Jump to content

Recommended Posts

That section of the park has always been a lovely, tranquil spot. Lawn bowls tends to be a quiet activity but not sure about mini golf and a cafe. Surely it is good to have a few quieter spots in the park where quiet and nature can prevail?


At a weekend most of the park's open spaces are used for sport which entails lots of shouting and the popular park run means many of the paths are taken up by runners thudding and panting as they go round. Obviously it is great for collective health but it would also be nice to preserve some quiet spots, especially in a loud and noisy city.

Lee, do you have evidence that there are plans long-term to hand over chunks of park to Harris or is this a hunch? This is a genuine question and not intended to undermine your point - just curious?


It's a real conundrum - Harris were clearly allowed to build their academy on the clear understanding that they would not then use the Rye as a sports etc. area for the school, and yet we know that having outdoor sports areas associated with schools is massively important for the long-term health and well-being of the pupils - sporting habits gained at school can be a positive influence over their lifetimes. So the pressures, outwith the assurances given at the time of build, to allow the Harris children to use the Rye are understandably large. It's a matter of competing 'greater goods' and I would not like to be the one to call it. But I believe, with Les, that there probably is a hidden agenda here (the councils and Harris' together or separately) - and I can't believe that Harris will not have organised sports on the Rye within the next 20 years. Whether the land is then alienated and becomes the school's, or whether Harris is just allowed to use, with others, existing facilities and space, is a mooter point.

?Whether the land is then alienated and becomes the school's...?


Most unlikely to happen as the ownership of the Common and the Park is governed by all kinds of legal covenants. For the same reason, it?s unlikely the reinstatement of Peckham Rye Lido and the larger associated scheme which is currently proposed, is unlikely to happen.

I think a lot of us feel the same Penguin and there was lengthy discussion about this when Harris Boy's was first built and James Barber was Cllr. I was just wondering if Lee had more concrete information or some sort of inside knowledge?


Use of land to promote community health for all is one thing, privatising and limiting public access for profit- as per the imminent music festival- another.

rahrahrah Wrote:

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

> They did privatise the house in the Southwest

> corner of the park though, so there is precedent.


I suspect small-scale measures, whether the music festival, park car parking, mini golf- all begin to create precedents for privatisation. What is initially intermittent use is slowly increased until the balance is tipped and then you have serious precedent.

alice Wrote:

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

> The house was Originally put on sale with the

> proviso it should be for community use. There were

> some shenanigans which resulted in it being a

> private sale. ?250000 Perhaps those with a better

> memory may recall


This is my recollection - that there was some controversy at the time at it's privatisation. Not sure of the details though.

Pugwash Wrote:

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

> I remember the mini golf by the lake in Dulwich

> Park.


I remember it well, was hoping they'd reinstate it when they did all that work there. Mind you if this doesn't put you off the plan for Peckham Rye I don't suppose anything will http://www.minigolf.org.uk/cms/index.php

Harris use Kings College Sports grounds in Brockley rise and have been doing so since 2010, almost 10 years! I?m pretty sure by now they have formed a very strong relationship with the local council/owners/university and have come up with a good agreement of using the grounds and at a good price, as far as I am aware Harris Boys? are probably the only school who use the grounds very regularly as they do a PE session in the morning for 2 hours and the afternoon for 2 hours five days a week, apart from that they use the sports hall and when students get to year 9 they do 40% theory towards their compulsory sports qualification, after all they are a sports academy.


I?m pretty sure Harris Federation would rather stick to this systems rather than working out the legal paperwork etc to facilitate the boys, also I?m sure the school staff do not want public, girls, dogs or traffic noise to be in the way of learning.

Another thing to add is some other Harris schools around London also use local sports grounds to facilitate PE lessons and they have done so for many years, as far as we know it probably is more cost affective and easier for them.

first mate Wrote:

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

>

>

> At a weekend most of the park's open spaces are

> used for sport which entails lots of shouting and

> the popular park run means many of the paths are

> taken up by runners thudding and panting as they

> go round. Obviously it is great for collective

> health but it would also be nice to preserve some

> quiet spots, especially in a loud and noisy city.


Hmm, I'm not sure you're really cut out for city life, First Mate, if you get annoyed by the sound of people literally breathing in a public space.

I didn't say it annoyed me I was making the point that while some people, quite rightly, will want to use the park for activities, some of which are noisy, others may want to visit the park to enjoy some quiet and 'commune' with nature. The hope is that both needs can be met.
If the Bowling isn't getting participation, then I think Mini Golf will be fun for many who will participate. Battersea (whilst slightly bigger) has had great success with theirs. The many times I've been, it's never been noisy everywhere in the park. The mini golf is near the play ground, as is Go Ape, and it's rather noisy there at peak-kid-times, but over by the fountain and nearly everywhere else, it's quiet. I think you'll find the same in The Rye with the trees buffering the noise and peace can be found pond-side as well as other places within the park.
The site is adjacent to the Japanese garden and pavilion which many people use for quiet time. Mini golf may, as you say, be reasonably quiet- I guess I keep thinking crazy golf. There is also the matter of aesthetics, as per Ed Oldies post.

first mate Wrote:

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

> The site is adjacent to the Japanese garden and

> pavilion which many people use for quiet time.

> Mini golf may, as you say, be reasonably quiet- I

> guess I keep thinking crazy golf. There is also

> the matter of aesthetics, as per Ed Oldies post.


Ah, that is right first mate, as I don't go in the Japanese Garden (I'm always there with my dogs), I had forgotten about that. You're right, that is supposed to be somewhat of a serene and quiet area. But, again, I do think mostly quiet will be achieved a good chunk of the time with the unquiet times focused around peak-kid-times.

Lee Scoresby Wrote:

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

>

> The chainsaws have been out, day after day; while

> some tree removals were clearly necessary, it

> seems that when they want a tree gone - to

> facility music events for example, or the parking

> of contractor vehicles - there is no tree in the

> park so healthy that 'dieback' could not be

> discovered in it, hohoho-hollow-ho. And without a

> huge bung from the National Lottery these bozos

> have not the slightest interest in, you know,

> actually PLANTING new trees. Rather, careful

> observers may have detected that a concerted,

> undeclared effort is underway to attenuate all

> areas of tree and other vegetation, evidently to

> allow continuous sightlines through the park from

> all angles, so as to faciliate policing (in the

> general sense). This vandalism completely undoes

> the thought and effort of many past generations to

> carefully enfold so very many private, beautiful

> spaces like an intricate puzzle within what is

> really not a large area. Again, did anyone ask us

> about this?

>

> And here's the doozy for locals and park lovers

> ... having concealed with grass-seeding their

> failure to repair the considerable, serious ground

> damage caused by last May's appalling (and

> 'commercially confidential' hoho) 'music event',

> Southwark is going to do it all over again at the

> end of this month. Watch and see the mayhem and

> squalor, the strutting security thugs, the

> noise-assault, the vegetated areas thick with

> fecal matter, the damage to the natural fabric of

> the park ...

>

>




Am I correct in thinking that the lovely huge tree that was used by my family - and numerous others with small children - to provide shade from the blazing sunshine at last year's festival, has now been cut down?! :(


Was this at the request of the organisers? I really cannot see the justification.

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...