Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I agree - I did say this in the written consultation but the anti-fence folk won. I think they've won now anyway - I can't see the council removing the fence, then having a 6 month trial and then really putting up another fence. Seriously doubt that is going to happen.

I'm a dog owner and do think it is better to have a dog free area, either as it is, or switch to the other side of the fence. I think the only problem is that the gates need to be self-closing because few dogs will be able to resist going through a gate that has been left open, which doesn't make it very dog free!


If the fence is removed, I think there should be an investigation into why so much money was spent on it in the first place and if the person/people responsible put it in without proper consultation they should be held to account.

Dogs can be one of the irritations of life. But things have got better; it?s not really that long ago since dogs were simply put out of the house for exercise - and if anybody picked up after them they would probably be considered perverted.

Unfortunately, where there are dogs there is dog poo, no matter how well intentioned the owners are. Despite this, Goose Green has always been well used for all sorts of purposes.

It may be news to some, but nobody likes wading through the stuff ? even dog owners! But consider the health risks to the poor children. Er . . . wait a minute, the poor children already have a special, protected play space at the Green. Oops! That argument loses some emotional kneejerkiness.


Goose Green is the nearest thing we have to a village green. Sure you can carve it up with fences and segregate people as a sledge hammer to a difficulty rather than address the obvious: Don?t allow dog owners to let their dogs leave crap. Don?t allow dogs to be out of control. Enforce the regulations. Let?s stay together as a community. ? Nah! let?s just fence off some people!

Goose Green is a historic open space. Shouldn?t it be protected as a whole, rather than crudely sanitised for some?

Accusations of incomer ponsification of East Dulwich roll off the back like the proverbial water, but if we are to have enclosures can I make a bid for separate ones for drunks, drug dealers, spoilt whingey children, arrogant buggy pushers, men with poor fashion sense and those at imminent risk of throwing up?

(Now if she had doggy children, she wouldn?t be saying that!)

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • The private sector is not going to build a significant amount of social housing. Everyone is very keen for *everyone else* to subsidise construction of social housing. I take it none of the objectors to this scheme was suggesting putting up council tax so Southwark could build more social housing...? Social housing isn't going to appear in serious numbers if the state doesn't borrow money and build it.
    • They must be really desperate to collab with Tesla. Honestly, it's not even the worst thing they've done. I've noticed these sex events happening in the last few months at a place that's supposed to be a restaurant and venue. I was planning my wedding there and was appalled by the setup for those events. When I discovered what was going on, I was disgusted by how they were using the same rooms as 'playrooms' where families are supposed to eat. The hygiene and safety concerns are just unacceptable. We really need to come together as a community to put a stop to this! They're destroying a sacred, Grade II listed building, and it's just not right. The owners need to be held accountable for their actions. It's time for us to stand up and protect our heritage and ensure that these spaces are used appropriately, especially when they should be serving families and the community.   sex events vid.mp4 sex events videe.mp4 Literally promoting it on their Instagram! Only just taken down after scrutiny.     
    • yes, which properly explains why they responded to me on this occassion, as i included the CQC in my response. I have spoken to the Health Ombudsman, and they feel the regulator is more suited to the issues I have raise for more than a year now. welcome aboard. its great to have you on the thread. so sorry you are also experiencing issues. has this been addressed as yet?
    • Tbh most Tesla owners are people who are concerned about the environment and have purchased accordingly- but mr nut job has soured their purchasing- so I actually sympathise with them being associated with such an awful man. But to actively promote the company given the knowledge we now know about him makes utterly unacceptable. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...