Rockets

It's madness that coverage is so poor in parts of Dulwich, especially the Village, and I am not buying it's because the networks don't want it. The fact that all operators have poor coverage in the area suggests it is more than just a decision on their part. If you look at Cellmapper.net you can see thetr is a big gap of masts once you go west of Lordship Lane. I wonder whether any of the local councillors could help lobby to resolve the situation as many people I speak to are fed-up with the situation.

I suspect it won't be long before he gets a knock on the door from a friendly police officer and he will no doubt start pleading his innocence and begging for forgiveness.....

Oh joy...London sells it streets to another VC funded company with money to burn desperate to try and get a foothold in London.....the cycle of flogging a dead horse continues... https://www.timeout.com/london/news/london-is-getting-a-new-e-bike-operator-and-20-000-more-bikes-on-the-streets-082224

Quite a lot of detail on her thoughts on improving cycling, lacking in detail on walking...another unbalanced investment policy heading our way per chance, over-indexing on cycling over everything....? And given her comments on her new ministerial car and not cycling in London, despite it being flat, I think Malcolm Tucker would have screamed to get her "on her *@*@*@*@* bike and make sure she cycles far, far away from any future interview!"

Does anyone know who blocks the attempts of mobile companies to provide decent coverage - so frustrating for anyone who lives, works or visits the area that it is a mobile deadspot.

Great news that the government is prioritising money for active travel. Not so great news that they are seemingly only interested in placating the cycle lobby. How depressing that she talks about investing in cycling and walking yet only focuses on cycling. What she should be saying is the government will review spending to date and see what gives the best ROI in terms of changing travel habits and then investing money accordingly. I did laugh out loud when I read this bit: She said: “I’ve not cycled in London. I don’t know why, because it’s obviously super flat. I definitely do want to get into it more, not least because I don’t have time to get to the gym. So it’s a really good alternative … I’m afraid now I have my ministerial car, I don’t know whether Dennis [her driver] would let me, he might have to drive alongside me or something ridiculous." This could be a section from an episode of The Thick of It! Malcolm Tucker would have some choice words about her words!

And another one: BBC News - Derby e-bikes scheme operator pulls out of city over vandalism - BBC News https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cgq27q4kk3lo

And perhaps those without a car might have wanted something, you know, a bit more accessible for those without a car... Honestly.... It is really amazing how some will try to spin the council's obsession with wasting tax payers money on that junction as to some benefit to everyone in the borough....it's all getting a bit desperate (and laughable) now.

BBC News - Hundreds of injuries from e-scooter and e-bike crashes in Essex - BBC News https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c1k38vrmgy2o E-anything seems to be a problem

Dulwich ward councillors are a weird mix of marxists and champagne socialists....they don't tend to mix well...and neither are really the best examples of socialism! It does seem very ironic that at a time when the council was trying to convince everyone their funding was being slashed by the government that they could waste so much money on Dulwich Square...but what's that saying about socialism and how great it is until you run out of other people's money to spend.

I think HappyMe5 is right that this is some sort of social media trend, knock-down ginger with a twist that kids kick the door rather than ring a doorbell.

Many of which led to those famous words: "A consultation is not a referendum". You don't have to spin your way out of a mess by saying that if you have majority support...

But that's where you are very wrong because the very council that cited poor PTAL scores as the reason there was so much car use in Dulwich then said that LTNs should only be put in areas with high PTAl scores. And then proceeded to put them in the very place they said would not be good for them, an area with poor PTAL scores. So the issue is not with distraction or trolling but one of rank hypocrisy from a council who have, since then, lied, misled and tried to manipulate the narrative. It's just some of us as smart enough to take a step back and say hang on a minute this is not right and a very dangerous precedent. Others seem happier to turn a blind eye and lap up the council Kool-Aid like George Galloway drinking milk from Rula Lenska's imaginary cup!

Data released by a council who are, ideologically, desperate to show their intervention is working, and which you admit yourself is incomplete (Underhill) is certainly indicating but not proving a positive impact - its a lesson in spin! At every juncture the council has lied and tried to mislead residents about the real impact of LTNs. The very existence of One Dulwich is because a lot of people were fed up with the claptrap the council was peddling to validate their LTNs.

Yes and unfortunately for them, the councillors and others in the cycling lobby we have long memories, took good notes and don't fall for the spin! #accountability

Sorry to go all Ben Kingsley on you from Sexy Beast but No...no,no,no,no,no,no,no...No.... The council's data collection of the "wider area" was so fundamentally flawed that it is laughable anyone takes it seriously..."that didn't include Underhill"...hmmmm why might that have been.....it didn't include a lot of the boundary roads soaking up the displacement. If I remember rightly the A205 was not monitored because "that was the responsibility of TFL". And the monitoring on Lordship Lane (near Melford) did not include any vehicle going under 10 after they moved the strips from near the entrance of Court Lane to adajcent to Melford...again why did they do that...? Interesting as well that their last update to their own dashboard showed marked increases in traffic above pre-Covid levels on many of the boundary roads. And a final reminder that the council initially only installed monitoring strips on roads INSIDE the LTNs rather than outside and only put them outside when they were forced to by public pressure. Again, why did they only want to monitor traffic levels INSIDE the LTNs.. No that was in 2022. Are you also suggesting TFL stating what they did that forced Will Norman to intervene was part of the anti-LTN lobby? They clearly stated delays were a direct consequence of the displacement from Dulwich LTNs, Southwark councillors took offence, made a load of TFL people cry and Will Norman was forced to wade in and try to keep the peace. There was actually from TFL not long after the measures went in and it was impacting Lordship Lane (in one direction if I remember rightly).

Dulwich College is not at all like the vast majority of private schools and they will see minimal impact from this. Many of DC's International boarders will likely not be impacted by this, DC is what the government want you to imagine every private school is like - schooling the offspring of world leaders and the super rich. The same cannot be said for smaller schools like Oakfield, Rosemead or Herne Hill and it is those that are most at risk from this policy and the parents there are not the super rich or the global leaders and elite.

It does appear that some sober realities are starting to have to be addressed around the active travel gold rush.

BBC News - Public outrage prompts Melbourne e-scooter ban https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c3w68ywqv2go

Of course not because the blinkered view of the cycle lobby is that everything has to come after cyclists...everything...no matter what the impact. Defeaning silence on this one...

You do realise, don't you, that the same definition of private education applies within UK VAT legislation as well and the government are going to have a challenge to unpick it all. Interesting article here: https://www.accountingweb.co.uk/tax/business-tax/labours-private-school-fees-pledge-requires-lesson-in-vat One wonders why the Greek government had not thought about this challenge but this is the problem with ideological policies...the finer detail tends to get in the way of the dog whistling. As the Greek government found to their, and their education system's cost. A big difference between "evidence" and "modelling " and the report to which Malumbu refers is based on modelling (and roundly, and predictably, criticised by those against the measures) not evidence. There was "evidence" that state schools were being bombarded with requests for places from parents with children at private school but this was spun as private parents doing it deliberately whether they needed a place or not. We have to hope that is the case because if not then the state sector could be brought to its knees but I do think it is interesting schools in Beckenham are apparently being told to prepare to increase classes by two. Time will tell....

So would you then also then advocate the removal of many of the cycle lanes in London that were installed at the cost of bus lanes and bus passengers? And, as TFL has stated in relation to Croxted Road, conjestion and bus delays are being caused by displacement from the LTNs - I presume you aren't supportive of lobbying to have LTNs removed...of course not because in the blinkered world of pro-LTN lobbyists the prviate car is the sole reason for every problem there is......? Do you have a more recent council review of transport in the area that states anything other than PTAL scores are poor?

Of course I do because the left-wing Greek government was the only government that has tried to do something similar and it was an absolute disaster - again driven by a blinkered idealogical hatred of private schools. Perhaps you know of a country that did this and it was a rip-roaring success? As Starmer tries to cozy up to Europe again it will be interesting to see what the EU makes of this as they jumped on the Greeks very quickly when they tried this to tell them to stop. BTW interesting that other countries take a very different approach - I didn't realise that private schools in France are funded/part-funded by the state.

I repeat...the council themselves concluded.... The Dulwich area has a low level of public transport accessibility. Areas around the main stations only reach a PTAL 3 and The Village a PTAL 2 whilst the main commercial area around East Dulwich has a PTAL 3. Other parts of Dulwich, particularly those where schools are located have a level 2 of accessibility translating into a higher use of car and coach for pupils outside of Dulwich.... .....since they haven't done another Transport report since 2018 and since, if anything, the provision of public transport accessibility has declined since then it seems the conclusion the council came to holds true. Around the same time the council suggested that only areas with high PTAL scores would be suitable for LTNs....and then what did they do...put and LTN right in the middle of an area that they concluded that: "the area has a lower public transport accessibility level than the remainder of Southwark".... Kind of a bit daft dont you think?

Southwatk's own reports state otherwise and your cant rewrite published data and comments from Southwark themselves...According to the Southwark Council 2018 Transport report (https://www.southwark.gov.uk/assets/attach/6887/Dulwich-TMS-SDG-Full-Report-Final-April-2018-.pdf) Southwark states categorically that: The Dulwich area has a low level of public transport accessibility. Areas around the main stations only reach a PTAL 3 and The Village a PTAL 2 whilst the main commercial area around East Dulwich has a PTAL 3. Other parts of Dulwich, particularly those where schools are located have a level 2 of accessibility translating into a higher use of car and coach for pupils outside of Dulwich. This is confirmed also by more general DfT accessibility statistics which show that, in general the area has a lower public transport accessibility level than the remainder of Southwark whilst by car it tends to be on par with the other parts of the borough or somewhat higher for hospitals, particularly due to the proximity of Dulwich Community Hospital.