Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Your regular reminder that it wasn?t ?the vast majority of residents? but the vast majority of respondents. Two very different things, yet some struggle to tell the difference.


Bic Basher Wrote:

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

> Two Dulwich Village Cllrs along with other Labour

> Cllrs in other Dulwich wards supported pushing

> through a LTN scheme that wasn't supported by the

> vast majority of residents, yet the attitude of

> one particular Village Ward Cllr has stunk since

> the start and now to pass the buck is a typical

> politicians response when they're in power.

Good idea - unfortunately it?s got the stage where no matter what a councillor says some will twist it and interpret it in a way to suit their agenda. Cllr Leeming was helpfully informing people of the Thames Water works, he?s right it probably will be quicker to walk or cycle if you can possibly avoid driving. That?s true of most travel in London.



jazzer Wrote:

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

> Perhaps bring this back to the topic, rather than

> go of at various unconnected tangent's.

>

> If you want to talk about cllrs/MP, how about

> starting a separate thread.

march46 Wrote:

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

> Your regular reminder that it wasn?t ?the vast

> majority of residents? but the vast majority of

> respondents. Two very different things, yet some

> struggle to tell the difference.

>

> Bic Basher Wrote:

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

> -----

> > Two Dulwich Village Cllrs along with other

> Labour

> > Cllrs in other Dulwich wards supported pushing

> > through a LTN scheme that wasn't supported by

> the

> > vast majority of residents, yet the attitude of

> > one particular Village Ward Cllr has stunk

> since

> > the start and now to pass the buck is a typical

> > politicians response when they're in power.


It's easy to spot a pro LTN person on EDF.

march46 Wrote:

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

> Good idea - unfortunately it?s got the stage where

> no matter what a councillor says some will twist

> it and interpret it in a way to suit their agenda.

> Cllr Leeming was helpfully informing people of the

> Thames Water works, he?s right it probably will be

> quicker to walk or cycle if you can possibly avoid

> driving. That?s true of most travel in London.

>

>

> jazzer Wrote:

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

> -----

> > Perhaps bring this back to the topic, rather

> than

> > go of at various unconnected tangent's.

> >

> > If you want to talk about cllrs/MP, how about

> > starting a separate thread.



To be fair I think a lot of people take offence to his tone and his, sometimes, pointed and demeaning tweets.


I am not sure what value adding the comment below brings to his thread, other than trying to have a dig:


Remember, this is the responsibility of Thames Water not the council


Either that or he is really worried about losing his seat and feels the need to spell it out to people! Pretty sure most people realize the water main has nothing to do with the council!

These threads can get abit personal at times??

Every now & again I take a peak but can?t be asked comment 🤨


London is a city for gods sake??. You will never get country roads/lanes down here!

All these LTN?s are helping nobody other than the councils/government fill their pockets!

If you mistakenly think for a second the government care about you, then I suggest you think again!


LTN supporters can support them all day long, all these past, present & future charges they are talking about are affecting the consumer?? the bottom line is everything is about clawing money from us for whatever they wish to use it for, we will always be worse off no matter how climate friendly you are!


Yes I know my post isn?t about the south circular, I?m sorry, but I just wanted to say something

Btw, I?m a driver & drive for a living but do not own a car simply because I don?t need one.

Bic Basher Wrote:

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

> march46 Wrote:

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

> -----

> > Your regular reminder that it wasn?t ?the vast

> > majority of residents? but the vast majority of

> > respondents. Two very different things, yet

> some

> > struggle to tell the difference.

> >

> > Bic Basher Wrote:

> >

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

>

> > -----

> > > Two Dulwich Village Cllrs along with other

> > Labour

> > > Cllrs in other Dulwich wards supported

> pushing

> > > through a LTN scheme that wasn't supported by

> > the

> > > vast majority of residents, yet the attitude

> of

> > > one particular Village Ward Cllr has stunk

> > since

> > > the start and now to pass the buck is a

> typical

> > > politicians response when they're in power.

>

> It's easy to spot a pro LTN person on EDF.


Interesting that you identified someone as pro-LDN because they had their facts straight. 🤔

Dogkennelhillbilly Wrote:

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

> Bic Basher Wrote:

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

> -----

> > march46 Wrote:

> >

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

>

> > -----

> > > Your regular reminder that it wasn?t ?the

> vast

> > > majority of residents? but the vast majority

> of

> > > respondents. Two very different things, yet

> > some

> > > struggle to tell the difference.

> > >

> > > Bic Basher Wrote:

> > >

> >

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

>

> >

> > > -----

> > > > Two Dulwich Village Cllrs along with other

> > > Labour

> > > > Cllrs in other Dulwich wards supported

> > pushing

> > > > through a LTN scheme that wasn't supported

> by

> > > the

> > > > vast majority of residents, yet the

> attitude

> > of

> > > > one particular Village Ward Cllr has stunk

> > > since

> > > > the start and now to pass the buck is a

> > typical

> > > > politicians response when they're in power.

> >

> > It's easy to spot a pro LTN person on EDF.

>

> Interesting that you identified someone as pro-LDN

> because they had their facts straight. 🤔



Another LTN troll.

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

    • Girls In Your City - No Selfie - Anonymous Casual Dating https://SecreLocal.com [url=https://SecreLocal.com] Girls In Your City [/url] - Anonymous Casual Dating - No Selfie New Girls [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/vanessa-100.html]Vanessa[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/vanessa-100.html]Vanessa[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/molly-15.html]Molly[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/cheryl-blossom-48.html]Cheryl Blossom[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/carola-conymegan-116.html]Carola Conymegan[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/pupa-41.html]Pupa[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/mia-candy-43.html]Mia Candy[/url]
    • This is a remarkable interpretation of history. Wikipedia (with more footnotes and citations than you could shake a shitty stick at sez: The austerity programme was initiated in 2010 by the Conservative and Liberal Democrat coalition government. In his June 2010 budget speech, Osborne identified two goals. The first was that the structural current budget deficit would be eliminated to "achieve [a] cyclically-adjusted current balance by the end of the rolling, five-year forecast period". The second was that national debt as a percentage of GDP would fall. The government intended to achieve both of its goals through substantial reductions in public expenditure.[21] This was to be achieved by a combination of public spending cuts and tax increases amounting to £110 billion.[26] Between 2010 and 2013, the Coalition government said that it had reduced public spending by £14.3 billion compared with 2009–10.[27] Growth remained low, while unemployment rose. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_government_austerity_programme From memory, last time around they were against the LTNs and competing with the Tories to pick up backlash votes - both failed. They had no counterproposals or ideas about how to manage congestion or pollution. This time around they're simply silent on the matter: https://www.southwark-libdems.org.uk/your-local-lib-dem-team/goosegreen Also, as we have seen from Mr Barber's comments on the new development on the old Jewsons yard, "leading campaigns to protect the character of East Dulwich and Goose Green" is code for "blocking new housing".
    • @Insuflo NO, please no, please don't encourage him to post more often! 😒
    • Revealing of what, exactly? I resurrected this thread, after a year, to highlight the foolishness of the OP’s op. And how posturing would be sagacity is quickly undermined by events, dear boy, events. The thread is about Mandelson. I knew he was a wrong ‘un all along, we all did; the Epstein shit just proves it. In reality, Kinnock, Blair, Brown, Starmer et all knew as well but accepted it, because they found him useful. As did a large proportion of the 2024 intake of Labour MPs who were personally vetted and approved by Mandelson.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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