Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Aside form there being no schools on Lorpshit Lane you seem to be letting your desire for a bargain cloud your judgement.

I'll get our local RADISH HEADED COUNCILLOR to smite you with his ILLIBERAL VENOM OUTSIDE SCHOOLS so the kiddy-winks can WITNESS JUSTICE.


ap

tough on snorky, tough on the causes of snorky.

good account of the meeting. the female doctor mentioned is not from the nursery but from the surgery; Dr Bhatia. i thought she handled herself well and in fact was the best person from DMC. She was clearly winded by the reaction but handled it in a calm manner. A great speaker if ever i saw one.

I thought about going but knew it would be a waste of time. I had some idea the nimbys would be out in force, nothing like threat of devaluation of house prices to get one off ones arse, so I gave it a miss.


No wonder the DMC didn't want to consult with that lot! I wouldn't want to either.

AnotherPaul, great report - thanks.


From the back of the room a city worker (as he described himself) made the point that the pharmacy going ahead would devalue house prices. Well, this is East Dulwich after all and house prices had to figure somehow. He'd just been on the phone to a city lawyer (oooh!) and suggested that locals in the community should get their houses valued and that he would start a class action against the DMC were they to proceed. Many arms were raised in support of this.



I don't know which city the lawyer came from, but he doesn't know much. Class actions don't exist in the UK (save perhaps certain actions before the Competition Appeals Tribunal, which have to be brought by an organisation like 'Which?'). He's also clearly never tried to get a Group Litigation Order (the closest thing we do have to a class action) off the ground. I have and it ain't easy. P.S. Costs still follow the event (i.e. loser pays) even if you have a GLO and I personally wouldn't fancy the group's chances of getting a funding agreement in place either.


I'm with Keef - people like that make me want to pick up a pitchfork and flaming torch. There are some serious issues here which deserve a sensible debate - not a petty (and ill informed) response like that. As this gentleman may well be following the debate here, I'd suggest his house price is far more likely to be affected by prevailing market conditions, created by some bad and some insane lending choices by the investment banks over the last few years. As a city worker (perhaps even someone who works at one of those banks), I'd expect he knows that too.

anotherpaul - an accurate account of the evenings 'performance' Those of you who attended - many thanks. We had invited the local police just in case we had a few extremists turn up to cause mayhem but everyone was remarkably 'restrained' in their behaviour!

It was encouraging that the local pharmacists have proposed extended opening hours rota and we hope this will be possible to introduce. Many valid points were made from the floor - and I too felt that the female GP at DMC did try and convince us that it was consummer/patient choice that all these extra things were needed. In fact that many of the audience were sceptical of the real reason behind the Mediquick's application, added to the weight of arguement against the application for pharmacy/syringe exchange. For those of you who had an opportunity to look at the posters and papers on display - there was a copy of a study by Oxford University who had been commissioned by Camden Council to look at the effect that a needle exchange had on a local community. Hard hitting academic research - Camden had a 20,000 petition against a needle exchange.

Although we may feel that PCT are likely to reject the Mediquick application - this is not a forgone conclusion. As Dr. Fryrer stated - the goverment request for the willingness to provide a 100 hrs per week needle exchange, and at this stage the DMC do not want to provide this service, but there is no guarantee that the DMC will, in both the long and short term, maintain this position.


BARA have a long standing reputation in the area, and the fact that both PCT , Mediquick and DMC attended the meeting was an indication of how seriously they took our stance.

Mediquick have a number of applications in for pharmacies in the Borough, and also in Lambeth, Lewisham, and Greenwich and in most locations, will be a threat to the many independent pharmacies.


For those of you who participated in the tea and biscuits afterwards and had opportunities to talk to key individuals, you would have gained much more than can be talked about on a public forum site - and no doubt you will tell your friends and neighbours.


I was glad that it was a long standing BARA member who gave the very elequent final speech of the evening which capitulated the mood of the local residents and what they thought of the DMC/Mediquick.


petitions will continue to be presented - the battle is not yet won - we need to continue to extert the pressure on the PCT.

Will keep you updated. (apologies for the spelling -it is the early hours of he morning and I am due up for work again at 7.30 am)

What extremists? Al-Crack-eda!


Were you expecting a horde of junkies to turn up and offer their view point?


No of course not.


You knew you could count on the vulnerable to stay where they are - in the background as usual, which is where you want to keep them.


You're not the Porche owner are you, by any chance?

There's a newspaper clipping in the chemists on Northcross Road, next to the petition against the proposal, the first paragraph says something like "Local residents are angered that the opening of a new drugs clinic will mean that schoolchildren will be attacked by crazed junkies".


I'm sorry but asking for police protection from extremists at a BARA meeting, to me shows that there is perhaps a lack of understanding about the "enemy" and therefore how to deal with them.

Yeah, that was our (ex)own Tom. I did pick him up on the use of unnecessarily scaremongering and emotive language, it doesn't do the debate any favours. Hopefully Jenny will offer a slightly more measured approach if her editor lets her.

has anyone read the " Mass psycology of fascism" by Wilhelm Reich ?


Fascinating stuff.


It is amazing how peoples heads can be turned to accept extremisn without them even realising it, how groups cen be demonised and excluded.


And I bet members of the BARA secret society are mostly Guardian readers


hang your heads in shame people


this truly is a low point in ED history.

BARA Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> We had invited the local police just in

> case we had a few extremists turn up to cause

> mayhem but everyone was remarkably 'restrained' in

> their behaviour!



I've been thinking about this and I'm absolutely shocked to realise that the people 'causing mayhem' might have been people like moi and AFN who were happy to have a bust-up and prevent the debate carrying on!! The shame!

Im sorry, this is balls.


BARA - you ought to be shamed of yourselves even mentioning this - its not surprising that the gaps in our fragmentedsociety are getting wider and wider - childish, reactionary, regresive backward behavior from people who should know better


hang your collective heads in shame.

> hang your collective heads in shame.



Whether it's a new Tesco Gigashed, a Casino, or a 24 hour pharmacy, it's wrong to attempt to provide services on the following basis:


1. identify potential goldmine for private company

2. start digging as quickly and quietly as possible in the hope that no-one notices

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Per Cllr McAsh, as quoted above: “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution. " Is anyone au fait with the Clean Air Act 1993, and  particularly with the state of 'Smoke Control' law and practice generally?  I've just been looking  through some of it for the first time and, afaics, the civil penalties mentioned  were introduced into the Clean Air Act, at Schedule 1A, in May 2022.  So it seems that, in this particular,  it's a matter of the enforcement policy trailing well behind the legislation.  I'm not criticising that at all, but am curious.  
    • Here's the part of march46's linked-to Southwark News article pertaining to Southwark Council. "Southwark Council were also contacted for a response. "Councillor James McAsh, Cabinet Member for Clean Air, Streets & Waste said: “One of Southwark’s key priorities is to create a healthy environment for our residents. “To achieve this we closely monitor legislation and measures that influence air pollution – our entire borough apart from inland waterways is designated as a Smoke Control Area, and we also offer substantial provision for electric vehicles to promote alternative fuel travel options and our Streets for People strategy. “We as a council support the work of Mums for Lungs and recognise the health and environmental impacts of domestic solid fuel burning, particularly from wood-burning appliances. “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution.  “This work is being undertaken in collaboration with other London boroughs as part of the pan-London Wood Burning Project, which aims to harmonise enforcement approaches and share best practice across the capital.” ETA: And here's a post I made a few years ago, with tangential relevance.  https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/278140-early-morning-drone-flying/?do=findComment&comment=1493274  
    • The solicitor is also the Executor. Big mistake, but my Aunt was very old, and this was the Covid years and shortly after so impossible to intervene and get a couple of close relatives to do this.  She had no children so this is the nephews and nieces. He is a single practitioner, and most at his age would have long since retired - there is a question over his competence Two letters have already gone essentially complaining - batted off and 'amusingly' one put the blame on us. There are five on our side, all speaking to each other, and ideally would work as a single point of contact.  But he has said that this is not allowed - we've all given approval to act on each others behalf. There are five on her late husband's side, who have not engaged with us despite the suggestion to work as a team, There is one other, who get's the lion's share, the typicical 'friend', but we are long since challenging the will. I would like to put another complaint together that he has not used modern collective communication (I expect that he is incapable) which had seriously delayed the execution of the will.   I know many in their 80s very adept with smart phones so that is not an ageist comment. The house has deteriorated very badly, with cold, damp and a serious leak.  PM me if you want to see the dreadful condition that it is now in. I would also question why if the five of us are happy to work together why all of us need to confirm in writing.             The house was lived in until Feb 23, and has been allowed to get like this.
    • Isn’t a five yearly electricity safety certificate one of the things the landlord must give for a legal tenancy?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...