Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Paul, as a club, i think it's just like a working man's club.

But we hired this venue two and a half years ago, for our little boy's baby naming celebration and it was very good. Has a great big hall with a stage, a OK'ish retro lounge with its own bar (like something out of Life on Mars). It's inexpensive to hire and it's local.


citizen

Its not the Tories that would be a Conservative Club. The clue being in the name.


It has a Constitution which makes it a members only club which means it can operate under more relaxed regulations. It will operate in a similar way to a WMC - having a membership who are the only ones allowed to drink in the place, but they will be able to sign friends in.


It will be a not for profit organisation, any surplus being ploughed into the club's infrastructure, member services and subsidising the food and drink.


I belong to a similar club in the Midlands - the beer is Soooo cheap.

We used to live above the Wandsworth Constitutional Club....er...in Wandsworth.


It is a Tory set up first and foremost. Every night after the evenings 'entertainment' they would all sing the National Anthem. Our landlord was the secretary of the Club. Once when we got locked out of our flat we entered the Club, and whilst waiting for said landlord had a drink in the bar. We went back in time to c1950. Flock wallpaper, ale for the men and port and bitter lemon for the ladies. There was a picture of Thatcher up on the wall next to the Queen.


The men as they walked in (of a certain era obviously!) even doffed their hats to me.

Michael Palaeologus Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Its not the Tories that would be a Conservative

> Club. The clue being in the name.

>


I'm afraid not. Despite not being called "The Conservative Club" the Constitution Club is very much aligned to the Conservative Party (as evidenced by many other who have been there). Whether you think that's a good thing I suppose is up to you. Pictures of the Queen AND Maggie Thatcher might put me off my beer though.

this is great, have been wondering for a while what it was and who owned it. i love the fact that in bethnal green it's a working mans club and here it's a 'aligned to the tories with pictures of maggie et al'. having witnessed the resurection of the WMC in bethnal green through hire for parties this could be the best place for one off parties, events etc... if the hall is a good size, get a projector and show short films.


anybody know what hours they keep?

Hi


As the bowling green is in back of our house, my husband and our ex-neighbor joined for fun. (they are fairly young guys) There was a box on the membership form one had to tick to say "I am a member of the conservative party" or something to that effect. My husband and his pal decided to photocopy the form without this sentence or box, filled it in, paid dues and signed up. They then had a great time with snooker and cheap beer. Unfortunately, our neighbor moved, so, my husband let his membership lapse. We would certainly sign up again -- it is a relic which would be great fun if other younger members joined. Any campaign to reshape/resurrect this club would be fantastic. They do "interview" prospective members - I think the guys just had a drink with someone and were welcomed. The downfall for it is I believe women have to join as "wives of"...I did pay a pound to join as "the wife" but I never ended up going...

The Club in Wandsworth kept whatever hours they wanted. I recall once they were all on the lasy until about 3am. They had a Frank Sinattra singer/DJ in the back.


I could here them falling over on the parquet fooring, p*ssed a newts, as the night rolled on!

Otto Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Hi

>

> As the bowling green is in back of our house, my

> husband and our ex-neighbor joined for fun. (they

> are fairly young guys) There was a box on the

> membership form one had to tick to say "I am a

> member of the conservative party" or something to

> that effect. My husband and his pal decided to

> photocopy the form without this sentence or box,

> filled it in, paid dues and signed up. They then

> had a great time with snooker and cheap beer.

> Unfortunately, our neighbor moved, so, my husband

> let his membership lapse. We would certainly sign

> up again -- it is a relic which would be great fun

> if other younger members joined. Any campaign to

> reshape/resurrect this club would be fantastic.

> They do "interview" prospective members - I think

> the guys just had a drink with someone and were

> welcomed. The downfall for it is I believe women

> have to join as "wives of"...I did pay a pound to

> join as "the wife" but I never ended up going...



They have a bowling green. Now I'm interested! There must be a draught of 20-something bowls players ready to take the scene by storm. Where do I sign?

Ladygooner Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I have heard that Tory Clubs will not accept women

> as members - even when Maggie was in power!

> neither are women allowed on the snooker

> tables..............enough said I think


I'm pretty sure they have to now. They changed the licencing laws a few years ago, so places like golf clubs where women weren't offered full membership were threatened with losing their drinks licence.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Girls In Your City - No Selfie - Anonymous Casual Dating https://SecreLocal.com [url=https://SecreLocal.com] Girls In Your City [/url] - Anonymous Casual Dating - No Selfie New Girls [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/vanessa-100.html]Vanessa[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/vanessa-100.html]Vanessa[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/molly-15.html]Molly[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/cheryl-blossom-48.html]Cheryl Blossom[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/carola-conymegan-116.html]Carola Conymegan[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/pupa-41.html]Pupa[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/mia-candy-43.html]Mia Candy[/url]
    • This is a remarkable interpretation of history. Wikipedia (with more footnotes and citations than you could shake a shitty stick at sez: The austerity programme was initiated in 2010 by the Conservative and Liberal Democrat coalition government. In his June 2010 budget speech, Osborne identified two goals. The first was that the structural current budget deficit would be eliminated to "achieve [a] cyclically-adjusted current balance by the end of the rolling, five-year forecast period". The second was that national debt as a percentage of GDP would fall. The government intended to achieve both of its goals through substantial reductions in public expenditure.[21] This was to be achieved by a combination of public spending cuts and tax increases amounting to £110 billion.[26] Between 2010 and 2013, the Coalition government said that it had reduced public spending by £14.3 billion compared with 2009–10.[27] Growth remained low, while unemployment rose. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_government_austerity_programme From memory, last time around they were against the LTNs and competing with the Tories to pick up backlash votes - both failed. They had no counterproposals or ideas about how to manage congestion or pollution. This time around they're simply silent on the matter: https://www.southwark-libdems.org.uk/your-local-lib-dem-team/goosegreen Also, as we have seen from Mr Barber's comments on the new development on the old Jewsons yard, "leading campaigns to protect the character of East Dulwich and Goose Green" is code for "blocking new housing".
    • @Insuflo NO, please no, please don't encourage him to post more often! 😒
    • Revealing of what, exactly? I resurrected this thread, after a year, to highlight the foolishness of the OP’s op. And how posturing would be sagacity is quickly undermined by events, dear boy, events. The thread is about Mandelson. I knew he was a wrong ‘un all along, we all did; the Epstein shit just proves it. In reality, Kinnock, Blair, Brown, Starmer et all knew as well but accepted it, because they found him useful. As did a large proportion of the 2024 intake of Labour MPs who were personally vetted and approved by Mandelson.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...