-
-
Latest Discussions
-
By DulvilleRes · Posted
There is no equivalence between One Dulwich purporting to be a local organisation speaking for local people, and actually properly constituted organisations such as The Dulwich Society. A 3 -second google search reveals the openly published names of the trustees of Dulwich Society, so I can make my own mind up as to whether these individuals are coming at local issues with a particular slant. I can read minutes of their meetings online, and whilst I might not agree with their every position, I can have confidence that they are an open and fundamentally democratic institution. There is absolutely nothing similar in terms of publicly accountable information to be found about One Dulwich - no idea of who is behind it, who pays for it ( it is clearly expensive), and on what basis they make their decisions. Given the Police involvement in the intimidation of people with a public pro-LTN view ( for which there is no equivalence in terms of severity of any incident for those with an anti-LTN point of view), I can fully understand why, for Dulwich Society's traffic sub- committee only, they want a bit of online anonymity. I also find it slightly disturbing that when The Dulwich Society current leadership asked the 'grouping' pushing for changes within it for a meeting to discuss their concerns, they refused it. Given the recent experiences of organisations such as The National Trust, the question can be asked - is something similar going on here? -
By BeatrixPaddler · Posted
I’ll post it to the DVLA if i don’t find the owner by midweek. -
The most recent one did, despite the council making it very difficult for anyone to object (which interestingly they were forced to change for the CPZ consultation and look how that went for them). I will dig out the responses for you when I have more time so you can enlighten yourself. Ha ha...the language used by councils when they see the results of a consultation and need an out to ignore the views of locals...;-) Did you not notice how this only became a thing once the consultation had been run....one wonders why!? Earl you can bluster all you like but you cannot ignore the fact the council closed the junction to emergency services and put lives at risk and resisted all calls (from the emergency services) to open it for them. Surely you can't defend that or are you willingly turning a blind eye to that too? Ha ha, which kind of begs the question then why so many of you get so vexed by One Dulwich? Surely you could compartmentalise their work if the above was true? I suspect it has a lot to do with the accountability that they are forcing and the fact some don't like it. -
By Earl Aelfheah · Posted
I believe around 57% of the 5,538 people who were part of the self selecting sample making up the original consultation, opposed the LTN. So just over 3,000 people. This was around 3 years ago now. I think there’s something like 40,000+ living across se22 and SE21 🤷♂️ The LTN is a minority interest at best. Whilst it’s an obsession for a small number on the transport thread who strongly oppose it, I suspect most locals quietly approve of the improvements made to that junction. …and we still haven’t heard who has supposedly been pressurising the emergency services and how (are we seriously going with the far left / the commies)? Is anyone willing to stand up and support the 'One' claim that people are partially covering their plates and driving through the filters due to inadequate signage? Again, it all sounds a little ridiculous / desperate. Feels like it may be time for them to start coming to terms with the changes.
-
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.