Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Malumbu, are you bored of it because you aren't a Southwark resident?

What has happened here is shameless and reflective of how Southwark treats residents.

If people don't complain about it then administrations can get away with it. This only came to light because a resident complained about it, else Southwark would have got away with it.

Have you watched the video? Are you happy that a council acts in this way and is there any part of you that thinks Southwark needs to be held accountable for these actions? This has put lives at risk and the residents, whom Labour purports to support, have been treated appallingly.

By the way your suggestion to move if you think a council has been treating other residents badly is a joke right?

 

To be fair your post looks like another brazen attempt to disrupt and divert a legitimate discussion thread to your own agenda and I think admin has been more than clear to everyone about that.

 

 

Edited by Rockets

I honestly believe that Mal has not watched the video - I think if they do, they may also be shocked at what these people have had to withstand - Mal, do watch and then maybe add commentary after. I would be interested in your thoughts.

The poor woman with a lovely flat ruined by contractors made me in equal parts sad and angry. I am in a political party - the Green Party and also personal attacks on posters - not a good look. I will report.

  • Like 1

It is beyond shocking and one of the speakers from the affected building did ponder whether Southwark might be going the way of Birmingham and Croydon and may need emergency measures - it sounds as if the budget to rectify these mistakes is going to be huge so where is the money going to come from to do it? Are residents expected to pick up the cost of council ineptitude in the form of higher council tax? Chat to anyone in Croydon after their 15% increase in council tax to see how that feels.

The level of mismanagement is truly scary as are the apparent attempts to block and bury. It does seem that the only reason any of this has come to light is that one of the residents reps is involved with planning elsewhere and I think he said he had been, or is, a councillor in another borough, so he knows how to work the process.

I would urge everyone to try to watch the monthly scrutiny sessions on environment as this is chaired by Cllr Margy Newens and it is where Cabinet Member Cllr McAsh has to report. If you google Southwark YouTube and then click on playlists, the various scrutiny sessions show up.

The most insulting part of that for me was them telling the residents that if they insisted on a Councillor answering their complaints they'd have to come back when the relevant person came back from adoptive leave.

No one else was prepared to look into it and come to the meeting to help them. 

  • 1 month later...

Tonight’s overview and scrutiny committee meeting is shocking, relating to another major works project. The interim chap had apologised profusely, disciplinary investigation /action is underway and auditors are involved. There’s not even an attempt at defending the incompetence/ poor behaviour etc.

Just to add the council officer who is the inter person in charge has just described this as a catastrophic failure and has also said that if fraud is shown it will be referred to the police. And that he’s struggling to understand how this has happened when residents have been raising issues to staff and councillors over a period of several years. He’s shocked as well.

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

    • Thank you for clarifying, James. So why would anybody want to take this on as a franchise if it is staying in this building? If it is now to be a sub office, does that mean that much of  the space could be used as a different kind of business altogether, with just part of it being used as a sub Post Office? Because if it is all to remain solely for Post Office business, (albeit as a sub Post Office it won't be providing all the services which it currently does) I can't see who would want to take it over? If it isn't profitable as a Crown office, how could it be  profitable running just as a sub office, even if staff are being paid less and it's opening for longer hours? Because presumably all the other overheads such as rent will remain the same?
    • Girobank was genuinely innovative, regarding the addressed customer base (significantly the previously unbanked) - but this would have been an ideally outsourced operation to an existing bank which already had the operational systems (and the regulatory experts) to manage a bank for someone else at marginal cost. The Post Office - when you consider the issues over the Horizon software - never originally designed by ICL/ Fujitsu for the application it ran - is a very good reason why the Post Office being involved in banking was long-term a bad idea.  To get back to the topic of this thread, the Horizon debacle is still not over (the software system is still in place) - most of the wrongly penalised sub-postmasters are still out of pocket - I'm not sure I would be leaping to take on the franchise being offered in Lordship Lane.
    • Otherwise in Bellenden Road are brilliant! They’ve made me stage dresses, restructured vintage finds and are working on remodelling my late brothers huntsman tweed suit for my modern husband! Not cheap and rents have meant they are moving premises at mo.
    • Penguin, I broadly agree, except that the Girobank was a genuinely innovative and successful operation. It’s rather ironic that after all these years we are now back to banking at the Post Office due to all the bank branch closures.  I agree that the roots of the problem go back further than 2012 (?), when the PO and RM were separated so RM could be sold. I’m willing to blame Peter Mandelson, Margaret Thatcher or even Keith Joseph. But none of them will be standing for the local council, hoping to make capital out of the possible closure of Lordship Lane PO, as if they are in no way responsible. The Lib Dems can’t be let off the hook that easily.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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