GALA 2025

[grajm]

How much extra council tax would people be prepared to pay to cover the lost revenue?

[jazzer]

Need to know how much Southwark Council are benefiting financially?

[Mystic Mog]

This takes the biscuit, all plastered around the site!!!!!

 

[Blah Blah]

2 hours ago, jazzer said:

Need to know how much Southwark Council are benefiting financially?

They never disclose that, citing 'commercial confidentiality'.

On nesting birds. This has been brought up several times at consultations, asking if the event can change to another time of the year that avoids the nesting season. As you can see, no-one is listening.

[Amika]

13 hours ago, F.R. said:

It’s 3 AM - Anyone know when this horrendous noise is going to stop?! We’re on the Sainsbury’s Local end of Landells and am quite frankly sympathising with all of you nearer Peckham Rye. My ears are ringing! How is this ok?! 
Edit: According to the website it should have finished by 22:30. What is going on and how is this acceptable (and not more people are complaining about the crippling sound levels we’re being subjected to?) - shocking.. 

I live directly across the road from the Gala site just up from Harris Boys, can see it from my front window, and the festival stopped before 11 pm and everything was quiet.

I haven't enjoyed the last few days, it's been unbearable in my flat and I went over the hill to Honor Oak last night and could still hear it there, but it certainly didn't go on until 3. 

It's actually not as bad today because it sounds like they only have one stage and I've just got one reggae song playing in the distance and it's quite nice. The thing that has made it most like torture is the cacophony of all the stages mixed together for three days. If it was just one stage at the sound level it is right now I'd probably be ok with it. 

[malumbu]

On 26/05/2025 at 16:51, Blah Blah said:

They never disclose that, citing 'commercial confidentiality'.

On nesting birds. This has been brought up several times at consultations, asking if the event can change to another time of the year that avoids the nesting season. As you can see, no-one is listening.

I'm unhappy with major building works going on during nesting season but I expect that this is immaterial to allowance of most human activities going on that cause a lot of noise.  I did some research but didn't find out a great deal so expect birds have evolved to live around human disruption.  Messing with the nest will cause birds to abandon it. Not sure how much the Gala causes.  Should welcome signage even if you consider that is a token effort.

Edited Tuesday at 20:02 by malumbu
Typo

[first mate]

Interesting, you think the bird populations in Peckham Park have evolved in the space of 6 years to cope with the noise of full blown, bass heavy, urban music, literally a few feet from where they are nesting? 

It will be great when the barricades are all down and the park can get back to normal. The hope is that the grass has not been so badly damaged this year and that the area can be used again immediately, for the rest of summer.
 

Edited Monday at 18:10 by first mate

[Blah Blah]

1 hour ago, malumbu said:

I'm unhappy with mafor building works going on during nesting season but I expect that this is immaterial to allowance of most human activities going on that cause a lot of noise.  I did some research but didn't find out a great deal so expect birds have evolved to live around human disruption.  Messing with the nest will cause birds to abandon it. Not sure how much the Gala causes.  Should welcome signage even if you consider that is a token effort.

There is emerging research that nesting birds are impacted by festival noise, especially starlings. Some species rely on acoustic signals that are disrupted by the kind of noise a four day festival produces  Why is this research emerging? Because the number of these types of events in urban settings is increasing, and it takes time to do the research and observations required. Evolution is a slow porcess taking thousands of years in most cases. Nesting birds don't evolve to these sudden events, they leave. If there are chicks already hatched, that's a problem. If they don't come back to nest, that alters the local ecology. It matters.

16 minutes ago, first mate said:

Interesting, you think the bird populations in Peckham Park have evolved in the space of 6 years to cope with the noise of full blown, bass heavy, urban music, literally a few feet from where they are nesting? 

It will be great when the barricades are all down and the park can get back to normal. The hope is that the grass has not been so badly damaged this year and that the area can be used again immediately, for the rest of summer.
 

This is something I have been looking into and will finally have some case studies to make both the council and event organisaers aware of moving forward. As you say, birds don't know that a huge wall of sound is about to hit them for four days. It disrupts the acoustic fequencies they rely on.

[malumbu]

3 hours ago, first mate said:

Interesting, you think the bird populations in Peckham Park have evolved in the space of 6 years to cope with the noise of full blown, bass heavy, urban music, literally a few feet from where they are nesting? 

It will be great when the barricades are all down and the park can get back to normal. The hope is that the grass has not been so badly damaged this year and that the area can be used again immediately, for the rest of summer.
 

They've been living with noise from humans ever since we've been doing things in an industrial basis.  And lost habitat ever since slash and burn.

3 hours ago, Blah Blah said:

There is emerging research that nesting birds are impacted by festival noise, especially starlings. Some species rely on acoustic signals that are disrupted by the kind of noise a four day festival produces  Why is this research emerging? Because the number of these types of events in urban settings is increasing, and it takes time to do the research and observations required. Evolution is a slow porcess taking thousands of years in most cases. Nesting birds don't evolve to these sudden events, they leave. If there are chicks already hatched, that's a problem. If they don't come back to nest, that alters the local ecology. It matters.

 

Any links?  I used mesh around my feeders to get rid of my starlings who were unwelcome visitors to the garden devouring food for the small garden birds.  Interestingly their numbers have plummeted across the country, nothing to do with festivals.  Not sure how important starlings are in local ecosystems.  Only see them in numbers in large car parks.  Labour will be ditching habitat protections on their build for growth programme so Gala will pale into insignificance.

Edited Monday at 21:23 by malumbu

[first mate]

21 minutes ago, malumbu said:

Labour will be ditching habitat protections on their build for growth programme so Gala will pale into insignificance.

Oh well, that's okay then. You seem to infer that Southwark Labour may view parks as just more land to be developed/monetised and aim to treat park habitat as no different at all to the average bit of street up for redevelopment.  Sits very oddly with alleged concern for the environment but it does kinda ring true.

[Rockets]

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/may/24/music-festivals-parks-brockwell-london-debate

[fishboy]

There are many negative aspects to the Gala festival, those that I am most concerned about include the residual litter & damage to the park and the impact on wildlife. The latter is supposedly absolved by the "Wildlife Survey" which is carried of each year, but has a sadly limited scope purely to tick a box, rather than actually investigate the effects to wildlife in the park as a whole. 

The survey document is available on the council website, but this summary from it is a good indication of the level of consideration Gala really have:

"The 2025 pre-show nesting bird survey found no evidence of active bird nests within the designated event footprint, and therefore no additional mitigation is required within the working area."

This clearly shows that all they are bothered about is whether there are nests onsite, which would prevent them from their construction activities, nothing more. The impact of 24/7 lighting, flashing lights, construction noise, loud music on wildlife outside of the site is of zero interest to them. 

Here's a map from the survey, showing nests onsite, and possible nests outside the site, and yet it makes no difference to their activities. Crack on, nothing onsite, don't care about anything else? 

 

PS I've just noticed that this map references the site footprint from 2022, yet is from the latest 2025 survey. And this is supposed to be a survey from a professional body??

PPS I've just noticed a bat survey on the council website by the same company, which states: 

"To minimise potential disturbances to local bat populations during the festival, it is recommended to limit artificial lighting and reduce noise levels starting at least 20 minutes before sunset throughout the event period in May 2025."

So which part of this did Gala adhere to?!?

[Blah Blah]

1 hour ago, fishboy said:

There are many negative aspects to the Gala festival, those that I am most concerned about include the residual litter & damage to the park and the impact on wildlife. The latter is supposedly absolved by the "Wildlife Survey" which is carried of each year, but has a sadly limited scope purely to tick a box, rather than actually investigate the effects to wildlife in the park as a whole. 

The survey document is available on the council website, but this summary from it is a good indication of the level of consideration Gala really have:

"The 2025 pre-show nesting bird survey found no evidence of active bird nests within the designated event footprint, and therefore no additional mitigation is required within the working area."

This clearly shows that all they are bothered about is whether there are nests onsite, which would prevent them from their construction activities, nothing more. The impact of 24/7 lighting, flashing lights, construction noise, loud music on wildlife outside of the site is of zero interest to them. 

Here's a map from the survey, showing nests onsite, and possible nests outside the site, and yet it makes no difference to their activities. Crack on, nothing onsite, don't care about anything else? 

 

PS I've just noticed that this map references the site footprint from 2022, yet is from the latest 2025 survey. And this is supposed to be a survey from a professional body??

PPS I've just noticed a bat survey on the council website by the same company, which states: 

"To minimise potential disturbances to local bat populations during the festival, it is recommended to limit artificial lighting and reduce noise levels starting at least 20 minutes before sunset throughout the event period in May 2025."

So which part of this did Gala adhere to?!?

There is no question that the events team makes exceptions to the promoted ethos of Southwark Council on green and ecological standards. This is part of the frustration when challenging the decision to allow an event of this kind in that part of the park. It's hypocrisy, and it's entirely commercially led. Other events have always been held on the common, be that the circus, fun fairs, even the two day Irish festival (back in the day). None of those events have ever caused anything like the level of disurbance or damage to the park and common. Local councillors will tell you that every year, the GALA organisers demand more and more and every year they have to be opposed by those same local councillors. It's exhausting. The consultaions are nothing to do with questioning of the event itself, but are designed to make tweaks and allay fears, because the deal is already done with the council events team by the time things get to that. It's so disrespectful to the idea of consultation and what that should mean.

[first mate]

I understand that we may never find out what Gala pocket out of this event, but I do not get how Southwark are able to keep their cut under wraps, if that is the case? I may have that wrong. The 'commercially sensitive' bit only applies if we know what percentage of overall Gala profits Southwark gets? I do not see how knowing the actual amount Southwark gets can be classified as sensitive? Southwark is not a private company. The point is the park requires investment and we are told some of this money will be used for that.

There are parts of the park badly in need of work. The toilets next to the park office are an absolute disgrace and apart from extreme dilapidation are also filthy, for anyone disabled or elderly, this is an aspect that needs fixing, immediately. They also need to be cleaned daily.

At a time of a large scale event like Gala, I do think the council should have a few parkies on patrol. I did not see one at any point, did anyone?  Gala look after their own interests with security all around the event perimeter but the rest of the park is open to abuse. On Saturday afternoon a group of young males were congregated beside the Sexby garden, consuming bottles of Vodka, an empty bottle discarded on the grass. They or others had also left discarded food wrappers and strips of blue paper towel lying around. Of course, youngsters will always do this sort of thing but it also needs a few grownups to supervise. Elsewhere there were smashed glass bottles. Come to think of it, I hardly ever see a parkie. Perhaps profits from Gala can be used to fund one?

Edited Tuesday at 09:12 by first mate

[Angelina]

a Freedom of Information request should confirm the amount of revenue generated from the event for the council and what the council spent that on.

There is nothing that meets the "commercially sensitive" exclusion (which is for the safeguarding of information which if disclosed would prejudice the commercial interests of any person, including the Public Authority holding the information),

Perhaps the best way forward is if we list the questions we want the council to answer and submit an FOI. It is a criminal offence for the public authority to refuse to disclose information and that can be enforced by the Information Commissioner.

I would have though that the council would want to be transparent.

 

 

[Penguin68]

1 minute ago, Angelina said:

I would have though that the council would want to be transparent

Well, there's a first time for anything, but transparency has, in my experience, never been their watch word. Secrecy and obfuscation however... 

[Angelina]

yes and it's illegal for the council to withhold information requested as an FOI, although they can use the exemption, if it meets criteria of being commercially sensitive, but it seems that is not the case, and would be less so if questions are suitably worded.

I don't know if there has been one, but am suggesting we compile questions and send one

[Penguin68]

I suspect that the council's deal may be based on a percentage of the gate take - as an example - but we want the actual sum paid and do not need to know the basis on which calculations were made. This is thus not very commercially sensitive as it discloses no information about the private company finances, other I suppose than one of its costs. As the council is obliged to disclose its sources of finance this shouldn't be an issue.

I suspect they are simply using this as an excuse to keep their own actions secret, which they are not meant to do. They may be worried that the sum 'earned' may be quite paltry and not commensurate with the cost to the community, including costs incurred by the council in doing this at all. 

Edited Tuesday at 11:15 by Penguin68

[Angelina]

Additionally, the council should be bound by the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981: This is the primary law protecting wildlife in Britain, including birds, their nests, and eggs. TfL, like other operators in London, must adhere to this Act when carrying out activities on their land or infrastructure. 

 

 

[alice]

Just seeing the extreme views expressed on this thread.  it’s a tiny minority who feel like that. I find it quite unpleasant.  

[Angelina]

AIice - a FOI is about ascertaining facts. 

It's not at all unpleasant, just necessary.

 

 

 

[DuncanW]

What makes you so sure that this information is not worthy of being classed as 'commercially sensitive'?  - they may feel that they could get more for this site or similar ones in the borough now or further down the line from another promoter. If it's publicly known what GALA are paying, that reduces their negotiating position in other contracts - plus GALA wouldn't want it publically known as another promoter could just come in and offer x% more to take it away from them. This is basic stuff, surely?

And it IS NOT a criminal offence to deny an FOI request that could be enforced by the ICO.  In some cases, it could be a criminal offence to block that, only after the ICO has made an enforcement. But that is a very different set of circumstances.

 

 

[Angelina]

I don't think the interest is to know what the council are paying GALA - just what the benefit is and how it's being invested elsewhere

[Rockets]

I think you have to question to whom it is "commercially sensitive" - the council or the Gala organisers? That rational for not sharing the detail can very easily be construed as a bit of a smokescreen for someone. 

[DuncanW]

3 hours ago, Angelina said:

a Freedom of Information request should confirm the amount of revenue generated from the event for the council and what the council spent that on.

 

⬆️