LTN: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3

[legalalien]

My Southwark Life magazine just arrived.

Pretty much every article / paragraph has a link to the specific related webpage on the Southwark site. Except the para about the Streetspace reviews. Which is written in a way that suggests public feedback is something that is going to happen in the future, with no mention of the specific Dulwich review or the deadline for comments. Seems like the council is really keen to engage. Not.

Pic attached.

[Rockets]

Oh no, not (yet) another oversight by the council......how unfortunate that these oversights only ever seem to happen when there's anything related to the LTN review involved....! ;-)

It's the brazenness of it that astonishes me....they operate like there is never any recourse. It's getting a bit like Liverpool City council and look what happened there......

[Spartacus]

Just done the online survey

As others have said, it's a bit like the council are leading a bull by a ring through its nose as it all seems very biased towards "rate how successful the scheme is" and if you disagree with any of the aims then it's off to the Fray Bentos pie factory for you (other brands of tinned meat pies are of course also available !)

I can see why people are saying "return to the original state"

I especially love the question about has the scheme "created a good trading environment for local businesses ?" 😱

[Metallic]

So who knew the Council had designed a special consultation survey for schoolchildren?

[Spartacus]

Metallic Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> So who knew the Council had designed a special

> consultation survey for schoolchildren?

Please elaborate further

[Metallic]

Spartacus Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Metallic Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > So who knew the Council had designed a special

> > consultation survey for schoolchildren?

>

>

> Please elaborate further

A consultation questionnaire was created and I know it has been presented at Jags as I have a relative there. Whether it is anywhere else I don't know. And the guy from Southwark who seems to have designed the adult one is talking to children at Dulwich Hamlet in a special presentation.

[Metallic]

A consultation questionnaire was created and I know it has been presented at Jags as I have a relative there. Whether it is anywhere else I don't know. And the guy from Southwark who seems to have designed the adult one is talking to children at Dulwich Hamlet in a special presentation.

[Spartacus]

That's worrying as it smacks of influencing young minds to be the councils voice.

Last time I heard of this sort of behaviour was pre 1939 in Germany where school children were used to report non conformation to the party line ...

Can't wait till the leader of the council publishes his book "My Fight"

[alex_b]

Oh come on, comparing the council to Nazi Germany is deeply offensive and also completely ridiculous.

The council has also been engaging local schools on environmental topics for as long as I can remember. There were kid drawn banners outside Goose Green school for a long time and anti-idiling posters outside most of the schools in the area.

[DuncanW]

Wow - you wen there, you actually went there!!

Spartacus Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> That's worrying as it smacks of influencing young

> minds to be the councils voice.

>

> Last time I heard of this sort of behaviour was

> pre 1939 in Germany where school children were

> used to report non conformation to the party line

> ...

>

> Can't wait till the leader of the council

> publishes his book "My Fight"

[Spartacus]

Yes I did and I make no apologies for it.

The council went beyond a point by ignoring views of locals, trying to push their agenda on young minds to influence a consultation that they know isn't going in their favour and pushing pollution and issues out onto other roads all whilst raking it in with ANPR cameras.

Did I compare it to an ideology that's condemned, no I didn't all I did was pick out that one of the tactics being used by the council has been used in the past and based on influencing young minds to a cause or idea.

In my mind the council using the young to get a decision they want is far worse then questioning if they are doing it.

Engaging children needs to be done with a non biased agenda, has anyone been invited to talk to schools about the disadvantages of the current schemes?

If not then it does smack of biased influencing and coercion to an ideal of the council.

Take that how you will but the council started by underhand playing and if you are offended by it being called out but not do anything to make sure the consultation isn't unduly influenced or biased then we will obviously never see eye to eye.

[Lynne]

It's the first time for a while that I have had to drive up ED Grove on Friday evening and the traffic was so bad I thought there'd been an accident or roadworks. It was continuous from LL down to the junction of the village. If this is the council's idea of healthy roads, especially round two big schools, then I wonder what their idea of traffic pollution is like.

[Rockets]

Seriously uncool of Clean Air Dulwich to post pictures of people's houses just because they are showing the anti-LTN posters. It seems some of their supporters are now taking this as a signal that they should be doing similar things if they think the posters are hypocritical because someone owns a car

A dangerous precedent is being set by Clean Air Dulwich and they should remove that post and refrain from such gutter tactics. What next, people posting pictures of cyclists emerging from houses with cars on their drives? Clean Air Dulwich need to grow up a bit.

[DulwichCentral]

@Rockets no comment on Spartacus comparing Southwark Council to the Nazis though

[Spartacus]

DulwichCentral Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> @Rockets no comment on Spartacus comparing

> Southwark Council to the Nazis though

Your words not mine, as pointed out they are using children to try and drive their agenda, which history shows us has happened before.

Not once did I actually compare them to or use the word you posted above so it's your perception here and trying to put words in my post.

What I brought up is that it's a technique that's been used before, not always for good!

Or are you actually supporting a one sided influence on our young to get them to complete a survey without bring given both sides of the argument ?

I hope not as that makes you complicit of this sedition of young minds by turning a blind eye or condemning those who speak out about it.

[Bic Basher]

The tactics of Clean Air Dulwich seem to have more in common with hard-left socialism. The exposing of an anti-LTN supporter's drive because they had the audacity to own a car says it all.

The anti LTN group from what I understand is to have sensible measures put in such as timed restrictions instead of the permanent closures which have turned some of the most affluent parts of SE21 into carless utopias while Lordship Lane, East Dulwich Road and Croxted Road are full of traffic.

[northernmonkey]

I was expecting something much worse given the handwringing on here, but having looked at that tweet I can?t see any of the numberplate, the door number, or indeed even the door. It doesn?t look like even the street has been named. Also, the tweet doesn?t mention the car. Is there another tweet that isn?t linked that?s the issue?

[Rockets]

Northern - it's a worrying turn and cannot be accepted. It's clear what point Clean Air Dulwich are trying to make and it is incredibly passive aggressive and actually quite threatening. If that was your house I am not sure you'd be best pleased. As I said before it is a dangerous precedent to set and it seems, from the second tweet, that some are going to follow their lead and highlight the perceived "hypocrisy".

But I am sure there are many who probably think it's acceptable.

DC - nothing to say on Spartacus's comment - I don't agree with such comparisons but don't feel the need to comment on it. If there is proof that the council are going into schools to encourage and influence children to partake in the review then that is a different matter. I have no problem with the council bringing the review to everyone's attention but if, as is suggested, they are going out of their way to influence the result by lobbying schoolchildren when they have failed miserably to alert a lot of residents of the review then that would be disappointing, but not surprising from Southwark.

They will seemingly engage in any underhand tactic to get the result they so desire.

In my view councils should equally present both sides of the argument but, as had been seen during this process, it seems Southwark don't subscribe to that approach.

[Earl Aelfheah]

Bic Basher Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> The anti LTN group from what I understand is to

> have sensible measures put in such as timed

> restrictions instead of the permanent closures

The anti LTN group are asking for a return to the previous state. In other words, the removal of any restrictions on car use. They also say they want to reduce car use and pollution and encourage active travel. They don?t quite state it such stark terms, as it would seem a bit contradictory, but instead dissemble and obfuscate a fair bit. Perhaps they mean it and do believe that the best way to get people out of cars is to make driving easier and more convenient, who knows? There are others who are supportive of changes, just not these ones and that would seem a reasonable thing to debate, but to be clear, One Dulwich are calling for a return to the previous state.

Clean Air Dulwich seem to be implying that this seems a little disingenuous and the owners of big cars who are campaigning for the removal of any restrictions on car use, may not all be interested in reducing car use, as they claim.

I don?t necessarily agree with their post, but considering ?anti- LTN? campaigners on Twitter regularly call anyone expressing even qualified support for LTNs racist and accuse them of being complicit in the death of children living on main roads, it seems fairly mild in comparison.

Also, I do suspect that at least some of those wanting to remove all road closures might be at least partly concerned about inconvenience. For some reason you never, hear this being given as even part of the reason that people want to remove restrictions.

[alice]

The only reason for removing all Dulwich LTNs is that tweaking will not work. It needs a fresh eye and approach. Perhaps not centring on that Village Junction. R3 Your language is becoming more emotive.

[Rockets]

Rahx3 - no-one set out wanting to return things to the previous state. You know that. You also know, as well as everybody else does, that the review is being so manipulated by the council that people who want something other than what the council wants are being forced to vote for returning it to the previous state because the council have provided no other viable option.

So please, stop the they want a removal of restrictions of car use nonsense. You know what's happening here so please stop trying to deposition them by playing that deliberately overly-simplistic narrative.

[Earl Aelfheah]

They aren?t asking for timed restrictions. They are campaigning to have things returned to how they were. This is a fact. I don?t buy the explanations for how they are being prevented from articulating an alternative, how they have been forced, unwillingly, to campaign for a return to the previous state.

[heartblock]

There are several local campaigns, most are people who have organised on one road and are asking for the Council to re-think LTNs in light of the increase in traffic, traffic flow and congestion they now suffer. If you walk down East Dulwich Grove, you will note that Open road and clean air for ED Grove signs are in flats, terraces, semi-detached and detached houses as the road passes through high density flats with no gardens, shared gardens, terraces all in Goose Green Ward, with very little car ownership to the last few houses that are larger and constitute the village end.

5 LTNs funnel traffic onto this road and have made life very unpleasant for those that live here.

[Earl Aelfheah]

@heartblock - to be clear, I was only referring to ?One Dulwich?.

@Rockets - It's notable that the other 'One' groups ('One Ealing', 'One Wandsworth', 'One Oval' etc.) have followed the same pattern - They start out by stating that they're in favour of active travel, of reducing car use, etc. They suggest that they're not against change, but want sensible alterations to current schemes. They grow local support and then campaign for the reversal of all changes and a return to the previous state.

It's instructive in my opinion that all of the 'One' organisations end up campaigning for the removal of LTNSs without putting forward an alternative that would actually increase active travel, reduce car use, or meet any of their other stated aims. This is the dissembling I referred to.

We don't know how these organisations are funded, who runs them or how they're linked. They claim to be unrelated, grassroots groups and they clearly are successful in building local support. But you can see from their websites, the materials they put out, their campaign tactics and the way many of their supporters encourage people to come out against road changes in different neighbourhoods on social media, that there is co-ordination.

I have a lot of time for those wanting to discuss how we might change / improve things, but I'm becoming increasingly cynical about these 'One' groups. They appear to be well funded and co-ordinated and whilst they have encouraged many local people to join up, aspects of their funding and governance remain opaque. I don't think it's unfair to question this. Arguably, they show some of the hallmarks of an 'astroturfing' outfit.

But regardless - I simply don't buy the idea that they're being forced, unwillingly, to campaign for a return to the previous state.

[Rockets]

Rahx3 - that's absolute nonsense and you know it.

You've been an active member on this thread since the outset and so are well aware of the timeline and the campaigning that the likes of One Dulwich have been doing for ANPR timed closures so you've either developed a case of selective amnesia or are trying to re-invent history to serve your own purpose?

You know full well that all of the groups were campaigning for timed-closures from the outset but the council refused to engage with anyone other than those in their own echo-chamber.

What is true is that there are groups of local residents who are being routinely ignored and deprioritised as councils take input, guidance and consultation from vested-interested groups like Southwark Cyclists to determine local travel policy. Time and time again the council has put the views of those groups over anyone that has to live or work in the area and are going out of their way to try to ensure only supportive voices are heard.

What makes me chuckle is looking back on this thread a few weeks ago and the pile on around the All Streets Matter debate posters and yet when Clean Air Dulwich start posting pictures of people's houses just because they are displaying a Clean Air for All poster we get this "I don't see an issue with this" narrative. You can't have it both ways.

I would have challenged Clean Air for Dulwich about the picture they posted on twitter but they only allow people who they follow to comment so no-one outside of their echo chamber are allowed to comment. It's all getting a bit cult-like.