Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • 5 weeks later...

So following the box ticking and predictable ignoring of the 'consultation' and 'stakeholder meetings' the foregone conclusion has been reached, and the journey towards a two weekend festival, with ever increasing numbers and expanding boundaries, begins...

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

Re: GALA Music Festival – event application ref: SWKEVE000820 - NOTICE OF DECISION regarding event consultation

We write to inform you that the event application submitted by Assembled GALA Ltd to hold GALA Music Festival and On the Rye Festival in Peckham Rye Park on the 23 - 26 May 2025 has been approved.

The consultation findings report is provided again for reference (please see attached).

The issuing of the events licence is subject to the following: 

That the event operator delivers the event in line with Southwark’s Outdoor Events Policy
That the event operator delivers the event in line with the conditions listed in the Event Licence Agreement
That the event operator delivers the event in line with the conditions attached to the Premises Licence
That the event operator obtains any other permission or licence required in relation to holding the event
That the event operator delivers the event in line with the Event Safety Management Plan, of which all elements must be approved by the relevant members of Southwark’s Safety Advisory Group

If you have any questions, please don’t hesitate to contact us.

Best wishes,

Charlie Simm

On behalf of Southwark’s Events team

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Well, what a huge surprise!

So, while the council digs up local footpaths to plant trees and 'green' the roads, it simultaneously offers up our parkland to private hire for a further extended period of annual damage. 

It is hard to see from the map, but it looks as though the footpath that was formerly available to walk along the length of the event site of old will now also be partially used up by the new footprint, it looks like it will be partly roped off?

I love how the final council report advise that 'while locals will be unable to use this nicer part of the park for a month ( and actually much of summer as it all gets churned up and has to be reseeded) that this is fine as they can just use the Common instead. 
 
It feels wrong that the nicer part of the park is given over for festival use. I do not buy that, as has been stated, the Common is just not big enough for the Gala event.

Edited by first mate
  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
  • Agree 2

I think it is less easy/ more expensive to fence off the Common, as opposed to the nicer parts, which is why our nicer parts are hawked off to Gala. Why should we have access to nicer parts of our park in summer when we might most like to have access if it can be monetised. It's ironic really that this council is so Trumpy. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Agree 1
18 hours ago, Penguin68 said:

I think it is less easy/ more expensive to fence off the Common

I would have thought the cost of erecting X meters of metal barriers would be the same irrespective of location, plus given the issues with access now due to the "bunds", it would also be easier given the ample direct access the common provides?

The reason I've heard from the organisers is that their footprint has been tailor made for that part of the park, so it's not possible to fit it anywhere else. Which is a ridiculous argument given that  they've already altered / extended it due to the space they've 'lost' from the "bunds".

The reason I've heard from FOPR and others is that as the common is public land (or similar) it requires permission from the Home Secretary (or similar) due to ancient grazing rights or something. Oddly it doesn't seem to have affected the circus, the steam fair, the dog show etc etc etc

20 hours ago, first mate said:

It is hard to see from the map, but it looks as though the footpath that was formerly available to walk along the length of the event site of old will now also be partially used up by the new footprint, it looks like it will be partly roped off? 

Yes, the wide path where Parkrun starts & finishes will become a controlled crossing during the build, and completely closed off during the festival.

Also, when I asked about the reason for the extended footprint onto the sports pitch, they said it was to replace lost space where the bunds are, which they used to store equipment. However, they were unable to explain where this storage area now was on the new plan...

And when asked about the loss of the sports pitch due to the extension & access road, they said the council had assured them there were no matches booked for that period. But what about the kids, families, who play on them? No answer...

  • Thanks 2

This will be interesting to watch 

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/brockwell-park-mighty-hoopla-field-day-legal-challenge-b1223476.html

Locals are launching a legal challenge against events in Brockwell Park on grounds of ecological damage. 

Two questions arise if they win 

1. Will events scheduled there look for alternative venues, maybe Peckham Rye 

2. Will a win for the locals set a president for other parks 

  • Thanks 6

More power to them. I very much hope they win and it would be fantastic if a precedent is set to stop exploitation of park land by councils. I would also like to see Gala moved to the Common- revellers would be closer to transport hubs and since part of the common used to be a large tarmac area, it just feels a much more suitable site, leaving the actual park free for use by locals and visitors to enjoy nature, wildlife and the scenery.

Edited by first mate
  • Agree 5
  • 2 weeks later...

I know. Now the weather has been better for a few days, that whole area has been well used by people sitting out in the grass and just enjoying the peace and views- mainly young people too! Now all that will be lost for the rest of the summer as the grass does not recover until autumn.

  • Agree 3

And already two huge HGVs have made their way up Colyton Rd, despite assurances at the meetings that they would be routed from the top. Love it how they make these statements to placate the locals, then just do whatever they want because there's no one from the council watching. Or caring.

13 minutes ago, fishboy said:

And already two huge HGVs have made their way up Colyton Rd, despite assurances at the meetings that they would be routed from the top. Love it how they make these statements to placate the locals, then just do whatever they want because there's no one from the council watching. Or caring.

Make a note of the vehicle details, complain to the company and then complain to the council copying your councillor in.

  • Agree 2

I've sent an email to the council about it & other related issues, but I won't hold my breath. There's no representation from the council on site, so Gala can & will do whatever they want. Highly unlikely they'll ever be punished / fined because they've got the council under their thumb, and the council are so starved of funds they'd never risk biting the hand that feeds them. 

Also worth noting that in the consultation findings report there's a statement in the section "If the event goes ahead" -

"At least 28 days prior to event taking place / Resident information letter posted to properties around the park (giving confirmed event information and resident ‘hotline’ number)"

Anyone received one of these yet? No? So are Gala in breach of the council's Outdoor Events Policy? Probably. Will there be any consequence? Nah.

Lastly, image attached of the cherry tree in the SW corner of the site, with white lines sprayed on the grass presumably indicating the position of the (very high) metal wall. Looks like the branch might get in the way, however will they resolve that....?

 

IMG_20250513_104016606~2.jpg

Edited by fishboy
Autocorrect typo
  • Agree 1

Those branches are going to get chopped...again.

All of this shows the central paradox at the heart of Southwark's greening the streets policy. What is the good of planting trees in tarmac if you are simultaneously wrecking large sections of the park and stopping locals using the park? It just does not make sense.

Cllr Catherine Rose should be made to answer for Gala conduct, if they are already flouting the terms of their agreement.

Edited by first mate
  • Agree 3

Just to clarify, this isn't the same cherry as last year, it's in the corner by the path that runs down to the crossroads of FHR / Colyton / Dunstans. It hasn't been an issue previously because the perimeter wasn't as large...

I'm sure it must have been noticed & flagged during the various planning meetings, walkabouts etc and there is an ecological resolution planned that will avoid any damage to the tree. After all, Gala pride themselves on their environmental stance, being "nestled in the park" and everything... 🤦

Edited by fishboy
Added detail
  • Agree 1

Walking in the park today I was struck by how much bigger the footprint of the event looks and how that will impact the park. I guess it is only when you see it all being cordoned off that you realise. It feels like all the playing fields will be impacted to some extent.

There is another area  being cordoned off at the other end of the park, close to Harris Girls. Does anyone know if this is temporary and to do with the event delivery juggernauts (so green, so environmentally friendly) or something unrelated?

  • Agree 1
On 13/05/2025 at 15:58, first mate said:

Walking in the park today I was struck by how much bigger the footprint of the event looks and how that will impact the park. I guess it is only when you see it all being cordoned off that you realise. It feels like all the playing fields will be impacted to some extent.

There is another area  being cordoned off at the other end of the park, close to Harris Girls. Does anyone know if this is temporary and to do with the event delivery juggernauts (so green, so environmentally friendly) or something unrelated?

That chosen route for heavy traffic is the longest possible distance and most disruptive route. 

  • Agree 2
13 hours ago, alice said:

That chosen route for heavy traffic is the longest possible distance and most disruptive route. 

They will have some rationale for this, but it feels like a deliberate testing of the waters, to see how much of the park they can take, with the trackway right across the length of the whole playing fields and the new and exceedingly ugly, extended footprint.

My guess is soon we will see further encroachments and extensions and even more events, from other organisations. Peckham Rye is on course to be a giant, summer-long event space, just like Brockwell Park.

I have just checked Southwark Council licensing and it seems the intention is to use the Gala infrastructure to mount events, this may only the extra 'family' day but 6 days are mentioned.

The Licensing Sub-Committee heard from the representative for the Applicant who advised that the purpose of the application was to present a family festival day and two live concert days to take place in Peckham Rye Park in May/June within the existing site operated by We are the Fair/Assembled Gala.  The Applicant would work in collaboration with the Peckham Festival on the events falling on the weekend after GALA. GALA normally is held on the late May Bank Holiday Weekend.

Edited by first mate

The Parkrun organisers have had to make the decision to cancel their events this week & next week, and probably the week after.

"Having inspected the start/finish area now that the Gala festival build is underway, we have concluded that it will be impossible for the event to go ahead safely."

So another assurance / promise broken by the organisers, who were adamant that the extended area wouldn't affect the Parkrun.

I'm just hoping this will open a few more eyes to what's going on...

 

  • Like 1
  • Sad 2
  • Agree 2

I hope the organisers make a big deal about the cancellation of the Park Run. What is the council thinking? This is a private event that is now negatively impacting the wellbeing of residents in multiple ways. The council allege they are heavily invested in improving health and greening the environment.

  • Agree 3
19 minutes ago, first mate said:

The council allege they are heavily invested in improving health and greening the environment.

The proof has always been in the pudding; and as regards Gala and Peckham Rye it has always demonstrated the opposite.  Fool us once, shame on you, fool us twice and thrice - shame on us.

  • Like 1

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...