Jump to content

Recommended Posts

As you may previously are aware, the original proposal was for Dulwich to share a seat with our neighbours in Forest Hill and Sydenham.


This has been since revised and the proposal is now for a Southwark only seat called Dulwich and Peckham covering all of the wards in SE21 and SE22 alongside The Lane, South Camberwell, Nunhead, Brunswick Park and Peckham wards.


http://assets.boundarycommissionforengland.independent.gov.uk/proposals/115%20South%20Thames/Dulwich%20and%20Peckham%20BC.pdf

Interesting - would perhaps make the constituency more marginal than previously by mixing traditional labour held Camberwell & Peckham with the more mixed and perhaps aspirational southern portion. Would make for a less predictable result and probably see hard campaigning.

Change Camberwell and Peckham for the eastern half of Brixton and that's what you get with the current seat. With Peckham solid Labour, the real campaigning will have to be here where we have Lib Dem and Tory councillors.


The revision gives a better chance for Tessa Jowell to keep her job as it would previously have been a fight between her and current Lewisham West MP Jim Dowd for the seat.


If we do vote under a new Dulwich and Peckham seat I still think it'll be a Labour hold with a smaller majority for Jowell.

As I understand it, because the Tories failed to back the LibDems' Lords reform proposals, these boundary changes are toast too. They are part of the Tories plan to reduce the number of seats and equalise the number of voters per constituency.
  • 4 weeks later...

Bigwade12 Wrote:

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

> The Tories will be wiped out in most of London in

> 2015 , with or without boundary gerrymandering

> attempts


Interesting prediction - based, I presume, upon a definitive survey of your own prejudices?

StraferJack Wrote:

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

> Bigwade's prejudices may indeed be anti-Tory, but

> it's not an outlandish prediction is it?


Perhaps not but, as you know, I prefer more rational debate and position taking to blanket statements with no evidence.

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

    • @CPR Dave He needs to communicate collectively with all of the beneficiaries.  That is the whole point of my original post.  Electronic communications are the best way of doing this, as I am doing now on this forum.  Apart from the gold digger who will get a six figure sum the rest of us are on four figures, and that is going down by the day. I'm offended by any suggestion that we are not behaving well.  What on earth do you mean?  
    • Surprise, surprise. It didn't take them long, did it. This will be something of a test as to how much the council really care about parks and the environment. A footfall of 60,000. Are they mad? There is no way this park is designed for or can sustain that sort of use. Just had a look at the schedule. If allowed to go ahead, this will involve a large slice of the park (not the common) sectioned off and out of use for three weeks of May and the first week of June. Here's an idea, why not trial the festival in one of the other Southwark Parks, so the 'goodness' can be shared around the borough?
    • There was another unprovoked attack on Monday this week on a young woman nearby (Anstey Road) at 6.45pm. Don't have any other details, it was posted on a Facebook group by her flatmate. Pretty worrying  https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1EGfDrCAST/
    • OMFG is it possible for the council to do anything without a bunch of armchair experts moaning about it? The library refurb is great news, as it's lovely but completely shagged out - the toilets don't even work reliably. Other libraries in the area will be open longer house during the closure. July is a rubbish time to begin a refurb because it's just before the entire construction sector goes on summer holiday, and it would mean delaying the work another 8 months.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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