Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I went to the Livesey yesterday with 4 kids aged 2 to 9 years. We spent a fantastic hour and a half in the exhibition which entertained all the children irrespective of their age. Such imagination and care had gone into the design of the exhibits. Our favourite was the treasure island with a quicksand beach.


Whilst we were there a school group arrived from (I think) Rye Oak primary school. The children were fascinated by the exhibits & the museum really connected with them. They were also very well behaved so well done to the children, teachers and museum staff. The Livesey gets 2 school visits a day during term time which suggests it is reaching a lot of children for whom museum visits are a rare treat.


This is a unique museum that provides incredible value for money in an area of London with very little to offer children to stimulate their minds. I am very sad that the council is too shortsighted to see this.

from the website- They need your support tomorrow night at Peckham Town Hall:


LET SOUTHWARK'S LOCAL COUNCILLORS KNOW YOUR VIEWS

- THERE IS STILL A CHANCE THE MUSEUM CAN BE SAVED


At Tuesday's meeting of Southwark?s Executive Council it was decided to close the Livesey Museum for Children in this year?s round of budget cuts. The decision was made in spite of a large amount of support for the museum from local people, which included a demonstration outside the council chamber. It also transpired that the Executive Council had based their decision on an inaccurate briefing paper which amongst other things slashed the museum?s visitor figures by nearly 8000.


This is set to be ratified at a full Council meeting on the 20th February. The meeting is at 7.00 at Peckham Town Hall.


PLEASE COME TO THE MEETING

- THE MUSEUM NEEDS YOUR SUPPORT

There is a facebook group providing more information about the campaign, contact details for councillors as well as imformation about the planned protest meeting and room to discuss whats happening.


The South London Press have picked up on the story about Southwark using inaccurate attendance figures to justify their decision to close the Livesey Museum.

Of the East Dulwich cllrs - Richard Thomas replied to my email to him to say that he was in favour of the closure, James Barber hasn't replied to my email (though was cc'd in by RT). On his blog, in one of comments discussing the council cuts, James Barber says he is in faviur of the closure because it only has 7000 visitors a year and therefore represents poor value for money / large spend per head. Southwark Council offical figures (as supplied to the Audit Office) are 17830 per year. This has been pointed out to Cllr Barber but I'm not sure if he has adjusted his poinyt of view in light of the accurate figures. As his main argument for closure was the visitor numbers I would hope that he would do the decnet thing and revise his stance ...


I don't know what the response of MP's are - according to the facebook group Harriet Harman is supporting the museum to stay open. I haven't had a reply from Tessa Jowell.


Essentially the cllrs are split down the predictable party lines with the lib dem / con coalition supporting the closure and the Lab cllrs opposing it.


There is much more detail on the facebook group but I don't have access to all of the comings and goings of the campaign so can't necessarily report accurately on the state of play.

It is an absolute disgrace that the council are seeking to close this fantastic resource. The area of Southwark is extremely deprived - the Old Kent Road has very little resources now for young families, particularly since the closure of the library in the former Civic Centre. I would very happily give up any money to replace that stupid fence on Goose Green and give it to the Livesly!!! I mean - really, if it is a choice between replacing a fence (which admittedly isn't very beautiful but serves it's purpose) and a children's museum then the choice is obvisous. But then, I guess since the Lib Dems are in power in this area and not where the Livesely is, they would rather pump more money here to keep there seats.

Cllr Barber is probably finding it hard to change his mind.


I imagine this is a difficult thing to do when you are in the public eye. He might take heart that his Lib Deb colleague former councillor for the Livesey ward, Jonathon Hunt says on the petition:


" I do believe my colleagues have got it wrong in closing this wonderful resource for children in one of the most deprived parts of the borough. I shall do my utmost to persuade them to look elsewhere for their cuts. And to keep the building in public hands as our benefactor intended."

I just noticed this post on the facebook group from an independent evaluator of the Livesey


"I had..the great pleasure and privilege of evaluating the Livesey's.. 'Myths and Legends' in 2006. The report..contributed to...'Telling tales- a guide to developing effective storytelling programmes for museums', thus proving that the Museum is at the forefront of its field...The Livesey attracts families and school visitors of diverse backgrounds and the Museum serves as a positive and vibrant, and very important meeting point... Building on the UN convention of the rights of the child, Children's museums are pioneers and essential in the field of... developing innovative and creative informal learning spaces...There are too few Children's museums in the UK, and by closing the Livesey..., this list will be even shorter... many young Londoners will be denied the opportunity to, in a dedicated and unique space with expert facilitators, develop their curiosity, imagination, teamwork and language skills." Emily Johnsson

All the Lib Dem counsellors held firm and with the Tories, they have agreed that the Livesey will lose it's funding and close of Feb 29 2008.


They might consider a rescue plan but someone has to step in quick. PLEASE - there must be some city type out there in Dulwich who has just pocketed a million pound bonus who could spare ?140,000??


As a note of interst, on the facebook group, someone posted a reply they got from our esteemed counsellor Barber where he stated that 'The Livesey Museum is an under-used resource. What the Livesey Museum needs is a cafe.' For goodness sakes, a cafe??' Again, it proves my point that these counsellors are all about style not substance.

any of those dulwich lawyers out there who could help with how to call for a judicial review (or similar appeal) of this decision based on false information and seemingly a two fingers to stated government policy on increasing children's access to museums?

Well it is closing...for now...but here's the full update from the facebook group..........there is hope! any hacks out there need to push this story and maybe they will get funding.



from the facebook Southwark museums campaign:


Despite a fast and popular campaign, lasting 21 days from a standing start (when the very first rumour of the threatened closure came out), Southwark Council finally voted to close the much loved Livesey Museum for Children. Its doors shut on 29th February 2008 (thought I'd add the year as some of you might have foolishly imagined the courtesy of a year's grace).


The process has been scandalous: A lack of detailed research to inform their decision, lack of consultation with and support for the staff, lack of information to the public and regular users, and the use of substantially wrong statistics to assess its value and to brief councillors.


One high point was the children's delegation before the Council meeting on the 20th Feb. We were really proud of them for asking such articulate and challenging questions of Cllr Stanton. Another high point has been the enormous amount of press coverage, which presses on as the story continues.


The story continues because the Council has agreed to discuss with us the option of the Friends forming a trust and seeking funds to run the Museum. Key points to negotiate are that we would need to be able to use the building and that Southwark wouldn't sell it, as they have said they plan to do, and that we would be able to access the Southwark art and heritage collections for use in displays. There have already been three approaches from good charities to support this cause, so we are hopeful. A lot of hard work will follow and there is a danger that we will feel deflated once the Museum shuts. If anyone has expertise, time, ideas, contacts and resources to help please get in touch.


Thanks for your support

Bridget McKenzie (for the Friends)

I just can't believe this at all! As others have said, this Museum is a fantastic resource for children in a very deprived area.


If the council's argument is that not enough people use it then why not spend a little on publicity?

I had not even heard of the museum until today and I have young children and live in the borough - sadly we've missed the boat as it closes for good at 5pm today. Very sad.


I've signed the online petition and I'll be emailing Tessa Jowell, I hope lots of others do the same.

bawdy-nan Wrote:

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

> I just noticed this post on the facebook group

> from an independent evaluator of the Livesey

>

> "I had..the great pleasure and privilege of

> evaluating the Livesey's.. 'Myths and Legends' in

> 2006. The report..contributed to...'Telling tales-

> a guide to developing effective storytelling

> programmes for museums', thus proving that the

> Museum is at the forefront of its field...The

> Livesey attracts families and school visitors of

> diverse backgrounds and the Museum serves as a

> positive and vibrant, and very important meeting

> point... Building on the UN convention of the

> rights of the child, Children's museums are

> pioneers and essential in the field of...

> developing innovative and creative informal

> learning spaces...There are too few Children's

> museums in the UK, and by closing the Livesey...,

> this list will be even shorter... many young

> Londoners will be denied the opportunity to, in a

> dedicated and unique space with expert

> facilitators, develop their curiosity,

> imagination, teamwork and language skills." Emily

> Johnsson



Emily...Hmmmmm...the pieces of the jigsaw are beginning to fit together

I'm not that great but I could probably help with anyone that did want to bring the decision to close the museum to the High Court for a judicial review. It's not a very difficult process but I think the court fees are about ?400 tho. Does anyone know if the people fighting the closure want to do that? We would need as much evidence as we could get that the decision makers acted either illegally, irrationally or against proper procedure. It seems that this may have been the case. Maybe looking at the levels of funding in different areas for less worthy projects might be something that could help. Anyway the judicial review has to be brought within 3 months of the decision.


I do judicial review appplications against Home Office immigration decisions at the moment (fairly successfully I might add!), so I'd be happy to have a go at this with some help.

I'm sure any help would be appreciated. I think the campaigners are concentrating on trying to persuade the concil not to sell the building - it was donated to the people of Southwark by George Livesey. There seems to be plenty of interest from the museums community as well as other funders such that it seems perfectly possible to run the museum independently.


Southwark say that they haven't factored any capital receipt into their budget planning but its unclear what they are planning.


Whatever the arguments about closing the museum (council blame govt cuts to local authority funding) Southwark have always acknowledged its excellence. With a realistic prospect of creating an independent trust to run the museum or finding a bigger sibling museum to incorporate it, it would be spiteful of the council to refuse to enable this to happen


You might get in touch with Bridget McKenzie via the facebook group orthere is now also a google groups as the email correspondence had got a bit out of control. If you go to google groups and then search for friends of the livesey you'll find it. You'll need to email one of teh group admins to join.

Hi East Dulwich


I'm active in the Friends of Save the Livesey. We need a solictor/ lawyer with property law experience who can help with conveyancing. Please contact us via the Google group if you can help.


Please join the Google group or email [email protected] (sorry its so long and not linked properly.


Thanks

There has since been a request for a surveyor to assist on a pro bono basis. The friends group is negotaiting with the council for the lease of the building and need help to assess the council's offers / proposals. If anyone can help or knows a firm that does community pro bono work please contact the friends via the google or facebook group (see contact details above)
Hi click on ths link for a list of solicitors that do property law. Click on the link to each solicitor to get all their details. Some do legal aid, so may do pro bono, or you may be able to persuade one of the others to fight for the museum.

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...