Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I was shocked to see the amount of littering enforcement officers around East Dulwich over the past few days. I agree with the fact that littering should be stopped and the people who dropped litter in the streets should be cautioned but I think in this economic climate the council have taken on and are paying staff to do this job, whereas we the tax payers are having to subsidise these people. Already money is very tight for alot of people and I would rather my tax be paid to people who are actually patrolling our streets so that people are not afraid to go out. I know of a friends whose children walk home after school and are terrorised by other children in the street. MAKE OUR STREETS SAFER!
Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/5455-littering-task-force/
Share on other sites

" we the tax payers "


I'm one - and I support the litter task force. Litter is a completely different problem to crime and bullying. Litter is easily dealt with. Crime and bullying less so and MUCH more expensive. I don't want to live in a tip while the bigger problems get sorted


Using "this economic climate" and "money is tight" should not be an excuse. Dear God if I worked for a council I would be so fed up with damned if you do and damned if you don't attitudes

quite agree with seanmac.


and also, rudy guiliani "cleaned up" new york by starting with its appearance, citing that people are influenced by their environment. it does matter. if the place looks like a tip people are more likely to behave disrespectfully.


i am wildly anti-littering.

SeanMacGabhann Wrote:

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

> " we the tax payers "

>

> I'm one - and I support the litter task force.

> Litter is a completely different problem to crime

> and bullying. Litter is easily dealt with. Crime

> and bullying less so and MUCH more expensive. I

> don't want to live in a tip while the bigger

> problems get sorted

>

> Using "this economic climate" and "money is tight"

> should not be an excuse. Dear God if I worked for

> a council I would be so fed up with damned if you

> do and damned if you don't attitudes



^

exactly that

I fully support the littering task force. Clean streets make for a more respectable place, more respectable means people are prouder of their area and that's a good thing.


Please consider the "fixing broken windows" strategy from the book of the same name:

"A successful strategy for preventing vandalism, say the book's authors, is to fix the problems when they are small. Repair the broken windows within a short time, say, a day or a week, and the tendency is that vandals are much less likely to break more windows or do further damage. Clean up the sidewalk every day, and the tendency is for litter not to accumulate (or for the rate of littering to be much less). Problems do not escalate and thus respectable residents do not flee a neighborhood."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fixing_Broken_Windows


This approach was adopted in New York and helped make it and keeps it a better place.


"MAKE OUR STREETS SAFER!", I agree.


[edited once]

Jeremy Wrote:

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

> Genuine query... have council budgets actually

> been significantly impacted by the recession?


Those who have/had considerable investments in the Icelandic Bank have had budgets cut, not sure if Southwark fall into that category or not.

  Quote
Genuine query... have council budgets actually been significantly impacted by the recession?


Logically they should - reduced income from tax revenues at central government, businesses closing - thus losing business rates and defaults on mortgages leading to losses of council taxes, should all equate to a sensible matching reduction in costs. At present this is not the road that government is taking - for reasons that some would support.


Personally I would prefer that Southwark Council looked carefully at its budget and determined what was essential spending and what was discretionary - and cut costs in that way. I would vote personally for losing the free magazine "Southwark Life" and similar vanity publications / activities, tho' I doubt we'll see that happen. An in depth review of the budget might reveal other possible savings.


However, it was cheering to note that Boris Johnston has successfully argued the case for not increasing the Mayor's precept on our council taxes and financed the static budget by dispensing with much of his predecessor's vanity projects - transferring the spend to more important areas.

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

    • If anyone has any spare tickets for Crystal Palace on Sunday let me know!
    • The tenant's business has already failed. If the landlord doesn't accept it, they can have a vacant property, stand in the queue of creditors, and get paid little or nothing. It's a gamble that the restructuring will work and the tenant will start paying rent again. Commercial properties are often hard to let. 🤷
    • An inquiry will put a huge amount of time and resource into looking at what happened in the past and why it happened and who was responsible and, in a year or two maybe more, a report will be produced and actions may or may not be taken, some of those responsible for bad decisions will already have resigned and moved on.   Given that we now already understand some of the issues that allowed this awful behaviour to continue unchallenged, my concern is less about whether there is an inquiry to examine what happened in the past but about what is being done right now to protect girls and young women from predatory and exploitative men in whatever race or identity they come in. Inquiries examine the past but don't necessarily solve problems and they certainly don't come up with conclusions quickly which is why they can often feel hollow.  I'd rather see perpetrators and those that let the perpetrators act with impunity, actually being prosecuted and an inquiry won't do that.  I suspect that's why some MPs voted against an inquiry. But do feel free to give me examples of inquiries that really made a difference and actually changed things in a timely and effective way.      
    • In recent consultation on further ED CPZ the majority of respondents were against. Fully appreciate you may not live on a road proposed for CPZ. If you are close to that area it is likely you will be affected by parking displacement if the CPZ goes in. I was just curious what James Barber's position on this is? Perhaps he'll come on here and let us know. He was always really good at visiting the forum.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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