legalalien

The reconstituted Environment Scrutiny Commission meets next Tuesday, will be interesting to see whether the dynamic changes with new personnel ( will they continue to co-opt Living Streets? Jeremy Leach and allow him such a strong voice at the table (perhaps not, given the shift in focus for this year?s work plan). One of the tasks is to finalise part 2 of the Air Quality Report, will be interesting to see whether the outgoing chair (Cllr Ochere)?s comments at the last meeting that he didn?t think the committee could include things without evidence will hold sway. https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?MId=7159 They?re focusing on community energy this year which I guess explains Cllr Newens chairmanship as she is involved in local community energy company SE24. https://www.se24.co.uk/.

Early signs are that XR Southwark don?t think the new strategy goes far enough as they?ve made a deputation request for next week?s cabinet meeting : https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/b50013439/Supplemental%20Agenda%20No.%205%20Tuesday%2013-Jul-2021%2011.00%20Cabinet.pdf?T=9 You may recall that while XR and Fossil Free Southwark were involved in the early stages of policy formulation, by October last year they were expressing concerns about progress, see https://xrsouthwark.earth/lobbying-xrs-open-letter-to-johnson-situ-on-his-appointment-as-cabinet-member-in-charge-of-transport-planning-and-the-climate-emergency https://fossilfreesouthwark.wordpress.com/2020/11/27/climate-strategy-partnership-steering-group-statement-27-11-2020/ - I guess that prompted the various XR stickers that popped up around ED. One of the things called for was an independent review by one of two named organisations, which seems to have happened (from late March)- see https://procontract.due-north.com/ContractsRegister/ViewContractDetails?contractId=94666f08-bd7d-eb11-810a-005056b64545&p=2241eb95-058a-e511-80f7-000c29c9ba21.(although if you google it, looks from linked in like the work was largely done by a junior intern, which may not be quite what the lobbyists had in mind). See also a more recent lobbying letter from XRS to Cllr Dennis who is now in charge of the portfolio. https://xrsouthwark.earth/xrs-letter-to-cllr-helen-dennis-climate Kudos to XR and FFS for publishing these online, the more transparency there is around lobbying the better.

I've tried to give cheddar a bit of a miss and stick to mozzarella and feta (which is what the bhf seems to recommend, thanks for the link). Seems to be genetic in my case. New cheese shop - if you ever read this- perhaps you could have a section/ some flagged up low fat cheeses :) Or plenty of crackers, celery, apples and pears. I love the accompaniments nearly as much as cheese.

Really? I?m sure the doctor told me to cut dairy ( I don?t mean that sarcastically). Can I now justify cheese as a way of staving off osteoporosis?

Here?s the Council?s report on its performance against milestones, prepared for next week?s cabinet meeting. LTN stuff at around page 19-20: https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s99996/Appendix%202%20Performance%20Schedules%20Borough%20Plan%20Cabinet%20Report%2013072021.pdf. Slightly concerning reference to the fact that no real data on level of active travel in schools but that sensors, social media feeds and incoming correspondence suggest targets met. Is this where we?re at? Worth looking at the whole document to get a sense of the various things the council is doing across the board.

Looks like there is an online meeting this Thurs to discuss traffic calming measures around Goodrich School - see https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?MId=7169. Described as a Dulwich Hill ward meeting so I guess it?s open to the public and you email the council officer for Zoom details - not entirely clear.

Could you not extend the consultation window until after the data is released? The high street forums sound like a good idea. amesmcash Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Hi Abe > > It's taking a frustrating amount of time to get > hold of data on this but I understand it should be > released in the coming two weeks, with a meeting > to discuss it. I realise it would have been better > for it to have come out before people respond to > the consultation but this wasn't possible. > > Best wishes > James

That would be quite inspired. Spartacus Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Maybe the council will use the ?3000 allocated to > "dulwich square" events to put up an outdoor > screen to show the game. > > But then again ....

Completely get that - same thing in lots of areas of law. The particular project described didn?t sound to me like something that needed an online platform at all, but who knows what they plan? One of the consultancies I saw on this morning?s register seems to be being paid ?100k pa on a ?sole source because of time constraints basis?, where linked in seems to show that they guy concerned has been working there in an ?interim? post for 5 years, 2 years before founding the consultancy with another ex Southwark employee and three years after. That?s the kind of thing that rings alarm bells for me. exdulwicher Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Legal - I suspect they would counter that since > the govt cuts they no longer have the resources to > do this stuff internally! winking smiley Your > point is a very relevant one though - we all know > getting consultants to do anything is actually a > very expensive way of doing it. > > On the other hand, there's a lot of expertise out > there that would cost councils far more to keep > "on hand" as employees. And if you do need > something doing relatively short term (say over > the course of 12-18 months), it's often far easier > to get in consultants because recruiting the > relevant expertise on short-term contracts is > difficult and expensive. > > Generally quicker and easier to buy in the > relevant needs - on the face of it, an ?85k > consultancy (which is the value of the dxw one) is > expensive but compared to keeping that level of > expert staffing as permanent employees of the > council, it's actually very cheap.

On the need for significant central government funding point - which is (rightly) made frequently - I can?t see how Southwark can think that central government would fund Southwark to achieve a decarbonisation commitment that is even more radical than the government?s own, national commitment, particularly given Southwark is a Labour council. Seems to me like that would never happen. I also don?t really understand why Southwark needs to spend so much on consultants to come up with something so general - a lot of the material in this is very general, and if all councils are producing strategies like this independently, that?s a lot of consultancy spend happening on duplicative stuff, rather than on genuinely borough specific things. Slightly off topic but it seems to me it?s going to be difficult for Southwark (or anyone) to achieve a reduction in emissions while at the same time carrying out a massive house building plan?

What?s strange is that the company is a software consultancy so it seems as though this is something that?s going to involve an online platform or service...

Was googling to see how much Southwark had spent on the external consultant helping to pull the climate strategy together (?60k contract) and came across the online contract register. For those interested in air quality issues, this new contract was added in May: https://procontract.due-north.com/ContractsRegister/ViewContractDetails?contractId=13a0cc7a-c5b8-eb11-810c-005056b64545&p=2241eb95-058a-e511-80f7-000c29c9ba21 Discovery phase: Mitigating the impact of air pollution on the health of vulnerable groups in Southwark (?airTEXT discovery project?) Description: Commissioning user-centred discovery phase research to improve the Council?s understanding of the needs of vulnerable residents in relation to mitigating the impact of air pollution on their health. The discovery phase will consist of new primary research with a sample of residents from our key target groups (children and their parents; residents with heart and respiratory conditions; older people). Within these groups, we will focus on understanding residents of BAME background and those living in more deprived areas in Southwark where there is the poorest air quality. This research will assess the capability, opportunity and motivation of these groups to change their behaviour to mitigate the impact of air pollution on their health, identifying opportunities where the Council could intervene to support health seeking behaviours. It?s within the environment and leisure portfolio (rather than health), ?83.4k. ETA there?s also a late 2020 contract (?153k) for air quality audits of maintained schools in areas of poor air quality, so looks like some priority being given to air quality issue. Other schools can request an audit at the same price Southwark pays. https://procontract.due-north.com/ContractsRegister/ViewContractDetails?contractId=bbf02071-3e9e-e911-80f8-005056b64545&p=2241eb95-058a-e511-80f7-000c29c9ba21

What? I didn?t comment on any of it I was just posting for info? That?s a pretty dramatic response if it?s responding to my post today.

Southwark's Climate Emergency Strategy now posted in advance of cabinet meeting next week, see https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/b50013388/Appendices%20Tuesday%2013-Jul-2021%2011.00%20Cabinet.pdf?T=9 There are some issues/ council views on issues around transport as well as other things - haven't read it yet.

Climate Emergency Strategy now published as one of the appendices to the reports for next week's cabinet meeting, for anyone interested. https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/b50013388/Appendices Tuesday 13-Jul-2021 11.00 Cabinet.pdf?T=9 Document also includes Southwark Stands Together annual report and draft Southwark Equality Framework. Other parts of the papers for the meeting indicate amends to the constitution to address climate emergency and equality issues, essentially to require their consideration when making decisions. Southwark are adopting the equality duty around socioeconomic status that was included in the Equality Act but has not yet been brought into force under that Act. Haven't read any of the documents yet.

Was just looking at the agenda for next week?s Cabinet meeting: https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?MId=7042. One of the Lib Dem councillors has tabled a motion calling on the Council to rethink its current policy of addressing the housing shortage in the borough by building on green spaces in existing estates, and that these green spaces be protected: https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s99857/Report%20Motions.pdf I haven?t seen much discussion of the issue on here even though there?s a fair bit about it in local newspapers and social media so thought I?d flag for general awareness, I?m not quite sure where I think the balance between the conflicting policy goals lies - my instinct is to favour protecting the green spaces but I?m not sure I know enough of the background detail to be sure about particular developments. Some background articles https://londonnewsonline.co.uk/campaigners-protest-against-plans-to-build-on-a-much-loved-green-space-in-peckham/ https://londonnewsonline.co.uk/peckham-green-protesters-feel-new-hope-after-southwark-council-cancels-nearby-developments/

That would be 4:48 mins to run a mile I think - bit better than jogging! You?re right that you can?t use the US injury figure to suggest there are the same levels of danger associated with this particular trial, of course. Those illegally riding privately owned scooters at higher speeds on the roads are the ones putting themselves at highest risk.

FYI Southwark has now formally decided to sign up to the pan-London e-scooter trial, which enables them to eg specify some no go zones, reduced speed zones, parking hubs etc. Decision notice here : https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s99526/Report%20-%20London%20eScooters%20trial.pdf To read more about the background and the identified benefits and risks, worth reading the TfL equalities impact assessment. I found the info about the risks of serious / head injury, compared with cycling, quite alarming. https://content.tfl.gov.uk/rental-escooter-trial-2021.pdf

I think Prof Aldred might agree with heartblock. https://repository.uel.ac.uk/download/05e32a098f5ff9a9ab80e6fd51818c891e33f7917940f2911548f7a18332ed35/152181/Aldred%252C%2520R.%25282008%2529%2520Sociology%252042%2520%25285%2529%2520887-903.pdf "Thanks to critics, medical science publications now take seriously conflicts of interest, although radical scholars argue that disclosure is inadequate and such conflicts must be ended. However, this issue is relatively new for social researchers; as Bell and Bryman (2007: 67) comment, management researchers rarely disclose affiliations and consultancy is seen as an unproblematic benefit. More critical analysis is needed of the commodification of social research: here we may learn from medical scientists? critiques of corporate funding of clinical research. While social researchers lack techniques that kill or injure participants (Dingwall 2006) social research, like medical research, may have damaging effects at a societal level. These effects could relate to what we do as researchers, but also to what we do not do, if we fail to analyse and critique organsiations and elites. Such issues should be the subject of professional and external debate, as with respect to medical research."

Perhaps the difference between science and social science is part of the issue here? http://www.differencebetween.net/science/difference-between-science-and-social-science/. It's an interesting discussion I've had with people before (possibly around a dinner table with too much wine involved).

Actually to add the rest of the paragraph for the first quote: "The absence of rigorous, national school travel data suggests children?s mobility is not valued as highly as adult commuting. This data gap is a barrier to research and inclusive transport planning. As Dr Anna Goodman, who was part of the Propensity to Cycle Tool (PCT) team, explains: ?If we had that data, we could do really high-quality research into the impact that school streets or low traffic neighbourhoods have on travel to school. As it is, we haven't got very far beyond anecdote on those questions.? So the research to date is anecdote, rather than high-quality research? She's describing her own research e.g. the Dulwich cycle count, no?

That's not good news for local cheese fans with high cholesterol levels (me). Metallic Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > There is a cheese shop opening next to Au Ciel in > Dulwich Village.

No,but I've had another flyer from Clean Air Dulwich: "Ask for MORE not less" and "Don't lose it. Improve it."

But all about cycling again - when most children walk to school. As a non-driving pedestrian female parent, having the boundary roads - which are generally the most direct /unavoidable walking routes prioritised is more important to me than cycle infrastructure. I sometimes feel we could all have had a more constructive conversation if we'd had a discussion about reducing car usage that focused initially on public transport and walking, and left cycling out of it. The discussion of peer review reminded me how much I enjoyed the Sunday Philosophy Club /Isabel Dalhousie books. I must dig them out and re-read. Otto2 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Interesting article -- > https://www.transportxtra.com/publications/local-t > ransport-today/features/69199/do-inclusive-transpo > rt-strategies-really-consider-the-needs-of-all-

I agree, surely the coffee/ wine/ deli market locally is a bit saturated?