-
-
Latest Discussions
-
By northernmonkey · Posted
Again on this - fees at local privates have been increasing circa 10% per annum recently and it hasn't stopped them being massively oversubscribed so this notion that there will be a mass exodus is a weird take on it. 2. The Labour plans for adding VAT have been around for a while - so if we are looking at secondary age kids, realistically the youngest year not to have known about it before putting their child in private school is year 10 now. There is often movement to state at sixth form anyway, so perhaps only 1 year to find the difference. For those at primary, similar story - v few 4+ places locally anyway comparatively so those at 7+ will be getting to year 6 now and could apply to secondaries. Using Charter North as a comparator isn't really reasonable - yes its oversubscribed. Some children who go to private now also wouldn't get in - but there are other Southwark schools which aren't over subscribed so there would be educational provision. -
It doesn't really matter anymore how we got here, everyone's far too fixated on blaming one thing / one party / one person. (I notice Mal you haven't mentioned Truss in there). What matters is how the next government is going to get us out. And, as Spartacus says, it's likely that no government can, not in the next term anyway. Labour will win this election and, as they won't be able to make any meaningful dent in the country's problems (which are also about poor infrastructure, outsized by population and slow growth), the Tories will be back in in five years. -
Of course the minimum 'lost time' for normal Rye users is actually the fat end of 3 weeks, once set up and strike is taken into account, and before any necessary recovery time is additionally added in. And that's normally during the summer period (this June is exceptional) when you might be expecting to take most benefit of a park. What I think is also objected to is the opacity of the whole arrangement - is this actually, once fully costed, in fact profitable for Southwark? If so where are these profits distributed (and if not where are the costs taken)? Are the Organisers charged for 3 days use or 3 weeks (or however long it takes)? Claiming 'commercial confidentiality' is not really acceptable when one party is a public body with public responsibilities for proper management. At the least the profit and loss issue of operating as an event landlord should be disclosed, even when the actual charges were kept confidential. If the council cannot be open and honest about its dealings (or chooses not to be) it starts to beg a cascade of questions. Knowing they made £1000 profit (or £1000 loss) does not breach confidentiality when the base figures aren't disclosed, but it does tell us whether the disruption to council tax payers was worthwhile in the grander scheme of things. -
By first mate · Posted
And the Brockwell Park model is exactly what Southwark Council have in mind , if they can get away with it. As to the observation that festival- goers also like to have an event in 'pretty' surroundings; I am sure they do, why wouldn't they. It also arguably makes that event even more saleable/profitable. But the inherent contradiction that the event they attend then removes degrees of prettiness for others, not only during the event but for weeks afterwards, cannot be denied either.
-
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now