Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Brixton Liveable Neighbourhood and LTN schemes - improvements for pedestrians and cyclists

The election coming up is a good reason to keep those signs up - but then there may be electoral rules that govern campaigns by non party groups, so they may want to check those too
 
A bit like the anti-speed camera carheads - why don't they just campaign to get speed limits increased? Answer of course is that they know they'd lose any such campaign because people generally aren't keen on faster traffic (possible exception; maybe they'd get somewhere on speed limits for motorways or major A roads).

So there's this whole hypocritical bullshit where they pretend that they hate speed cameras but not because they want to break the speed limit, when that's the only possible reason for becoming virulently against them. It's such nonsense.
Except what he says above is not correct
 
That's a bit unfair, it started at 1030am and it looks like there were 10 people there (if you count the photographer). Though the banners seem to be completely at odds with the grounds the case is being argued on. This seems to be back to 'dirty air for all'.

View attachment 305743
There were strict restrictions on the number of peope who could turn up.

Also, for those of you always saying “it’s the motor lobby” look at the people in the photo. These are the women who have done 90% of the work on this and nearly all of them have done so because they have someone who is “vulnerable” and impacted by LTNs
 
This has been raised here many times & if true I wonder whether the law firm raised this with chowce5382

Someone watching has said that they've said any ruling would be for Ferndale & Streatham Hill - is this true?
As I’ve said all along with JR SR cases, the relief granted is up to the judge. Is not the same as a criminal case with a jury
 
There were strict restrictions on the number of peope who could turn up.

Also, for those of you always saying “it’s the motor lobby” look at the people in the photo. These are the women who have done 90% of the work on this and nearly all of them have done so because they have someone who is “vulnerable” and impacted by LTNs
The banner & signs aren't about this though which is surely telling. One of them is also a taxi driver.
 
Yup. One bloke. The rest are as I’ve said above, so that’s 90% who aren’t “the motor lobby”
Women can't be part of the motor lobby or taxi drivers?

The signs are pretty clear what they're campaigning for - getting rid of LTNs - no mention of this in the court case today, in fact your barrister seems to be a fan on LTNs.
 
Women can't be part of the motor lobby or taxi drivers?

The signs are pretty clear what they're campaigning for - getting rid of LTNs - no mention of this in the court case today, in fact your barrister seems to be a fan on LTNs.
Because this is an appeal Ed. It’s not a rerun of the previous case. In any event, this wouldn’t be pertinent to the case. You can believe that these women are part of the motor lobby if you want that to be your convenient truth.
 
Because this is an appeal Ed. It’s not a rerun of the previous case. In any event, this wouldn’t be pertinent to the case. You can believe that these women are part of the motor lobby if you want that to be your convenient truth.
You really don't make a lot of sense, It's an appeal so their signs shouldn't mention what the case is actually about?
 
You really don't make a lot of sense, It's an appeal so their signs shouldn't mention what the case is actually about?
You said “getting rid of LTNs - no mention of this in the court case today”. I pointed out that’s it’s the appeal and so this isn’t pertinent as it’s looking at the relevant merits of a previous decision. The appeal court are looking at those merits and so the basis of the decision. I’m not sure why you think that this would be brought up unless you don’t know how the court of appeal works. This would be understandable given it’s quite technical. As I’ve said, relief is at the gift of the judge and will depend on their decision
 
You said “getting rid of LTNs - no mention of this in the court case today”. I pointed out that’s it’s the appeal and so this isn’t pertinent as it’s looking at the relevant merits of a previous decision. The appeal court are looking at those merits and so the basis of the decision. I’m not sure why you think that this would be brought up unless you don’t know how the court of appeal works. This would be understandable given it’s quite technical. As I’ve said, relief is at the gift of the judge and will depend on their decision
oh ffs - that's the point. The OneLambeth group are saying "No to LTNs" & "remove road closures" which isn't what the court case is about. You're claiming they're solely focused on the needs of people with disabilities, they are demonstrably not.
 
oh ffs - that's the point. The OneLambeth group are saying "No to LTNs" & "remove road closures" which isn't what the court case is about. You're claiming they're solely focused on the needs of people with disabilities, they are demonstrably not.
I was pointing to the people in the photo and said that they weren’t the motor lobby and were there as they all had a reason based on protecting those that are “vulnerable”. So the peope in the photo are there for the exact reason the court case was brought about. Unless you know them better than I do. I which case I’m happy for you to tell me their reasons for being there.
 
Anyone that thinks this is a good use of £50k is probably a lawyer.
Not sure why you give a fuck really. If it’s upheld you’re happy. If it’s overturned, you’re also happy as it will mean that the council is reminded that it has to operate within the confines of the law. You win either way Ed
 
I was pointing to the people in the photo and said that they weren’t the motor lobby and were there as they all had a reason based on protecting those that are “vulnerable”. So the peope in the photo are there for the exact reason the court case was brought about. Unless you know them better than I do. I which case I’m happy for you to tell me their reasons for being there.
Oh sorry - I was going by what the signs they were holding up were saying. My bad.

Not sure why you give a fuck really. If it’s upheld you’re happy. If it’s overturned, you’re also happy as it will mean that the council is reminded that it has to operate within the confines of the law. You win either way Ed
So you're agree this wouldn't stop LTNs. Maybe update your fundraising page then "An appeal win could influence how LTNs are implemented across London and other UK cities, and even whether the schemes are allowed to continue."
 
Oh sorry - I was going by what the signs they were holding up were saying. My bad.


So you're agree this wouldn't stop LTNs. Maybe update your fundraising page then "An appeal win could influence how LTNs are implemented across London and other UK cities, and even whether the schemes are allowed to continue."
I’ll feed back your concerns.
 
Not sure why you give a fuck really. If it’s upheld you’re happy. If it’s overturned, you’re also happy as it will mean that the council is reminded that it has to operate within the confines of the law. You win either way Ed
We definitely care because it's our Council tax money being wasted.
 
We definitely care because it's our Council tax money being wasted.
As I’ve said, if it’s overturned then it will
Mean the council don’t put themselves in a similar situation again and the save money.

Remember that Lambeth have form here and have had to pay out millions in damages. You should probably worry about those cases too.
 
thanks - I'd missed that.

FFS - telegraph sinks to a new low here I think with the "North Korea' line. This is sub local paper stuff - it's very clear from that planning doc that you don't have a 'democratic right' to stick a sign in your front garden.

Lambeth are just spinning up the execution squads and gulags, and they’ll be right on it next week.
 
I was pointing to the people in the photo and said that they weren’t the motor lobby and were there as they all had a reason based on protecting those that are “vulnerable”. So the peope in the photo are there for the exact reason the court case was brought about. Unless you know them better than I do. I which case I’m happy for you to tell me their reasons for being there.
It's great to see these people coming together with a common purpose to improve conditions for the vulnerable. There have been lots of OneLambeth complaints, and mention in the court, that not enough groups representing people with disabilities were consulted ahead of the implementation of the LTNs. I guess the reality will show over time - whether these individuals will now be volunteering with one or more of the existing groups, or forming a new local body to lobby the council for a range of improvements to the area to benefit people with disabilities. Or whether their only interest and concern is over LTNs and their freedom to drive everywhere by the shortest route. That the banners they're holding up seem unrelated to the case doesn't seem a good sign.

The original OneLambeth morphed into a general 'anti-council' / referendum on committee council campaign and seems to have dropped any concern about LTNs, traffic or pollution at all. Their new twitter account is languishing on just 122 followers and their petition seems to have barely moved in months - it's still under 700 when I think they need something like 15000. Maybe theres a big push coming over the 3 remaining months.

Are the remaining OneLambeth planning to run any candidates for the council elections? Putting up some single issue councillor candidates would seem a clear way of showing the degree of opposition to the current council Transport Strategy. The official Twitter account keeps posting 'vote them out in May' messages - so is anyone running? While Tim Briggs has done a lot to court attention he's in a ward that doesn't have an LTN (though of course he wants to deliver one there for his residents who are plagued by rat running to shortcut between the A205 and A3) and from what I've seen OneLambeths supporters largely claim to be Labour supporters so seems a big ask to get them to vote for a Conservative candidate (especially given the current performance the Government)
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom