The Lounge
The place to relax and chat about anything.
22,727 topics in this forum
-
- 2 replies
- 628 views
-
- 0 replies
- 116 views
-
- 0 replies
- 170 views
-
- 36 replies
- 2k views
-
- 6 replies
- 927 views
-
- 2 replies
- 762 views
-
- 10 replies
- 1.7k views
-
- 0 replies
- 83 views
-
- 14 replies
- 1.5k views
-
- 6 replies
- 1.1k views
-
- 15 replies
- 1.3k views
-
- 0 replies
- 418 views
-
- 3 replies
- 1.8k views
-
- 3 replies
- 578 views
-
- 6 replies
- 1k views
-
- 8 replies
- 944 views
-
- 0 replies
- 444 views
-
- 23 replies
- 1.2k views
-
- 0 replies
- 149 views
-
- 11 replies
- 905 views
-
- 4 replies
- 537 views
-
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/sep/23/anti-brexit-group-mounts-legal-challenge-over-artic
- 0 replies
- 302 views
-
- 0 replies
- 391 views
-
- 11 replies
- 1.4k views
-
- 30 replies
- 2.9k views
.thumb.jpg.eaa800377742009ec4027e93b004ab0d.jpg)
-
-
Latest Discussions
-
By Frenchpolisher · Posted
Just a quick note that my son was mugged last night on Dunstans Road just after 6pm. Two youths on bikes with balaclavas stole his phone, headphones and driver’s license near the mansion block next to Dawson’s Heights. Please be vigilant when walking in the area after dark. -
-
No, because they are a business and their job is to make a profit. It is the local council, on our behalf, who should be giving regard to the environment. Gala, not unreasonably, might take the view that it is the council's role to protect the environment of Southwark, and if they have no objection to this scheme then frankly why shouldn't they (Gala) go ahead? And the council also seems to take the view that they are focused on revenue and not the environment. Otherwise they might listen to the environmental pleas here. The mistake you are making is assuming that either party to this transaction (we are clearly only bystanders) gives a flying fig for the environment when there is money in the offing. -
It struck me last year that any dialogue with Gala themselves e.g. at the box-ticking "Community Engagement Sessions" is completely pointless, as they are just a business trying to do whatever is necessary to hold their event; the park is just a venue to them, a necessary facility, and they'll say anything to secure it. They don't care about it's welfare or upkeep, over and above making sure there's no complaints big enough to prevent them using it again. I've found that discussing issues with them has just led to them using that info to counteract that issue - effectively helping them strengthen their position. What I find frustrating is that the council, despite being the body that decides on this, and should be representing local residents, takes no active part in any discussions or presentations, so there's no way to engage with them apart from an online consultation which is clearly also a box ticking exercise, bearing in mind for the last two years the overwhelming majority (97% of respondents) objected to the event. Why are Gala running the community meetings? Why do Gala run the issue hotline? If the council really care about the park and the surrounding community, and still allow this type of event, they should be way more hands on with taking responsibility for it's running, not just handing it all over to a profit making company. Sorry, probably tldr but so sad about the repeated negative impact on our (once beautiful & peaceful) park and just exasperated that there's so little that can be done to halt it. This is just the start, it WILL turn into another Brockwell Park, and Gala & the council just don't care.
-