Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I think if they did lift and deepen private graves then this would be open to legal challenge.


Although that is possible, it is clearly a drafting error in the most recent (2007) legislation - clearly Southwark was excluded from the earlier (1976) legislation because what was being proposed was already enacted for them in 1975. The most recent (2007) legislation, which referred back only to the 1976 Act could be understood to clearly mean that all those now conforming to the 1976 processes (which Southwark had already achieved in 1975) were additionally now covered by the new legislation of 2007. That sort of problem is why we still have a revising chamber (which didn't do its job in this case). I suspect that any judicial review would conclude that Southwark, in following a lift and deepen policy, would be acting consistently with the intent of legislators, if outside the (flawed) coverage of the 2007 act, which should additionally have referred to the 1975 as well as the 1976 Act. There is, as far as I can see, no intent in the 2007 Act to create an Inner London anomaly in Southwark compared with all other London Boroughs. Lift and deepen was chosen so that any survivors (after 75 years) who wished to visit the site of their relatives burials could visit the same site as before, even though that site was now shared (as of course common graves always were). This is still a caring policy, in Southwark as elsewhere in London. The practices (of disinterment and re-burial elsewhere) regarding re-use in common graves in consecrated areas was mandated by the Church of England, who I believe are themselves reconsidering this.

Sue Wrote:

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

> JoeLeg Wrote:s

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

>

> >

> > Coward.

>

>

>

> Probably best to stick to facts rather than make

> personal attacks?


>

> Difficult I know given SSW's general modus

> operandi.



I'd say that is a fact.


They've got a history of being aggressive and rude, you know what Lewis did, and they refuse to answer straight questions. Like, point blank ignoring them. They long ago lost any pretence of being willing to negotiate or debate. It's the refuge of a coward to insult people when they disagree and refuse to listen to dissenting opinion. Why should we be nice to them?


The motto of 'play the ball, not the person' ceases to matter when the other person is being so openly passive-aggressive and unwilling to recognise that other people should be respected.

> Attachments: SN 9 March 2017 (1200 x 1600).jpg (460KB)


There's a legible full version of the article, with additional photographs, at https://www.southwarknews.co.uk/news/southwark-diocese-approves-council-plans-hundreds-new-burial-plots-fought-cemeteries/

As a friends of... group have they elected a chair and so on? Presumably the minutes of their meetings are online for the public? They'll also have a headcount of attendees...


Blanche, I know you don't like answering questions but these are quite important ones.

STATEMENT:


CHURCH ASKS COMMONWEALTH WAR GRAVES COMMISSION NOT TO PUT MEMORIALS ON THE GRAVES OF LOCAL POOR WW1 SOLDIER'S GRAVES


Callous Southwark Council wants to sell ?new? burial plots over the graves of forty-eight local First World War soldiers.


And the Church of England has said the Commonwealth War Graves Commission do not need to mark the poor soldiers? graves - to avoid making them seem special and for 'practical purposes', that is, to allow Southwark to bury on top of them.


To read more... http://www.savesouthwarkwoods.org.uk/48-ww1-soldiers-graves/4593715253


Disrespect for the Nation's soldiers is another reason why Southwark's burial strategy must be stopped.


TODAY'S SOUTHWARK NEWS ONLINE


"Cabinet member reacts to accusations of 'religious discrimination' from Save Southwark Woods campaigners"

https://www.southwarknews.co.uk/news/southwark-diocese-approves-council-plans-hundreds-new-burial-plots-fought-cemeteries/


Blanche Cameron

Friends of Camberwell Cemeteries / Save Southwark Woods Campaign

07731 304 966 [email protected]

[www.savesouthwarkwoods.org.uk]

Twitter: @southwarkwoods Facebook: Save Southwark Woods


Friends of Camberwell Cemeteries was founded as Save Southwark Woods in January 2015 to stop the destruction of the woods and graves of Camberwell Old and New Cemeteries.

We are for maintaining recreational activities already taking place on cemetery grounds, such as the Recreation Ground and the Allotments.

We are for preserving the cemeteries as Memorial Park Nature Reserves, like Nunhead or Highgate Cemeteries.

Hey Blanche,


This new tactic you're trying with soldiers graves - take it over to ARRSE and see how much support you get!


I'm only one ex-soldier, who thinks you can sod off with that tactic. But go and ask some more. If you're so keen to play the military card maybe see if you can get some military types on board? Otherwise maybe stop thinking you speak for the military.

SSW's latest angle on this is a wilful and disingenuous misreading of Petchey's judgement. Quite staggering really. And utterly disreputable.


A link to the full judgement is here:


http://www.savesouthwarkwoods.org.uk/download/i/mark_dl/u/4013025308/4631603353/Petchey%20Consistory%20Court%20Ruling%20Camberwell%20Cemeteries.pdf


Worth reading as an insightful, balanced and thoughtful analysis of the issues.


Para 45 deals with the war graves issue. Key quote - "CWGC do not object to the proposals and evidently see them as an opportunity to provide additional commemoration of the war dead." I would absolutely trust the CGWC on this matter. They are a brilliant organisation.


Paras 49-54 deal with the tree issue. Pretty damning of SSW.

I think ssw is attempting a wonderful obfuscation. They are not (properly) distinguishing between Commonwealth War Graves (I suspect) and the graves of WW1 soldiers who did not die in the war, but subsequently (possibly a lot subsequently). And there are at least 2 (I think) graves of WW1 soldiers who did die in the war, but who were buried privately and not in a War Grave (including I think one VC - but I am very prepared to be contradicted on this). So they are parading an, at best, half truth as a reason for objection. Par for their course, of course, but actually quite disgusting. There is an argument about some individual graves, of course, but the tenet of their objection is pure flim-flam.
I should add that if I'm right about the VC grave, it is also one in the 'wilded' section and is thus virtually impossible to access, as they others probably are as well. So hardly available for respectful mourning - not that that's ever actually been what these people are about!
There are two VC graves in the cemetery. In the wooded area lies William Stanlake, who got his VC at Inkerman during the Crimean War. His old regiment association (the Coldstream Guards?) put a stone up recently and created a clearing, so you can easily access it. The other is Albert Mackenzie (WW1) whose grave forms part of a private plot, near to but not part of the main war grave site and memorial (at the north eastern edge where COC abuts Forest Hill Road). I think he is buried in his mother's plot. So his stone is just in front of hers. Mackenzie survived the war (as did Stanlake). But he died of influenza in 1918. They erected a statue to him in Bermondsey a few years ago.

Wow, I just looked at the @SouthwarkWoods twitter feed. Sample tweet: "Read @peterjohn6 @lb_southwark says "Discrimination? Muslims & Jews are free to eat our pork pies like everyone!".


Links to an article where nothing of the kind is said or even hinted at. I don't even know where to start with that.

His old regiment association (the Coldstream Guards?) put a stone up recently and created a clearing, so you can easily access it.


Sorry, yes, I did recall this, but not quite correctly - his grave had been lost to the undergrowth but was 'reclaimed' by his regiment. I had not realised there was a second VC as well. Commonwealth War Graves contain graves of those who died in the war or as a direct consequence of it (hence a number of post-war deaths in the grave of combatants who died later in hospital - which also is why there are war graves in UK cemeteries as well as associated with battlefields).

TREES BEING CUT ON ONE TREE HILL - 13 SO FAR - DOZENS TO COME - DEMO CALLED SATURDAY 12PM


Emergency Demo For One Tree Hill:

12pm Saturday 11th March

Meet 12pm Camberwell New Cemetery Gates

Brenchley Gardens SE23 3RD


Southwark Council started felling trees on One Tree Hill this morning.


Southwark is denying any trees have yet been felled as they are required to carry out bird and bat roost assessments before beginning. Southwark says "only ground vegetation cleared". More trees to come scarring One Tree Hill for generations.


MORE INFO: http://www.savesouthwarkwoods.org.uk/demo-for-one-tree-hill/4593718959


Blanche Cameron

Friends of Camberwell Cemeteries / Save Southwark Woods Campaign

07731 304 966 [email protected]

[www.savesouthwarkwoods.org.uk]

Twitter: @southwarkwoods Facebook: Save Southwark Woods


Friends of Camberwell Cemeteries was founded as Save Southwark Woods in January 2015 to stop the destruction of the woods and graves of Camberwell Old and New Cemeteries.

We are for maintaining recreational activities already taking place on cemetery grounds, such as the Recreation Ground and the Allotments.

We are for preserving the cemeteries as Memorial Park Nature Reserves, like Nunhead or Highgate Cemeteries.

Oh, the horror, Southwark is out gardening again.


(Considering the scrub and sapling growth in the Old Cemetery in just 15 years of neglect - with saplings 13-17ft tall, 'scarring One Tree Hill for generations' may be a little rich, but hyperbole is their middle name)

It is NOT on One Tree Hill. It is NEXT to the hill on the other side of the boundary, that is a HUGE difference from what you state. Can you stop mis-leading people by causing confusion and conjecture.


As the attempt to create racial tensions has seemed to fail you are now bringing our WW1 hero's into your vile argument. STOP as you are discrediting these people who fought 100 years ago for all our freedom.

DEMONSTRATION ON ONE TREE HILL

STOP THE CUTTING OF TREES ON ONE TREE HILL


Meet at Camberwell New Cemetery Main Gates

12pm Saturday 11th March

Meet 12pm Camberwell New Cemetery Gates

Brenchley Gardens SE23 3RD


Southwark Council started felling trees on One Tree Hill yesterday, next hoardings, then the tree cutters come in.

Cutting down trees for 121 burial plots



MORE INFO: [www.savesouthwarkwoods.org.uk]


Blanche Cameron

Friends of Camberwell Cemeteries / Save Southwark Woods Campaign

07731 304 966 [email protected]

[www.savesouthwarkwoods.org.uk]

Twitter: @southwarkwoods Facebook: Save Southwark Woods


Friends of Camberwell Cemeteries was founded as Save Southwark Woods in January 2015 to stop the destruction of the woods and graves of Camberwell Old and New Cemeteries.

We are for maintaining recreational activities already taking place on cemetery grounds, such as the Recreation Ground and the Allotments.

We are for preserving the cemeteries as Memorial Park Nature Reserves, like Nunhead or Highgate Cemeteries.

The Cemeteries cause made the Telegraph today.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/10/war-graves-lost-court-gives-council-permission-bury-civilians/


DEMONSTRATION ON ONE TREE HILL

STOP THE CUTTING OF TREES ON ONE TREE HILL


Meet at Camberwell New Cemetery Main Gates

12pm Saturday 11th March

Meet 12pm Camberwell New Cemetery Gates

Brenchley Gardens SE23 3RD


Southwark Council started felling trees on One Tree Hill yesterday, next hoardings, then the tree cutters come in.

Cutting down trees for 121 burial plots



MORE INFO: [www.savesouthwarkwoods.org.uk]


Blanche Cameron

Friends of Camberwell Cemeteries / Save Southwark Woods Campaign

07731 304 966 [email protected]

[www.savesouthwarkwoods.org.uk]

Twitter: @southwarkwoods Facebook: Save Southwark Woods


Friends of Camberwell Cemeteries was founded as Save Southwark Woods in January 2015 to stop the destruction of the woods and graves of Camberwell Old and New Cemeteries.

We are for maintaining recreational activities already taking place on cemetery grounds, such as the Recreation Ground and the Allotments.

We are for preserving the cemeteries as Memorial Park Nature Reserves, like Nunhead or Highgate Cemeteries.

The Cemeteries cause made the Telegraph today.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/10/war-graves-lost-court-gives-council-permission-bury-civilians/


DEMONSTRATION ON ONE TREE HILL

STOP THE CUTTING OF TREES ON ONE TREE HILL


Meet at Camberwell New Cemetery Main Gates

12pm Saturday 11th March

Meet 12pm Camberwell New Cemetery Gates

Brenchley Gardens SE23 3RD


Southwark Council started felling trees on One Tree Hill yesterday, next hoardings, then the tree cutters come in.

Cutting down trees for 121 burial plots


About today: [www.savesouthwarkwoods.org.uk]


Blanche Cameron

Friends of Camberwell Cemeteries / Save Southwark Woods Campaign

07731 304 966 [email protected]

[www.savesouthwarkwoods.org.uk]

Twitter: @southwarkwoods Facebook: Save Southwark Woods


Friends of Camberwell Cemeteries was founded as Save Southwark Woods in January 2015 to stop the destruction of the woods and graves of Camberwell Old and New Cemeteries.

We are for maintaining recreational activities already taking place on cemetery grounds, such as the Recreation Ground and the Allotments.

We are for preserving the cemeteries as Memorial Park Nature Reserves, like Nunhead or Highgate Cemeteries.

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

    • It's the "due to commercial reasons" line again that is vexing. Last year it seemed, although there was a similar level of objection, that the reasons were commercial - Gala didn't appear entirely prepared to run 3 more events, or more likely didn't have sufficient interest from other promoters / organisers who could 'sub-let' the site as with Brockwell Park (I believe?). This year they appeared more organised, had another year to plan & prepare, to the extent they actually had names for two of the three new events which indicated to me that they had third party promoters / organisers in place.  So yes, it does make you wonder whether the repeated level of objection, combined with the impending elections, led to the council 'advising' that maybe they shelve it again? I'm afraid I can't see the whole extension application just being a ruse to guarantee permission for the 'regular' event. Gala are a commercial venture with ambition - every festival's business plan is to expand, expand, expand, year on year on year. Gala won't give up until they have taken over the whole park for a Summer of Raves, and the mysterious owners are on their yachts counting their ££££
    • Thanks for that. Maybe forthcoming elections have stymied the 7 day request? If Labour get back in, do we think GALA will try with greater success in 2027?
    • Better late than never, same obscure reason as previously for not going ahead with the extended plan... "Due to commercial reasons, the event organisers have withdrawn their application to hold a 7- day event over two weekends. The application has been revised to request the use of Peckham Rye Park to hold a 4-day event over one bank holiday weekend with the following schedule: • Onsite: Monday 11 May 2026 • GALA: Friday 22 – Sunday 24 May • On the Rye Festival: BH Monday 25 May • Off-site Sunday 31 May 2026 This is the same event programme that was delivered in 2025."  GALA 2026 consultation findings report 1519.pdf
    • Do great pizzas there at community cafe.. lots going on — was free parking but plans  to like everywhere get folk to pay.  Nice area… only discovered it a few years ago..   
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...