Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I've only lived in this area for the last 25 years so I can't say what it was like 40 years ago, and I'm not quite sure what makes the Irish community 'ethnic' but I'm certain that they've never been a pre-dominant group.


Otherwise, I agree with Marmora man,

"There's "nice to have" and "must have" categories in council spending -the Irish Festival falls squarely in the former category."

No-one here has been able to verify the Irish origins of the event, I'm part Irish but would agree this is not a particularly 'Irish area' in terms of immigrant profile. I suspect most of us have simply enjoyed it as a well attended fun event.


I have no idea at all how much Southwark council stumps up for the event; I'm sure I'm not the only one to have given it too much thought but I appreciate that budget cuts must be made.


To me it's a shame it has to go and who knows if it will ever return?

Could the organisers not get sponsorship from some appropriate organisation/s, eg Guinness or something, rather than depending on council funding?


It's not like it is a huge festival, after all, the costs of running it can't be that enormous?


I know everyone is strapped for cash, but businesses are still sponsoring events.


That could turn the festival into a win-win situation for everybody.


ETA: As well as the festival PeckhamRose mentions above, there will be a second Aquarius Festival this year - bigger and better and on a non-clashing date this time :))

I know that some of our residents are planning to look into other ways of having some kind of Irish Festival even if it's a scaled down event. I also wonder if some previous events could be combined into one event too. That surely would be a cheaper way of having something.
East Dulwich was certainly an "Irish" area - we still have the Irish shop on the highstreet, and the EDT was an Irish pub when I moved into the area, not in the sense of an O'Neils but in a "Republican Times on the bar" and a "Don't wear an England Shirt" way, hence the origins of the festival
I for one shan't be lamenting the loss of the Irish Festival. The thought of of sweating gingery Irish folk (and assorted wannabes) clad in bright green man-made fibres and drinking warm Guinness whilst listening to "tiddly-tee" music is more than one could bear. I come from a gingery-Scots background - we don't feel the need to have festivals celebrating our Scots heritage. What's the attraction of these things???
Actually, you're right Sue. My description was wholly based on a vague generalisation and crude stereotyping of all things Irish. So there wasn't any bright green clothing, warm Guinness or "tiddly-tee" music??? If not I take it all back. (But it would seem rather pointless to hold an Irish festival without any of the foregoing??) So in your own words Sue, what WAS the attraction of this festival and why should we lament its demise??

oilworker Wrote:

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

> Actually, you're right Sue. My description was

> wholly based on a vague generalisation and crude

> stereotyping of all things Irish. So there wasn't

> any bright green clothing, warm Guinness or

> "tiddly-tee" music??? If not I take it all back.

> (But it would seem rather pointless to hold an

> Irish festival without any of the foregoing??) So

> in your own words Sue, what WAS the attraction of

> this festival and why should we lament its

> demise??


xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


I just object to people criticising and stereotyping without any basis.


I've only been to this festival once - it was OK. I think anything which gets the community together is a good thing. Sorry if you disagree :-S

Although East Dulwich is not a predominantly Irish area there has always been a very strong Irish community here.


Southwark Irish Cultural Arts & Development Centre is run by a team of dedicated volunteers who seek to promote participation in Irish arts, culture and sport - http://www.southwarkirish.com/about_us.html


SICAD?s website states, ?Irish Festival part funded by Southwark Council & Emigrants Support Programme in conjunction with the Irish Government? http://www.dfa.ie/home/index.aspx?id=292


Dulwich is also home to the Dulwich Harps Gaelic Football team ? one of the oldest in London - http://www.dulwich-harps.com/index.php You may have seen Niall McCann from the team on BBC Breakfast recently discussing handball and the 2012 Olympics. Incidentally the goalposts on the Rye belong to the team.


The Southwark Irish Festival is not about ?sweating gingery Irish folk (and assorted wannabes) clad in bright green man-made fibres and drinking warm Guinness whilst listening to "tiddly-tee" music?. The Saturday was a celebration of Gaelic Games (football, hurling & camogie) and the Sunday always started with an open-air mass led by the Bishop of Southwark followed by dancing and music.

*Bob* Wrote:

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

> Now I know what the festivals I go to have been

> lacking.. an open air mass.

>

> Would the Bishop of Southwark be available for the

> Secret Garden Party? How do I get in touch?



I know you're joking, but http://www.rcsouthwark.co.uk/bishops.html

That's the problem with religion philiphenslowe, it's very divisive ;-)


I'm all for the Irish doing whatever they want to do to celebrate whatever they feel is important. Just not on the taxpayer. Can't believe they ever paid for it. They'd be within their rights to ask the Irish for their money back.


If the Brits did it it would be called 'cultural imperialism'.


Can you imagine the Irish funding an English festival?

Nothing wrong with it at all.


It simply shouldn't be paid for by people who don't want to go. Does your neighbour pay for your dinner parties?


Besides which, the Irish government doesn't contribute because they want people in ED to have a fun afternoon, they pay for it because it's a marketing opportunity.


Why should the taxpayer be funding an Irish advertising campaign?


I'm surprised that anyone's really trying to justify this.

Huguenot Wrote:

--

> Why should the taxpayer be funding an Irish

> advertising campaign?

>


xxxxxx


It isn't an Irish advertising campaign, FFS.


It's a community event. For people living in the area. Whether they are Irish or not.


Jesus wept.


ETA: Let's ban all forms of public enjoyment while we're at it, why don't we.


ETA: And I'm not suggesting the council should continue to subsidise this given the cuts they have to make, hence my earlier post suggesting an alternative.

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

    • The is very low water pressure in the middle of Friern Road this morning.
    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
    • What does the area with the blue dotted lines and the crossed out water drop mean? No water in this area? So many leaks in the area.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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