Jump to content

Recommended Posts

1. Who are the Officers of FOCC?

2. Where is the constitution of FOCC and is it publicly available?

3. Are FOCC meetings minuted and where are the meeting minutes published?

4. What is the relationship between FOCC and SSW?

5. How are FOCC funds managed?

6. When are you actually serving Southwark Council with an injunction?

And finally Why were you barred by FONC?

JoeLeg: It's a shame you didn't come over and say hello.


It was great to meet so many hundreds of people who had already heard about Southwark's horrific actions and plans and were against them.


Please come to the Families and Friends Day on 25th June - meet 2pm Camberwell New Cemetery Gates Brenchley Gardens SE23 3RD


We will be informing people again of Southwark's actions and plans digging up or mounding over almost half a million graves for resale - and felling acres of woods 'in the way'. All welcome.


http://savesouthwarkwoods.org.uk/families-protest-grave-robbery/4593842405



Blanche Cameron

Friends of Camberwell Cemeteries / Save Southwark Woods campaign

07731 304 966 / [email protected] / www.savesouthwarkwoods.org.uk

"JoeLeg: It's a shame you didn't come over and say hello."


If you think I'm giving Lewis another opportunity to insult me and threaten me, you've another thing coming. He thinks he's pretty hard, doesn't he? Likes to try and intimidate people, eh? Swear at them? Call them names? He chucks his aggression around pretty freely, he wants to be careful with that.

Blanche Cameron Wrote:

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

> Near total support for protecting and preserving

> the cemeteries as nature reserves.

> Over 700 signatures collected at a Nunhead

> Cemetery Open Day Saturday.

>

> People are against this for so many reasons.

>

>

I'm sure they are. What did the petition which they signed say?

It's worth noting several things about the petition - the wording of which I have not seen.


(1) Many people sign petitions without really reading them, particularly where they may be responding to things said (or to banners etc.) which do not exactly match the petition's wording.


(2) The way that the case is presented may be biased - 'stop Southwark desecrating war graves' for instance would be something many people would agree with (and the fact that there are no plans so to do would be irrelevant to their support). 'Stop Southwark destroying nature' similarly. The actual, complex and nuanced impacts of Southwark's actual plans are very unlikely to be effectively communicated in these circumstances.


(3) Even where addresses or post-codes are collected for a petition they are, in my experience, rarely carefully scrutinised. Although those coming to this particular open day are quite likely to be 'local' they are not necessarily so. When last in Pisa (a month or so ago) I had to argue strongly with someone collecting signatures for a petition about legalising drugs that, as a non Pisan (and non Italian) my support was frankly irrelevant to. I suspect that many potential signers may be less punctilious, especially if pressed to sign.


(4) Even where the method of communicating their ideas was wholly unbiased and fact-based (any estimates as to the chances of that?) and even where only genuinely local people took part, anyone who disagreed with ssw's position has no vehicle in which to express his/ her disagreement. The 'votes' for are counted, without any mechanism for collecting or counting votes against.


So, I'm glad if people had a good day at in Nunhead, but what else happened there is wholly irrelevant to anything.

The petition to save the Camberwell Cemeteries states:


?We petition the London Borough of Southwark to stop destroying trees, open spaces and graves in Camberwell Old and New Cemeteries and make the cemeteries nature reserves.?


Over 14,000 people have signed our petition -- 10,000+ online and 4000+ on paper.


Anyone could start a group or petition to support Southwark?s redevelopment of the cemeteries, if they desire.


Added: If you would like to sign the petition to save the graves and trees, please go http://www.savesouthwarkwoods.org.uk


Blanche Cameron

Friends of Camberwell Cemeteries / Save Southwark Woods campaign

07731 304 966 / [email protected] / www.savesouthwarkwoods.org.uk

Are these questions to hard for you to answer as you much prefer to ignore them? It really is not hard you know.


1. Who are the Officers of FOCC?

2. Where is the constitution of FOCC and is it publicly available?

3. Are FOCC meetings minuted and where are the meeting minutes published?

4. What is the relationship between FOCC and SSW?

5. How are FOCC funds managed?

6. When are you actually serving Southwark Council with an injunction?

And finally Why were you barred by FONC?


Lets continue the debate!!!!!!!!!

?We petition the London Borough of Southwark to stop destroying trees, open spaces and graves in Camberwell Old and New Cemeteries and make the cemeteries nature reserves.?


(1) - Although trees are being removed in the clearance phase, there will be replanting (hopefully of the right species at appropriate distances from each other to allow proper growth showing the full glory of the trees planted). Southwark has estimated the net loss (if any) of proper mature trees (as opposed to scrub and unplanned sapling growth) to be small.


(2) The 'open spaces' are a moot point - some of it is currently hard-standing as I understand, so hardly the basis for a 'nature reserve'


(3) In your petition you do not say - 'stop any more burials in Southwark at all' - quite a key part of your intent. Many people believe (you apparently have done so in the past) that the designated status of the existing cemeteries somehow makes them a protected or nature reserve, so many people will assume, particularly outside Nunhead cemetery, that what you are asking for is the status quo, and not a change of use. Indeed you do not make it clear that the 'destruction of graves' includes the mounding of invisible grave sites (no memorials) to allow more burials.


And you have not said what other statements were being made around the signing sessions which might have led people to misunderstand what they were signing. As I have said, many people sign street petitions without really attending to the actual words they are signing.

dhboy: As if we are doing this for the money.


Here are more photos at Nunhead Cemetery Open Day.


http://www.savesouthwarkwoods.org.uk/locals-want-project-stopped/4593871923


Blanche Cameron

Friends of Camberwell Cemeteries / Save Southwark Woods campaign

07731 304 966 / [email protected] / www.savesouthwarkwoods.org.uk

Ms Cameron missed this:


1. Who are the Officers of FOCC?

2. Where is the constitution of FOCC and is it publicly available?

3. Are FOCC meetings minuted and where are the meeting minutes published?

4. What is the relationship between FOCC and SSW?

5. How are FOCC funds managed?

6. When are you actually serving Southwark Council with an injunction?

And finally Why were you barred by FONC?

You say you are FOCC, well in my book, that quite simply makes you ACCOUNTABLE, so I ask again;


1. Who are the Officers of FOCC?

2. Where is the constitution of FOCC and is it publicly available?

3. Are FOCC meetings minuted and where are the meeting minutes published?

4. What is the relationship between FOCC and SSW?

5. How are FOCC funds managed?

6. When are you actually serving Southwark Council with an injunction?

And finally Why were you barred by FONC?


And by the way, if you cannot or fail to answer what in effect are some Very easy questions, I believe you are unfit to call yourselves FOCC.


Let's have the debate, that's what I and others are seeking from you, and that includes answering questions that are asked of you as you state you are FOCC.

dbboy Wrote:

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

> You say you are FOCC, well in my book, that quite

> simply makes you ACCOUNTABLE, so I ask again;


A more immediate question might be what's happening to the collected signatures? Who holds them now, was a fully-compliant Fair Processing Notice issued, and were appropriate contact details provided?


Such minutiae are often overlooked, but Data Protection doesn't just cover electronic data and SSW/FOCC don't appear to have either a privacy policy or a physical address. As I'd hate anyone to get into any more trouble on account of such minor lapses, I'd suggest they sort that out first.


As for the other questions, if it's nothing more than a bunch of people (an 'unincorporated association') then then they don't need to publish anything or be registered anywhere (except with HMRC, should they sell anything or take money from people/organisations under the FOCC/SSW name). As far as the public is concerned, FOCC/SSW is just a name, it's not a legal entity, and therefore cannot sue anyone, be sued or (for that matter) organise petitions. That is all done by the individual members as individuals, each of which is exactly as accountable as any other individual would be, except for the directors, who are personally legally liable for the consequences of any actions taken in the name of the organisation.

Anyone can call themselves a Friends Of... organisation, in the same way anyone can call themselves Doctor whatever. However, if they've adopted the name and displaced a group who were already in place that's not particularly pleasant.

The Camberwell Cemeteries Working Group is focused mainly on saving the green spaces of the two cemeteries.


Friends of Camberwell Cemeteries and the Save Southwark Woods campaign are working to protect the green spaces but also all the graves and the memorials. That is why FOCC reaches out to families and friends of those buried there to inform them about what is happening.


Family Day is Sunday 25th June, meet 2pm Camberwell New Cemetery Gates, info here:

http://savesouthwarkwoods.org.uk/families-protest-grave-robbery/4593842405


Attached is a photo today of an area in the Old Cemetery that the Working Group and FOCC are fighting together to save.


Blanche Cameron

Friends of Camberwell Cemeteries / Save Southwark Woods campaign

07731 304 966 / [email protected] / www.savesouthwarkwoods.org.uk

Old Cemetery Flowers...


More like Old Cemetery Weeds - I note you have never posted either photographs of the wonderful daffodil displays in the early spring - or the growing (and will have flowers) meadow sections - but then, these are in the actual working cemetery and not the abandoned area of scrub. It would have been possible to argue for a 'woodland' planting in part of the recovered areas (in fact, clearly the sections along the Underhill boundary have been somewhat planted in this fashion) - but that would have been to look for helpful compromise - not part of the ssw shtick which is all about confrontation and half truths.


And let's get it straight - what you want isn't a better cemetery - it's no cemetery, no burials - no use. Just another area for dog walkers. And foxes, and rats, and Japanese Knotweed and other invasive plants. Because there's no money for yet another pleasure palace for those who hate the living (people) - although apparently, by your posts, you worship the dead, as long as they are long dead and have a military background - and love only a muddle of trees. Because working cemeteries are very much for the living.

As you have not had the courtesy to provide answers I'll do it for you.



1. Who are the Officers of FOCC?


We don't have none


2. Where is the constitution of FOCC and is it publicly available?


What's a constitution????


3. Are FOCC meetings minuted and where are the meeting minutes published?


Naaaaaa, we meet down the pub


4. What is the relationship between FOCC and SSW?


Errr well, errrrrrr, their ain't one


5. How are FOCC funds managed?


"As if we are doing this for the money"


6. When are you actually serving Southwark Council with an injunction?


Errrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr, we're STILL thinking about it.


And finally Why were you barred by FONC?


Well, we was outside.



So, FOCC is really just made up, just like the whole rest of ssw, its all one big shenanigans, nuff said, nuff time wasted, lots of hot air and plenty of inaction.

You made me laugh - Save Southwark?s Weeds!


But mostly you?ve stopped talking about Southwark?s plans - cutting down acres of trees to mound over and dig up the dead for burial plots. Are you beginning to realise how bad it is?


FOCC?s Family Day is on 25th June - come and hear about Southwark?s plans, we?ll have the 2012 Burial Strategy with us. Meet 2pm Camberwell New Cemetery Gates:

http://savesouthwarkwoods.org.uk/families-protest-grave-robbery/4593842405


Blanche Cameron

Friends of Camberwell Cemeteries / Save Southwark Woods campaign

07731 304 966 / [email protected] / www.savesouthwarkwoods.org.uk

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...