales and the fact that one of the bus companies is having to reschedule / reduce services asa result. Rockets, I think you are onto something.

Actually I think FM’s post raises an interesting point. While central government’s view on net zero / transport policy has been aligned with the view of local government, councils have had lots of scope to pursue policies like Southwark’s “discourage car” policy, without the risk of being called out by central government. With Sunak’s regime now “on the side of the motorist”, head office might be tempted to take some symbolic actions to reinforce their position (for example tweaking guidance on parking powers under RTRA to make it clear that they are not to be used for the purpose of making car use more difficult (!)). Am sure there are other areas where they could act to reinforce their political position (conditions attached to funding various council transport plans maybe?)

I believe they’ll still have to do the statutory consultation on the individual traffic management order(s) implementing the parking restrictions - I think this is what they mean when they refer to legal consultation https://www.southwark.gov.uk/transport-and-roads/traffic-orders-licensing-strategies-and-regulation/traffic-management-orders I imagine there’s plenty of scope for gerrymandering when determining how many traffic orders to use and which areas to put into each traffic order - perhaps there’s a cunning plan to use this extensive soft consultation to inform that process (suspiciousness morphs into conspiracy theory..) It is probably quite useful for the council to have a detailed view of people’s opinions on appropriate time periods, so you can decide where to put zone boundaries (once you accept that a CPZ is happening).