Jump to content

Recommended Posts

*Bob* Wrote:

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

> God forbid elected officals (elected by us,

> offically) should have opinions on things.

>

>



Indeed - and yes I do note your irony Bob. But why not wait to see what their eloctorate feel about the issue before lodging an objection?

Because we elect people to let them make decisions on our behalf, not expect them to consult us on EVERY issue.


It's called representative democracy.


James, in his capacity as a councillor, is absolutely entitled to register his discontent at this idea without having to conduct some sort of survey of the electorate. And he's still entitled to vote whatever way he wants regardless.


You are entitled to out an x in a box once every four years. Get used to it.

It would be more appropriate to actually email/contact the licensing department act the council not to email/contact James.


The idea that James is the main contact for such issues is incorrect, ridiculous and incredibly misleading on James' part.


If you want your comments taken seriously follow the proper channels.

sedm Wrote:

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

> I think it's great that James Barber highlights

> what's going on in the area so people can make

> their views known.

>

> Personally I'm pro a Co-Op opening 24/7 - I work

> shifts so would be very handy being able to grab

> some food on the way home!


Ok, so you will be.pleased that James Barber already objected to it then

Despite the many who use this forum many don't. So it's a useful sounding board but in the end I have to act in what I consider the best interests of the area.


But I've highlighted how to comment for or against These applications.


For this decision a licensing sub committee of three councillors will decide on these two interconnected applications. I won't be one of them nor will my ward colleagues.

Jeremy Wrote:

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

> I think Southwark council should organise a

> refurendum on the opening hours of Co-op's

> Lordship Lane branch.


Ha ha. I have never known James Barber's view to be swayed by anything expressed on this forum.


Yes he does deal with ad hoc questions well but on planning matters he makes up his own mind. Maybe that's what he is elected to do but I'd have thought he'd be interested in people's views and be flexible enough to adapt his views but personally I think he is rather stubborn. This is another example.

Ok. The world has changed a bit since the time when elected representatives had no means of testing the water on local opinion. And most do not hold up the pretence of taking into account the views of people on this forum. It is this double standard that I personally disagree with.

KalamityKel Wrote:

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

> It would be more appropriate to actually

> email/contact the licensing department act the

> council not to email/contact James.

>


xxxxxxx


But that is exactly what James has asked people to do in his original post in this thread!


He gave the email address of the licensing department for people to do that. He just asked to be copied in - obviously you don't have to copy him in if you don't want to.


ETA: So I really don't understand why you think he has been in any way misleading.

It does seem that when the Forum agrees with James, well that demonstrates the voice of East Dulwich. When the Forum does not agree with James, it is simply a useful sounding board that many do not use.


Is there any supermarket development (other than Waitrose) that James Barber would support? It would seem not.


A 24 hours Coop seems like a useful addition.

Personally wouldn't want to live next to 24 hour local supermarket, and wouldn't want my local corner shop to go 24/7 either. I'm constantly picking up rubbish from my doorstep from people dropping it, and its always worse on the weekend when people dump eg takeaway containers after a night out. Street cleaning probably better on lordship lane but the surrounding streets will see more rubbish from drunken munchies packets being discarded in gardens. Maybe wouldnt irritate most, but every day I'm picking up some lazy sods rubbish and it drives me crazy!

Sue Wrote:

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

> KalamityKel Wrote:

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

> -----

> > It would be more appropriate to actually

> > email/contact the licensing department act the

> > council not to email/contact James.

> >

>

> xxxxxxx

>

> But that is exactly what James has asked people to

> do in his original post in this thread!

>

> He gave the email address of the licensing

> department for people to do that. He just asked to

> be copied in - obviously you don't have to copy

> him in if you don't want to.

>

> ETA: So I really don't understand why you think he

> has been in any way misleading.


Sue if you're going to quote me please do so correctly.


By James asking to be copied in would imply his involvement in the application or indeed there is some influence to be had with the decision making, which, James has indicated he has no part of so aside from sheer noseyness why should James be included?

No doubt there are will be some that disagree agree with me *shrugs* and waffle on about all the good he's doing... blah blah blah. Yes making us aware is good but not to give a false impression.

I'd be in favour of 24 hour co op. I don't live in close proximity to it. But I'm not sure either that the availability of a local amenity should be dictated by very close residents. Not sure why that is the case when it could benefit a very wide residential area. As would M and S.

I asked to be copied because it inform me should my original stance feel wrong. So far people copying me it about 3 to 2 for the Co op being open and selling alcohol.


Equally the number of emails we receive helps us decide priorities. We only have so many hours.

I wouldn't be against the proposed opening hours - but I am a bit doubtful they will be that beneficial to Coop themselves, and wonder if those opening hours will last.


I'm sure it will be beneficial to some people, but enough of them to warrant the costs of staying open that long?

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

    • These are the smokeless fuels you can burn on a open fireplace in Southwark: https://smokecontrol.defra.gov.uk/fuels-php/england/ https://www.southwark.gov.uk/planning-environment-and-building-control/environment/air-quality/reduce-air-pollution/reduce-smoke
    • Thanks all, our hope was (despite the diminishing estate) he would get on with it.  Progress is glacial, it's been two years since probate was granted, that's two cold and damp winters with no heating, and not surprisingly a pipe burst. He's blames the issues on the estate agent, who separately had a dispute with him, he had a wobbly when one of the beneficiaries spoke to the estate agent.  Separately he said it was the family's fault for letting the property get into a poor condition.  It was dated, but certainly not in poor condition. There are two five star reviews on Google, and five one star: ** WARNING** This solicitor firm has to be one of the worst I have encountered. The solicitor is prehistoric in his practices and will carry out work at his own snails pace, the fax machine he uses gets turned off at 2 pm and its near impossible to get him on the phone. STAY AWAY, YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED, check the solicitors ombudsman, this firm has previous bad practice recorded.   Disgusting under no circumstances use this solicitor.For over 10 years he has not carried out the terms of a Will he has not re-invested money but has retained it.  He writes letters which are pure "Flannel" excuses for doing nothing.  You have been warned   shocking experience, delayed the whole process, told other side solicitors to not contact him as he feels pressured etc. never use.   Not fit for 21st century. No website, no email address, no electronic transfer. Very slow, very little communication.   Was not a pleasant experience dealing with this firm    
    • If you mean the one outside the church going towards Peckham, it still had the closed sign on it this morning, but as there are no road works there, I'm sure some of the drivers will stop there on request.  The stop outside the chippy coming from Peckham is closed as there are road works in front of it.  The 4 way traffic lights are in operation.., causing a lot of congestion.
    • We found a recommendation for Geek Electrics on a here after we wanted to have a electrical inspection of a property we are buying. From the very beginning through to the end Bob was responsive, helpful and demonstrated his knowledge. He has been an absolute pleasure to deal with. We will defiantly be using Bob again and would thoroughly recommend him! His details are... www.geekelectrics.co.uk 07453 407 226 [email protected]
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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