Southwark-wide CPZ

[march46]

It’s strange how some drivers think they should be entitled to store their private property in the public realm for free.

[Charles Martel]

1 hour ago, march46 said:

It’s strange how some drivers think they should be entitled to store their private property in the public realm for free.

The residential  roads in this area were laid out in the mid 1800s, before cars or bicycles were invented.  What do you think they were intended for if not for vehicles?  Public roads are for public use.  It just so happens that we have moved on from the type of vehicles we had in the 1800s to the ones we have now.  Repeating this nonsense about "the public realm" or whatever as if people who own cars were less entitled to use use the public roads after more than a century of precedent is pointless.

[malumbu]

On that basis we should use much of our roads for electric scooters and bikes as these are the latest evolution in personal mobility.  

I don't expect in 1860 there would have been long lines of carts parked outside our houses.

[first mate]

The "latest evolution" does not by default supersede what has gone before. 

[Penguin68]

13 hours ago, Andrea Mac said:

Yes - you will pay extra to park everywhere in Southwark except for your paid for parking permit zone that will be maybe 2 streets 

That has certainly been the case for the original (actual parking pressure caused) CPZs. And it would be the most effective revenue earning choice here (which is what this is all about) - but in reality, where there isn't any actual parking pressure having a much wider zone would make perfect sense - so, I suppose, don't expect that.  Ideally the council would issue many more permits than in any one (limited) space zone thus guaranteeing more fines! Offering a much higher per diem revenue profile.

But actually I don't believe the council has declare any formal decision here.

Of course, they will be aiming for as close to 24/7 coverage for the CPZs as they can - but will the extend the time period for existing CPZs to whatever the maximum will be in the bits of Southwark that aren't under parking pressure - as they are so sold on equity? I wonder how well that might do down?

[modernMajorGeneral]

We've launched a borough wide letter for everyone to sign

https://opposethecpz.org/2023/07/27/southwark-wide-petition/

[redpost]

On 29/07/2023 at 23:57, Charles Martel said:

The residential  roads in this area were laid out in the mid 1800s, before cars or bicycles were invented.  What do you think they were intended for if not for vehicles?  Public roads are for public use.  It just so happens that we have moved on from the type of vehicles we had in the 1800s to the ones we have now.  Repeating this nonsense about "the public realm" or whatever as if people who own cars were less entitled to use use the public roads after more than a century of precedent is pointless.

Yes, in the mid 1800s every household had 1, 2 or even 3 horse and carts parked outside their house

Sports utility carts with 2 horses were quite popular in this area as well

[first mate]

7 hours ago, modernMajorGeneral said:

We've launched a borough wide letter for everyone to sign

https://opposethecpz.org/2023/07/27/southwark-wide-petition/

Thanks for the reminder. At the very least, a proper debate is required.

[malumbu]

2 hours ago, redpost said:

Yes, in the mid 1800s every household had 1, 2 or even 3 horse and carts parked outside their house

Sports utility carts with 2 horses were quite popular in this area as well

Not in the Village as they all had off street stabling and enjoyed priority access to the track network.  

[Beulah]

CPZ = Controlled Pony Zones

[first mate]

Plenty of debate around LTNs in the media today, whatever one thinks of 'Fishy's' motivation for deciding to look at it, no bad thing to try to get better scrutiny. It may have more of an impact on Southwark's goal of a borough-wide CPZ too.

Only way to try to get a proper debate via a properly democratic process is to sign up https://opposethecpz.org/2023/07/27/southwark-wide-petition/

[Rockets]

I bet the council's lawyers are busy trying to work out how water-tight those "consultations" were....

[malumbu]

They wouldn't have got the money if they hadn't produced a case.  Money was dolled out by TfL who I'm sure would have lawyers sign the case off.  Do you know how national and local government do business?  

One only hears about the occasional case where government gets things wrong and is overturned by the courts. Usually because the policy was rabid such as sending asylum seekers to Rwanda.

Let's have some other political discussions, far more interesting.  So I've said a Brown government returning in 2010 would have already been charging the most polluting cars 

A Corbyn government?  Think this would have been more disastrous for the environment than Sunak's current intentions.  I reckon he would have not have coped with Covid but perhaps would have had a better back room team 

Ps this thread is about CPZs not LTNs or what if politics

Edited July 31, 2023 by malumbu

[snowy]

Word of the day from Susie Dent today is:

snollygoster

'one who abandons their principles for shirt term gain or power.

[Rockets]

Every politician, at every level, is a snollygoster then!

Malumbu, we can definitely agree on one thing, Corbyn would have been an absolutely disaster, on most fronts, for this country! Backbenchers are there for a reason and his rise to lead Labour was a great example of the power behind the scenes needs not to be more important than the person weilding the power!

To be fair only seconded by Ed being chosen over David! If only, if only, if only...hindsight is a powerful thing...

[first mate]

Snollygoster. Hmm, reminds me of a certain local Councillor who completely abandoned his promises about implementation of CPZ. Clue, used to call himself marxist now changed to socialist.

Edited July 31, 2023 by first mate

[Rockets]

Meanwhile on Twitter one of the councillors who berated TFL for telling the truth about disruption and displacement caused by the LTNs tries to tell people what's "really happening" in Dulwich....its all going a bit Comical Ali....

 

https://twitter.com/RM_Leeming/status/1685909438735998976?t=N1HQCR_Wb4pPrs4GiHzw0g&s=19

[first mate]

Just watched that link, perpetuating the myth that the council election result of 2022 was a resounding vote in favour of Southwark Labour LTN policy; that would be the one that was not mentioned once in the manifesto. 

[Bic Basher]

1 hour ago, Rockets said:

Meanwhile on Twitter one of the councillors who berated TFL for telling the truth about disruption and displacement caused by the LTNs tries to tell people what's "really happening" in Dulwich....its all going a bit Comical Ali....

 

https://twitter.com/RM_Leeming/status/1685909438735998976?t=N1HQCR_Wb4pPrs4GiHzw0g&s=19

Even more offensive is Leeming's comment about the extra traffic on the South Circular.  Some of us live here and have as much right to feel that the LTNs aren't working, especially when I'm a carer for my elderly mother who has breathing difficulties since it was implemented.  (And no, she doesn't smoke!)

[Spartacus]

1 hour ago, Rockets said:

Meanwhile on Twitter one of the councillors who berated TFL for telling the truth about disruption and displacement caused by the LTNs tries to tell people what's "really happening" in Dulwich....its all going a bit Comical Ali....

 

https://twitter.com/RM_Leeming/status/1685909438735998976?t=N1HQCR_Wb4pPrs4GiHzw0g&s=19

Bless him, he's obviously swallowed the blue pill and woken up after a lovely dream that people willingly give up their cars because he believes it  

I believe in LTNs I do I do I do 😅

[malumbu]

Well I believe in measures to reduce  the numbers of vehicles on the road.  I'll let others decide how best but the status quo can't be an option.  This thread and similar ones have been slagging off LTNs, ULEZ expansion and the extension of CPZs for months if not years without providing viable alternatives.

[Charles Martel]

2 hours ago, malumbu said:

Well I believe in measures to reduce  the numbers of vehicles on the road.  I'll let others decide how best but the status quo can't be an option.  This thread and similar ones have been slagging off LTNs, ULEZ expansion and the extension of CPZs for months if not years without providing viable alternatives.

Do you want to live in a democracy or a dictatorship?  Unfortunately it seems that the only way you can get what you want is if the rest of us have no choice in the matter.  There was a proposal for a CPZ across a wide area in East Dulwich in 2019.  Most residents rejected the proposal and that was respected.  As recently as November 2022 writing in the SE22 magazine councillor McAsh reiterated this democratic principle.

"As you may remember, the zone was conceived in response to demand from local residents and its boundaries were drawn to offer controlled parking to the highest possible number of people who wanted it, whilst imposing it on the smallest possible number of those who did not."

Now, mere months later, it seems he has changed his mind. Now everyone gets a CPZ with no say in the matter, whether they want one or not.  The abandoning of the previously established democratic process is clearly due to the fact that allowing people a say would give the wrong result.  Now McAsh simply has to dictate how much ordinary families will have to pay him for parking their family cars outside their family homes. 

 

[Bic Basher]

This is what happens when Dulwich residents continually vote Labour back in.  Despite not mentioning LTNs or CPZs in their manifesto at the last election, they'll continually milk residents for extra revenue using greenwashing tactics.

[CPR Dave]

And thus is how a Labour frontbencher deals with their own parking costs.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12354701/Labour-frontbencher-Abena-Oppong-Asare-faces-calls-resign-billed-TAXPAYERS-55-parking-fine.html

[Jules-and-Boo]

So the Tories are calling for an MP to resign after claiming expenses for a parking fine while at work. The process has been overhauled to make it easier to follow - which is fair.

Good to see the Tories now have such high standards of integrity. If they applied the same stringency to their own party, it would be a very small number remaining.

How our politicians like to deflect and shine bad light on anyone, to show themselves in a better light, comparatively.

We know the Tories have no respect for the people but they also think we are stupid to not see that.