Jump to content

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, MrsR said:

Road Traffic Acts

LONDON BOROUGH OF SOUTHWARK

VARIATION OF RESIDENT VISITOR PERMITS, PERMITS, PAID FOR PARKING, CAR PARK SEASON TICKETS AND SUSPENSION FEES

 

https://www.thegazette.co.uk/notice/4297157

Given, Cllr Rose' personal commitment to ensuring the whole borough is CPZ, before long this will apply to everyone, and not just those who own a car. 

Edited by first mate
Quote

Abe_froeman

Hello James

 

I understand that the council intend to implement a CPZ in this and all the other wards in East Dulwich, in spite of the views already expressed by the people who live here.

 

On the basis of what you said below, will you resign if this happens?

 

 

"Posted by jamesmcash 01 May, 2019 23:33

 

Before I was elected last year and when I was a Labour candidate, I was frequently asked about controlled parking. Whether the person questioning me was for or against I always said the same thing: a CPZ should only be implemented if local residents want it"

 

jamesmcash

 

 

 

Abe_froeman

I believe you're referring to a paper that was wrongly published, without the knowledge of either local ward councillors or the relevant Cabinet Member. There are no plans to implement a further CPZ in East Dulwich.

Abe, 

If you listen through the most recent council scrutiny session on environment and community engagement commission, chaired by Cllr Margy Newens ( it is on youtube) Cllr Rose states it is her ambition and intention to see the whole of Southwark made CPZ.

Watch from about 44:24

Cllr Rose explains the rationale and then refers to when there is controlled parking throughout the borough.

she also talks about how when every car owner must hold a permit the council can collect much more detailed data on what sort of vehicle is owned, size, weight, engine size etc.. and this will allow a more nuanced approach to charging. She and Margy Newens refer to research on pollution from tyres and so while ownership of electric vehicles is being, as Rose says, "incentivised" she also notes that they are heavier, so this may change how they are charged down the line.

In terms of benefits to the public...fewer cars so the spaces occupied by cars can be freed up for other things..think many more bike hangars, now to also house some of the hire e-bikes and scooters and more places to park/store more two wheeled vehicles on the street. Southwark aim to be the first borough to take provision of bike hangars in house.

They are also mulling over woodburners and gas hobs.

We get to give more of our money to them. That is the benfit to us.

It was obvious two years ago when they accidentally published that document that were coming for the roads that aren't CPZ yet.

They will. Regardless of what people who pay for them actually want.

  • 2 months later...
On 26/05/2023 at 14:20, malumbu said:

Well actually the money goes to all residents in the borough to provide services etc which has to be a good thing.  So if you think about it like this you will be much happier.  In fact I will thank you for your good citizenship. 

 

On 26/05/2023 at 14:20, malumbu said:

Well actually the money goes to all residents in the borough to provide services etc which has to be a good thing.  So if you think about it like this you will be much happier.  In fact I will thank you for your good citizenship. 

It is illegal for the money to be used for anything other than running the scheme and highway maintenance. 

But not to make no provision for expenditure on roads but to use your budget to spend on other things. That's the problem with such hypothecation. It's meant to be additional expenditure, of course, but there's nothing in law to stop it being wholly substitutional. Southwark intends to make the 40-50% of households (more in the south of the borough) with cars pay for the whole of the road and pavements in Southwark. Those without cars still get full and untrammeled use of those roads and pavements of course... What price equity, eh? 

  • Like 1

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

    • I think it's connected with the totem pole renovation celebrations They have passed now, but the notice has been there since then (at least that's when I first saw it - I passed it on the 484 and also took a photo!)
    • Labour was damned, no matter what it did, when it came to the budget. It loves go on about the black hole, but if Labour had had its way, we'd have been in lockdown for longer and the black hole would be even bigger.  Am I only the one who thinks it's time the NHS became revenue-generating? Not private, but charging small fees for GP appts, x-rays etc? People who don't turn up for GP and out-patient appointments should definitely be charged a cancellation fee. When I lived in Norway I got incredible medical treatment, including follow up appointments, drugs, x-rays, all for £200. I was more than happy to pay it and could afford to. For fairness, make it somehow means-tested.  I am sure there's a model in there somewhere that would be fair to everyone. It's time we stopped fetishising something that no longer works for patient or doctor.  As for major growth, it's a thing of the past, no matter where in the world you live, unless it's China. Or unless you want a Truss-style, totally de-regulated economy and love capitalism with a large C. 
    • If you read my post I expect a compromise with the raising of the cap on agricultural property so that far less 'ordinary' farmers do not get caught  Clarkson is simply a high profile land owner who is not in the business as a conventional farmer.  Here's a nice article that seems to explain things well  https://www.sustainweb.org/blogs/nov24-farming-budget-inheritance-tax-apr/ It's too early to speculate on 2029.  I expect that most of us who were pleased that Labour got in were not expecting anything radical. Whilst floating the idea of hitting those looking to minimise inheritance tax, including gifting, like fuel duty they also chickened put. I'm surprised that anyone could start touting for the Tories after 14 years of financial mismanagement and general incompetence. Surly not.  A very low bar for Labour but they must be well aware that there doesn't need to be much of a swing form Reform to overturn Labour's artificially large majority.  But even with a generally rabid right wing press, now was the opportunity to be much braver.
    • And I worry this Labour government with all of it's own goals and the tax increases is playing into Farage's hands. With Trump winning in the US, his BFF Farage is likely to benefit from strained relations between the US administration and the UK one. As Alastair Campbell said on a recent episode of The Rest is Politics who would not have wanted to be a fly on the wall of the first call between Angela Rayner and JD Vance....those two really are oil and water. Scary, scary times right now and there seems to be a lack of leadership and political nous within the government at a time when we really need it - there aren't many in the cabinet who you think will play well on the global stage.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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