New Grove Vale library - Dulwich Garden Centre
December 31st, 2007 by James BarberSouthwark Council Planning Officers are currently preparing a report on this scheme. They will decide early next week whether to recommend this planning application be Granted or Refused. Since 19 November, when I last posted about this new Grove Vale library, the scheme has been revised. Unfortunately the library height proposed has been reduced. The top floor is now proposed to be set back and overall the building will appear less bulky. It also has lost much of its copper banding and wont be as striking. Shame.
If you want more details, want to support or oppose the scheme, then please get in touch with me.
The final decision by the full Planning Committee is expected to be taken 7pm 22 January at the Town Hall. These meeting have very long agendas so be prepared to wait some time and bring a book, snack, drink.
Alert boxes
December 28th, 2007 by James BarberIn October the three East Dulwich Liberal Democrat Councillors Cllr Richard Thomas, Jonathan Mitchell and I allocated £25,000 to help fight shop crime in East Dulwich. This was the number one priority for investment from the local Crime Prevention Officer.
Just before Christmas another 100 traders in East Dulwich signed up for Alert boxes - a proven method to reduce shop crime by typically 57%. The Alert Boxes have been programmed and will be delivered during mid January.
Big thanks to the East Dulwich Safer Neighbourhood Team and council officers nad project managers for making this happen - Andrea Allen, Sarah De Souza and all the traders who have joined in the scheme.
Digital tax
December 27th, 2007 by James BarberWe’ve all grown very used to how to make a television work. Get a licence, aerial and TV. Simple. The government has decided to really complicate this. The ‘old’ system uses analogue signals which are very forgiving when things not tuned correctly or aerial not pointing correctly and yet will still work. 2012 the analogue transmitters will be closed down. This is so the government can sell the radio spectrum. They don’t know what this radio spectrum will be sold for yet, but after making £21billion from selling radio spectrum for 3G phones they’re sure they want another sale. So everyone and anyone who uses a TV will have to buy a set top box or new digital TV and potentially a new aerial, etc.
Southwark Council controls 55,000 properties. All these properties need to have solutions to this government created problem before 2012. Estimates of what this cost vary but it will cost several tens of millions of pounds.
Is this something you think the country needs to be worrying about now?
Sadly the 3G phone people have been licking the wounds from that 3G auction. No one in business will pay such ridiculous prices again. So the premise of closing the analogue transmitters seems false.
This is effectively a regressive digital tax - i.e. the poorest pay a higher proportion of income buying set top boxes/digital Televisions compared to the richest to still have access to TV. We will all pay for every council in the country being partly distracted from delivering crucial services while they sort this unnecessary pickle out.
Riverside new councillor - déjà vu
December 16th, 2007 by James BarberA by election in the Riverside Ward in Southwark gave me a huge de jevu feeling. While canvassing for the excellent Liberal Democrat candidate Anood Al-Samerai I kept coming across Labour leaflets with covers identical to those used in East Dulwich in 2006. Same broken windows on estates not located in Southwark. Same Police officers in uniforms that the Metropolitan Police have never used - looked like West Midlands Police officers. All stating that Liberal Democrats are soft on crime. Err, that would be Southwark with crime down ahead of tough targets set by central government through hard work of Liberal Democrat run Southwark Council working with the Police.
I also had the same de jevu that voters in Riverside would see straight through such rubbish. They duly did and Anood virtually received 50% of the votes - 1,114 out of 2,248 and extended the majority over Labour.
Well done Anood.
Graffiti at height
December 6th, 2007 by James BarberSouthwark Council graffiti removals service is second to none. 24hours removal once the site owner has agreed and no charge even for businesses. Just one small caveat. Although five of the officers are trained to work at heights they don’t have a vehicle with a crane or cage to support this. Colleagues in other departments, such as street lighting, have such vehicles but due to government best value rules they have to cross charge to hire these between departments. How complicated. Also, to park such vehicles they need to officially close road lanes unless an emergency. Failed street lighting is currently considered to meet this criteria but removing graffiti isn’t. Currently another Southwark Council department Highways require 6 weeks notice and an expensive traffic management order to close a lane of traffic. Hence such graffiti at height stays around for a very long time.
Now the Executive Councillor Paul Noblet, accountable for all these departments, knows how disjointed this is it shouldn’t take long to fix.
Mobile Operators…propaganda?
December 3rd, 2007 by James BarberAs a councillor I receive lots of post - typically 12 inches high a week and about 200-400 emails on a typical week. Boy does it take a lot of time to ensure I read everything that could be useful for me and the residents in East dulwich.
One newsletter caught my eye and thankfully I read it cover to cover - the Mobile Operators Association newsletter. It started by saying how much money has been spent on research proving mobiles and base stations are safe. It then talked about how every public authority in UK has been sent a list of all the mobile operators combined plans. Then buried on later pages how research so far indicates more medical research is needed to be sure.
1stly. Checking with Southwark officers they haven’t received such combined mobile operators plans.
2ndy. Why not state this last part about more medical research being needed on page 1. Could it be they just don’t expect many councillors to read that far into the newsletter.
How cynical is that?






