GALA 2026

[Blah Blah]

Yes, that compromise is in not extending the event to two weekends, and keeping it to the one currently. 

5 hours ago, CWP said:

Has anybody else had trouble signing up to attend the community engagement event for GALA? (See screenshot)

Yes, I am getting that too, but just go anyway. I intend to. 

On 14/11/2025 at 18:59, first mate said:

Blah Blah, great idea- we need a leader and organiser to get this started.

I will talk to FOPR, and see if there is any interest for a petition from those going to the consultation tm. We just need some volunteers to get together and do the leg work. I've done political party canvassing before, and so can organise a ward by ward schedule. I think it's fair to say that any goodwill some of us had towards working with Gala has gone with this proposed expansion. They are not the same people that started the event with We Are the Fair. At least one of those people actually lived next to the park. The people running things now have no connection to the park or local area and quite frankly are taking the p*** now. Might be worth officially demanding to know where the money the council gets from the festival is actually spent as well. 

[PeckhamRose]

The consultation advertised as being last night Tuesday 18th, and to which our Councillor Renata Hamvas told me she was unable to attend, never happened because Events Team and Gala never showed up at Pod 1 Peckham Library. Cllr Hamvas is not supporting the 2nd weekend.  I then noticed in Southwark News the meeting is scheduled for tonight Wednesday 19th Nov 2025.  I can't attend. CllrVictoria Mills doesn't reply to my emails. Anyone able to go? I am unable to leave the house at this time. 

[Sue]

2 hours ago, PeckhamRose said:

The consultation advertised as being last night Tuesday 18th, and to which our Councillor Renata Hamvas told me she was unable to attend, never happened because Events Team and Gala never showed up at Pod 1 Peckham Library. Cllr Hamvas is not supporting the 2nd weekend.  I then noticed in Southwark News the meeting is scheduled for tonight Wednesday 19th Nov 2025.  I can't attend. CllrVictoria Mills doesn't reply to my emails. Anyone able to go? I am unable to leave the house at this time. 

That all seems really poor.

How could there be two different publicised dates for the consultation?

Hopefully not deliberate 🙄

[Blah Blah]

That explains why no-one was there when I went yesterday. Something else to complain about this evening then, and given that at least one adjacent ward is having their Labour Party branch AGM this evening (the one Renata Hamvas belongs to), may well be raised in passing conversation there😉 . 

[Penguin68]

2 hours ago, Sue said:

Hopefully not deliberate

You thinK?

[Blah Blah]

Trying to get to the bottom of the confusion. The events team email, the council website and the letter we all got through the door, says the consultations are this evening. I went along yesterday because it looks as though word of mouth had sent some people there on the wrong day (myself included). So not an error by the council on the date, but definitely a problem in letting people register their interest in attending. Hopefully that clears things up.

[fishboy]

A letter, you say - we haven't had one of those (again...).  Has anyone seen any blue notices on the park railings? Or an advert in a 'local paper'? All things that Gala are supposed to be doing as part of their application, according to the consultation document. And will there be any penalties if they don't? 😖

Is there any update from those who attended either the online or physical PR tick box events? Such ridiculous times and location, why not hybrid & local?

[Blah Blah]

I went and will post a summary in morning. It was a farce. But the good that came out of it was the start of a physical petition and I will get started on a strategy group for an orgnised opposition to the extention. So watch this space and if anyone is interested in being part of that strategy group, please DM me. 

[first mate]

7 hours ago, Blah Blah said:

I went and will post a summary in morning. It was a farce. But the good that came out of it was the start of a physical petition and I will get started on a strategy group for an orgnised opposition to the extention. So watch this space and if anyone is interested in being part of that strategy group, please DM me. 

Blah Blah, many of us are grateful to you for taking the first steps towards saving the park from further privatisation and exploitation. A truly valuable community service.

I do hope Cllrs Hamvas and Mills can find the time to advocate for the future of the park, rather than seemingly view it as a useful events space for private hire money-spinner for a cash-strapped council.

 

[oldermum]

I have written and complained about the 'consultation'. The notice given was not adequate. Placing the in person consultation in Peckham means that it was not really accessible to many people - e.g.older people, some women and people with some disabilities that might not want to travel some distance to this venue on a cold dark evening. They effectively excluded many local residents. The offer of one online consultation is also not adequate and would not be accessible to people without digital access or who work during the day.  I think that this breaches the council's duties under the Equality Act.

I did get a helpful response from Jon Hartley, Dulwich Hill. Sadly he has not been selected to stand in next year's elections. Our other councillor, Maggie Browning, is on maternity leave and there appears to be no cover. I also emailed the Leader and Ellie Reeves.

Happy to support an online petition. I assume that it needs to be on the Southwark website.

[Penguin68]

1 hour ago, oldermum said:

I assume that it needs to be on the Southwark website.

I wouldn't hold your breathe that it would be allowed. They are not there to facilitate protest. 

[fishboy]

4 hours ago, oldermum said:

I have written and complained about the 'consultation'.

My understanding is that the "Community engagement sessions" aren't technically part of the consultation per se, and are not a necessity. They are basically PR / tick box exercises held by Gala to give the impression that they have 'reached out' to the local community, rather than a required action by the council - hence why there was (I presume?) no council representation on them. And as Gala don't like awkward questions, confrontation or home truths, of course they won't make it easy for people to attend...!

The 'consultation' is the online recording of local residents views / objections by the council (which is a required action), so that they too can tick a box and then grant a licence anyway, irrespective of those overwhelming objections (as they've done for the past two years).

The bit I can't understand is how a valid consultation can be carried out when the details of the event are unknown. Even whether the first Sunday is going to be a "concert" or a "festival" is "TBC"! How can anyone be expected to make informed comments on something they have no information on?

@Blah BlahIf I can help with some kind of action I will, but tbh after spending a lot of time and effort over the last few years battling Gala & the council events team just for them carry on regardless, I am slightly out of motivation...

[first mate]

What is also surprising is the silence of Cllrs Hamvas and Mills. Have either of you any sense of where they stand on the issue?

If We are the Fair no longer run the event, what do we know about the organisation that has taken over?

[PeckhamRose]

2 hours ago, first mate said:

What is also surprising is the silence of Cllrs Hamvas and Mills. Have either of you any sense of where they stand on the issue?

If We are the Fair no longer run the event, what do we know about the organisation that has taken over?

I already posted that Cllr Hamvas has said will not give Gala licence for the 2nd weekend. Cllr Mills doesn't respond to my emails.  It might have been better had the meeting been held at Clockhouse pub or closer to the Park. 

[first mate]

5 hours ago, PeckhamRose said:

I already posted that Cllr Hamvas has said will not give Gala licence for the 2nd weekend. Cllr Mills doesn't respond to my emails.  It might have been better had the meeting been held at Clockhouse pub or closer to the Park. 

Sorry PR, somehow I missed that. Do you think that without a licence that means the event cannot be extended then? If so, that would be fantastic news.

I would also like to see it cut back to the original size before it was extended in terms of footprint, last year.

[PeckhamRose]

18 hours ago, first mate said:

Sorry PR, somehow I missed that. Do you think that without a licence that means the event cannot be extended then? If so, that would be fantastic news.

I would also like to see it cut back to the original size before it was extended in terms of footprint, last year.

I would prefer it be cancelled from here altogether.  It's a nightmare no matter 3 days or 6. They have no respect for any of us and it flies in the face of Southwark's claims to be a listening caring council to its residents. It is SO loud and SO disruptive to park and wildlife. Money doesn't go back to cover damage which should not be done in the first place. 

[MrsR]

https://www.mylondon.news/whats-on/controversial-south-london-festival-could-32923666

[first mate]

5 hours ago, MrsR said:

https://www.mylondon.news/whats-on/controversial-south-london-festival-could-32923666

That's a lot of objectors. Hard to know how the Council can ignore this level of dissatisfaction or allow the two weekend extension that the event organisers are asking for.
Let them look at doing one weekend on the Common (the usual site for all other events on Peckham Rye);  leave the actual park to be used as a green space and haven over all of summer, as it should be.

[aggie]

9 hours ago, MrsR said:

https://www.mylondon.news/whats-on/controversial-south-london-festival-could-32923666

Would like to sign the petition. How do I find it?

[Gooseygreeny]

I read the environmental report and it's not convincing that there is any substantial wildlife benefits at all. If the main highlight is a paved-over stream, then it's not a biodiverse park. It seems like it's all just grass and the odd duck and gull. If it was stave hill ecological park or nunhead cemetery I could understand, but it's primarily amenity grassland.

It's  designed for community events like Gala which a lot of my friends in the borough attend. The park is for everyone's benefit, so it seems very reasonable to allow 1-2 weekends for younger generations that enjoy these kinds of events. 

[Sue]

2 hours ago, Gooseygreeny said:

I read the environmental report and it's not convincing that there is any substantial wildlife benefits at all. If the main highlight is a paved-over stream, then it's not a biodiverse park. It seems like it's all just grass and the odd duck and gull. If it was stave hill ecological park or nunhead cemetery I could understand, but it's primarily amenity grassland.

It's  designed for community events like Gala which a lot of my friends in the borough attend. The park is for everyone's benefit, so it seems very reasonable to allow 1-2 weekends for younger generations that enjoy these kinds of events. 

From a post on the previous page, which  was in answer to a similar post from you:

And also this one, also in response to you;

Edited Sunday at 14:07 by Sue

[aggie]

Gooseygreeny, would you ever consider taking a sound system into your garden and playing music as loud as it can possibly be? Would you think of doing this from lunchtime until 10.30pm for 3 days in a row and then repeat it the following weekend? Somehow I think not. No reasonable person would do this, considering that we are all surrounded by neighbours. You would surely realise that whilst you might be enjoying yourself an awful lot of people are not and that they would be extremely upset. Would it occur to you that your antisocial behaviour would cause misery and untold stress to others? This what Gala does - big time.

[first mate]

The idea that the park was "designed" for events like a 5-day music festival is misplaced, to say the least. Excerpt taken from Southwark Council website about the park:

 

"Peckham Rye Park and Common is a Victorian park and historic common featuring ornamental gardens, flowing streams, woodland, and a lake. It provides a pleasant refuge for both the local community and wildlife.

The garden is an area of tranquillity with sensory summer planting, a winter garden, bug towers, a beehive, a pond, raised beds for community fruit and vegetable growing and a shaded meadow area with a loggery and seating. The entry gates were specially commissioned and designed by Heather Burrell.

This is a beautiful oasis of peace amid the bustle of city life. "

 

[fishboy]

On 23/11/2025 at 11:24, Gooseygreeny said:

I read the environmental report and it's not convincing that there is any substantial wildlife benefits at all. If the main highlight is a paved-over stream, then it's not a biodiverse park. It seems like it's all just grass and the odd duck and gull. If it was stave hill ecological park or nunhead cemetery I could understand, but it's primarily amenity grassland.

It's  designed for community events like Gala which a lot of my friends in the borough attend. The park is for everyone's benefit, so it seems very reasonable to allow 1-2 weekends for younger generations that enjoy these kinds of events. 

I'm presuming you're not a regular visitor to the park, if you need to read a report rather than just know what wildlife is in the park. All those trees to the East of the site, which is the direction most of the stages blast towards, have many nesting / resident birds in May. I've seen Woodpeckers and hear owls regularly. Did you also read the 'bat' survey for the 2025 event, which confirmed many species of foraging bats in the area which WOULD be affected by loud noise & bright lights? And I'm guessing it's no coincidence that I haven't seen a Stag beetle for several years now, which I used to see regularly around May / June in the SW corner of the park. Plenty of biodiversity, all of which is clearly disturbed massively by this event, in what is a PUBLIC park.

I'd be very interested to know where it says that the park was "designed" for massive festivals? And it's not "1-2 weekends" , it's just shy of four weeks that the site is unavailable to the public, plus many months of reinstatement that effectively turn it into a (re) construction site throughout the summer, just when the younger generations i.e. children would like to enjoy it...