Jump to content

Recommended Posts

sunshine77 Wrote:

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

> Totally incorrect. Don?t post rumour Alice, deal

> in facts



It isn't clear what post you are responding to! Nor is it clear in your subsequent posts!


The "quote this message" option is a helpful one in this respect :)

rahrahrah Wrote:

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

> Whilst many high streets are boarded up / in

> serious decline, East Dulwich is arguing over a

> whether or not they like a mural.



It's the East Dulwich Forum.


The mural is a fair subject for discussion, I would say :)

DulwichFox Wrote:

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

> With regards to the Mural I think enough has been

> said.

>

> Not worthy of continual discussion.



What do you consider "worthy of continual discussion", then, Dulwich Fox?


This is a forum. People discuss things on it. Like local issues. Like this one.

Sue Wrote:

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

> DulwichFox Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > With regards to the Mural I think enough has

> been

> > said.

> >

> > Not worthy of continual discussion.

>

>

> What do you consider "worthy of continual

> discussion", then, Dulwich Fox?

>

> This is a forum. People discuss things on it. Like

> local issues. Like this one.


Well As far as I am concerned I personally have no more to say on the matter.

Or do you want to make it compulsory like Voting. ?

DulwichFox Wrote:

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

>

> Well As far as I am concerned I personally have no

> more to say on the matter.

> Or do you want to make it compulsory like Voting.

> ?



Eh?!


It didn't occur to you to just stop posting on the thread if you "personally" had no more to say then?


:)) :)) :))

  • 3 weeks later...

alice Wrote:

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

> It?s southwark CGS funded



It now (or maybe always did) says at the bottom right that it is Cleaner Greener Safer funded.


Can anybody explain to me how a painted wall is making North Cross Road cleaner, greener or safer?


And if not, how on earth did the money to paint the wall come out of this particular pot of council money?

alice Wrote:

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

> Got an email with all the successful CGS funding

> applications. Very interesting



Care to share it on here?!


Or post a link to where we can see these successful applications?


Because I would be extremely interested to see whether they actually meet the criteria for CGS funding (though it's a long time since I was involved in CGS projects, so possibly things have changed .....)

I'd like to know what the criteria is for CGS funding .


It all seems bonkers to me - presumably the mural is providing a "cleaner " vision of the wall ? Couldn't they just have increased the provision of cloth bags* ? We could put them over our heads, instantly removing all visual clutter and simultaneously filtering air pollution. In fact as we'd no longer be able to see anything and would be stranded at home this would reduce demand for consumer tat and traffic movement plus help the NHS by cutting demand for beds as we quietly fade away at home .


I suppose the ED Harris Academy gets ?17,000 for air purification works because they have professional advice at their fingertips and were on the ball when it came to applying .


It seems odd to me that Southwark gives money from a heavily slashed and constrained budget to a school funded by central government and having other central government revenue sources (https://www.gov.uk/guidance/school-capital-funding ) available for this type of thing .


* I'll leave it to someone else to say "what cloth bags ? " .

Oh ,whoops I haven't .

Harris got the ?17k because levels of pollution around the school are at illegal levels. Governors at the school took matters into their own hands to ensure the kids don't have to breathe such filthy air in their classrooms. It wasn't even enough: the money had to be supplemented with a sizeable chunk of cash fundraised through many events. It shouldn't be necessary to find money this way but you go through whichever door is open to you.
Though there is a precedent for a mural funded by CGS funds in Kennington, that particular wall attracted a great deal of graffiti and the painting of the mural itself was carried out as a community project. The North Cross Road Committee who applied for the funding is a consortium of independent shops and market traders and the benefit is purely commercial with no cleaner, greener and safety contribution to the community. It should not have received funding from the CGS budget.

worldwiser Wrote:

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

> Harris got the ?17k because levels of pollution

> around the school are at illegal levels. Governors

> at the school took matters into their own hands to

> ensure the kids don't have to breathe such filthy

> air in their classrooms. It wasn't even enough:

> the money had to be supplemented with a sizeable

> chunk of cash fundraised through many events. It

> shouldn't be necessary to find money this way but

> you go through whichever door is open to you.



And then you have the whole Goose Green Tree Amigos fiasco, with a diesel generator bang next door to the children's playground- where another chunk of CGS funding was spent to increase screening from car pollution. Astonishing example of Southwark being all over the place in terms of decision making.

worldwiser - I'm aware that pupils in a school built next to a main road in London will be breathing in polluted air .


The question in my mind is why cash strapped Southwark is handing over ?17,000 when it appears that funding for capital spending on improvement is available from Central Government .

intexasatthe moment Wrote:

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

> it appears that funding for capital spending on improvement

> is available from Central Government .


There isn?t in practice anywhere near enough


In reality all (state) schools are under ever increasing financial pressures


Obviously

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

    • Hey Sue, I was wrong - I don't think it would just be for foreign tourists. So yeah I assume that, if someone lives in Lewisham and wants to say the night in southwark, they'd pay a levy.  The hotels wouldn't need to vet anyone's address or passports - the levy is automatically added on top of the bill by every hotel / BnB / hostel and passed on to Southwark. So basically, you're paying an extra two quid a night, or whatever, to stay in this borough.  It's a great way to drive footfall... to the other London boroughs.  https://www.ukpropertyaccountants.co.uk/uk-tourist-tax-exploring-the-rise-of-visitor-levies-and-foreign-property-charges/
    • Pretty much, Sue, yeah. It's the perennial, knotty problem of imposing a tax and balancing that with the cost of collecting it.  The famous one was the dog licence - I think it was 37 1/2 pence when it was abolished, but the revenue didn't' come close to covering the administration costs. As much I'd love to have a Stasi patrolling the South Bank, looking for mullet haircuts, unshaven armpits, overly expressive hand movements and red Kicker shoes, I'm afraid your modern Continental is almost indistinguishable from your modern Londoner. That's Schengen for you. So you couldn't justify it from an ROI point of view, really. This scheme seems a pretty good idea, overall. It's not perfect, but it's cheap to implement and takes some tax burden off Southwark residents.   'The Man' has got wise to this. It's got bad juju now. If you're looking to rinse medium to large amounts of small denomination notes, there are far better ways. Please drop me a direct message if you'd like to discuss this matter further.   Kind Regards  Dave
    • "What's worse is that the perceived 20 billion black hole has increased to 30 billion in a year. Is there a risk that after 5 years it could be as high as 70 billion ???" Why is it perceived, Reeves is responsible for doubling the "black hole" to £20b through the public sector pay increases. You can't live beyond your means and when you try you go bankrupt pdq. In 4 yrs time if this Govt survives that long and the country doesn't go bust before then, in 2029 I dread to think the state the country will be in.  At least Sunak and co had inflation back to 2% with unemployment being stable and not rising.   
    • He seemed to me to be fully immersed in the Jeremy Corbyn ethos of the Labour Party. I dint think that (and self describing as a Marxist) would have helped much when Labour was changed under Starmer. There was a purge of people as far left as him that he was lucky to survive once in my opinion.   Stuff like this heavy endorsement of Momentum and Corbyn. It doesn't wash with a party that is in actual government.   https://labourlist.org/2020/04/forward-momentum-weve-launched-to-change-it-from-the-bottom-up/
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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