rupert james

You both seem to be playing the editing game

European SUPERSTATE to be unveiled: EU nations 'to be morphed into one' post-Brexit EUROPEAN political chiefs are to take advantage of Brexit by unveiling their long-held plan to morph the continent?s countries into one GIANT SUPERSTATE, it has emerged yesterday. Was this not Adolph Hitler's plan?

As these comments are on a London Forum do you think outside of ED people are thinking the same thing?

What this shows whether you voted in or out there is no politician or political party that has any kudos to pick the baton up and run with it. It is a internet world and real live experience now does not exist to make any worthwhile contribution. Perhaps people should look at the Somme, misguided but true conviction. How many of these people would welcome a rerun. Snowflake generation, how very true. Referendum. advisory to Government Yes. Let's backtrack. Make your mind up to what this means to this Country.

"And it's also completely obvious from Renata's posts that those councillors are very involved in liaising with residents as too is the local MP. She has also pointed out that Wandle are starting their own legal action against those responsible. They don't have to report every 5 mins to this irrelevant forum" This came from the thread on the Solomons passage thread, Just how relevant is the ED forum in local matters. Is the response to the above the sum of the forums worth?

buddug Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Hamvas said: "Southwark building control did > follow correct process and procedure at this > site." Oh, did they? Still protecting your > paymasters. Let's see what my freedom of > information request throws up in the next few > days. Have you received a reply back from Southwark on this matter. Sure many people including myself would be interested in the response.

"There's an automatic drive it seems to lay blame at Southwark, or Wandle etc. But until the facts are fully established and understood (as they must be through some kind of inquiry), seeking blame where there may be none is unfair." As the original builder went into liquidation as you might expect they are out of the frame. In financial takeovers there is a thing called due diligence where one company looks at another to establish what the true situation is before they go ahead. Why did the new construction company not look at what they were taking on and report and why did Wandle not know what they had in construction terms when the other builder went down? No matter which way the cake is sliced Wandle is the main ingredient. Southwark is in the picture because of building control. It would seem proper for Wandle to hold their hands up and say we are 100% in the wrong. "What matters in the immediate term, is that residents are given satisfactory alternate accommodation at no extra expense to themselves (whilst the rebuild takes place) and that fair compensation is given for the disruption. This should be done with no objection or fuss from Wandle." An enquiry should slow this down. Drive time should be praised for bringing this into the public arena.

I believe that these properties are owned by Wandle Housing Association. Do they have 85 homes of the same standard and size anywhere in the borough? Do Southwark have a duty to these people or do their displaced residents come first? The local MP should be on the case immediately. There was marching in the street when a toy shop had to close but this is not attracting any interest. Strange

It would appear if you throw up sub built housing to tick official target boxes all is ok. Speed not quality is the requirement. With all the houses that have come down at the Elephant and Aylesbury Estates where will these people go? Not all these places are social housing but also included shared ownership. People have worked hard to get these places and build a future for them and their families at prices they can afford. Where will they be able to get other places the same with prices rocketing upwards? Not doubt other places will be built on the site at a price only the wheel heeled will be able to afford. i.e. The Elephant. As someone mentioned earlier will heads roll at Southwark and the Housing Association. It used to be the bigger the cockup the greater the promotion. Were these buildings monitored during construction? Perhaps the Housing Association might like to list and explain exactly what is wrong with all these buildings and the full extent of the cockup will become apparent. I did hear that that one of last blocks built the original developers went into administration halfway through construction and the final phase was completed to a different design. Why were faults original and new not seen then? I would have thought extra care would have been shown. Speed not quality? I do feel very sorry for all these people who felt secure in new properties and now this. No doubt that old phrase. "Lessons will be learnt and acted on in the future" will appear at some point

After living in the area for almost 70 years starting just up the road from Ruskin Park House on Champion Hill. I have rather given up on all the changes that are continually raised. Dont know how I and friends ever managed to stay alive and even fit in now. Some of the comments I see on this forum only make me chuckle. Real life seems to have passed them by.

You sound like a very sound chap. Welcome to Bellenden Village

I have no bias. In fact You are becoming my super hero "I don't think I'm a superhero at all - I'm a slightly tubby vaguely unfit middleaged cyclist." Overtaking into oncoming traffic. Awesome

I suspect if the traffic has stopped you do not wait in line behind these stopped vehicles but edge dangerously up the inside path.

Seeing as you can use the bus lane maybe you are not the super hero you think you are.

And the top picture is the gentrified part of Rye Lane

bodsier Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > if it's so popular, why is there such an increase > of cars parking in uncontrolled areas. To be > honest if people oppose it and it is still > introduced. Provided they can afford to pay the > permit fee,then please just pay it. If you decide > to park elsewhere to save the fee, you are just > delaying an even bigger expense as you will > eventually have to pay for your area, and any > other neighbouring area that you visit. The > parking companies win . They love it. We are then > the losers. Judging by some of the expensive cars > that park in unrestricted parking areas, such > fees are affordable, They just chose to avoid > them. I think it's fair enough if you can't > afford the permit price, but if you can, cough up, > it's shortsighted to think that you are onto a > good thing. You are just pushing the problem out > further. Why is it not possible for residents to have free parking permits? Answer. Southwark wants to screw every last penny out of residents. Just remember Southwark spent almost ?500.000.00 0n staff refreshments at Tooley Street and Queens Road over the last 3 years.

Any route that they can use to bring in more changes without consulting.

This and all the other proposals that Southwark are quietly implementing should be a wake up for all residents. Just how many residents actually go to the DCC and more importantly how many residents know of proposals that Southwark have in mind. Not Many Only those few in the loop and aided and abetted by those Cllrs with their own agendas means they will be passed. Look at all the recent consultations and note just how many responses come back. As long as there is a % no matter how small it will get passed if Southwark wants it. Beware

Why has Barber and the other Cllrs not flagged this up on the forum. It seems that every traffic proposal is left till the very end so people do not get a chance to comment.

Why could the other 2 Cllrs not step in and carry the baton? If Cllr Barber appears to be the main man why do the others still have a Cllrs job? Perhaps the other 2 should throw in the towel and let 2 others do the job

.

Posted by James Barber February 07, 05:25PM Cl thank you and Jeremy, Mark T and KK have laid out the issues in regard to planning and process and James Barber seems to have disappeared. "Thanks ITATM for helping while I've been focusing on a fab new day job." -------------------- Regards james.barber@southwark.gov.uk 07900 227366 Liberal Democrat Councillor for East Dulwich Ward Skype cllrjamesbarber [www.jamesbarber.org.uk] [twitter.com]

Nigello Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > nevermind her taking pictures of other peoples > cars with no authorisation. - Why do you need > permission to take a picture, on a private road or > not? It makes even less sense if that private road > belongs to the person who is taking the photos. > Other aspects of her behaviour may well be > unreasonable but I cannot see that one falling > into that category. If private road rules extend > to photography, I'd be happy to be corrected. edhistory Wrote: If you had looked at the plans you would have seen that the land in question is part of the old garden centre freehold and runs to the railway cottages boundary.

I might have had sympathy if as the OP stated she had not been abusive over a very minor and unimportant incident. I cannot see what has changed. When the garden center was there people parked all along the garden center wall and she accepted that after moving in for a long period of time. Now they have gone she does not accept anyone stopping. More to this than meets the eye. Is there not a Railway Rise Action group objecting to the proposed demolition of the cottages? No 2/3 On gossip dated 8th January 2016. Interesting read any connection.

This is not about parking but dropping someone off. Door open / door shut / off Somehow different to parking