teuchter
je suis teuchter
Imagine being a parent without access to a car. We've been over this before. What are they supposed to do?
Loughborough Junction public space improvements - consultation begins
- Thread starter Leo Chesterton
- Start date
teuchter
je suis teuchter
The easier it is for car-owning parents to send their kids to distant schools, by driving them there, the more of them will do it. Remove a little bit of that advantage from them, and maybe it's possible to moderate this vicious circle.
I was thinking more of the case where the parents didn't choose a school or schools far away.
You are like the executioner who first crucifies his victim and then breaks his legs because he didn't die fast enough.
critical1
All views expressed are definitely my own.
those days are over unfortunately, I remember getting the bus to school or walking it as I had spent my bus fare on something more worthwhile
I also remember kids being mugged and stabbed and being disruptive.. As a parent theses days I wonder what I would do to make sure they are within the school gates.. Have you noticed most schools look like fortress's these days impenetrable!! Make you wonder...
teuchter
je suis teuchter
You mean when the kids end up in a school far away through no choice of the parents?
Again - what about the parents in this situation who don't own a car? Should we be trying to make life easier for them, or not? Or should we be worrying about the parents lucky enough to have a car, whose journeys might now take a bit longer?
I don't see any validity in the argument that, because some people don't have X, no-one should have X.
If that were a valid argument, no-one should have access to electricity or clean running water.
those days are over unfortunately, I remember getting the bus to school or walking it as I had spent my bus fare on something more worthwhile
I also remember kids being mugged and stabbed and being disruptive.. As a parent theses days I wonder what I would do to make sure they are within the school gates.. Have you noticed most schools look like fortress's these days impenetrable!! Make you wonder...
Yes, I know what you mean. I walked past my old primary school recently. It's amalgamated with the secondary school next door and the place looks more like a prison than a school. Massive iron fences and bars everywhere.
teuchter
je suis teuchter
That's not my argument though, is it?
No, your argument is that even if some people have X they shouldn't use it because other don't have the option.
bimble
floofy
I don't have kids (or a car) but got to admit if I had small children living here with me I'm not sure how relaxed I'd feel about them cycling to school on shiny bikes, or walking home after dark, etc.
On the other hand, the statistics (nationwide) do look pretty dire: "Over a quarter of parents (27 per cent) automatically drive their children .. In stark contrast, 92 per cent of pensioners and 81 per cent of today’s parents walked to primary school when they were children; in 2012 just 47 per cent of trips to and from primary school were made on foot and 44 per cent by car'.
That's a lot of rush hour traffic right there..
http://www.livingstreets.org.uk/sites/default/files/content/library/Factsheets/Walking to school.pdf
On the other hand, the statistics (nationwide) do look pretty dire: "Over a quarter of parents (27 per cent) automatically drive their children .. In stark contrast, 92 per cent of pensioners and 81 per cent of today’s parents walked to primary school when they were children; in 2012 just 47 per cent of trips to and from primary school were made on foot and 44 per cent by car'.
That's a lot of rush hour traffic right there..
http://www.livingstreets.org.uk/sites/default/files/content/library/Factsheets/Walking to school.pdf
critical1
All views expressed are definitely my own.
What about people who have three children all at different schools and also have to go to work every day and come back and collect the children and what about if they are a single parent and a possibly doing even two jobs one during the day and one in the evening to make ends meet.
Should these parents give up and receive benefits or take the bus or walk
Should these parents give up and receive benefits or take the bus or walk
teuchter
je suis teuchter
No it's not.
teuchter
je suis teuchter
If they are car owners they should be arguing for anything that moves away from a world where people so short of time are spending half their waking hours being a taxi driver.
If they aren't car owners they should be arguing for anything that improves the safety of their children who have to walk/take the bus to school.
It would be in their interest whether car owners or not to have a system where walking / PT to school was encouraged and where it was the norm, and where those walking journeys were along streets busy with other pedestrians rather than traffic, because that's what makes them safer.
LadyV
Well-Known Member
No one is saying that absolutely everyone should walk/cycle/public transport to school/work etc, there are always going to be some people for whom that isn't really an option but there are a good number of people that could consider their choice of transport. For instance one of my neighbours in Styles Gardens used to drive her son to school, which is on the other side of Loughborough Road towards Herne Hill. She's now walking him there because it's no longer convenient to drive but I doubt she would have stopped otherwise. If we could reduce non essential journeys like that then we would have no need for a road closure. But maybe something like this, not necessarily this, is needed to make people think about their journeys.
And before you think otherwise, I do not want the closures as I think they were ill thought out, badly implemented and rushed, I also believe there were other options that could have produced similar results but without the animosity the closures have caused. And yes I have filled in the appropriate consultations and have complained the relevant parties to that effect. But despite being against them, I'm also rational enough to let the trial continue and see what happens.
bimble
floofy
ooh. BBC London radio this morning.
The bit about LJ's closures is at about 1hr 47 in..
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p035db84#play
The bit about LJ's closures is at about 1hr 47 in..
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p035db84#play
critical1
All views expressed are definitely my own.
A few of the pedestrians are gangs there have already been a few deaths in the area. Loughborough rd now has wheelies and people doing hand break turns due to the lack of commuters down this road, are you suggesting that parents should resent caring for there children and ensuring there safety and livelihoods.
Last edited:
critical1
All views expressed are definitely my own.
Well said on the BBC no less...
LadyV
Well-Known Member
Have just seen this on the LJ Road Madness facebook page, am I reading it right that it says that they are extending the trial time? I'm all for seeing the trial out but this is not going to go down well with some people
"BREAKING NEWS THIS RESPONSE JUST NOW FROM THE DEPUTY MAYOR:
Dear Mr. Hickey
I have read your e.mail with interest, myself with my Cllr colleague met the officers yesterday morning to raise the concerns which residents are snaring with us
We agreed to extend the trial time from December to March next year, also officers are looking into alternate ways of dealing with this important issue. By extending the date there will be more time to do satisfactory consultation /engagement with the residents affected by this scheme
I am as your Local councillor willing and happy to come to any public meetings residents arrange
Councillor Saleha Jaffer
Deputy Mayor
One of your Labour Councillors for St Leonards Ward
Tel: 07929 547 619
Email: Sjaffer@Lambeth.gov.uk
"BREAKING NEWS THIS RESPONSE JUST NOW FROM THE DEPUTY MAYOR:
Dear Mr. Hickey
I have read your e.mail with interest, myself with my Cllr colleague met the officers yesterday morning to raise the concerns which residents are snaring with us
We agreed to extend the trial time from December to March next year, also officers are looking into alternate ways of dealing with this important issue. By extending the date there will be more time to do satisfactory consultation /engagement with the residents affected by this scheme
I am as your Local councillor willing and happy to come to any public meetings residents arrange
Councillor Saleha Jaffer
Deputy Mayor
One of your Labour Councillors for St Leonards Ward
Tel: 07929 547 619
Email: Sjaffer@Lambeth.gov.uk
bimble
floofy
What is that about?
Sounds like just a return to the original 6 month trial with no break clause now, no 3 month review let alone the 8 week one there's been all this fuss about??
critical1
All views expressed are definitely my own.
All very STRANGE has this been verified as being authentic...
Myself with my Cllr colleague?? Who exactly lol
Last edited:
Yes, I can vouch it is authentic.
The Council promised an early review to see if the project was working and if not it was stated that they would bring it to an early end. It is clear that the Council (or Cllr Brathwaite at least) were hoping that the results might show a positive outcome for continuation of the scheme. However, as a result of the massive outcry against it from local residents, an online petition and paper petition combined now exceeds 5000 names (yes 5000), let alone the survey monkey thing, it appears that they do not like the results of their consultation so far. Consequently it is clear from the below that the Council intends to EXTEND the duration of the scheme UNTIL MARCH 2016. They have already agreed to do that BEFORE THE REVIEW DATE HAS CONCLUDED AND A DECISION TO BE ANNOUNCED ON 19th. It is obvious that the so-called ‘review’ by the Council and its offers is a sham since the Council has no real intention of paying any attention to the wishes of the people with whom it is bound to consult and is prepared to act irrationally to secure the result it wants.
WATCH THIS SPACE - it's going to be in the BBC news this evening I think. And the Fiasco is in the Standard. The MPs are also now starting to take an interest.
bimble
floofy
Ok.. it looks like there's no 'mix up' . Don't know what I'd call this but not a mistake.
This seems to be the background.. Mr Hickey's email (an OPEN LETTER) is far too long to post (it's 4 pages of A4, a very detailed critique of the closures)
But I'll quote this bit of it:
Your Council is required to have a live ongoing 6 month consultation period for the experimental TMO. In fact the Lambeth website misleads on the question of the public realm improvements by suggesting that a consultation is closed and there is no live consultation, thus deterring unsuspecting members of the community from providing a response. Those people who have emailed you to voice their objections have been met with a wall of silence and no acknowledgment. It was only this week (during school half-term) a survey monkey questionnaire prepared by the Stockwell Partnership has been opened asking a limited number of questions with limited space for comments but most members of the public will not be aware of this and it has not been posted on the Lambeth website section which deals with consultations. I understand that the duration of that survey will last just this week ahead of the review next week. In other words your Council has decided to restrict the scope of any consultation: there is no acceptable justification for this, indeed it demonstrates the Council wants to limit the scope for representations because it fears that the vast majority are opposed to the road closures. The review at 8wks will apparently take into account pollution levels recorded on the closed LR but you have not measured, and do not intend to measure, the pollution levels on Coldharbour Lane to check the extent to which CHL is more polluted than before. The data from this unscientific approach are going to be inherently unreliable.
It is disgraceful that the decision on whether to continue with the scheme will be made by Cllr Brathwaite alone – particularly since the Cllr in question has not even had the courtesy to acknowledge receipt of my emails on the subject, nor other people’s correspondence. She has not attended any meetings with the vast majority in the local community who oppose the road closure. It is clear that Cllr Brathwaite is determined to ignore representations made to her because her mind is already made up to press ahead with an initiative that is her pet project. The decision should be called in by other Councillors so that such an important issue affecting the local community is left to the will of one person who is unwilling to admit this has been a drastic mistake.
and the response seems to be ' ok, well we'll leave them in place for the full 6 months then' (?)
On 2 Nov 2015, at 16:23, Brathwaite,Jennifer Cllr <JBrathwaite@lambth.gov.uk> wrote:
Dear Mr Hickey,
Thank you for your email. Given its length, I will take time to read your comments and get back to you.
Regards
Councillor Jennifer Brathwaite
Labour Councillor for
Gipsy Hill Ward
Cabinet Member for Environment and Sustainability
07805943813
This seems to be the background.. Mr Hickey's email (an OPEN LETTER) is far too long to post (it's 4 pages of A4, a very detailed critique of the closures)
But I'll quote this bit of it:
Your Council is required to have a live ongoing 6 month consultation period for the experimental TMO. In fact the Lambeth website misleads on the question of the public realm improvements by suggesting that a consultation is closed and there is no live consultation, thus deterring unsuspecting members of the community from providing a response. Those people who have emailed you to voice their objections have been met with a wall of silence and no acknowledgment. It was only this week (during school half-term) a survey monkey questionnaire prepared by the Stockwell Partnership has been opened asking a limited number of questions with limited space for comments but most members of the public will not be aware of this and it has not been posted on the Lambeth website section which deals with consultations. I understand that the duration of that survey will last just this week ahead of the review next week. In other words your Council has decided to restrict the scope of any consultation: there is no acceptable justification for this, indeed it demonstrates the Council wants to limit the scope for representations because it fears that the vast majority are opposed to the road closures. The review at 8wks will apparently take into account pollution levels recorded on the closed LR but you have not measured, and do not intend to measure, the pollution levels on Coldharbour Lane to check the extent to which CHL is more polluted than before. The data from this unscientific approach are going to be inherently unreliable.
It is disgraceful that the decision on whether to continue with the scheme will be made by Cllr Brathwaite alone – particularly since the Cllr in question has not even had the courtesy to acknowledge receipt of my emails on the subject, nor other people’s correspondence. She has not attended any meetings with the vast majority in the local community who oppose the road closure. It is clear that Cllr Brathwaite is determined to ignore representations made to her because her mind is already made up to press ahead with an initiative that is her pet project. The decision should be called in by other Councillors so that such an important issue affecting the local community is left to the will of one person who is unwilling to admit this has been a drastic mistake.
and the response seems to be ' ok, well we'll leave them in place for the full 6 months then' (?)
On 2 Nov 2015, at 16:23, Brathwaite,Jennifer Cllr <JBrathwaite@lambth.gov.uk> wrote:
Dear Mr Hickey,
Thank you for your email. Given its length, I will take time to read your comments and get back to you.
Regards
Councillor Jennifer Brathwaite
Labour Councillor for
Gipsy Hill Ward
Cabinet Member for Environment and Sustainability
07805943813
critical1
All views expressed are definitely my own.
Thanks for that, I'll wait for official verification from Lambeth or LJMADNESS
Ok sure, but I can tell you from the horse's mouth that it's a reply by the Deputy Mayor to my email!
bimble
floofy
It IS you. . It looks to me like they have to some extent used that bit of your open letter (the 6 month consultation requirement) to legitimate delaying any review / repeal until March.. is that how you see it ?
They are obliged to consult for 6 months before deciding to make a TMO permanent, but they do not have to keep the roads closed in the meantime. Having called an early review they are worried about what the current conclusions would show: the people who have petitioned and those who have completed the survey have spoken - I suspect overwhelmingly against continuation of the road closure but they don't want to demonstrate that with the review. I think they are also concerned that the consultation so far has been flawed and open to judicial review and might be seeking to have more time to do it right. I can't see this ending well.
CH1
"Red Guard"(NLYL)
Wow - no wonder you are up posting on Urban75 at 5.20 am. Dissociative PTSD (Post Traumatic Stress Disorder to the uninitiated).
There is probably a claims firm for that.
Similar threads
