One Dulwich have met with Cllr McAsh

[heartblock]

Clean Air Dulwich claims to represent a group - has met with Cllrs on many occasions but isn't a group at all.

Born from a resident or two who wanted their road closed...and in the end after lobbying certain Cllrs got their rd closed. OneDulwich represents many people from many political persuasions, I imagine a much wider group of people than Clean Air Dulwich... or Clean Air For The Few as we like to call it.

I don't know how one can claim impartiality when actively seeking for their own road to be closed...but anyway, I think we should leave Dr. A. Goodman out of this thread and concentrate on improving our residential boundary roads in terms of pollution and the bus route times.

[Bic Basher]

The Tories could have promised the world and they still wouldn't have won in Village as the local election became an outlet for voters to bash the Government with as a protest vote, even if Southwark Labour have continued to act arrogantly. 

 

 

[Rockets]

And Labour went out of their way to make sure they didn't mention anything about LTNs or Healthy Streets in their election push. So maybe the reverse applies that as they didn't lead on it does it mean the CPZ plans weren't part of their manifesto and no-one was given the chance to vote on it?

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

21 minutes ago, heartblock said:

OneDulwich represents many people from many political persuasions.

Does it? Is there any data to back that up...? 🤣

[heartblock]

Any data to say different?

[goldilocks]

3 hours ago, heartblock said:

Clean Air Dulwich claims to represent a group - has met with Cllrs on many occasions but isn't a group at all.

Born from a resident or two who wanted their road closed...and in the end after lobbying certain Cllrs got their rd closed. OneDulwich represents many people from many political persuasions, I imagine a much wider group of people than Clean Air Dulwich... or Clean Air For The Few as we like to call it.

I don't know how one can claim impartiality when actively seeking for their own road to be closed...but anyway, I think we should leave Dr. A. Goodman out of this thread and concentrate on improving our residential boundary roads in terms of pollution and the bus route times.

Have Clean Air Dulwich met with cllrs? Also how are they less of a group than One Dulwich? Genuinely interested in the distinction.
 

Also I was under the impression from here that One Dulwich had been in numerous meetings with either cllr Rose , highways and now McAsh. Isn’t this the case?

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

14 hours ago, heartblock said:

Any data to say different?

Yes.

Number of identifiable "members" of the OneDulwich "group" to date: 1.

Number of opaque anti-LTN "groups" for which that member acts as a spokesman: 2.

Number of political parties exactly aligned with OneDulwich to date: 1.

[Rockets]

If One Dulwich goes into bat on the CPZs then I suspect those 2,000+ local people who registered their support against the LTNs will grow significantly - One Dulwich's seat at the table may get bigger - that'll irk a few people and send them into an even more frenzied attack mode ! 😉 

[heartblock]

DKH - Does that count as ‘data’ as in the same way heterozygous secondary data garnered from tertiary sources counts as ‘research’ in Dr. Anna Goodman’s article on accidents in LTN boroughs and non-LTN boroughs?

I'm in favour of CPZ and ULEZ myself, I only dislike interventions that cause more pollution on high density residential  streets. 

Edited July 5, 2023 by heartblock

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

6 minutes ago, heartblock said:

Does that count as ‘data’...

You've actually just brilliantly demonstrated the OneDulwich playbook: object to the issue, deny any data exists, and then when presented with the data, begin a metaphysical conversation about what the meaning of "data" is in relation to some other subject. 👏🤣

[heartblock]

And you fall into the LTN at any cost playbook...wilfully misrepresent my view. I’m not ‘objecting’ to any issue. Your ‘data’ isn’t ‘data’ it’s you alluding to two people who have represented views at Council meetings, yes they are Conservative members and did stand for Council...so what? 

[CPR Dave]

Did he mention the forthcoming CPZ in Dulwich Village when he met them?

 

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

5 hours ago, heartblock said:

it’s you alluding to two people who have represented views at Council meetings, yes they are Conservative members and did stand for Council...so what? 

I am not clear what you are saying here. 

Are you saying that the "members" of OneDulwich that met with Cllr McAsh are actually just the two Tory candidates?

[heartblock]

On 27/06/2023 at 13:23, Rockets said:

According to the OP -Cllr McAsh said that:

• there is no plan to revisit the decision to close the Dulwich Village junction in the near future – although he agreed that, in principle, everything can always be amended;

   

• he would look at the issue of bus delays on LTN boundary roads like Croxted Road, Dulwich Common (the South Circular) and East Dulwich Grove;

   

• he would take up the issue of incomplete data;

   

• he advised business-owners to raise concerns with ward councillors, but agreed that shops and businesses should be consulted on issues that affect them;

   

• he wanted us to email him the various written assurances made by council officers about the potential for access for vulnerable groups and those who care for them;

   

• he would come back to us with a substantive response to all the issues we had raised in two months’ time. When we queried why his investigations would take so long, he said that he would respond sooner if possible.

 

 

[Rockets]

1 hour ago, Dogkennelhillbilly said:

I am not clear what you are saying here. 

Are you saying that the "members" of OneDulwich that met with Cllr McAsh are actually just the two Tory candidates?

 DKHB - the two Tory councillors did take a petition to the Southwark Cabinet in December - you can see it here, they don't mention One Dulwich - they are there representing the resident associations. Gotta love Cllr Williams' "you're failed Tory councillors" opening salvo - this is the problem - this council, and the councillors, doesn't like anyone telling them they are not right or that people may have an opinion different to theirs. Granted they are Tory councillors but if you treat fellow politicians like this what hope do us residents have when we voice an opinion that doesn't synch with theirs - politics and the process of politics is supposed to be based mutual respect but the way they treat the two bringing the petition compared to the way they treat other people presenting is very stark? 

 

34.34 Cllr Williams fires the opening salvo

43.44 Cllr Williams is so dismissive and well worth watching for a few seconds more for a giggle for the Cllr Rose mansplaining moment - she honestly looks like she may kill them during the whole of their presentation.

 

 

[heartblock]

Thanks Rockets - as I say I'm not sure what DKH had as their 'data' below. I was guessing it was the Council meeting? Who knows what below means - as much clarity and veracity as a pneumatic ATM in a traffic jam. 🙃

10 hours ago, Dogkennelhillbilly said:

Yes.

Number of identifiable "members" of the OneDulwich "group" to date: 1.

Number of opaque anti-LTN "groups" for which that member acts as a spokesman: 2.

Number of political parties exactly aligned with OneDulwich to date: 1.

 

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

In my research, which was limited and amateur, I thought it was odd that I only came across one person who could be identified as a "member" of OneDulwich. And no-one here claims membership, despite this being a bit of a hub of "passionate" (cough) opponents of LTNs. That one person I did come across does double duty speaking for two supposedly distinct "groups" - Dulwich Alliance and OneDulwich. That person has had a long career in PR. And the OneDulwich "group" operates as a political outrider for the local Tory candidates and vice versa.

Even though the one (1) identifiable member of OneDulwich has been quoted on the record in national newspapers and voluntarily written to their letters pages, I'm still reluctant to post the links and mention the guy's name because (as this thread has shown) there have been some extremely nasty and personalised attacks by anonymous users against real people. It's easy to research all this stuff online, for free, with a modicum of effort.

It's totally possible, of course, that OneDulwich really does have lots and lots of members, and genuinely has a mandate to "represent" a real number of local residents, in which case perhaps their endless wibbling about data should be entertained. I'm sure they have tons of data that would prove or disprove this point, and they have certainly been enthusiastic about transparent sharing of data in the past.

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2009/sep/07/astroturfing-energy-citizens-us

 

[Rockets]

DKHB - but what do you mean by members - it's not a private members club?

 

When you sign up by giving your email, address and postcode they don't then try to upsell you to ask you to become a "member". So really not sure what you are getting at? Do you mean the founders of the campaign or something else?

[march46]

3 hours ago, Rockets said:

Granted they are Tory councillors but if you treat fellow politicians like this what hope do us residents have when we voice an opinion that doesn't synch with theirs - politics and the process of politics is supposed to be based mutual respect but the way they treat the two bringing the petition compared to the way they treat other people presenting is very stark? 

 

@Rockets I'm sure you're aware but this is not correct - they are not 'Tory councillors'. They stood as Conservative candidates to become local councillors and failed. 

[Rockets]

Yes sorry they stood to be councillors, you're right they were candidates who did not become councillors.

I do think our council has a respect problem - that video probably goes some way to show why Will Norman had to step in to intervene between Southwark councillors and TFL after the treatment of TFL staff by members of Southwark Council reduced them to tears. There seems to be something very wrong with the way Southwark council interacts with people - there seem to be a few unsavoury characters who seem to think it is OK to treat people appallingly if they don't agree with them.

Edited July 5, 2023 by Rockets

[first mate]

It felt a little like Cllr Williams took advantage of his position as Chair. Not a good look.

As for Cllr Rose, banging her hand on the table to make her points and spouting phrases like "I am sorry you are not aligned", and "mansplaining", it all seemed quite aggressive and defensive. Listening carefully to her answers, for the most part they were not specific to the questions about Calton Rd, but a generalised and self congratulatory word salad about her great work in the borough.

My overall feeling was this is not a group of people who have any intention of truly listening to perspectives that do not "align" with theirs. 

[heartblock]

DKH - gosh, a lobby group based in ED/Dulwich has some supporters that have a PR background and some Tory party members in it - how shocking!

I think they mapped all the residents that signed up here - https://www.onedulwich.uk/supporters

It's quite extensive - maybe Clean Air Dulwich should do the same - or would that be a couple of dots in a couple of roads/groves just off ED Grove and a dot in on a crescent just off ED Grove.

 

 

 

[goldilocks]

How many meetings have One Dulwich had with the council vs Clean Air Dulwich @heartblock ? 
 

this isn’t information that I’ve seen, so would be interested in understanding.   One Dulwich do make much of how many people they represent though which may or may not correlate to email sign ups! 

[first mate]

6 hours ago, goldilocks said:

How many meetings have One Dulwich had with the council vs Clean Air Dulwich @heartblock ? 
 

this isn’t information that I’ve seen, so would be interested in understanding.   One Dulwich do make much of how many people they represent though which may or may not correlate to email sign ups! 

What is the relevance of this? OD have asked some questions that a number of people would like to see some answers to. The Cabinet member in charge of streets took OD and the questions seriously enough to have a meeting with them.

Why do you think a poster on this forum would have access to the number of meetings councillors have had with any groups?

I also agree with Heartblock, that attempts to make something of the fact that some OD founders may be Tories and one may have been in PR is a bit so what?  I don't know if that is the case, but if it is it does not invalidate interest in and support for the questions they are asking. Even in the HOC members across the parties can find common ground on single issues.

[Rockets]

And it was clear during those infamous online council meetings about the Melbourne Grove closures that some folks (I suspect CAD) had been given "front row seats" and given the mike to herald the closures as part of the council organised filibuster whilst anyone else who had a question was forced to the chat...that they then subsequently closed for other online meetings.