alice

The idea of having 100s of healthy working age people not allowed to work is absolutely ridiculous. It’s a set up for failure and division The Tory government organised that labour is carrying on with it.

Where are people expected to get their information from about ‘illegal’ immigrants? The government? newspapers?

Well, tighten up black market not punish those who are already paying

That wouldn’t work people sending money have already paid tax on it

Reform are jokers. A mixture of conmen and the easily lead.

Maybe some bodies are mature enough at 16 to start drinking in pubs. But that’s irrelevant -

I would imagine that the evidence shows that protein powder is not suitable for under 18s whatever the brand. Staff should’ve known that.

Same odds given for Rayner being next leader of Labour Party.

Yes but I was wrong

So no alcohol no drugs no masks no violence the 13th should be busy then.

fake photo and fake posts.

I suppose the primary purpose of that shop is to provide funds for the hospice at Sydenham. if the new prices don’t increase the profit substantially it won’t last but (as others have said it’s been going on for awhile) it clearly must

Southwark planted over 5000 trees last year.

National insurance for landlords? I’d say over half of them are past retirement age

Well, I do stand by my point that sometimes academies can be seen to spend money that does not directly impact the education of children., removing trees or bushes is one such thing. Maybe they intend to replace them with something far superior but this is all money that could be spent elsewhere that actually benefits learning. edit: of course if they have been removed because they contain poisonous berries that may result in the death of a child I bow my head and apologise.

That’s what academies do spend money on things that do not directly relate to the education of the children. In fact, in this case, I think it would be detrimental - don’t plants reduce CO2 and a school on a busy road needs to maximise that benefit not reduce it

The only children that would be crossing there would be accompanied by teaching / support staff. But no, it’s a very non-busy road because of current Southwark restrictions and as all children would be over 11 I don’t consider them vulnerable.

That’s making me cry. So much for prioritising the vulnerable.

Isnt it connected to the Prince of Peckham?

Now isn’t that land going to be built on for student housing or have I got it wrong? Maybe it’s prep? PS plenty of benches in Dulwich Village and Melbourne Grove if you’re searching for somewhere to sit.

Fabulous news I hope the court had the power to order you compensation

I wonder why they didn’t use Fairfield Halls with 10 times the space

When I lived in San Francisco, it wasn’t flat.

That’s quite an unpleasant accusation.

Every single time I cross at lights, I have to slow down and look down the left side of the bus or the car or the truck to see if a cyclist is shooting up there.