Lambeth Country Show, Brockwell Park, Saturday 21 & Sunday 22 July 2018

Discussion in 'Brixton' started by editor, Jan 15, 2018.

  1. Gramsci

    Gramsci Well-Known Member

    The above bit I put in bold is common assumption. The Council has legal obligations re library services for example. Fortunately.

    But not in other cases. Take Adventure playgrounds. For many years very important free service for parents and young children. Now all cut. Council has no legal obligation to fund this service ( even part fund it ) so it doesn't. Even though in areas like mine (Loughborough Junction) they are life sustaining ones.

    People donating money and time is already happening. The Grove Adventure playground has received small ( relatively) donations from local residents to buy building materials and fridge for example. Also voluntary labour to repair the playground the Council neglected for years.

    So its already been happening on the quiet.

    I don't think this is good thing. Its not sustainable in long term.

    The other issue is how to ask for donations. It should not be done in way that makes less well off people feel embarrassed.

    The Grove Adventure playground is open for summer through grant from charity and locals donating there time and money to get it ready for summer.
    Last edited: Jul 30, 2018
    editor and bimble like this.
  2. Gramsci

    Gramsci Well-Known Member

    Not criticising your interesting post but thinking on from my previous one.

    I'm already donating money to library services. The gym / library pet project of Council is receiving money from the income that leisure centre users in Lambeth pay. Like when I swim at Brixton Rec I pay for that. On assumption that this money goes to keep Rec and other leisure centre going. But Lambeth have decided that a percentage of this will be donated to Carnegie gym / library . Which I regard as donation without my consent.

    I don't trust Lambeth using residents donations in way that residents think they will be used.
  3. jimbarkanoodle

    jimbarkanoodle Well-Known Member

    id be more than happy to pay around a fiver, but only as long as i could bring my own booze.
    Smick, DietCokeGirl and Tricky Skills like this.
  4. alcopop

    alcopop Banned Banned

    That sounds perfectly reasonable
  5. jimbarkanoodle

    jimbarkanoodle Well-Known Member

    maybe something like a 'corkage fee' of a fiver if you want to bring in your own alcoholic drinks could apply. Anyone else remains free.

    id obviously prefer it to stay as it has for 44 years, mind.
  6. FridgeMagnet

    FridgeMagnet Administrator

    Tbh I doubt that BYOB will be on the cards regardless of whether there’s an entrance fee or not.
    editor likes this.
  7. jimbarkanoodle

    jimbarkanoodle Well-Known Member

    its certainly wishful thinking.
  8. Mrs Miggins

    Mrs Miggins There's been a slight cheese accident

    I would be very, very surprised if the LCS is ever an open event again and also very surprised if there isn't at least a £2 per person charge next year. More likely £5 and tickets in advance.
  9. Winot

    Winot I wholeheartedley agree with your viewpoint

    Wasn't it a loss of something like £350K last year? So a fiver an adult is probably about right.
  10. alcopop

    alcopop Banned Banned

    Yeah £5 is fair
  11. editor

    editor Forked with electrons

    Fair for whom?
    Gramsci and Rutita1 like this.
  12. aka

    aka Brixton Hill

    turned out a lot of the tents, and the security/stewards were provided by/via a company from Scotland. There you have it kids - a firm based in Scotland could provide a better value deal than all the numpties in London and the Home Counties - including sending the staff down and putting them up (albeit in tents etc.) Lambeth didn't even employ Lambeth based contractors. btw The security I met were never anything less than respectful and professional (also sexy accent).
  13. Rutita1

    Rutita1 Scum with no integrity, apparently.

    Exactly. It can't be a mandatory charge otherwise loads of people will be excluded.
    Gramsci likes this.
  14. editor

    editor Forked with electrons

    Right wingers don't give a shit though. It's about money, never about social value and community.
    Gramsci likes this.
  15. editor

    editor Forked with electrons

    brixtonblade and Gramsci like this.
  16. editor

    editor Forked with electrons

  17. Nanker Phelge

    Nanker Phelge Leave the gun. Take the cannoli.

    20th - 21st July 2019 - They've just added an event on FB
    Rutita1 likes this.
  18. Rutita1

    Rutita1 Scum with no integrity, apparently.

  19. quimcunx

    quimcunx protestant traybake

    It's a community event that costs money to put on, not a business whose purpose is to make a profit, so describing it as a loss isn't really accurate. It's paid for out of council tax (I'm totes assuming), so a service Lambeth residents pay for.
    RubyToogood and Gramsci like this.
  20. Nanker Phelge

    Nanker Phelge Leave the gun. Take the cannoli.

    Well spotted..
    Gramsci likes this.
  21. Nanker Phelge

    Nanker Phelge Leave the gun. Take the cannoli.

    Posts on the event have to be approved....
  22. Winot

    Winot I wholeheartedley agree with your viewpoint

    To be clear, I am in favour of the event remaining free to all residents. My post was just a guess at what it might take to break even if Lambeth did go down that route.
  23. shakespearegirl

    shakespearegirl just worked out taglines

    If it turns into a commercial paid event then Lambeth shouldn’t be paying for any of it. I use very few council services and I’m really happy that my council tax is used to pay for things that benefit or are accessible by the whole community but not an event that will exclude huge percentage of the residents of the borough
    Smick, Gramsci and quimcunx like this.
  24. Winot

    Winot I wholeheartedley agree with your viewpoint

    And incidentally, the logical conclusion of this point is that council tax should go up to cover the cost.
  25. quimcunx

    quimcunx protestant traybake

    My point is that if we start talking about community assets that cost money as if they are a loss making business we're feeding into the ideology of austerity and privatisation etc. We wouldn't say the Social Services department at Lambeth makes a loss. It costs money and is paid for through taxation. Same for the LCS.

    The logical conclusion of this point is KILL THE TORIES :mad: Socialism ftw, etc. But also Lambeth spent several years bragging about council tax freezes. Most people who pay full council tax can better afford an increase than the people whose services have been cut have been able to afford that. I think it is more fair for me to pay a bit more council tax to keep community events free and inclusive.
    shakespearegirl, Smick, Me76 and 7 others like this.
  26. editor

    editor Forked with electrons

    Or maybe Lambeth stop wasting money on dodgy projects and/or make the show more efficient in terms of gaining more revenue from traders/sponsors?
  27. Gramsci

    Gramsci Well-Known Member

    Good post. But disagree with highlighted sentence. A lot of people I know, including me, pay full CT but only just scrape by.

    And btw Im already paying extra indirectly. As I have been one of the volunteers working on Grove Adventure playground. That includes me buying some of the building materials. This was Council supported service before. As I posted up before there are already members of the local community putting there hands in there pockets and providing unpaid labour to replace what were council services. And I think there is hidden social economy out there replacing cut Council services. Whether its an unpaid carer or just acts of kindness like helping out people. It all counts and is worthy of research imo. Given government is run by the well off for the well off. Even if they say they care. Its heartening that at least ordinary people will do stuff.

    It might be necessary to increase CT. Its not fair when up the road the rich scum in the City are doing fine. As well as kill the Tories. I'd say hang a few rich scum from the City as well.

    The previous Libdem/ Tory coalition government cut central government funding for Councils and limited ability to increase CT.

    Yes it was Big Society Cameron and his chums in LD who did this. I agree kill the Tories. Undermining Councils was attack on the less well off. Its not people like me who wage class war its the likes of Cameron, Osbourne and now May. I might moan but I don't have any power.
    Last edited: Aug 1, 2018
    editor likes this.
  28. Gramsci

    Gramsci Well-Known Member

    And it would help if Lambeth Labour party would support Corbyn.
  29. alcopop

    alcopop Banned Banned

    You make a cogent, well reasoned argument.

    Thank you.
    Gramsci likes this.
  30. Tricky Skills

    Tricky Skills Well-Known Member

    When Steve Reed launched the failed Co-operative Council this was one of the very same arguments that he put forward. He floated the idea that if you sweep your street, help out at a community centre, volunteer your time etc then you might receive a Council Tax discount.

    Like the whole Co-op vanity project, the problem was that this was never thought out. How do you quantify your time compared to a different contribution made by someone else?

    It didn't matter, anyway. Reed's Co-op Council achieved its aim in propelling him to Westminster.

    Good riddance.

    I just wish that the current Progress administration would accept Reed's failures and stop trying to pretend that they have co-operative values.
    Gramsci and editor like this.

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice