Brighton Terrace Drug Treatment centre
- Thread starter Bob
- Start date
As far as I can make out, 141 is Segas House, the old Gas offices - it's in between the Sunlight Laundary (135) and the curious printers (?) on the corner of Acre Lane and Kings Avenue (159). Are we sure that this is the vacant building in question?
It's been empty for a while and was used for a Rave (or whatever young people call these events where they play their beat-combo records loudly, these days) last summer, and caused much protest from nearby residents. There are houses facing, it's just round the corner from King's Avenue School and there are blocks of flats near by. They'd have a fight on their hands.
I think Bob may be right - this is just a tactic to kick it into the long grass.
It's been empty for a while and was used for a Rave (or whatever young people call these events where they play their beat-combo records loudly, these days) last summer, and caused much protest from nearby residents. There are houses facing, it's just round the corner from King's Avenue School and there are blocks of flats near by. They'd have a fight on their hands.
I think Bob may be right - this is just a tactic to kick it into the long grass.
innit said:
I am guessing this is it? (from drugs.gov.uk)
Not that the document is marked, dated or anything, or linked from the ODPM's site, or on the government search engine. Why do all government websites that are supposed to open up information end up doing the exact opposite. Why is everything in PDF so that google cant find it
<rant over>Ive only had a quick flick through it, but the guidelines seem so vauge that you could object on almost any grounds. It does however specifically mention childrens playgrounds which is one of the grounds for objection in Brighton Terrace.
pooka said:
It does look that way. Of all the replies so far only Kate Hoey has stated any rpeference for a location
innit
c'mon, little life giver
I wrote a really long reply to this thread yesterday and then lost it 
The more I think about it, the more I do see their point (sorry). It is SLAM's job to come up with an appropriate site, taking into account relevant guidance eg the ODPM guidelines (which I might ask Toren Smith if he can send me). I can see why they would rather receive a proposal which offers several potential sites which could be consulted on.
However, I can also see how their approach offers them an easy out, which allows them to give lip service to the drug treatment centre while never actually having to bite the bullet and, inevitably, piss off a bunch of resident who end up living near to the site. I can also see why SLAM might have thought it was perfectly acceptable (and perhaps in some ways preferable) to offer a proposal for one location to the planning committee. Can you imagine the bunfight which could ensue between 2 or 3 groups of disgruntled residents, none of whom want the site on their road to be chosen.
I will think about a suitable reply to Toren's email in which I would ask him if he can demonstrate his positive support / commitment to the project as a resource for the wider community, including those constitutents who would use the service.
The more I think about it, the more I do see their point (sorry). It is SLAM's job to come up with an appropriate site, taking into account relevant guidance eg the ODPM guidelines (which I might ask Toren Smith if he can send me). I can see why they would rather receive a proposal which offers several potential sites which could be consulted on.
However, I can also see how their approach offers them an easy out, which allows them to give lip service to the drug treatment centre while never actually having to bite the bullet and, inevitably, piss off a bunch of resident who end up living near to the site. I can also see why SLAM might have thought it was perfectly acceptable (and perhaps in some ways preferable) to offer a proposal for one location to the planning committee. Can you imagine the bunfight which could ensue between 2 or 3 groups of disgruntled residents, none of whom want the site on their road to be chosen.
I will think about a suitable reply to Toren's email in which I would ask him if he can demonstrate his positive support / commitment to the project as a resource for the wider community, including those constitutents who would use the service.
innit said:I wrote a really long reply to this thread yesterday and then lost it
The more I think about it, the more I do see their point (sorry). It is SLAM's job to come up with an appropriate site, taking into account relevant guidance eg the ODPM guidelines (which I might ask Toren Smith if he can send me). I can see why they would rather receive a proposal which offers several potential sites which could be consulted on.
However, I can also see how their approach offers them an easy out, which allows them to give lip service to the drug treatment centre while never actually having to bite the bullet and, inevitably, piss off a bunch of resident who end up living near to the site. I can also see why SLAM might have thought it was perfectly acceptable (and perhaps in some ways preferable) to offer a proposal for one location to the planning committee. Can you imagine the bunfight which could ensue between 2 or 3 groups of disgruntled residents, none of whom want the site on their road to be chosen.
I will think about a suitable reply to Toren's email in which I would ask him if he can demonstrate his positive support / commitment to the project as a resource for the wider community, including those constitutents who would use the service.
Fair enough. The key thing as far as I'm concerned is that we stop them vetoing every site on the issue of specifics while saying they are in favour in practice. Asking them to suggest a specific site that they think is a good idea in principle is one way to do this.
I got an email back from Keith Hill's office. He has heard nothing about the 141 site. More info to follow apparently.
Ive also set up a petition for increased drug treatment provision in Brixton
EDIT: i meant to say, to sign teh petition you need to click on the the grey "Edity this page" button at the top
Ive also set up a petition for increased drug treatment provision in Brixton
EDIT: i meant to say, to sign teh petition you need to click on the the grey "Edity this page" button at the top
memespring said:I got an email back from Keith Hill's office. He has heard nothing about the 141 site. More info to follow apparently.
Ive also set up a petition for increased drug treatment provision in Brixton
EDIT: i meant to say, to sign teh petition you need to click on the the grey "Edity this page" button at the top
I've created a new thread on the basis that a lot of people won't be following every nuance of this thread.
clive diedrick
New Member
Pro Brighton Terrace
The Brighton Terrace proposed move is being foiled by bureaucrats and people who have no realistic idea of what its like to be in treatment.As a service user and co chair of Stockwell Project Users Group,I have met,and known many people who would endorse the move to Brighton Terrace. Some would be service users but most are not,they are just ordinary people with ordinary jobs.I dont think it helps when you have councillors who are sitting on the fence and not doing what they are elected to do.I know many service users that are upset at the delay and uncertainty of the proposed move.I hope those who have the power and responsibility to make this happen-Would they hurry up and do so. Co Chair:Stockwell Project User Group
The Brighton Terrace proposed move is being foiled by bureaucrats and people who have no realistic idea of what its like to be in treatment.As a service user and co chair of Stockwell Project Users Group,I have met,and known many people who would endorse the move to Brighton Terrace. Some would be service users but most are not,they are just ordinary people with ordinary jobs.I dont think it helps when you have councillors who are sitting on the fence and not doing what they are elected to do.I know many service users that are upset at the delay and uncertainty of the proposed move.I hope those who have the power and responsibility to make this happen-Would they hurry up and do so. Co Chair:Stockwell Project User Group
clive diedrick said:
Welcome to the boards.
I think the councillors we've got feedback from are probably not on the fence at all but simply trying to ride two horses at once by claiming to be in favour of the principle but against any particular place.
Ironically though the bureaucrats (if that's what you call the council/police/nhs employees) are on the side of the angels as far as I can see.
Anything you can do to get people to sign up to the petition would help - there's about five weeks until the decision - so there's a real chance of changing the decision.
And remember that Stockwell ward (the north side of Stockwell roughly) is going to be one of the key battlegrounds for the council elections next year - so getting people to sign the petition from there is particularly helpful.
The Brighton Tce., Rehab is on the CPCG Agenda for its public meeting on Tuesday 1 November at Lambeth Accord, 336 Brixton Road SW9.
There's usually a good attendence of people form across the borough, individuals and community groups, as well as councilors, council officials and senior police officers.
There's usually a good attendence of people form across the borough, individuals and community groups, as well as councilors, council officials and senior police officers.
clive diedrick
New Member
Treatment Fights Back
In response to Coucillor Paul McGlone(Labour), who posted this message("Drug Invasion Quelled"), on the Lambeth Labour website.The drug invasion could have been "Drug Treatment for All".Because of the fears of the local residents, they have now highlighted the problem of their very safe community and made themselves a target for "anti-social behaviour", whereas treatment and a high-visibility profile from the police would ensure that the treatment centre would have run smoothly. Yet the negative views of councillors like Paul McGlone cause panic and distress to not only the residents of the local community, but a much wider spectrum of the Lambeth population.He might as well have taken out an ad in the South London Press screaming:"COUNCILLORS PLAY IT SAFE!VOTE FOR ME BECAUSE I SIT ON THE FENCE,(And I dont really care for the communities needing treatment within Lambeth....). How can it be the right centre in the wrong place?Surely if its the right centre, then it would have been the right place to tackle treatment in the front line of the heart of the community? The need for treatment has grown dramatically in Lambeth because of the inneficiency of non-commited councillors(+MP`s).What is scary is that these councillors need to do their homework, because it makes sense-If you have the uunique problem that Lambeth has, you need to tackle it at the front line and not hidden behind bureaucracy and inefective "electioneering councillors...."
In response to Coucillor Paul McGlone(Labour), who posted this message("Drug Invasion Quelled"), on the Lambeth Labour website.The drug invasion could have been "Drug Treatment for All".Because of the fears of the local residents, they have now highlighted the problem of their very safe community and made themselves a target for "anti-social behaviour", whereas treatment and a high-visibility profile from the police would ensure that the treatment centre would have run smoothly. Yet the negative views of councillors like Paul McGlone cause panic and distress to not only the residents of the local community, but a much wider spectrum of the Lambeth population.He might as well have taken out an ad in the South London Press screaming:"COUNCILLORS PLAY IT SAFE!VOTE FOR ME BECAUSE I SIT ON THE FENCE,(And I dont really care for the communities needing treatment within Lambeth....). How can it be the right centre in the wrong place?Surely if its the right centre, then it would have been the right place to tackle treatment in the front line of the heart of the community? The need for treatment has grown dramatically in Lambeth because of the inneficiency of non-commited councillors(+MP`s).What is scary is that these councillors need to do their homework, because it makes sense-If you have the uunique problem that Lambeth has, you need to tackle it at the front line and not hidden behind bureaucracy and inefective "electioneering councillors...."
Ol Nick
beer in Brixton
Maybe you think so, but the man's a hero in Brighton Terrace where he took on the council machine and won.clive diedrick said:
This thread mostly involves people congratulating each other on their marvellously enlightened views ("side of the angels, darling") rather than considering how you might convince local residents that you aren't planning another 5 years of junkies in the stairwells and needles in the gardens just when they were getting the last lot under control.
Is dumping every social problem in Lambeth on the council tenants of Brixton is the Lib Dem manifesto promise? I didn't read it.
Ol Nick said:
The only way I can think to do this the displacement argument. The problems in Brighton Terrace didnt just disapear, they were displaced into other areas of Brixton.
You may be experiencing less problems now, but without the removal of demand (which I think anyone would agree requires decent treatment facilities) the problem is always going to shift onto someone else. Currently this is Saltoun, Rushcroft and Electric Avenue.
Without removal of demand the problem could quite easily return to Brighton Terrace; in the mean time it affects your neighbours in other parts of Brixton and the areas you shop and go out in.
Ol Nick
beer in Brixton
My feeling is that unless a truly non-residential/non-controversial solution can be found, then some kind of public enquiry considering multiple sites is the only way to convince every group of residents that they are not being "picked on". In Brighton Terrace at least the subject is too raw. I imagine it is like this over most of Lambeth.
Ol Nick said:
The trouble is, and Im saying this having flicked through 2jags very dull guidelines on the subject, virtually the whole of Lambeth is controvertial in some way or another. We live in the most populous borough in Town, and I think this is the 12th proposed site?
You're right that it is a raw subject, but only if it is treated as purely a Brighton Terrace problem (or any other area for that matter). We need to have the balls as a community to say it is going to happen but demand we get the nessesary safeguards and follow up from the council.
Ol Nick said:
Sorry - this is bollocks. What we're complaining about is the lack of leadership by the local councillors who aren't willing to try and persuade people of anything, and aren't willing to suggest an alternative. That's cowardice and they should be ashamed of themselves.
True.memespring said:
clive diedrick
New Member
To Brighton Terrace, (and back again...)
Dear Councillor Mcglone My name is Clive Diedrick and I am a service user at the Stockwell Project in Lambeth. I am a founder member of the Stockwell Project Service User Group. I also co-chair the London User Forum and I sit on the Nation al Treatment Agency’s, National User Advisory Group. (Besides being an honorary member of the Lambeth Service User Council). The proposed move to Brighton Terrace has been thrown into serious jeopardy because of the lack of insight and co-operation on the part of yourselves, for reasons which are not clear and do not seem to be in accordance with the published "General Planning Guidance Policy". I feel somewhat confused by all of this and so do a considerable number of my peers. I wonder why something that could be so positive for the community of Brixton, (let alone Lambeth), is thrown into chaos because of the indecisiveness of yourselves, which in turn creates an adverse effect towards the general population of Lambeth. Wouldn’t it make better sense to have a treatment centre in the heart of the community, (such as Brighton Terrace), rather than on some urban outpost, (which does not exist in Lambeth). I implore you to reconsider your decision and make the RIGHT CHOICE, the ONLY CHOICE, the CHOICE THAT MAKES SENSE... Yours Sincerely C.Diedrick (Co-chair Stockwell Project User Group)
Dear Councillor Mcglone My name is Clive Diedrick and I am a service user at the Stockwell Project in Lambeth. I am a founder member of the Stockwell Project Service User Group. I also co-chair the London User Forum and I sit on the Nation al Treatment Agency’s, National User Advisory Group. (Besides being an honorary member of the Lambeth Service User Council). The proposed move to Brighton Terrace has been thrown into serious jeopardy because of the lack of insight and co-operation on the part of yourselves, for reasons which are not clear and do not seem to be in accordance with the published "General Planning Guidance Policy". I feel somewhat confused by all of this and so do a considerable number of my peers. I wonder why something that could be so positive for the community of Brixton, (let alone Lambeth), is thrown into chaos because of the indecisiveness of yourselves, which in turn creates an adverse effect towards the general population of Lambeth. Wouldn’t it make better sense to have a treatment centre in the heart of the community, (such as Brighton Terrace), rather than on some urban outpost, (which does not exist in Lambeth). I implore you to reconsider your decision and make the RIGHT CHOICE, the ONLY CHOICE, the CHOICE THAT MAKES SENSE... Yours Sincerely C.Diedrick (Co-chair Stockwell Project User Group)
*Applause*clive diedrick said:
