legalalien

Just looked and found the leaflet on Twitter. Looks like it has been out together in a rush and pretty amateur (and I note they carefully don?t identify which candidate they are talking about). I don?t get it - surely if it works it consolidates the anti- Labour vote with the ?definitely local? Conservatives (or is it some complicated strategy to make undecided voters empathise with the LD candidate)? And in any case, doesn?t Cllr Leeming himself live in one of the other wards (albeit in Southwark - there is an emphasis on not having someone on Lambeth vote on council tax in Southwark, but given Southwark are likely to be putting in council tax increases at the maximum capped amount for the foreseeable future I don?t see that as a big deal)? Presumably the LD candidate concerned meets the eligibility rules and either occupies (albeit not living in) premises in Southwark or works in Southwark. The leaflet doesn?t suggest he is ineligible to stand.

Haven?t got that one yet (it has been a bumper year for flyers here I have to say!) Had a very generic Labour one this morning that didn?t mention any local issues at all ,focus on the general cost of living crisis and central govt. do you mean one of the village ward candidates lives in streatham, or is it a leaflet about someone unrelated?

I have heard that the charitable trust that owns the field is in the process of exploring options to make more / better use of it for youth education/ sports etc. in some capacity as it doesn't really work for the school given its location. From a quick google the St Olaves and St Saviours Foundation is linked to the Dulwich Estate https://www.thedulwichestate.org.uk/about-us/who-we-support/st-saviour-s-and-st-olave-s-schools-foundation. The school that uses it is a local authority maintained, voluntary aided school according to this? What I would say is that leasing and maintaining a sports ground is expensive and trying to bring in sufficient income to cover costs is no mean feat. While specialist grounds maintenance contractors are paid, pretty much everything else at the charities that operate the grounds in DV that I am familiar with, is done by volunteers. If anyone has brilliant ideas for the ground and a burning desire to set something up there, I'd suggest contacting the trust and finding out more!

The Chinese crabapple in our garden is blooming and standing under it you can hear the buzzing of loads of bees. I love this tree.

I have no trouble divorcing local and national politics, and will also be voting conservative locally* but def not for Boris? crew nationally when the time comes. It?s the only way to get any semblance of accountability back into local government. People voting for councillors on the basis of national politics seems to me to be precisely what has gone wrong with the system. And let?s face it, one historically Tory ward turning blue again isn?t going to send much of a message to Conservative HQ. Southwark council as a whole will undoubtedly stay in Labour control (although I do think there?ll be a swing away from Labour given the situation with council housing developments, Southwark repair service etc.) *having just watched the hustings I was pretty impressed with Richard Wingfield but from speaking to others locally the general consensus seems to be to vote Conservative in DV to avoid splitting the ?vote for change?. I did like the socialist candidate at the end who remarked on Lambeth?s significant ?rainy day? reserves and declared that ?it?s pi$$ing down?.

We?ve now had three visits from Labour, two from Lib Dems and two from conservatives. And lots of leaflets from all three, plus one leaflet from One Dulwich suggesting we vote based on local issues (didn?t have to convince me of that!). In DV ward - presumably regarded as a potential gain/ loss by all three parties.

Had a quick look at old forum posts to see whether any obvious ED traffic incidents that might have caused a spike in second week of Sept 2019. Only thing that stood out was Barry Road closure put in place the week before and due to last several weeks, which seemed to be dumping traffic onto LL and clogging up the GG roundabout, which could I guess encourage cars to turn up EDG and then Melbourne to get around if that was continuing? /forum/read.php?5,2058247

and looking at that there should also be some January 2019 data? as the report compares the Sept 2019 data with the January 2019 data. It does note in relation to evening peak traffic that "The variations observed along East Dulwich Grove and Denmark Hill are not likely to be attributable to the Champion Hill scheme. ", which I guess begs the question as to what they were due to. Northernmonkey, sounds as though you have seen the January 2019 data given you say it's artificially low due to school holidays? Is it available online?

The power of google - think it's this https://www.camberwellsociety.org.uk/rw_common/plugins/stacks/armadillo/media/ChampionHillAreaMonitoringStudyFINAL.pdf

Also worth mentioning that the 2019 data seems to be monitoring relating to the Champion Hill closure which predated the ?Dulwich Low Traffic Neighbourhood? concept a little, I think? So maybe the council counted it, monitored it in relation to Champion Hill, but don?t see it as LTN monitoring per se? And then someone at the water cooler said - you know, we did actually do a count outside the health centre when we were looking at Champion Hill, why don?t we do another count in the same place and maybe we could compare it? That?s my theory.

I had a go and found it - but just to make the instructions slightly clearer, the trick is not to try and use the "Highways" map layer on the map you see on the opening screen. You need to click on the arrow next to "map configuration", select Southwark Highways from the drop down list, this then brings up a different set of map layers which include the option to select traffic counts. there are 8 on there and if you scroll down the list on the LHS there are two 2019 ones by the look of it, one with the detail of eastbound traffic and one with the detail of westbound traffic, both seem to have the same data summary at the front.

In a new development, I received a Reform U.K. leaflet today. The policy on LTNs is ?to improve Dulwich Village LTNs by using smarter technology?. I won?t be voting for them but did like their policy of no party whip on councillors.

I really don?t agree DulvilleRes. I want my local councillors to focus on local issues/ in fact I?d prefer the council generally to focus much more on the local issues within their remit and spend less time passing motions about subjects that they have no responsibility for or control over. In fact if I had my way all the councillors would be independent, and being a councillor wouldn?t be seen as a route into central government politics. Completely agree that Boris should go, but that?s something I?ll use my general election vote for when the time comes. If we all keep using our votes in local elections to register views on unspecified aspects of central government, then local government becomes less and less accountable (which seems to me to be what has happened). If people want my view on central government policy they can conduct an opinion poll. We need more democracy/ accountability at a local level.

And also ignoring your electorate without extensive engagement/ consultation.

My favourite sign is this one, which has been up for ages and relates to the previous redesign. In its current context I always think ?you?re not wrong there!? They seem to have taken down the ugly blue streetspace ones (could have sworn they were there yesterday)

Not just double yellowed but now has those blip things which should be more effective as no waiting to load/ unload. Good in principle(but they are horribly ugly and do add to the overall sense of decay of the area that has been created by so much signage, traffic lights with orange covers, mismatched street furniture and planters, planters that have weathered while there are signs on them and signs now removed, graffiti? if this closure stays I?m hoping it will be tidied up a bit, happy to pop down with a paint brush and some wood stain although my DIY skills are pretty limited?)

I?ve been canvassed once each. Just received the attached through the letterbox which: (i)begs the question as to why, if hundreds of residents have been raising issues over the last two years, I?m only hearing about opposition now, shortly before the election (I guess that?s what the ?understandably, COVID? wording is aimed at, although as I understand it loads of staff are still off work with COVID and numbers of people commuting into central London is still down, which I guess is what is driving the timetable change?; and (ii) made me wonder who makes decisions on timetable - is it the train operator, government, Is TfL consulted, does someone consider taking into account overall PTAL and alternative services (I have no idea but would be quite interested to know) (iii) how would TfL take control of services that go beyond TfL boundaries and do any of these fall into that category (Thameslink do presumably, but some might not). But then given dire state of TfL finances do they want responsibility for these services as they don?t seem like moneyspinners? ?Boris Johnson?s government wants to cut train services permanently in our area? sounds a bit hyperbolic. I doubt they care that much either way in WC1 or whatever the postcode is?. Thoughts? ETA the attachment. Doh!

Good question. I?m more concerned that voting Labour would signal support for Southwark Labour (as opposed to Labour for central govt) than I am about the potential that voting conservative would signal support for Boris at a central govt level. The Dulwich Village ward is a fairly obvious microclimate viewed against Southwark as a whole. If people vote Labour locally it will undoubtedly be presented by SL as support for the Dulwich LTN, infill on council estates, the cabinet system, a lack of transparency about lobby groups and a bunch of gentrification policies that I have reservations about. So I?m sticking to my policy of voting on a local issues basis for these elections. My vote in the next general election - reserving judgment.

Do you think that?s what?s going on- I think most of the public are well aware of the party gate issues so I?m not sure what impact conservatives speaking out or not would have on local elections - in fact in some ways I would have thought that an active backbench rebellion might encourage people not to taint local candidates with the Team Boris brush as it would show that not everyone in the Conservative party agrees with the partygate behaviour? I see local elections as quite different from general elections but that could well be as a result of growing up in a country with relatively apolitical local government and/ or wishful thinking on my part.

I think it?s pretty clear that not everyone in the Conservative party is that happy with antics at number 10. I tend to think that staying and clearing things up/ out is a better strategy in this sort of situation. Otherwise you?re just letting the wrongdoers win. With no general election imminent, the only way to get Boris and friends out is for appalled conservatives to stay there and take care of the problem? Anyway, having read the manifestos now, and with a focus on local issues at a local election, I think I?m going to vote conservative. It would be nice not to have political parties / so much constant noise about national politics at a local level (and for everyone to be a bit more collaborative),but the system is what it is, I guess.

I?ve read it, and then went to the main UK website. Tbh I hadn?t appreciated quite how much XR were focused on regime change rather than putting political pressure on government and corporates: It says this on their webpage ?We recognise that we can?t look to government to solve the world?s problems. It tends to concentrate power and wealth in the hands of a very privileged few, and often does not have the interests of the majority of people and the natural world at heart. We understand that we must self-organise to meet our own needs, which in the context of Extinction Rebellion means that we are working to equalise power by disrupting the usual pillars of power that govern our lives. In so doing, our intention is to create access to the resources we need, such as democratic structures that ensure everyone has a voice and an influence, information that comes without the bias of the rich and powerful, decent healthcare, education, social care and housing, clean energy production, and protections in law to prevent ecocide.? So it?s no to government, but then yes to unspecified other democratic structures and legal protections. I know I lack imagination but I?m really unsure what is envisaged. Dismantling existing governmental structures worldwide and building something new seems a bit ambitious, and I wouldn?t be confident that some alternative wouldn?t result in power being concentrated in a different group of people (Animal Farm?). I understand the the idea of mobilising 3.5% to effect this change relates to research about historically successful non-violent civil disobedience movements, but I wonder whether many of these related to more specific demands e.g. US civil rights movement. ?The change needed is huge and yet achievable. No regime in the 20th century managed to stand against an uprising which had the active participation of up to 3.5% of the population (Erica Chenoweth?s research, see ). In the UK, this would mean mobilising around 2 million people in order to oversee a rapid change in wealth distribution and power structures, preventing a rich elite from perpetuating a self-serving ideology.? From a quick google I found this article in the Guardian quite interesting. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/oct/21/the-guardian-view-on-extinction-rebellion-numbers-alone-wont-create-change. Back to the specific topic about trespass/ bylaws and the right to protest, if anyone wants to read some case law these decisions are interesting, one about the sort of protest camp on Clapham Common during lockdown, and the other about the guy protesting against HS2 in a tunnel on private land. https://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/format.cgi?doc=/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2021/1962.html&query=(Lambeth)+AND+(grant) https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/DPP-v-Cuciurean-Final-30-March-2022.pdf The first one gives an idea of the factors the council would have to take into account if it wished to move the camp on. The second raises some interesting legal issues as to the intersection between criminal offences and human rights of peaceful assembly and freedom of expression. I see that yesterday the Attorney General asked the Supreme Court to clarify the relationship between the offence of criminal damage and those rights, using the Bristol statue case as an example. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/attorney-general-seeks-clarification-on-the-law-following-protest-case. Admin - apologies for the slight lounge-ness of this but I thought some people would be interested in the Lambeth camping case in particular(skip to para 88 to get to the guts of it). The point being that the Council has a human rights exercise to go through in deciding how to respond which may be another factor in their ?turn a blind eye? response. https://extinctionrebellion.uk/the-truth/about-us/

Just checking I have this correct - the new bit is the ?update? at the end: in recognition of the fact that there is now a tree protection order in place for the two oak trees (thanks to the @SaveOaks campaign), there?s a revised refurb plan for the footbridge which allows the two trees to be retained but no info on cost of new plan, or how many other trees may need to be removed, and there?s a stakeholder meeting in May/ June to discuss - details tbc? What I found most striking is that the Council were pretty adamant that the campaigners? alternative proposal involving screw piles was not feasible (despite their having got extensive specialist advice that it was possible)- and the new solution says that it involves screw piles! If you read this earlier (Sept 2020) Q and A document the campaigners had some detailed questions about council cost estimates so let?s hope the council have listened to what they have to say on that front as well. Perhaps they should appoint the guys at @SaveOaks to oversee the project and take a share of any savings they identify and make for the council! https://www.southwark.gov.uk/assets/attach/24229/Response-to-Questions-rev-.docx

I think you may have misread, it?s the neighbours who were shouting and screaming?

Yes I?m voting but not for the current admin. Haven?t quite decided who for yet.

Article on just this topic in today?s Times ( not sure if behind paywall?) https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/7cc63c62-b903-11ec-94e5-2197dead5942?shareToken=d4eddf673004685649038228bfe17dd2