Jump to content

Recommended Posts

On the subject of the Walworth Road "improvements" I think Cllr Thomas is unwise to claim this as something to be proud of. This is a major traffic artery and is essential to our local economy. Not all traffic is the too often demonised "cars" but most during the daytime will be business traffic - deliveries to our shops, business people and the man coming round to mend the gas boiler! Simple logic tells me that if vehicles travel at half the speed they will be polluting the area for twice as long. And if they travel in a lower gear then they use more fuel. So even more pollution.

These crazy "improvement" schemes never seem to consider the carbon footprint. The publicity says there are 25,000 vehicles a day. Taking some first order assumptions I calculate that the increased CO2 will be 1350 tonnes per annum - just in one road. Not a professional calculation but it shows that if the Council were to take this factor seriously and commission an expert the results could still be significant.

The same argument goes for road humps which litter ED residential roads. The slow-fast travel of the vehicles (even though below 20mph) is vastly increasing the pollution that creeps into our houses. In France, Germany and even other parts of the UK they have much more imaginative and visually attractive traffic calming measures. Why are we stuck with humps? Now the council wants to put them all over the borough. And we have Cllr. Thomas to thank for this crazy proposal.

Something I've noticed now that I am using a trailer behind my bike, instead of a car, is that there are loads of cycle calming railing things and other barriers blocking path/cyle/roadways all over the place, presumable to stop kids roaring up and down on motorbikes or something, but they make it very difficult to get through with a bike trailer (or a double buggie or mobility scooter).


If the Council are actually serious about trying to get people out of their cars and using other less polluting forms of transport, why do they keep putting these barriers up all over the place?

Cllr Thomas is an absolute crazy proposal ! He recently stated that money should de diverted from the East London Line and into the Tram proposal to ensure that it went across the river. His excuse was that there were areas of severe deprivation in parts of South London ? These people must think we are all stupid, he knows dam well that the East London line does not connect East Dulwich Station to the tube but does connect Peckham Rye and Queens Road, he also knows that a Tram that goes across the river will really help.........yes you guessed it the house prices in East Dulwich.....


Hows the Nunhead Regen going councillor thomas?.....have you found us on the map yet ?....are we to get some more pub benches in Nunhead Green and the lane widened to take even more of your unwanted traffic ?

Richard Thomas has done a great job this year helping me improve the roads in my local area. He has provided advice on tackling graffiti issues, told me about the 'Street Leader' programme to report problems, given ideas and support on how to improve our local shopping parade to help the survival of local shops away from Lordship Lane, supported a Cleaner Greener Safer bid I put in for the local area, helped us tackle a 'problem' neglected sight and escalated the problem when we had difficulties getting the council to take action, escalated our issues about litter and contacted the people at the council in charge of this. He really works very hard for the community. Try e-mailing the councillors directly with your concerns and comments and see what response you get.


BTW I am not a lib-dem, but I speak from experience. This month I have had e-mails from all 3 lib-dem local councillors - a number of e-mails from Richard Thomas about various of the above issues, a number of e-mails from Jonathan Mitchell and one e-mail from James Barber about the CGS bid I put in. If you contact the councillors with your concerns and some suggestions they do take action - I've seen it happen!


The councillors may not be knocking on people's doors now that the elections have past, but they are available via their regular surgeries at the community centre and also will meet people outside these times if they have a pressing issue and they are always available via e-mail. If you have concerns, they need you to contact them and make yourself and your issues known to them. I think out of the many e-mails I have sent the councillors, I didn't get a response twice, so I followed it up and both times the relevant councillor apologised - some e-mails do get sent through to 'junk' automatically!


Before I started contacting the councillors, I too wondered what they did apart from knocking on doors at election time. But once I started contacting them, I got some great responses and action from them so I am now pleased with having them as our councillors - because they have acted on the concerns I contacted them about and I have seen actual results - that speaks volumes to me. (tu)


(edited for typos)

Er the Tram won't go anywhere near East Dulwich. It will go through the most severely deprived areas of Southwark. Areas far more in need of regeneration than Nunhead.


I could care less about the Tram. But on its face value, it is the right thing to move forward.

Well if you do not call an 8 min walk from Goose Green any where near ED that is fair enough ?


It may loop round the bottom part of the Rye. And moving forward would be Improving the Stations, bringing a tube to South Londan Via the East London Line and not trying to divert funds to add more bells to the Tram. It will still go through all these areas if the proposal goes through so whats the problem ?


And actually there are major parts of Nunhead that a very very deprived, happy to show you and all the councillors around if you like ? We could start at the Primary Schools then move into the estates......

The Tram is proposed to head through North Peckham Estate and areas South/North of Burgess Park. Southwark long ago identified this area as the most deprived transport area in the whole Borough - and in deprived in terms of economic demos. Add to it Peckham.


Nunhead does have more than one bus as transport option, no? Some of these areas have only one bus, and anything else is far more than 8 minutes away.


Again, it won't impact me but I've read about it with great interest. I'd love to see Trams return. But that's by the by. Your argument suggests that Nunhead is far more economically and transport deprived than the areas with one bus. If you are right, then I'll support your neighbourhood with its trains and multiple buses should get a tube before the area in question should get anything more than their one bus.

No actually I was not suggesting that at all, i just meant that councillors are constantly trying to skew things in their favour, the Tram will have the same inpact of ED as It would on Nunhead, but the East London Line will have far more effect on Nunhead while having less on ED.


And as the East London line has been delayed for so long and is a good thing I feel that local council should not be suggesting that it get some of its funding diverted.


Just because ED has a lot of engaged residents (and I am sure if some one really considered why that it is it may offer a bit of perspective) it does not mean that local council should just listen to the most vocal girl in the class...if you get my clumsy analogy.....I hope that the democracy that we would like to believe in would be a bit better than that.


Ps ..your getting very fast on the replies..... Maurice the fastest blog in the east !

Here we go again.


If you want to see some action, unfortunately you can't just always whine loudly (even if you're very good at it) to your local councillor/council and expect everything to be solved.


It can sometimes necessitate YOU having to undertake many hours hard work, based around solid facts (remember those?), and with the engagement and support of your local community, to see some results. We had to work hard to get our CGS bid.


Since the lib dem councillors came in, I have seen a lot of improvements in issues which matter to me. I couldn't really care less which party the councillors are from, as long as they do what I consider to be a good job. Re parking on zigzags and near misses, the police should attend and charge people with dangerous driving if that's possible. Its selfish and there's no excuse for it.


Analogies again. In case its not clear, I really don't come on this forum for people (take note AllforNun) to have a go at any opportunity. Its boring boring boring. Places to go, people to meet, things to do.......:))

Sorry are you responding to what I actually wrote or trying to make some personal point ?


My whine is not loud it just that you do not want to know about it


Maybe if the councillors were subject to some exposure or scrutiny commitee, you know like the one's you see on your telly box, we could find out why Peckham Pulse was closed for 2 years, why the Nunhead regeneration Zone has been stalled, then watered down, and stalled again and why our olympic swimmers are travelling to Paris to swim because Crystal palace is closed till next August !

@ Allfornun


Councillors are answerable: to the Local Government Ombudsman; to the Audit Commission and to the HQ of their applicable political party. Most importantly they are answerable to the press. Can I suggest that you write to some/all of the above?

Both the Local Government Ombudsman and the Audit Commission are more of a check on Councils rather than Councillors. The notable exception was in the 80's when Councillors were being surcharged and barred from office by District Auditors (part of the Audit Commission) - usually through failing to set a rate.


If you have a complaint about the conduct of a Councillor the Standards Board is the place to go. This is really in connection with propriety rather than 'performance'.

All for Nun - sorry much too busy (ordering clutch bags) to rant! :))


I went past Goodrich School today and saw a number of big bright yellow banners on the railings telling people not to park on the zigzags, although I've not gone past at start time and home time to see if they're having any effect.

So that's no one then !


I think we should get them in front of a televised panel - just like they do with the parlimentry politicians, it would be much more effective and would make them a lot more accountable.


You may notice that council procedure is so dense, as to deter anyone from actually getting any kind of significant answer from anybody about anything, letter writing is equally as unproductive. Just another avenue for them to try to manage you out of their hair, while they tax our money and spend it where is the most benefit to them ! revolution is the only way, Musharaf is bang on, arrest the laywers and the politicians and get the x cricketers in hiding it's the only way.

"Maybe if the councillors were subject to some exposure or scrutiny commitee, you know like the one's you see on your telly box, we could find out why Peckham Pulse was closed for 2 years, why the Nunhead regeneration Zone has been stalled, then watered down, and stalled again and why our olympic swimmers are travelling to Paris to swim because Crystal palace is closed till next August !"


http://southwark.gov.uk/YourCouncil/AgendasMinutes/scrutinysubcommittees/


See the link above. The public can attend the meetings too.


Crystal Palace is nothing to do with Southwark Council, or any other council but here you go: http://www.sportengland.org/print/news/press_releases/sport_england_statement_on_swimming_and_diving_facilities_in_london_07.htm

is it a good idea to devote a section of this forum (like lounge) to sensible debate with councillors? save all that wretched emailing. RT has logged in, invite the others. Maybe too open door, in that for sure all that they say, we say, is open to scrutiny..It would save a lot of timewasting protocol. As much as we here could try to be civil and well behaved ,they could check in say once a week.

Sorry but Crystal Palace is absolutely something to with a council ! - Mayor of London, London assembly, the new GLC whatever you what like to call it. And as it serves the need of a community that is very close by I would think that local council, would take some interest ?


As for the scrutiny commitee and the minutes it's not exactly direct engagement, and does not cover what has been decided outside of meetings and behind closed doors. These people need to be managed properly, not given free reign to wage war against cafe Nero !

Angela Bray (Con) grandstands for the camera about Ian Blair, he neatly points out that had anyone taken up any of the proposals stretching back YEARS for an airwave system to put into the undergound they would have had more communication, that may , have avoided as he said "someone dead from seven bullets to the head",


Camera pans back to huge new council assembly chamber built so Angela Bray and her mates have a nice office environment to work in. So basically they put our public safety at risk by putting new council chambers ahead of an airwave system for the underground. This is the decision making process that needs to be under scrutiny. These people are havin a laugh.

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

    • The is very low water pressure in the middle of Friern Road this morning.
    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
    • What does the area with the blue dotted lines and the crossed out water drop mean? No water in this area? So many leaks in the area.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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