R&A

">My experience of Denmark Hill and the SLL was that outside of rush hour the service was virtually empty. I was often one of only four/five people in a carriageSo since the service is poorly used outside of rush hour, it strikes me that a campaign like this might be more about house prices than hospitals.The unfortunate side-effect was that the maximum success didn't necessarily deliver the maximum service to Denmark Hill.<" - there are many stations that will be affected across south london.... Clapham north tube station is closed most mornings because of over crowding.. the SLL is used as an alternative during these times. Equally Wandsworth road is a barren desert in terms of public transport links etc etc

I can't see how TJ is claiming credit... she is merely pointing out to hugenot that there are wider economic and social impacts that far out weigh the direct costs associated with maintaining links to central london from central-south london. She clearly points out that 'every politician' is campaigning to keep these vital links that benefit a cross section of society (from patients to city workers) And just to reiterate that point. This isn't a small 'action group' fighting to keep these train services, it covers all parties and the Mayor. This is not a political issue anymore. Consensus is that we keep central london line links.

Thanks for your response Tessa - can you clarify that the money is not conditional on labour winning the election? thanks

This is fantastic news - many thanks indeed Just a quick question, and sorry if this is a stupid one, but has the funding been guaranteed i.e. already in Southwark council's bank a/c or is there a chance that a new government could reverse this decision? Thanks

Is anyone going back because they are the breadwinner? Has anyone's partner/husband chosen to be SAT'H'? how is that working out? Should a relationship break up or say (god forbid) there's a loss through death, how will our decisions now affect our choices later on? just thought i'd throw these in the mix as it may help those yet to make a decision.. incl SB (and me!)

isnt' it the mum who suffers in the event of leaving upset older kids? The kids adapt and/or forget pretty easily. I was at boarding school (full time) from 7 years to 18 years due to my dad being in army and moving 18 times over 18 years.... My mother had a terrible time - never crying in front of us but pulling up in her car 5 mins away from school to have a cry at the beginning of each term (she only told us this recenlty). We (my sister and i) cried a lot when we were dropped off at the beginning of term which is understandable. But as soon as we were past the school gates the tears were forgotten and we loved school. I watched day girls getting picked up each day but i dont' remember looking on longingly. I did get upset that my parents weren't at sports day or parents evening though... but i had quite an extreme set up .. it does sound painful though but are the kids really suffering or is it the mum?

>I doubt anyone ever looks back and wishes they'd worked MORE when their children were small, TBH! But possibly the opposite. my mother and her friends are pretty resentful (probably the wrong word) of their past in terms of career and kids. They were brought up in a world where you had limited or no choice but to give up work after kids... She'd much rather have furthered her career than look after children. I have an excellent relationship with my mother and see her most weeks as she lives round the corner. So yes the first few years are unique but your relationship with your kids is constently developing and doesn't have to end at 18 years? The thought of giving up a career and living a life 'through your children' is certainly not for everyone. However, i am most definitely sitting in the 'niave seat' on maternity leave at 9 months pregnant (first baby) and dreaming of going back to male dominated city job, after 6 months off... let's see what happens... My ideal set up is a four day week. Happy to take a pay cut and still do five days in four days etc...

apparently the 'happiest' workers are part-time working mums. Perhap because their lives are diversified/varied etc and having a little bit of everything sort of.. works and as we all know... happy mother = happy child

I just read this thread and wanted to put my thoughts down regarding 'the greed of pharmaceutical companies' which was referred to earlier in this thread I do not work for a pharmaceutical company but I do feel like they get unfair press. They have a worse reputation than tobacco firms which makes no sense to me.... Pharma companies invest approximately 40% of their sales into research and development. A lot of that money is lost through drug failures either because of safety and/or efficacy issues. A minority of drugs do however manage to get through the various stages of drug development and in return pharma companies receive exclusivity on sales of that drug for approximately 10-14 years, yes - at a profit. they then reinvest back into R&D and the cycle continues. New drugs enable the pharma company to make enough profit to keep a company thriving, innovating and paying their staff etc I can't think of a better way of doing things (perhaps there is a better way?) and new drugs are being discovered yearly through this process e.g. Herceptin which can now cure some types of breast cancer thanks to Roche. Unfortunately for poorer countries it means waiting for 10 years until they can benefit from said new drugs as they turn generic, BUT Herceptin wouldn't exist without the R&D by Roche in the first place? Sounds harsh but scientists just can't work for free. Unfortunately the cycle is a necessary evil? What i personally struggle with is the hatred projected towards these pharma companies when tobacco companies are profiting from actually KILLING people. None of their profits go towards medical R&D - just directly into shareholder returns. Why is it that these companies have a better reputation than pharma companies??? Slightly off topic but kinda on topic too

There are some articles in The Times and some bbc podcasts which help explain the pros and cons really well. At 6 months the baby is developed anyway - unlike those poor woman who took thalidomide ... Saying that it's fever that is thought to cause birth defects so it's a risk not to take the vaccine I'd recommend reading around the subject a little and making your own decision Personally i'm getting it on Saturday morning (i'm nearly 9 months pregnant) but i have spent a LOT time researching to come to this decision. What swayed me was the possibility of transfering antibodies (either through me or breast feeding) to my baby. I don't think you can vaccinate very young babies and I'd feel terrible if there had been something i could have done to prevent the baby suffering. That was what swung it for me but listen to the podcasts and read the articles and you may come up with a different conclusion

This is crazy - it's literally just 7 streets away from that other major fire, a few months back. Seems really backward constructing a huge building using TIMBER frames? Is that normal??? At least no one was seriously hurt this time which is amazing considering the damage done

You can park on McNeil road just off camberwell grove. There's a little walkway just opposite which leads you directly to denmark hill train station. It'll only take 5 min to do the walk We're planning on driving there first time with Dad-to-be then moving the car to McNeil Road AFTER i've been accepted by the hospital There's a baby boom right now and the staff are turning people away if you're not properly 'in labour' (i think no earlier than 5cm dilated now) The taxi fares and/or parking costs can really add up if you keep being turned away...

ignore

i agree - nothing prepares you other than say what happened to you Sylvie. i had a nasty thing happen to me, walking back from the bus stop at 7pm (coming back from work) in December '07. I did all the right things after i realised i was being followed, took keys out and had them ready, turned around and looked at him directly, walked with purpose towards my house. however i passed out, probably from shock/fear when i was tripped up by the man. On coming round i just screamed and thankfully two men came running to help. So now i feel better prepared probably cos i'm a little braver and will scream earlier or just run as soon as i realise i'm being followed. Everything else seems futile... He was massive - i had no chance. I too am quite a strong person but it took a while to not have the jumpy thing. But as has already been mentioned, it does go and now i'm completely fine All the best

just realised - you'll struggle to get people telling you that their virgin connection's not working.....?

i have virgin broadband and it's working fine tonight i'm by East dulwich station

This is such a brilliant outcome. Hilarious and relieving in equal measures. I live just round the corner from you and it really shook us up. Everyone's probably a little more on their guard re hard locking their doors etc. no bad thing at all. brill

Great - so she may want to help as the Maudsley is served by Denmark Hill too right? Let's hope she does read this and steps in... pm me Jo! :)

Just had a thought - Didn't Jo Brand work at Kings when she was a nurse AND currently lives in Camberwell??? Do you think she could help us campaign to save the South London Line? Are there any other famous people that could hopefully attract the attention of the media? Especially as yesterday Boris was in his dream world again, suggesting that we could extend the bakerloo line (how are we going to pay for that boris? scrap all the buses? perhaps close a few hospitals?) What he's promising and what he's doing seem to conflict somewhat. I'm sure the newspapers would like to know.... and famous people (unfortunate but true) get the media's attention. Also Jeremy Hardy? that left wing guy off radio 4 - doesn't he live in the area too and will be affected by the scrapping of SLL?? he could drop in a few comments on the news quiz This will help the campaign to keep BOTH the SLL and the East london line extension and not have to scrap one for the other... Anyone actually know Jo BRand or how i could get in touch with her? Shout me down if you think this a stupid/trashy idea... just came to me this morning after reading all of the empty promises boris was making yesterday...

if you already get the vouchers i think you keep them but new mums n' dads will miss out :(

i thought most of those train stations were zone two?

i think that's the case - but i heard that there is a way around it by 'stacking' the trains OR for Southwark council to refuse planning permission for london bridge's planned changes unless they compromise somehow?

blatantly - only just joined and only two posts to his/her name.... probably the mail... apparently they were sniffing around last week

Surely Eileen has been instrumental in making this a debate by bringing it to our attention in the first place? The issue is that this decision was made on our behalf, w/out our consultation, despite us paying for all of this as tax payers. It has been a direct result of the efforts of the few that tfl/boris etc are now revisiting the issue I'm curious as to why it's 'impossible' to have both lines? Isn't it all about priorities? How can we change tfl's current priorities? .... as it feels like central south london comes way down the priority list....

Why is it we can't have/fight for both? People will benefit from the ELL, of course they will The fact that the majority of people would rather keep the SLL (see network rail survey, support for eileen and EDF responses etc) is by the by Even with the ELL, south london is still a barren desert compared to north london's transport network Anyway - i'm ducking out now on this as i sound like a broken record. Sorry for that.