Forum Topics

Ealing Restaurant Applying to Stay Open All Night

When I was searching for something else I incidentally came across an application by the Palm Grill on Hanger Lane for an extension of opening hours to 5am and to play recorded music for this time. It may be that proximity to the A40 means that residents aren't going to be particularly bothered about the extra noise but given that these things often sneak through because they are not properly publicised I thought I'd post details here:
LONDON BOROUGH OF EALING. LICENSING ACT 2003 NOTICE OF APPLICATION FOR NEW/VARIATION* PREMISES LICENCE / CLUB CERTIFICATE* Murtadha Rajab Has applied to Ealing Council for new/variation of a premises licence / club premises certificate* for:The Palm Grill, 11 Royal Parade, London, W5 1ET The proposed new/variations/timings are as follows: Provision of late night refreshments (from 23.00 to 05.00) and use of recorded music (from 12.00 to 05.00). Opening hours 12.00 to 05.00 Any person wishing to submit representations to this application must give notice in writing to:Licensing Team, Perceval House, 14-16 Uxbridge Road, Ealing W5 2HL. Tel 020 8825 6655. Fax: 020 8825 8750. Email: licensing@ealing.gov.uk Not later than 31/07/2018 Dated this 26 day of June 2018 Signed: Murtadha Rajab Note 1: Representations must relate to one or more of the four licensing objectives. 1. Prevention of crime and disorder. 2. Public safety. 3. Prevention of public nuisance. 4. Protection of children from harm Note 2: Anonymous representations cannot be accepted. Note 3: Copies of representations will be included in reports to the licensing sub-committee and therefore will pass into the public domain Note 4: It is an offence liable on conviction to a fine up to level 5 (£5’000) on the standard scale under section 158 of the Licensing Act 2003 to knowingly or recklessly make a false statement in connection with this application TM Ref: 225496609-01

Dennis O'Shea ● 2984d0 Comments ● 2984d

The Will of the People and Brexit

One thing that really surprised me after the referendum is how polarised and tribal the issue became after the result. Many people had quite fluid views before the vote but afterwards they seem to have become set in stone with a relatively small proportion changing their minds. Most of the polls held since have shown a majority of people now want to Remain but the swing is a result of people having been undecided at the time of the referendum changing their minds. The most recent Survation poll does suggest that this is starting to change with a 6% gap between Remain and Leave. This was held before the news about Airbus and BMW so that gap is only going to get bigger. I've had a number of conversations with ardent Leavers in recent weeks in which they have said that they still would vote the same way even though their son's/daughter's, grandson's/granddaughter's employer would be negatively affected by leaving the EU. It occurs to me that many people might be saying this because they don't want to admit an error or to changing their mind after arguing so stridently for one point of view but if they were given the chance again in a live vote rather than a poll they would put the interests of their family members ahead of their desire for vindication. This would mean that the polls currently are significantly understating the swing towards Remain and, if there were a second referendum, the will of the people would clearly be to stay in the EU. It would really be helpful for someone to explain to me why, given that the will of the British people seems to have decisively changed, that we should be inflicting something on them that is clearly not wanted or in their best interest.


Andy Jones ● 3005d65 Comments ● 2989d

Withdrawal of proposed increases in Resident Parking Permit Charges and introduction of shared use p

There is a second petition doing the rounds which stands a better chance of winning the council round, providing it gets enough signatures. There is nothing to stop anyone signing both petitions.  This one has been written by the residents in Southfields Ward and unlike other Wards, Julian Bell has agreed to meet with them and their Lib Dem Ward Councillors.The current proposals which include a borough roll out of Order 4114 (removal of some resident bays and introduction of shared bays amongst other things) to allow commuters and persons going to Heathrow to park close to Elizabeth Line and other stations.  Whilst resident permits will be made up of location and vehicle emissions rating, the incomers will only be charged on location and pay far less than they would at stations outside the borough or at the airport. Coupled with the inconvenience of an incomer parking for an estimated £4.00 a day outside your house for a couple of weeks just adds insult to injury. Ealing Borough is 55.53 kmsq, as a Zone 2 borough we have contributed £35 a msq, (you do the maths) for the building of Crossrail/Elizabeth Line. Crossrail was built to stop people driving into London.  Why are Ealing now encouraging people to do this? Their own Transport Strategy has been written to positively discourage its residents from driving. “Research indicates that annually, up to 9,000 early deaths across London and 387 early deaths within LB Ealing have been attributed to poor air quality” (from vehicle emissions). The increase of traffic at peak times rat running through the borough will also increase the potential for RTAs. And all this to raise mere extra £250,000 is just plain stupid and clearly unfair.Please read and sign this petition:http://ealing.cmis.uk.com/ealing/ePetitions/tabid/96/ID/50/Withdrawal-of-proposed-increases-in-Resident-Parking-Permit-Charges-and-introduction-of-shared-use-parking-bays.aspx

Libby Kemp ● 2994d6 Comments ● 2994d