Forum Topics

Enfield Road  access only

Have just seen that Council is proposing to make Enfield Road and adjoining roads access only.  Have looked on Hounslow website and cannot find precise details of the scheme.Does anyone know exactly what is planned?Do we want it?  Not, of course, that we have any say in the matter.Enfield Road is pretty quiet at the moment apart from speeding cyclists (the majority of whom don't bother with lights at night), scooterists and skateboarders.

Alison Robins ● 2225d111 Comments ● 2190d

Trees

Can anyone advise me.  Who is responsible for trees in the borough that could be or become a danger ?  Is it Hounslow Highways?  Thanks in advance.

Pat Kingham ● 2214d9 Comments ● 2191d

CNN Chris Cuomo 2:00am then Don Lemon 3:00am

In the light of the Bob Woodward revelations these two are an absolute must to watch in the early hours.  Their handover is always entertaining but their programmes tonight will be amazing.

Sarah Felstead ● 2192d0 Comments ● 2192d

Cleaner wanted

We are looking for a reliable cleaner, once every 2 weeks for 3 hours.  References required.  Any recommendations appreciated.  Thanks!

Tamsin Kemmis ● 2194d1 Comments ● 2193d

TV warnings.

As we are constantly being told at the beginning of TV programmes that there may be content that we might find upsetting, do you think there's any chance that any item that has Donald Trump in it could have a similar warning?Quite honestly every time he pops up spouting his nasty rhetoric and mangling the English language (profoundly accept?) I feel extremely nauseous, as for poor Abraham Lincoln's name being mentioned in the same sentence - for Heaven's sake, is there no end to this clown's vanity?

Vanessa Smith ● 2205d4 Comments ● 2194d

Well, well, well.

‎Brentford TV‎ to Brentford Today & TV: #Debate Not Hate#5h · COUNCIL'S INTERNAL REPORT EXPOSES "PROBLEMS WITH CORPORATE CULTURE • PEOPLE POLICIES NOT FIT FOR PURPOSE • POOR COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT APPROACH" – As soon as he saw the document, Cllr John Todd took a screen grab. That was fortunate because, when he asked questions, it was immediately removed. It had been written by the senior management at Hounslow Borough Council and was a frank admission of serious performance failings. It declared: ‘Our digital offer is ineffective, our customer service delivery is not good enough (and)…We do not have a single Corporate, systematic way of understanding our customers and their needs.'The report was an Appendix to a recent Single Member Decision in which a Cabinet member sought an additional £500,000 to restructure the Council's Human Resources and Organisational Development Department.The Appendix said: "This is a programme of change, to ensure that the council is at the cutting edge of public service delivery. We are not at the moment…The first phase is to rectify current issues and problems with our corporate culture and infrastructure."We do not systematically look at how we are doing and how effective we are and whether what we are doing is meeting the real, objectively identified needs of our communities."Our people policies are not fit for purpose and our approach to investing and developing talent and rewarding people is inadequate."Our approach to public service reform and public service integration is segmented and very under-developed. Our approach to community engagement is poor. We are stuck in a neighbourhood renewal paradigm that pre-dates austerity."Cllr Todd says: "I posed a number of questions about this report believed to have been written in February including ‘who wrote this section?' and ‘where is the data previously published which evidences the adverse comments in this section?' I received a prompt response. The senior management had drafted this paragraph (italicised above). My second question was not answered to my satisfaction."Cllr Todd says: "My interest in the council's performance was heightened In June 2019 when the cabinet agreed a different way of assessing its performance data, highlighting success rather than failure. Our opposition role is to chase the latter so I met with the Chief Executive and Head of Overview and Scrutiny to express my concerns."My intervention over the HR and OD Report caused the Cabinet Member to direct that the published appendix I had quoted from be immediately removed from the LBH website. A most unusual course of action."The Cabinet member in question was Cllr Candice Atterton and here is the Council proposal she was approving: https://democraticservices.hounslow.gov.uk/documents/s163160/HR%20OD%20SMD%2027.8.20v2.pdf

Vanessa Smith ● 2194d1 Comments ● 2194d

Grant Shapps tells councils to stop abusing £250m

Grant Shapps tells councils to stop abusing £250m fund meant for green transport revolution https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/09/05/grant-shapps-tells-councils-stop-abusing-250m-fund-meant-green/Grant Shapps has told councils to stop abusing the £250 million fund meant for a green transport revolution by installing pointless one way systems and barriers that offer “no benefit to anyone”.Writing in the Sunday Telegraph, the Secretary of State for Transport says he will personally intervene to scrap the worst examples where local authorities have ruined high streets and residential roads in an attempt to build cycle lanes and promote social distancincing for pedestrians.His comments come after a series of petitions attracted thousands of signatures from people across the country who fear councils are pandering to the cycle lobby.Campaign groups representing the disabled, small business owners, pollution activists and motorists have criticised the schemes for being rushed through with little or no consultation.Many have claimed traffic congestion has been shifted elsewhere, while pollution has increased and many high street shops are struggling to emerge from lockdown because parking spaces have disappeared.In some London boroughs, planters closing off roads have been vandalised amid concerns emergency vehicle response times have plummeted as firefighters and paramedics have encountered new road layouts.Mr Shapps announced the £250 million scheme to promote “a new era for cycling and walking” at the height of lockdown in May.But today, Mr Shapps stresses how “not everything has worked” and because they are trials and the height of the Covid emergency has now passed there is ample opportunity for councils to consult local residents, businesses and the disabled.In a direct message to council leaders, he says: “Where some councils have abused the cash, my message is clear: speak to local residents, get it fixed or no more cash.”He adds that while some schemes had been “done well”, in the worst cases “a number of them will be coming out soon”.The Sunday Telegraph revealed in July how the minister had personally intervened in his own constituency after being dismayed with the way Hertfordshire County Council had set up a one-way system in the village of Welwyn which was said to have left the high street deserted.He writes: “Some councils have introduced random one-way systems, which don't seem to offer many benefits to anyone.“Some of those plastic barriers that have gone up in town centres to widen the pavements can actually prevent pedestrians, including disabled people, crossing the road.“They narrow the carriageway for traffic, causing congestion and increasing danger for cyclists. They reduce parking for essential visits to the pharmacy or dentist or doctor. And they don't seem to be much used by pedestrians either.”The minister said while many green activists claim the car should “die”, he believes it should instead “evolve” to help save the planet.As an electric car driver himself he added how he was an “electric head” rather than a petrol head, a description for those obsessed with fossil fuelled motor vehicles.He also said it was essential to “keep the main arteries of our economy flowing” at this pivotal time as Britain emerges from lockdown and prepares for Brexit.He adds: “For those who say we shouldn’t be building roads, I say there’s nothing green about standing still in traffic, pumping out CO2 and pollution.”However, the Road Haulage Association (RHA) remained adamant last night that more needed to be done to ease congestion after it had seen members, particularly in London, complaining how journey times were increasing.“We don’t believe that the Government has thought through the practical reality or economic consequences of reducing road space for vehicles,” a RHA spokesman said.“This will only lead to increased congestion and delays to deliveries – all of which increases the costs of moving goods – and somebody’s got to pay for that.“We’re all for a ‘green recovery’ but you can’t do this by clogging up our roads and making it more difficult for people and goods to get about.“On a local level, councils are using Covid-19 as an excuse to circumvent proper consultation about traffic schemes and ignoring their damaging economic and environmental consequences.“We’re hearing from members, especially in London, of increasing journey times and delays. In one instance round trips taking up to 50 percent longer than normal.”

Bernard Allen ● 2196d7 Comments ● 2194d

Paramedics couldn’t get to patient because of covid-bollards

Paramedics couldn’t get to patient because of covid-bollards blocking roadZoe Drewett Thursday 3 Sep 2020 10:57 amParamedics were delayed from treating a patient by 20 minutes because the road they wanted to take was blocked by newly installed bollards. The man was found unconscious by people living in Leighton Road in Ealing, London, at around 2.15pm on Saturday. Emergency services were called but the medics could not get past new bollards and raised flowers beds installed at the road junction. It has emerged the area is one of ten new ‘low traffic neighbourhoods’, created during the pandemic to make social distancing easier. According to the council’s website, the low traffic neighbourhoods are ‘essential for the post-lock down period where social distancing is needed, and public transport is at reduced capacity’.It is hoped that making the area only accessible to pedestrians and cyclists will ‘prevent increased future rat running’ as people choose to stay away from buses and trains and drive more instead. But London Ambulance Service had not been issued with keys to the new bollards – put up by Ealing Council three days before the man’s collapse. Witnesses said the paramedics were angry they could not get close enough to help the man during the medical emergency. Dominic Small, 53, who lives near the alleyway where the man was found said it took the medics around 20 minutes to park, then they had to walk 40 yards with their equipment to help the patient.He said: ‘The paramedic was really quite cross about the whole situation. In the end he had to park across on the other side of the barriers and walk to the patients around 30 to 40 meters and treat him that way. ‘If they had to get to him for something more serious, it could have been the difference between life and death. They had to go quite a distance and then if they had to trolley someone that far back to the ambulance it would cause a crucial delay. ‘The paramedics said it was a risk to health and safety and we should complain to the council as they can’t. ‘I asked the council why they haven’t removed the barriers given that they now know the ambulance services don’t have keys, but have not got a response yet.’The sick man was treated at the scene and refused to be taken to hospital, the ambulance service said. Ealing councillor David Millican said the bollards caused another ambulance hold-up on Tuesday evening when an elderly resident fell and had to wait an extra 30 minutes for paramedics to arrive because of the new diversion. The woman needed to stay in hospital overnight and is now said to be fine but her husband was worried about the slow response had it been a matter of life and death, the councillor said. He added: ‘I’ve been warning senior councillors and council officers for many weeks that the emergency services would struggle to navigate and pass through the road blocks.'The refuse lorries are also unable to pass through the barriers, meaning it is taking them much longer to complete their rounds, as there are sections of the scheme that their lorry cannot reach.‘If refuse lorries cannot pass through the barriers then clearly fire engines cannot either, despite the assurances we have received.’ Christina Fox, who lives near the new barriers, called them dangerous and said someone could ‘die waiting’ for an ambulance. London Ambulance Service claimed they reached the first patient within their target of 18 minutes for a category 2 emergency call. Category 2 calls are those that are classed as an emergency for a potentially serious condition that may require rapid assessment, urgent on-scene treatment or to be urgently taken to hospital. Ealing Council has been contacted for comment.Read more: https://metro.co.uk/2020/09/03/ambulance-couldnt-get-to-man-who-collapsed-because-of-road-bollards-13216848/?ito=cbshare Twitter: https://twitter.com/MetroUK | Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/MetroUK/

Bernard Allen ● 2199d14 Comments ● 2196d

Bins

Does anyone know why it is that the binmen leave the bins - wheelie and recycling - scattered all over the pavement when, with the same amount of effort, they could put them inside people's front gates?

Alison Robins ● 2199d13 Comments ● 2196d

Secondhand book sale to raise funds for the FoodBox.

Brentford Voice’s recent Plant Exchange and Sale raised an impressive £680 thanks to you, our community. We would now like to try and help the Hounslow Community FoodBox again with your fantastic support.Brentford Voice will hold a secondhand book sale on 13th September 2020 beginning at 11.00 a.m. in the Market Place, High Street, Brentford. The sale will coincide with the regular Brentford Market which is held on the second Sunday of each month.All proceeds from the book sale will be donated to Hounslow Community FoodBox. Only cash payments will be accepted so please come armed with an adequate supply of coins and notes.In the light of current restrictions buyers will have to judge each book by its cover. There can be no browsing or tender fondling of books. Social distancing will be observed at all times, hand sanitiser will be provided, and masks are advised.We would very much welcome any donations of secondhand books. Books suitable for readers of any age - hardbacks and paperbacks, fiction and non-fiction - will all be most welcome. We ask only that your donations are in reasonably good condition.Donations can be dropped off in advance at:20 Avenue Road, TW8 9NS or 46 Lateward Road, TW8 0PLThe Verdict Bakery in the Market Square has very kindly offered to accept book donations in advance of the sale. Please drop off your books at the Verdict during their opening hours (8.00 a.m. to 6 p.m. Monday to Saturday, and from 10.00 a.m. on Sunday).Alternatively, please bring along your donations to our stall in the Market Place from 10.30 am on 13th September.

Jim Storrar ● 2196d0 Comments ● 2196d

Brentford High Street Ghost town

I've been working locally this week and had to go up and down Brentford High street several times during the day.I wonder how any shops are still in business. It's completely dead.Quite shocked as the last time I was working in the vicinity during the lockdown it was busier!It was not long before I asked a couple of shops open.They are all on their last knockings.  Simply lost all Passing trade.  No buses stopping most of the time to the point that no-one takes a chance to use the local stops as they are closed so often.No parking whatsoever and all the possible parking is occupied. Alternative parking for passing trade is too far away for those quick in and out purchases and no signs advertising free parking and where.Plenty of signs for no stopping though.What a complete shambles.

Raymond Havelock ● 2212d23 Comments ● 2197d

Have you read this?

'School street restrictions' on front page - unbelievable! I especially liked this bit below, as truth is the first casualty of war - it seems that Covid has been one of the excuses to erode local demoracy."Resident only access restrictions would mean that residents' vehicles and residents' visitors would be permitted to enter the affected roads. Residents would not be exempt from the Edensor Road stopping restrictions. Residents can register their own and their visitors' vehicles free of charge. The council say there is no impact on traffic leaving the roads during the hours of operation.If you are expecting a visitor during the hours or restriction, you would ideally need to register them by letting the council know in advance using an online form which is not yet available. However, in the case of unplanned visitors, you will be allowed to register them with the council until the end of the same working day. Regular visitors such as carers would need to be registered once, and blue badge holders living in the area would also need to be registered.The council say, “While the need to register vehicles presents a slight inconvenience to residents, we have streamlined the process as much as possible, and made it free of charge. Feedback from existing schemes suggests the benefits greatly outweigh any inconvenience.”No explanation given as to what those who are not online can do.

Vanessa Smith ● 2203d22 Comments ● 2199d

Broadband speed

The fact is now out, we have some of the slowest speeds in Europe. It takes nearly double the time to download a movie here than in some other countries. Still there is light at the end of the tunnel (fibre). Boris has promised superfast broad band everywhere!!!!

Nicholas Beard ● 2200d0 Comments ● 2200d

Public Health England

PHE is to be replaced with a German style organisation. I note PHE has only been in existance seven years. Is this the way forward. I dont know. What do other contributors think?

Nicholas Beard ● 2217d9 Comments ● 2201d

Possible removal of island Grove Road?College Road Isleworth

I see that Mark Frost & Co have attached notices to lamp posts in Grove Road Isleworth and also Ridgeway Road stating that they are going to remove the island at the end of Grove Road,it is used by most of the students coming up College Road to attend Isleworth & Syon School,not to say it is also used by residents. This crazy move has been on the cards for some time, but what with no planning meetings which can be attended by the public, the scheme looks like going ahead. I have contacted the Mayor who has been silent so far. I wonder what Mr Ferguson Head of Isleworth & Syon School thinks of this scheme,since it may be his pupils get mown down by reckless drivers. Also the removal of parking spaces for residents is planned.

Richard Buchanan ● 2204d5 Comments ● 2204d

Watch out for this scam.

Looked out yesterday to see an LBH parking attendant breaking his neck to hand out tickets in Enfield Road. I asked why he was ticketing cars with residents permits and he pointed to a yellow sign which said (Bays suspended sewer works) I said but there are no works going on here. I then asked him to stop while I knocked on my neighbours doors so they could moved their vehicles the answer was sorry mate to late.Now here's the odd thing the yellow that appeared overnight on Sunday had disapeared overnight by Tuesday. So it was in place just long enough to ticket 8no vehicles while no sewer work whatsover was carried out.

Robert Ayres ● 2207d6 Comments ● 2204d

HS2 and TREES

I read that a farmer in Bucking has had around 50000 trees cut down near his farm. He said we are replanting new trees but lots of them die. Why are new trees dying? I know someone will be able to answer this.

Nicholas Beard ● 2209d7 Comments ● 2205d

Rave at 35 Enfield Road

Last night I went to bed at about elevenish and became aware of a lot of noisy activity in the road.  Eventually I looked out of the window and saw a load of youths (male and female) gathering around 35 Enfield Road and going in and out of the property.  They looked as though they were up for a party.  Some arrived on foot, others by private car, some were dropped off by taxi.  The age range was probably late teens/early twenties.At about midnight the noise increased and about twenty (possibly more) people spilled out of the house and into the road where they milled around.  Shortly afterwards a police car arrived and also Hounslow's Noise Team.  There was music thumping away.The police officers had a long conversation with some of the occupants of the property and one of my neighbours and myself came out of our houses and spoke to the officers and also the noise people.  Apparently the back garden of the property was heaving with people - some of whom were smoking weed and taking cocaine.The owner does not live at the property but rents it out - we think he's been doing the airbnb thing.  A similar "event" took place at the property the weekend before last.  He is, apparently, not bothered on the occasions when he's been contacted about what's happened.Police said they were powerless to do anything; noise team said they would be contacting the owner.The party continued for most of the night.  The volume of music increased.  There were continual comings and goings and shouting in the street.  I observed people emerging from the property and urinating/defecating behind parked cars and then going back inside.I also rang the police and was told that they had been contacted by a number of local residents but that, in reality, there was very little they could do.I gather that this sort of thing is fairly common at the moment.  It's horrible for local residents who just want to go to sleep. The party was still going strong at 4am but I managed to get some sleep by going to the back of the house.  Did anyone else hear this event?  What can we do to make sure it doesn't happen again??

Alison Robins ● 2211d35 Comments ● 2207d

Brentford Dock Estate - proposal to erect gates and fences

I wonder if any readers of this Forum have any views on Brentford Dock Limited's proposals to remove access by others in Brentford to a large part of the Brentford Dock Estate?This would be achieved through the erection of 8 electronically-controlled gates that would remove public access to the open area at the southern end of the estate.Our family has lived in Brentford for 43 years and we have always enjoyed access to this area. The walk and the magnificent views over the Thames and across to Kew have provided us with a regular physical and mental tonic.There is no doubt that the land in question is in the private ownership of Brentford Dock Limited (BDL) and it seems that there is no public right of way. It also appears that no planning permissions would be required.If the Dock residents regularly experience problems such as littering, noise, and vandalism then that is clearly unacceptable. However other means are available to tackle such issues.In relation to this matter does BDL have any moral responsibilities to the wider community in Brentford or should they feel free to do whatever they wish?

Jim Storrar ● 2237d24 Comments ● 2208d

Is there a funny smell around here?

Hot on the heels of the news that our local aristocrat, the Duke of Northumberland who is still trying to build on the local allotments,  is the staggering revelation that the Northumberland fortune has seen upwards of a £36M increase. Quite why some of that can't go towards the work we keep being told is needed on Syon House we do not know.There are also worries about the somewhat close relationship of Hounslow council's Leader and the Northumberland Estate who have had three meetings to dicuss future plans which include a fresh planning application, in spite of the Estate losing the public inquiry at the end of 2018, which says the allotment site should remain as local open space.We seem right to be concerned about these meetings when you read what 'The Guardian' has highlighted about the dubious deals councils - Hounslow among them - are stitching up with developers, and not for the good of any local people."Revealed: London councils take funds from developers to pay for planning guidelinesCritics say ‘poachers have become gamekeepers’ as a result, but councils deny conflict of interestThe final straw? Tory heartlands in revolt over planning reformsMoD cavalry barracks in HounslowThe Ministry of Defence paid Hounslow council £20,000 to fund supplementary planning guidance for its cavalry barracks, which it plans to sell for the development of 1,000 homes. Photograph: Martin Argles/The GuardianRobert Booth Social affairs correspondentSun 23 Aug 2020 17.40 BST266Councils have accepted hundreds of thousands of pounds from property developers to fund planning guidelines designed to help govern their own schemes, a Guardian analysis has found.In deals that have been criticised for allowing unfair influence and marginalising local residents, bodies including housing developers, landowners and urban regeneration companies paid large sums to draft supplementary planning documents (SPDs), which councillors must then consider when determining planning applications.The planning documents subsequently published set out major and potentially lucrative development strategies for the sites in which they have an interest. The payments are not declared in the documents.AdvertisementCouncils, which normally fund SPDs, and developers have denied allegations of conflicts of interest, but critics fear the arrangements mean “poachers become gamekeepers”.The practice has emerged less than two weeks after ministers announced a wholesale reform of the planning system which campaigners and voters fear will hand greater powers to developers in order to speed up building.According to responses the Guardian obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, Conservative-run Barnet council in north London received £223,000 from the housing association Notting Hill Genesis to cover the costs of a planning brief for Grahame Park, a 3,000-home estate regeneration. The borough accepted the money via its joint venture company with Capita.The SPD for Grahame Park specified additional social housing only “where viable” and the housing association later proposed cutting the number of affordable homes by 257. The London mayor, Sadiq Khan, described it as “a classic example of how not to do estate regeneration”.In Hounslow, west London, the Ministry of Defence (MoD) paid the Labour-run council £20,000 to fund supplementary planning guidance for a barracks site it is planning to sell for the development of 1,000 homes, which critics have attacked as over-development.In response to a freedom of information request to all English councils, none outside the capital said they engaged in the practice.The London councils insist the arrangements afford developers no unfair influence over what is permitted on the sites, but some cited budget shortfalls as the reason for needing to take the money. Critics, however, attacked the practice.“It is blatant collusion between planning authorities and developers,” said Bob Colenutt, the head of research the Northampton Institute for Urban Affairs and author of The Property Lobby. “Is this what the government means by cutting planning red tape? ... Poachers have become gamekeepers with local councils ceding yet more influence over planning to vested interests in speculative development.”Steve Reed, the shadow communities and local government secretary, said: “Government cuts to council funding have left town halls without the resources to develop full planning guidelines so developers have been allowed to write their own. This appears to be part of a strategy to diminish the voice of local communities and let wealthy developers bulldoze and concrete over local neighbourhoods and green spaces increasingly at will.”Reed said it was a harbinger of the “anti-democratic planning reforms” the government proposed earlier this month, which could fast-track development without a requirement for detailed planning consent.Councils usually pay for and draw up SPDs to provide guidance for what developers will be allowed to do. Councils said that plans drawn up using developer cash must still be meet wider planning rules. They are a material consideration in planning decisions.“It is often said that ‘he who pays the piper calls the tune,’” said Steve Goodrich, a senior research manager at Transparency International UK. “Any planning guidance developed which then contributes to council policy should be drafted in the public interest, not that of landowners and developers. Accepting payments for this work from those with a clear financial interest in the outcome risks exposing the authors to heavy and undue influence.”Barnet council also received £140,000 from the development company Joseph & Partners to draft a strategy for the renewal of North Finchley town centre. It then entered into a partnership agreement with the firm. The planning document included a proposal to demolish an art deco shopping arcade and replace it with an 12-storey apartment building. Campaigners including Dave Davies, the Kinks guitarist who used to buy guitar strings at the arcade in the 1960s, are opposing the scheme.Jonathan Joseph, the head of Joseph & Partners, denied there was any conflict of interest. “If and when any proposals do come forward for North Finchley, a full consultation and engagement process will be undertaken,” he said.Barnet denied the arrangements gave developers the role of poacher and gamekeeper. An SPD cannot be in conflict with wider planning policies in the borough, it said.Notting Hill Genesis stressed that Barnet “retained responsibility for final decision-making both on the SPD and subsequent planning decisions” for Grahame Park.On the Greenwich peninsula, the landowner Scotia Gas Networks (SGN) paid the council almost £30,000 for a planning brief for a gas-holder site. The brief concluded the area could accommodate high-rise buildings including as many as 1,200 homes, offices, a hotel, shops and restaurants.The council cited “a decade of government cuts” as a reason for needing to accept the funds, but said the landowner had no unfair influence over the planning brief.Dan Brown, a spokesman for SGN, said: “We had no role in producing the planning brief and the brief does not necessarily reflect the most favourable possible outcome for us.”In Hounslow, the MoD’s property arm spent £20,000 to fund supplementary planning guidance for its 18th century cavalry barracks, which it plans to sell as a site for 1,000 new homes. When Hounslow formally adopted a version of the planning strategy drawn up by the Defence Infrastructure Organisation, it made clear it “will be a material planning consideration in the determination of future planning applications”. Some local campaigners who oppose the plan say it amounts to “over-development” and want the buildings turned into a military museum.“The draft planning brief underwent full public consultation,” said Lily Bath, the deputy leader of Hounslow council. “The brief is in no way a guarantee for planning permission, but provides a framework for consideration of future planning applications.”An MoD spokesperson said it works “collaboratively with councils to draft guidance that ensure a quicker, and more cost efficient process for planning, design and development.”

Vanessa Smith ● 2209d0 Comments ● 2209d