Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Plot to rename bonfire night


James Barber

Liberal Democrat Councillor for East Dulwich


Article by James Tweeted on Twitter.


Labour run Southwark Council have decided to hold a public bonfire event in Dulwich Park.

Sadly they don?t feel they want to call it firework display but have come up with a more politically correct name for the event ? ?The Colour Thief?.


What is not politically Correct with 'Firework Display' or 'Bonfire night'


What is so politically Correct with ?The Colour Thief?.


Am I missing something.??


Article Here

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/19633-plot-to-rename-bonfire-night/
Share on other sites

Why would you not call a fireworks event on 4 November a fireworks party?

The original bonfire was a catholic being. This proposed Southwark event is titled The Colour Thief and the environment director and team have pointeldy and repeatedly stated its not a firework party. So why on bonfire weekned would you have a non fireworks party costing over ?55,000 that involves fireworks?

Truely bizarre.


This contrasts with the ?900 support for the Dulwich festival and the fact lcoally we have numerous firework events already in the area.


Wouldn't you rather see such money either spent on local events such as the Dulwich Festival or not be spent at all?

There are lot's of events that use fireworks that are not necessarily fireworks displays....the Thames Festival for one. Is the event solely fireworks? Or will there be other types of entertainment there? I would like to hear the Entertainment Directors thinking and have more information before having a view on how the money is spent.

A bit of digging around and it seems The Colour Thief is a sort of Drama/Music/Costume spectacle thing, with a name, like a play.

So maybe not so completely bizarre as it first sounded. It is all a bit It's Grim Up North London / Modern Parents though isn't it ;-)

There we go James.....it's not just a firework display is it? It's a carnival of light....the Thames Festival has one of those too......and the council specifically describes it as theatre.


From Southwark Life


Web: www.southwark.gov.uk/

whatson

Info: The Colour Thief is a vibrant, inspiring and sparkling story, an outdoor spectacle to lift the spirits and warm us into winter. Using stunning carnival creations, processions and sparkling pyrotechnics, the show will surround

the Dulwich Park audience with light, colour and theatre fit for the season.



So the question is, how does this relate to Bonfire night?......Well maybe it doesn't in a traditional way, but given that as you say there are lot's of traditional fireworks displays around the borough, why does it matter if this event is a bit different?


The cost of it though is where you do get my ear. It seems a lot of money to spent on one event at the moment.....especially when several annual festivals lost their funding this year, and when as you say there are plenty of alternate free events over that weekend.


*crossed post with MP*

James Barber Wrote:

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

> Why would you not call a fireworks event on 4

> November a fireworks party?

> The original bonfire was a catholic being. This

> proposed Southwark event is titled The Colour

> Thief and the environment director and team have

> pointeldy and repeatedly stated its not a firework

> party. So why on bonfire weekned would you have a

> non fireworks party costing over ?55,000 that

> involves fireworks?

> Truely bizarre.

>

> This contrasts with the ?900 support for the

> Dulwich festival and the fact lcoally we have

> numerous firework events already in the area.

>

> Wouldn't you rather see such money either spent on

> local events such as the Dulwich Festival or not

> be spent at all?



If I wasn't confused before I am now ! So, they are proposing a non-fireworks party that has a firework display but calling it a "Colour Thief" night?

What exactly does "Colour Thief" mean?

Sounds totally non-sensical unless I've completely missed something.

Absolutely in agreement with DJKQ.


I think it's verging on the hysterical to blame political correctness for the name (and frankly makes no sense: there's nothing politically incorrect about 'firework display', and I'm quite sure I've never heard anyone use the phrase 'firework party'). Please can we not pander to the political health and safety gone correct brigade - I don't expect such arrant Daily Mail nonsense from a LibDem councillor, even during conference season.


To me, The Colour Thief smacks much more of an artsy name that interprets something through the manner of rhythmic mime and balloons, but I'm open to finding out the facts before blaming it all on the EU.

....the Thames Festival is in September..


Guy Fawkes Night, also known as Guy Fawkes Day and Bonfire Night, is an annual commemoration observed on 5 November.


It was to celebrate the foiled Gunpowder Plot of 1605.


Perhaps The anti Catholic sentiment was the reason behind the not 'Politically Correct' tag.


Hence Labour wanting to rename it. Well it's taken them a long time.


Sounds like Labour Councillors have nothing more important to worry about.


Very similar to the 'Rename Waterloo' campaign. because it might offend French Visitors


Well they did not rename Waterloo. They just moved the terminus to St Pancras


What else are we going to rename.?


Trafalgar Square. ??


Fox.

But our politicians don't do religion do they.


Well, apart from Dumbledore or whatever his name was, no wonder he's happier in the states than here these days!!


Anyway I agree with the ladies, it's patent nonsense to attach IPCGM to this one.

In fact it sounds like it could be rather fun and a bit of a change from the usual firework display type affair which I've grown a bit bored with as a grown up. Plus the pyro in me always preferred the bonfire anyway.

That's a point......what happened to the bonfires? We used to go door to door as kids collecting rubbish and wood before helping to build a massive pile in the local park!!! (imagine doing that now).....but inevitably someone always set fire to it a couple of days before :D

Think what fantastic events we could hold in Dulwich with ?55,000. A Dulwich Festival 2 or 3 times the curreent size with free events for local schools.


So why hold the ONE Southwark Council event for southern Southwark on the one weekend Dulwich is already full of events?

Why blow the ?55,000 on that single Friday for what officers have told me will be a one hour event - please don't let it rain that night.

When asked have the Police, who tell me they are alway stretched that weekend, agreed they can support it. They tell me yes. But our local Police throw their hands up in horrow not knowing how on earth they can Police another major event.


It's daft.


Up intil the SLP ran this as its front page story today the event was called the Colour Thief. At 8am today Southwark Council renamed it as a fireworks diplay and issued a revised consultation form. So now newspapers can see the before and after public documents making the council look even sillier and one reporter told me deceitful.

James, I'd drop the PC argument...really I would. It doesn't matter what kind of event it is or what it's called...I don't think people really care too much about that, and it just makes you look as though you are playing party politics for the sake of it.


The funding issue though is a very valid criticism. It is a lot of money, and certainly a lot of money to spend on one hour of entertainment. That is something that I think many people would like some explanation on. Firework displays are exepensive though anyway but it might be helpful to have some idea of what the ?55k is being spent on.


Ian, you will find a copy of Southwark life (published by the council) on the website as a PDF and it is listed in that.

It is a heavy investment for an needless service.


It's like the freee school dinners thing - they seem to be buying off monied middle classes with perks they don't need at a price they would be perfectly capable of paying for themselves.


It also sounds pretty snooty and pretentious - not exactly mass appeal.

Can we have a definitive answer on the cost? In the web article, it says 'plan to spend ?55k' (my bold). On here, James suggests that they are spending over ?55k.


Plan to spend is not the same as actually spend. I'd been been planning to go on holiday this year, but when it came to it, I couldn't afford it, so I didn't do it. Still planned it though.


Clearly the event is going ahead, so money is being spent. How much, target audience, rationale etc all currently unknown. James, can you clarify? Is the amount confirmed? How much is it? Where has the funding come from?


Any labour councillors care to join the party and explain the thinking.


As for snooty and pretentious, I disagree. I wrote lots of poems at my unsnooty, unpretentious primary school about autumn colours. I think it sounds rather lovely. Not ?55k of council tax lovely, but lovely nonetheless.

The ?55K doesn't include council officer time.


Today they've dropped the daft title and are now callnig it Firework event.

Apparently it will have design, performance, music and dancing. Not sure how in an unlit park anyone will see the design, performances or dancing though.


The Dulwich Park car park will be closed so the now predicted 2,000-3,000 visitors and those not walking will have to park near the Court Lane entrance which will be open. The event is listed in Time Out so clearly expectation of attracting more than just Dulwich residents.


Don't get me wrong. I love a party. But I'm sure the money could be spent on other local events to reach more people and make a bigger impact.

I hope this doesn't mean Fat-Beardy-Man-with-inappropriate-behaviour-towards-children won't be bring me any pressies for 'Winterval'!


'A Firework Event' sounds like someone somewhere busting a gut to be 'original', and the inclusion of a couple of dancers or maybe a poet and some new-age music probably means it can be classified as a 'mass-appeal-multi-arts-media-event' rather than an opportunity to have our pagan souls stirred by a roaring fire and some loud bangs and whooshes.


*lights blue touch paper and refuses to retire...*


E.T. correct pagan spelling.

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

    • I mean I hold no portfolio to defend Gala,  but I suspect that is their office.  I am a company director,  my home address is also not registered with Companies House. Also guys this is Peckham not Royston Vasey.  Shoreditch is a mere 20 mins away by train, it's not an offshore bolt hole in Luxembourg.
    • While it is good that GALA have withdrawn their application for a second weekend, local people and councillors will likely have the same fight on their hands for next year's event. In reading the consultation report, I noted the Council were putting the GALA event in the same light as all the other events that use the park, like the Circus, the Fair and even the FOPR fete. ALL of those events use the common, not the park, and cause nothing like the level of noise and/or disruption of the GALA event. Even the two day Irish Festival (for those that remember that one) was never as noisy as GALA. So there is some disingenuity and hypocrisy from the Council on this, something I wll point out in my response to the report. The other point to note was that in past years branches were cut back for the fencing. Last year the council promised no trees would be cut after pushback, but they seem to now be reverting to a position of 'only in agreement with the council's arbourist'. Is this more hypocrisy from 'green' Southwark who seem to once again be ok with defacing trees for a fence that is up for just days? The people who now own GALA don't live in this area. GALA as an event began in Brockwell Park. It then lost its place there to bigger events (that pesumably could pay Lambeth Council more). One of the then company directors lived on the Rye Hill Estate next to the park and that is likely how Peckham Rye came to be the new choice for the event. That person is no longer involved. Today's GALA company is not the same as the 'We Are the Fair' company that held that first event, not the same in scope, aim or culture. And therein lies the problem. It's not a local community led enterprise, but a commercial one, underwritten by a venture capital company. The same company co-run the Rally Event each year in Southwark Park, which btw is licensed as a one day event only. That does seem to be truer to the original 'We Are the Fair' vision, but how much of that is down to GALA as opoosed to 'Bird on the Wire' (the other group organising it) is hard to say.  For local people, it's three days of not being able to open windows, As someone said above, if a resident set up a PA in their back garden and subjected the neighbours to 10 hours of hard dance music every day for three days, the Council would take action. Do not underestimate how distressing that is for many local residents, many of whom are elderly, frail, young, vulnerable. They deserve more respect than is being shown by those who think it's no big deal. And just to be clear, GALA and the council do not consider there to be a breach of db level if the level is corrected within 15 minutes of the breach. In other words, while db levels are set as part of the noise management plan, there is an acknowledgement that a breach is ok if corrected within 15 minutes. That is just not good enough. Local councillors objected to the proposed extension. 75% of those that responded to the consultation locally did not want GALA 26 to take place at all. For me personally, any goodwill that had been built up through the various consultations over recent years was erased with that application for a second weekend, and especially given that when asked if there were plans for that in post 2025 event feedback meetings (following rumours), GALA lied and said there were no plans to expand. I have come to the conclusion that all the effort to appease on some things is merely an exercise in show, to get past the council's threshold for the events licence. They couldn't give a hoot in reality for local people, and people that genuinely care about parkland, don't litter it with noisy festivals either.   
    • Aria is my go to plumber. Fixed a toilet leak for me at short notice. Reasonably priced and very professional. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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