One (part of) Dulwich

[Earl Aelfheah]

3 hours ago, Penguin68 said:

'Representative democracy' I suspect in your case, means a dictatorship which might be changed every 3 years or so, but is not required to consult or, if they do, to follow the results of that consultation.

Why don’t you just read up on what representative democracy is, how it works and the difference between a consultation and a referendum?

1 hour ago, Rockets said:

2 hours ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

But when you say you want people (both councillors and their 'cheerleaders') held accountable, censored, or 'disciplined', what does that mean?

I have already explained this so you're going over old ground again and, as usual, deflecting.

Well that's ironic. You dodge the question, by claiming that asking it is deflection.

What is it you actually want, if not to reverse the changes made 5 years ago? You want them to stand for re-election on their record? It's already happened? You want them 'censored'? For what? How? What does that mean?

You talk about ‘taking the fight to them' - I hate to tell you, but the 'fight' ended half a decade ago.

All you're doing is endlessly complaining and trying to justify why your inability to move on isn’t just the unhealthy fixation it appears to be. 

What do you actually want?

Edited Wednesday at 15:45 by Earl Aelfheah

[Rockets]

9 minutes ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

Well that's ironic. You dodge the question, by claiming that asking it is deflection.

Well I have already answered it previously so hardly dodged the question have I? Maybe take a look back at what I said in response to your last few questions on this.

10 minutes ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

Again, this all comes down to your unhappiness at a change to road layout. You talk about 'taking the fight to them' - I hate to tell you, but the 'fight' ended half a decade ago. All you're doing is endlessly complaining that you lost.

Ha ha, well clearly the fight did not end half a decade ago - it had barely even started half a decade ago but clearly you are of the opinion that once the measures went in they were here for good - despite the legal requirement for consultations  (this was the first deception by the council as, if you can cast your mind back that far, they installed the measures for, ahem, "social distancing" purposes exploiting a loop hole in the emergency measures handed to them).

I can assure you that people who actually live in the affected area still talk about it today. In those 5 years the council has misled and wasted huge amounts of tax payers money on something the majority of local residents do not want.

So all I want is for the council to be held accountable for how they have treated their constituents and for the active travel lobby usual suspects to admit that the council may have used underhand tactics to get these measures through. Neither of which, I hasten to add, I think will actually ever happen! 😉

 

[Earl Aelfheah]

1 hour ago, Rockets said:

So all I want is for the council to be held accountable

Yes, you’ve said. What does that mean? It obviously doesn’t mean at the ballot box. They have already stood for re-election and won. They haven’t broken the law, so there is no legal sanction I can see. You have said before that you are not calling for the road layout to be reverted back to how it was before. So again, what is it you are demanding happens? Or as I suspect, are you just going to moan endlessly across multiple threads to zero effect?

[first mate]

I think it is really cynical to be so completely partisan that you are happy to discount broken manifesto pledges as small beer and be so dismissive of others that take issue with that. Last election many wanted to punish central government for behaviour during Covid; that will not be the case this time round, I think. Broken promises break faith in those you have handed power and trusted to make decisions on your behalf. This could really become an issue that blind followers of the incumbent council come to regret.

[Rockets]

4 minutes ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

It obviously doesn’t mean at the ballot box. They have already stood for re-election and won.

What despite the fact that that was exactly what I just said....? Do you not actually read previous posts?

Yes and maybe at the next local elections they can't lean in to a protest vote about the government and maybe people look at what is happening in central government (see Angela Rayner today) and say...you know what, these folks are treating us with contempt nationally and locally - maybe I will make a protest vote against them too. To be honest the only way I see them being unseated locally is if one of the Tories or Lib Dems withdraws from the race.

Remember, ignorance (within the electorate) is bliss for elected officials. What politicians hate is when people are aware of how they have been behaving and the people hold them to account.

So you should be thankful that there are people on there and groups like OneDulwich who are helping make sure local constituents are up to speed on what has actually been going on. This is what frustrates some folks - is that five years on people are still talking about it and angry with the way the local community has been treated by our elected officials. The active travel lobby seem to want to do everything rather than acknowledge what has actually been going on - why? Because they are the ones benefiting from it - some local folks are actually making a living from the roll-out of LTNs and then going out of their way to try and stop the very debate about their effectiveness.

 

[march46]

Pretty much the only people ‘still talking about it’ are you and a handful of others here on this forum, and OneDulwich which is essentially one obsessive campaigner. 

Oh….and the local Conservative want-to-be councillors.

Most people have moved on and are on the downhill slope of the curve.

Edited Wednesday at 20:11 by march46

[malumbu]

How many people are still angry?

People seem to go on more about cyclists, another common issue on this forum.  I expect most are just used to it now and have come to terms with it, and hopefully many like me like it.

[first mate]

And the cavalry have finally arrived. 'Charge and deflect'🤣

[Rockets]

Hey @march46 you may have to adapt your chart - didn’t the % of people opposing the DV measures actually increase between the two consultations? What if you’re not at the top of the hill yet?

1 hour ago, malumbu said:

  I expect most are just used to it now and have come to terms with it, and hopefully many like me like it.

Folks from outside the area may like it, a majority of those who live in the area oppose it - therein lies the issue - whose interests are the council protecting - us local residents or noisy lobbyists from outside the area and often outside the borough. What was it Peter Hill Wood once famously said after a tetchy Arsenal AGM: Thank you for your interest in our affairs!

[newresidentindulwich]

I disagree that most in the area don’t like it. We all love it. Other people I know here love it. It’s such an improvement. 

[Penguin68]

2 hours ago, newresidentindulwich said:

I disagree that most in the area don’t like it.

Done the polling have you?

[Earl Aelfheah]

10 hours ago, Rockets said:

Hey @march46 you may have to adapt your chart - didn’t the % of people opposing the DV measures actually increase between the two consultations? What if you’re not at the top of the hill yet?

After 5 years? You think 'opposition is growing'? Do be serious. I get that you're aggrieved that you didn't get your way, and determined to paint the square as some sort of dangerous, dystopian, hellscape (it's not, it's actually quite a nice space). But 5 years on and it's just relentless, undirected, simmering resentment. You still can't actually say what you want. You don't want to reverse it, you just seem to want someone to say you were right. OK. The council behaved appallingly and the square is awful. Do you feel happy now?

Edited 20 hours ago by Earl Aelfheah

[Rockets]

25 minutes ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

After 5 years? You think 'opposition is growing'? Do be serious.

@Earl Aelfheah I know you'rea big fan of data and if you look at the first DV consultation and compare it to the most recent one the level was opposition was actually grown. So yes, I am very serious.

26 minutes ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

But 5 years on and it's just relentless, undirected, simmering resentment.

Stimulated by 5 years of lies, manipulation and wasting tax-payers money. That's what people are angry about.

27 minutes ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

OK. The council behaved appallingly and the square is awful. Do you feel happy now?

I am happy that, even you, can finally acknowledge this - are you happy our elected representatives behaved that way? Do you now trust them now in light of this? Perhaps now you can see why so many are still aggrieved by the way this all came about and happened - that the views of local residents were ignored in favour of active travel lobbyists and groups.

[Earl Aelfheah]

Still can't say what it is you actually want - beyond boring on across multiple threads. It's just one long tedious tantrum.

[first mate]

Attempting to undermine other posters via character assassination really does nothing to strengthen your argument and reflects rather badly on you.

In all of this the closest behaviour I've seen to a tantrum was when Dr Goodman was filmed on CCTV, glancing around before hastily ripping down an anti LTN poster displayed on private property 😉

Edited 14 hours ago by first mate

[Earl Aelfheah]

I'm just asking what Rockets actually wants? Beyond unspecified people being 'held accountable' in unspecified ways, for unspecified crimes. It's not too much to ask considering that he's been complaining about a road filter on Calton Avenue across almost every thread in this section, over a period of many years now. What does he want? Do you know?

Edited 14 hours ago by Earl Aelfheah

[CPR Dave]

It's fairly obvious, he wants the council to actually listen to their own constituents and to accept some decisions that they have made have been poor and should be corrected.

It's equally obvious that you want to defend this council from any possible criticism, no matter how legitimate, and that you want to silence anyone with a different point of view to you on car ownership / use. 

[malumbu]

It's not a poor decision.  Unpopular for some.  Popular for others