first mate

I?d like to hear from some of those out and about mixing and socialising and not practising social distancing yesterday to try to understand their thought processes. How do they justify or explain their behaviour?

It is not thought to be airborne over long distances but short distances they are not so sure. So, even on bicycles, people should keep a good distance from one another.See https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/infection-control/control-recommendations.html

It is a very generous offer and clearly well intentioned. I normally cycle but am now wondering if this is wise? Groups of cyclists stopping at lights etc may not be a good thing in terms of social distancing. If you are cycling you will probably be panting at some point. If only few cyclists probably okay but if cycling increases to avoid public transport then not so sure this is a good idea while C19 is a major threat to public health?

As a retailer yourself thanks Monica for reporting this. Shameful, selfish behaviour by some which should not be forgotten once this is all over.

It seems the Council are forging ahead with CPZ implementation, surely they could hold off until the Covid 19 emergency is over?

Perhaps it?s a matter of the council engaging swiftly with business and advising how shopping behaviour can be channelled to the greater good. Clearly the council cannot control these things but perhaps they can engage and pressure...perhaps they already are. As others have said, we just need more regular communication from our councillors who seem rather quiet at the moment.

Soylent Green Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Relax parking restrictions for medical staff so > that they can get to work safely without risking > contamination on public transport. With 2 major > teaching hospital sin the borough, this is really > important. This is incredibly important. The Council should approach the organisation that runs car parking for Kings and ensure all staff, at whatever level, are given free parking. Health workers should also park without charge near their homes.

It's a vague document in a highly verbose 'officialese' partly given over to explaining what the virus is and then what has been advised nationally, then further waffle about committees and reporting, an organogram that is colourful but explains little. Perhaps we can take heart from the existance of a Council Gold Stick (CEO) a 'Resiliance Forum', some other kind of committee and a hypothetical Borough Emergency Room... 'if necessary' (whatever that means). Not very proactive in my view but perhaps I am way off base.

Attached is the official Southwark 'response' to Covid19. Do we find this reassuring?

Is this being caused by the extensive work at end of Barry Road?

Southwark has a team of community and parking wardens on scooters. They could be tasked with delivering leaflets and perhaps even collecting medication from pharmacies and delivering to elderly etc.. There will probably be other useful tasks they can perform.

There are quite a lot of posts this am about no water and electricity on some roads. The Council are going to need to be very proactive about this sort of occurrence and the role of Councillors will be vital in ensuring incidents are dealt with ASAP.

Ring 111 immediately.

Alert your councillor.

The Council should be intervening if essential services are interrupted and not being dealt with promptly. Ask your Councillor to investigate.

To echo some earlier posts, I think Southwark should postpone CPZ implementation (for all the reasons described by other posters) as well as charges for the parks. My thinking is that for the elderly asked to self-isolate being able to drive to the park for a breath or fresh air or to walk the dog, is going to be much safer than using public transport. If, despite everything, Southwark insist on forging ahead with CPZ it would be irresponsible at the moment.

The question is, how do Southwark keep getting away with this sort of incompetence? It does feel as though there is zero accountability.

So how can we incentivise schools to be more community minded? Should/can schools be forced to keep their intakes strictly local? Is there a conflict between parents wanting the very best education for their child but also collective responsibility for healthy streets?

My guess is no child of that age could access a car on a regular basis without the parent?s knowledge. Just as parents pay for the school fees they will also more than likely have purchased the car. Parents with the means to do both probably also have sufficient means and intelligence to monitor and, if necessary, curtail their child?s behaviour. Anyway, it is a very minor point. The broader point is whether children should on the whole only go to schools local to them and schools be made to limit their catchment areas? I guess it would impact negatively on the business, competitive nature of the current education model but school traffic seems to be a major problem and this might go some way to tackling that?

Down to the parents really, surely they would know if their child owns a car and is using it to get to school? if it is made school policy it would be the parent?s responsibility to enforce.

Cycling feels dangerous for reasons other than cars, although cars are a factor. I have found other cyclists going faster than me a real menace and have had a number of close shaves. Cycling at night/ fear of crime is another factor. In terms of collectively putting children?s health first, it does seem as though school traffic is a big issue. Perhaps parents need to work harder with other parents to figure out how to get their children to school without using cars and coaches? Should we start seeking a situation where children have to go to a school that is walking or cycling distance only? Should 6th formers be banned from driving to school by the schools they attend?

If CPZ is up and running elsewhere in the borough why is it such a mess in this instance? We had similar shenanigans when Southwark first started charging for garden waste last year. Is it really just council cockup and incompetence? Councillor responses/intervention to this latest fiasco seem minimal to non-existant, yet they were so very involved in CPZ consultation.

Is it one of those consultations where anyone in the borough can comment?

Carrie Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > We have been having exactly the same problems, > doesn?t seem to matter whose name is the lead on > the council tax bill - the system will not > recognise the account number. Tried the phone line > - listened, through gritted teeth, to the endless > messages saying how easy it was to get the permit > online - finally got put through to a recorded > message which said ?sorry this mailbox is full? > and the call was disconnected! Have uploaded a > water bill and await confirmation from Southwark > that I do indeed live in the house for which they > have been charging me council tax! Ask your councillor for help- they are meant to help with these types of issues.

rahrahrah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > exdulwicher Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Rockets Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > ----- > > > Are the council allowed to do reinvest money > > > raised from that to other services - I > thought > > > they were, by law, only allowed to spend > money > > > raised from parking charges back on road > > > infrastructure? > > > > Yes and no. All income from parking charges and > > penalties has to be invested locally rather > than > > going to central government or becoming a > profit. > > Doesn't say it has to be invested in roads. > > I wasn't aware of this- Interesting. In these > times of reduced budgets for councils, that does > somewhat incentive more charges. And incentivise fines. Who is hiring and managing the parking wardens? Are they directly employed by Southwark or contracted out?