Jump to content

Recommended Posts

The blue notices on the fences around Peckham Rye Park are for a music festival which is planned for the Bank holiday next May. The notices don't indicate what is planned and the Friends of the Park have now been given a bit more information. You may wish to give your views to the Council (or ask questions about what is planned).


Programme ? 1st day 18+ live bands all day ? ticketed ?15. 2nd day family ( not sure of pricing) Live Music all day. Entrance by pre booked ticket 8,000 ticket available.

Site plan ? red line on the area shown on the plan will be surrounded by an 2 meter metal fence and closed to the public for 8 days.The main entrance to the festival is within the Park.


Operational hours ? 10am ? closing 11pm.


Security ? they will have security staff within and on perimeters but not further

Noise ? Not known as we do not know what type of music. Neighbouring properties will be sent letters with reduced ticket offers


Traffic and transport ? no car parking ? ?everyone will use public transport or walk?


I attach a copy of the blue notice and a copy of the plan for the event in the Park. The link given on the poster for people to respond does not work (www.southwark.gov.uk/businesscentre/licensing/currentapplication) but the council seem to think that this does not matter as people can phone or write - it is a licensing application for alcohol.


The company organising this is called We Are The Fair.


Perhaps Renata or James can enlighten us on what is planned?

The applicant is a professional event management company so they will be doing this for/with someone else, but you can get a flavour of the previous events they have put on here (no connection, just the result of a quick google):


http://www.wearethefair.com/case-studies

Angelina - I'm afraid I have no details on what is planned - that is why I think the Council needs to explain more.


I understand they do plan to offer some local residents discounted tickets. No idea who or how to qualify.


Siduhe- I'm not clear whether this is an event they are being paid to put on (and if so, for who?) or whether they are organising it on their own behalf - they have done a Jazz, Soul and Funk festival before.

https://www.residentadvisor.net/events/976840


http://bit.ly/GALAMovie


Might pop in but Bjork is playing that weekend so we?ll see.


Edited to add: HMD & Mood II Swing are playing so I?m in. CAN.NOT.WAIT. http://thisisgala.co.uk/

"...the council seem to think that this does not matter as people can phone or write - it is a licensing application for alcohol."


I imagine at this stage with a confirmed line up and tickets on sale (as shown in Rolo Tomasi's link) the council will have already entered into a licence agreement giving this festival permission to use the park.


So I think it is safe to assume this will be going ahead and publicising the alcohol and entertainment licence is a mere formality. The council will no doubt ignore any representations made about the licence application because the festival needs the licence to proceed and pay the agreed rent to the council.

Actually I think you'll find that 8,000 people don't take up that much space. But this maybe a useful link. http://www.gkstill.com/Support/crowd-density/CrowdDensity-1.html As I am lazy, do they state the size of the area which is to be used for the event, and whether the 8000 figure is attendance over the event, or maximum attendance at any one time (different things).

Below is the correct link for making representations about this proposal. (The one in the original post above doesn't work.)


Click on the link and go to ?make a representation? ? then ?contact us?.


http://app.southwark.gov.uk/Licensing/LicPremisesAppliedDetails.asp?systemkey=861145

Clifton Wrote:

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

> Below is the correct link for making

> representations about this proposal. (The one in

> the original post above doesn't work.)

>

> Click on the link and go to ?make a

> representation? ? then ?contact us?.

>

> http://app.southwark.gov.uk/Licensing/LicPremisesA

> ppliedDetails.asp?systemkey=861145


Or maybe don't bother - let it go ahead. It's great for the area. Clapham, Blackheath, Finsbury Park etc all have weekend festivals. Why should we miss out.

I don't really see the problem. Are you really that bothered by a bit of music and a few thousand people for just one day?


I mean last year's line-up looks pretty abysmal to me, but that's just my taste. I'm sure some people must like this stuff. Seems a bit mean-spirited to try and stop it going ahead.

I'm livid that I only found out about this planned event by logging on to EDF to see if I was the only one with a Virgin boardband issue and saw the post. Definitely will be opposing this. I live directly oppersite the park and there is no way 8000 people will be accommodated safely. This is a slap in the face to those of us who have been asking for a return of the Irish festival and fireworks display that used to happen successfully in the past. Dulwich park is a far better location if there is to be no parking as it's an already enclosed space and accessible via public transport. Council are really showing their desire for ruining Peckham rye/ nunhead like others have done with Clapham/ Battersea/ Shoreditch/ Brixton. I'm sure the residents in Dulwich would have all been written to, with better advertisement of the planned two day event. I'm pretty sure that the money being offered will not cover the true cost of the damage to the park and is serving only as a vanity project to the Council. Livid.

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...