Latest One Dulwich update

[Rockets]

DulvilleRes - any concerns from your side about the stories of Labour councillors and award winning active travel lobbyists infiltrating the "properly constituted local organisation" Dulwich Society transport sub-committee to the point that Dulwich Society had to intervene and state that that committee did not speak on behalf of DS and that they were impartial to the DV closure......

It seems there is a hefty dose of double-standards at play here or is that fatuous?

[first mate]

Agreed, and councillors have the power to do stuff. Infiltration of The Dulwich Society transport sub-committee by individuals with an agenda to get expensive changes to local junctions, against the will of many locals, is far more significant.

[DulvilleRes]

On 13/02/2025 at 16:52, Rockets said:

DulvilleRes - any concerns from your side about the stories of Labour councillors and award winning active travel lobbyists infiltrating the "properly constituted local organisation" Dulwich Society transport sub-committee to the point that Dulwich Society had to intervene and state that that committee did not speak on behalf of DS and that they were impartial to the DV closure......

It seems there is a hefty dose of double-standards at play here or is that fatuous?

I have no idea of the ins and outs of this one, so we only have your word for what has happened, something which frequently in the past has been subject to 'reader added context' style interventions across a range of topics. However, if true, from your description, this is exactly what a well-run transparent organisation does if it perceives something that runs against it's constitution.

That is in stark contrast to One Dulwich, who no one actually knows what it really is. Is it like Farage's Reform, and constituted as a private company? Certainly something that it would have in common with Reform is that many are claiming that they are hugely exaggerating their level of support. I find it deeply puzzling and in many ways potentially misleading that the One Dulwich website represents itself as a broad-based community organisation, campaigning for, amongst other things, transparency and democracy in local politics, yet these very important questions go unanswered.   

This same sense of opaqueness and the sense I feel of things not quite adding up applies to some of the posters on this forum. They claim they have no idea or no interest in who might behind One Dulwich, and yet demonstrate a detailed knowledge of local politics and a relentless anti-council agenda that would suggest being political activists. The sustained attack lines and strong alignment with One Dulwich's pronouncements suggest a campaign. They might of course deny this, and say it is all a massive coincidence. Whatever the truth, I have no issue with people engaging in local politics, but the question remains is it being done transparently on this forum, and in the good faith manner a local debate between neighbours should be?  

[first mate]

Your consistent attempts to conflate those who disagree with your views on local traffic changes with far right political groups is risible. It is clear what you are trying to do and does you no favours.

Posters on here who happen to agree with views on local traffic and road layout changes as expressed by One Dulwich, are fed up locals who know the council is not interested in their views. Something that has been demonstrated again and again when the council has proceeded with its preferred agenda, without mandate, rejecting consultation results.

It is the Council, not One Dulwich, that has the power. It is the Council that in this issue is treating locals with contempt.

[Glemham]

4 hours ago, DulvilleRes said:

 

This same sense of opaqueness and the sense I feel of things not quite adding up applies to some of the posters on this forum. They claim they have no idea or no interest in who might behind One Dulwich, and yet demonstrate a detailed knowledge of local politics and a relentless anti-council agenda that would suggest being political activists. The sustained attack lines and strong alignment with One Dulwich's pronouncements suggest a campaign. They might of course deny this, and say it is all a massive coincidence. Whatever the truth, I have no issue with people engaging in local politics, but the question remains is it being done transparently on this forum, and in the good faith manner a local debate between neighbours should be?  

Please could you explain the difference between being a “political activist” and “people engaging in local politics”? You seem to be suggesting the former is not to be trusted, but the latter is acceptable. 

[first mate]

Take note how daring to voice disagreement with traffic and road measures in your local area on a local forum is reframed as a "relentless anti council agenda". 

[Glemham]

Indeed! You are entitled to your opinion and to speak freely as long as you don’t  criticise the Council agenda ………….now where have I been reading recently about similar attitudes to “Free” speech?