cafe nero - petition

[lpool]

"Just curious. Had a small indepedent coffee shop done the same thing, would you be opposed to it? Asked another way, is your affection for the law equal toward 'big bad chain' and 'local independent'?"

Wondered when someone might ask this question. Friends of mine have a coffee shop - all 1 of them so I guess classifies as "independent". They ended up applying retrospectively for planning permission after failing to ensure that they had the correct approvals for selling food. They were new to the game so did not understand the requirements at the time - so in this respect different to Cafe Nero who clearly would know it was potentially breaking the law. That said, I am in favour of the it staying - no other cafe in the area touches it in terms of being able to sit down in comfy chairs and not be hemmed in at tables - and they do gluten free cakes. I've lived in the area for a long time and would hate to see a return to the old Lordship Lane which I think has rightly been described eslewhere as resembling a ghost town at one stage.

[Maurice]

I'm all for the letter of the law.

Can I just take a poll? For those of you opposed to Cafe Nero being allowed to get retroactive permission for having not followed the letter of the law from the start, were you equally outraged at the needle exchange clinic for not having followed the rules of consultation?

And vice versa - those keen to be a bit lax on Cafe Nero, were you equally open to allowing the clinic to slide on the details of the laws of consultation?

[Zebedee Tring]

Good point, Maurice. We must have consistency, whatever we think of the individual applicant. I'll be interested to see the responses to your questions and the arguments contained in those responses.

[Brendan]

You mean we can?t just pursue our own selfish ends and use the law and peoples' perception of it as tools to manipulate situations and get our own way?

I was under the impression that this was how the world works as it is how all our hallowed institutions of government and commerce operate. Surely we must follow their lead. They are after all what have made this country great.

[Emily]

Oh yeah, a nice cafe serving coffee and sandwiches, hugely popular with local people, is EXACTLY the same a needle exchange next to a nursery!

It's a bloody cafe. People love it. I am seriously pissed off if the local council is wasting my money on trying to get rid of a popular local amenity.

It's pathetic inverted snobbery.

[Maurice]

Ah a good afternoon giggle.

I like Cafe Nero. I hope it stays. But the argument was to follow the letter of the law, which was the same argument for the needle exchange from BARA ('failed to follow proper consultation'). I just thought it would be interesting to poll on it...it has obviously shown that a) the letter of the law is only important to you when it serves your purposes and b) many never wanted the needle exchange and used the consultation excuse to further their own prejudices.

Personally, I'd take a Cafe Nero and pass on the needle exchange too dear Em.

[Brendan]

I was just playing devil?s advocate.

Personally I would have neither. I?m not too bothered about the idea of caf? Nero. I just don?t like the look of the place. It looks like it belongs in an American shopping mall.

[James]

I would be okay with it closing... as long as we got an M&S to replace it

[Emily]

I actually take the kids to Jacks most often, which is very nice. But for a free paper and a comfy chair you can't beat Neros. I really object to spending money trying to force it out. It's not like it's a front organisation for international terrorism. It is bizarre that this gets people here get more upset than getting about a needle exchange in a totally residential area right next to a children's nursery. I know which I think benefits the local community more. And one costs us money, and the other doesn't. Hmm....

[Mr Bojangles]

I can't see what all the fuss is about. It provides a valuable and much needed service to the local community. The coffee is slightly bitter - just how it should be. The food is pretty awful though so I'd be happy if the council stopped them selling that...

It is important that the right conditions are set for independents to thrive and for LL to retain its character but I can't see how going to the time and expense of seeking to close down CN achieves that.

Give em a fine / slap their wrists (for what could be an honest mistake) and lets move on

[SeanMacGabhann]

Emily

It's the 2nd time you've brought up the needle exchange - that has nothing at all to do with this issue

I've made my peace with Nero more or less (the establishment - not the Forumite of same name) but there are sound reasons to be wary of it's arrival

As it happens I'm not OVERLY upset about it's retrospective push to get the license - to have it removed on that technicality would be a hollow victory for me (the 50/50 balance of food outlets on the lane tipped over by a panini?? oh purlease....)

If it means the council shows some leeway to independents (as in helping out the situation at G&B) then I'm all for flexibility

The reasons for genuinely objecting to it's arrival are the same as those expressed in the chains threads on the forum.

In my book the regeneration of Dulwich was done by independent traders (ED, Grace & Favour, William Rose, G&B, etc etc)

That regeneration is the reason we like living here

If LL just becomes another mall-on-the-street with the usual names (Next, M&S, Boots, yadda yadda) why live here as opposed to anywhere else. There is no evidence to say it will become this way, but the amount of chains sniffing around suggests a balance will not be found.. they will push everyone else out and we will be living in blandalanda. Some people would be happy about that I'm sure

The needle-exchange thread has some important points on both sides but the debate about it should be kept to that thread

Lastly - going to a place for free papers as one of it's attractions??? You're paying ?2+ for a warm cup of milk with brown bits - buy your own paper forcryinoutloud!!! Decent journalism costs money

[Maurice]

'Twas me who brought it up Sean.

[SeanMacGabhann]

hmph... maybe - but I'm not even speaking to you! ;-)

I expected better from Emily

[Emily]

As it happens, I didn't 'bring up' the needle exchange. Someone else compared Neros to the needle exchange, which is clearly absurd. I was merely responding.

it's bloody bliss to go to a cafe and read the paper provided while the kids have free babycinos and a muffin without having to trail up the street to find a paper shop with your aforementioned children and their rapidly declining attention/patience. it's called 'thinking about your customer' and in general, if the independents were as good at it as the chains, they'd be the chains.

I notice it's men who hate neros...

[Emily]

I am also highly amused at the love and trust shown towards the council on these matters. They'd happily bang you up for putting a jam jar in the wrong bit of your recycling, or tow your car away (as happened to my elderly neighbour) for not reading a miniscule sign about the waterboard digging up your road. They are not our friends, my friends.

[Maurice]

Why is it clearly absurd?

A poster claimed it was cut and dry: the law says x so it must be enforced. I wondered, as a matter of amusement I admit, if the same group who claim it is ONLY about the law (and not their secret desire to see Cafe Nero out of town via any route) then are they the same who called foul on the needle exchange for violating rules on consultation. And by similar, are those opposed to the needle exchange (claiming ONLY because it violated rules on consultaton and not their secret desire to see it out via any route) were equally fervant about the law being applied to Cafe Nero.

I reckon neither is really about the law being applied cut and dry - but both used it as an excuse. I'm quite honest about these matters. No to needle exchange and yes to Cafe Nero.

[Emily]

Well, it's clearly absurd because they are so totally and utterly different. One is a nice cafe which full of local residents and hugely popular, the other is a needle exchange which is hugely unpopular, full of junkies, nd right next to a children's nursery. I really don't think anyone here is stupid enough not to spot the difference.

Of course the the issue with chains is nothing to do with the inherently evil nature of businesses with more than one branch (Ed, village books, tales on moon lane, Mrs Robinson, Neros) v the gorgeous desirable purity of shabby, not very successful independents, its to do with rents. High rents = lots of chains, reasonable rents = a mix of businesses. Petty disputes about technical breaches of planning regulations are really quite irrelevant.

[SeanMacGabhann]

Emily

For my earlier mistake alone, I must apologise. I was wrong to lay the needle-exchange-blame at your feet but at least Mozza stepped forward and corrected me. My mistake is entirely understandable however as I genuinely have stopped reading most of his posts...

As for the rest... hmmmm. Generalising an argument along gender lines? And you a journalist?

And owning more than one branch doesn't a chain make. If I jump on a train and go to Devon, Yorkshire or Scotland only to find a G&B on every hight street then that's a chain. It's not the size of the business that bothers me it's the homogeneity. It's enough to make me scarper to somewhere remote like Peru and no mistake. Except there's a bleedin Starbucks there and all...

Look - all some people are saying re: Neros and chains is "isn't it a tiny bit nice to live somewhere that's a tiny bit different and not like all them towns what got in the news* today about being Britain's most popular places to live?"

* link to that story

[Maurice]

I can only guess now that Emily must be a journalist for something like the SLP or Southwark News.

It would explain everything.

[Keef]

To be fair to Maurice, he never compared a needle exchange to Neros at all. He just questioned, quite rightly for me, whether those who argued against the needle exchange, on the basis that they had not gone through the correct consultation processes, would automatically be against Nero and vice versa. It reminds me of how the residents against the ED Warehouse got little sympathy for their cause because the warehouse was something people were excited about.

[Keef]

Oh and Sean, I'm not sure William Rose deserve any credit for the regeneration of the area, they were a bit late in the day for that. ;-)

[Zebedee Tring]

IMHO William Rose deserve the credit for being the first business to attempt regenerate a part of LL that is still fairly grotty.

[Keef]

Hmm maybe, but I don't think that was the mission they set out with for the good of ED. I suspect that's just where they could get hold of a shop.

[Zebedee Tring]

I never thought that William Rose were some kind of hippy philanthropists working for the common good of man and womankind. But good luck to them. Surely they are the kind of small business that the anti-Cafe Nero people should be supporting.

[Cassius]

Emily Wrote:

> I notice it's men who hate neros...

Actually I hate coffee chains too - or at least find them bland, uninteresting, overpriced and I'm not impressed with their coffee.