Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Brixton news, rumours and general chat: Summer 2019

Status
Not open for further replies.

David Clapson

Infamous Knob
Just had a no-meat Halo Burger from Pop Brixton. Stunningly delicious. £8 for cheeseburger and chips. Made with a Beyond Burger, a plant-based thing stocked by Tesco. I now live in hope that beef lovers have a sustainable future. I hope nobody is about to tell me that the Beyond Burger causes drought and famine.
 

alex_

Well-Known Member
They didn't try to close it. They were directly instrumental in moving the PO to smaller premises so that that they could bag the bigger space for their showcase offices. This is documented fact.

Anyway, we can agree to disagree on this if you like. Now are going to give examples of the 'plenty of things' to blame Squires for?
Personally I’d have though that the post office closing 10,000 branches nationwide over the last 20 years was more likely to be a cause than squires or are you blaming squires for the other 10k branch closures too ?

It feels to me like squires were pushing on an open door, rather than being the cause. To be honest in paying for it to move to smaller premises - it’s possible they saved it.

Alex
 

editor

hiraethified
Personally I’d have though that the post office closing 10,000 branches nationwide over the last 20 years was more likely to be a cause than squires or are you blaming squires for the other 10k branch closures too ?

It feels to me like squires were pushing on an open door, rather than being the cause. To be honest in paying for it to move to smaller premises - it’s possible they saved it.

Alex
It's also possible that they rode into Brixton on pink unicorns. Have you any evidence from any source suggesting that the main Post Office in Brixton was under threat of closure? Anything at all?
 

alex_

Well-Known Member
It's also possible that they rode into Brixton on pink unicorns. Have you any evidence from any source suggesting that the main Post Office in Brixton was under threat of closure? Anything at all?
None whatsoever !

Alex
 

Gramsci

Well-Known Member
As aka says, S&P can be scrutinised or criticised for a number of things, but the reduction of the Brixton PO branch size sure isn’t one of them.
Can you suggest what these things are?

whilst aka is thinking about it.

Alex has suggested the promised community space. That didn't last long. Do you ( and aka) agree on that one?
 

T & P

|-o-| (-o-) |-o-|
Can you suggest what these things are?

whilst aka is thinking about it.

Alex has suggested the promised community space. That didn't last long. Do you ( and aka) agree on that one?
Of course I do. And S&P deserves criticism for it. But is a different issue altogether, and its inclusion in a discussion about whether they’re to blame for the downsizing of the Brixton PO is completely irrelevant and unrelated to the issue being discussed at this moment in time.

Some might be tempted to add it’s also an exercise in goalpost moving. It certainly adds zero amount of supporting evidence to the claim that has been made.
 

T & P

|-o-| (-o-) |-o-|
It's also possible that they rode into Brixton on pink unicorns. Have you any evidence from any source suggesting that the main Post Office in Brixton was under threat of closure? Anything at all?
Since nobody on either side has any actual evidence about how the downsizing of the Brixton PO branch came to be, but there is ample and well documented evidence of an ongoing policy of widespread branch closures, and reduction of branch services & customer service counters on countless other PO branches, I think we all know which of the two scenarios is the more likely. And also which side of the argument is in far greater need of producing evidence to support their less likely claim.
 

Gramsci

Well-Known Member
Of course I do. And S&P deserves criticism for it. But is a different issue altogether, and its inclusion in a discussion about whether they’re to blame for the downsizing of the Brixton PO is completely irrelevant and unrelated to the issue being discussed at this moment in time.

Some might be tempted to add it’s also an exercise in goalpost moving. It certainly adds zero amount of supporting evidence to the claim that has been made.

Are you saying I'm trying to move the goalposts?
 

Gramsci

Well-Known Member
Of course I do. And S&P deserves criticism for it. But is a different issue altogether, and its inclusion in a discussion about whether they’re to blame for the downsizing of the Brixton PO is completely irrelevant and unrelated to the issue being discussed at this moment in time.

Some might be tempted to add it’s also an exercise in goalpost moving. It certainly adds zero amount of supporting evidence to the claim that has been made.
You did post a number of things that Squires can be criticised for. What are the others?
 

T & P

|-o-| (-o-) |-o-|
You did post a number of things that Squires can be criticised for. What are the others?
They can be discussed, and criticised by anyone who sees wrongful behaviour by S&P. But as several of us have said in the current discussion, none of the other issues mentioned are related to the Post Office discussion or offer any kind of proof that S&P forced the PO to downsize.
 

Gramsci

Well-Known Member
I
They can be discussed, and criticised by anyone who sees wrongful behaviour by S&P. But as several of us have said in the current discussion, none of the other issues mentioned are related to the Post Office discussion or offer any kind of proof that S&P forced the PO to downsize.
In you post 916 you said:

As @aka says, S&P can be scrutinised or criticised for a number of things,
So apart from the fake community space , which we can agree if I get your previous post right, you say a number of things.

So what are they?
 

editor

hiraethified
Can we have the post office in Stockwell back?
Only if a company company catering to the super rich decides they want the adjacent buildings for their own showcase vanity project. You might even get a vetted, members-only exclusive bar plus a shiny new glass dome too! Oh, and one of those faux 'community spaces' as well.
 

editor

hiraethified
They can be discussed, and criticised by anyone who sees wrongful behaviour by S&P. But as several of us have said in the current discussion, none of the other issues mentioned are related to the Post Office discussion or offer any kind of proof that S&P forced the PO to downsize.
Wait. So you're positing that the arrival of Squire & Partners has absolutely nothing to do with the PO being shunted into shitty new premises? Wow.
 

T & P

|-o-| (-o-) |-o-|
I


In you post 916 you said:



So apart from the fake community space , which we can agree if I get your previous post right, you say a number of things.

So what are they?
I said scrutinised or criticised, so I wasn’t necessarily agreeing with anything in particular. As to the issues, they are those that others, not me, have raised over the last couple of years. Such as possible impact on local rents, or as a driver of further gentrification, or their community values.

All issues worthy of discussion, which if you check the S&P thread will see I have debated on.
 

T & P

|-o-| (-o-) |-o-|
Wait. So you're positing that the arrival of Squire & Partners has absolutely nothing to do with the PO being shunted into shitty new premises? Wow.
I am posting that there is no evidence at all that the management of the Brixton Post Office were forced by S&P to downsize. It might have happened or it might not. But patterns elsewhere more than suggest it is not unusual or far fetched at all that the PO was intending to downsize all along as part of the firm’s nationwide drive to close branches and sell off and reduce costs in others. And it was going to happen regardless of who was going to take over the building.

If a given post office branch somewhere closed down, and shortly after a Sainsbury’s Local store opened in its place, would you immediately assume that it was Sainsbury’s that caused the PO branch to close?
 

Gramsci

Well-Known Member
I said scrutinised or criticised, so I wasn’t necessarily agreeing with anything in particular. As to the issues, they are those that others, not me, have raised over the last couple of years. Such as possible impact on local rents, or as a driver of further gentrification, or their community values.

All issues worthy of discussion, which if you check the S&P thread will see I have debated on.
You said in post 916:


As @aka says, S&P can be scrutinised or criticised for a number of things,

If I get your clarification right your not criticising or scrutinising Squires for anything.

Your just pointing out that others have.

So you saying that Squires can be criticised or scrutinised for a number of things doesn't mean that you yourself think so. Your just pointing out that others have.

This isn't clear in your post 916. So thanks for clarification.

So the other reading of your post is that their are legitimate criticisms / scrutiny that can be made. But not the post office one.

So in that case what are the legitimate ones?

And Alex put forward the community space issue. Is this one?

Do you think that in hindsight that Squires promises of community space came to nothing?
 

editor

hiraethified
If a given post office branch somewhere closed down, and shortly after a Sainsbury’s Local store opened in its place, would you immediately assume that it was Sainsbury’s that caused the PO branch to close?
This is a poor analogy but to run with it: if Sainsbury's were architects and took over the building to turn it into their show stopping vanity headquarters - while shunting the Post Office into smaller premises as part of the very same development - then it would be very odd to then claim that they played absolutely no part in the relocation/down-sizing.
 

T & P

|-o-| (-o-) |-o-|
Sorry, who sho said they were "forced"?
Forced, driven to, not given the option to remain in their existing size... you know what I meant.

But frankly, I am out as we're just going to endlessly go around in circles. Anyone can believe what they want naturally but I don't think it's unreasonable to point out any such conjectures are are just that and not supported by any specific evidence I am aware of. And that debatable or questionable practices in unrelated issues are in no way proof of anything in this particular case.
 

editor

hiraethified
Forced, driven to, not given the option to remain in their existing size... you know what I meant.

But frankly, I am out as we're just going to endlessly go around in circles. Anyone can believe what they want naturally but I don't think it's unreasonable to point out any such conjectures are are just that and not supported by any specific evidence I am aware of. And that debatable or questionable practices in unrelated issues are in no way proof of anything in this particular case.
You have absolutely nothing to support your case, yet you choose to defend the multi-million, all-gentrifying, exclusive vetted private bar incomers.

Perhaps you never use the Post Office, but if you had to regularly walk past the palatial, artfully empty surrounds of Squire's HQ and then pack into the shitty Post Office they themselves built for the community, perhaps you night understand the frustration.
 
I've done a lot of work for the Post Office up to a year ago and know them well. They are downsizing as much as they can. Sad though it is, with the increase in couriers and drop -off points for online shopping (I've just dropped a returns package at the Texaco in West Norwood), the Post Office has increasingly fewer customers through which it can make any money.

The Post Office is no longer a 'public service' in the traditional manner. It has to make money to survive. And it is struggling, so reducing costs is a thing. They will make decisions that don't make immediate sense to people. They will make decisions based on commercial issues. Some will be good, some will be bad (depending on your POV).

One of the things they have done is move Post Office services into local shops, as well as increasing opening hours. I now have a Post Office at the top of Leigham Vale that is open until 10pm. And the Tulse Hill Post Office is now open until 7pm. So there have been some major changes which work for me.

At the same time, I suspect the option of moving to smaller premises was quite appealing to them. And the Post Office is by no means a happy, friendly community asset: Subpostmasters achieve ‘stunning victory’ against Post Office in Horizon case

Editor has me on ignore and so won't see this post (well, he probably will but won't acknowledge it).

As always, it's a nuanced argument, and I fully expect that this post will be passed by and people will continue to ignore the nuance.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top