1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Lambeth: Let's churn up Clapham Common for profit! Up to 104 events per year planned

Discussion in 'Brixton' started by editor, Jul 4, 2017.

  1. CH1

    CH1 "Red Guard"(NLYL)

    I still remember the 1997 Gay Pride Festival on Clapham Common (just about).
    It was supposed to be fenced off and admission by £3 donation - but that petered out by the early evening (show time was 2pm to 10pm)
    It was actually a marvellous do - with a set by the Pet Shop Boys to finish (with fireworks) - and a message from Tony Blair (who had just been elected)
    Problem was the collapse of any arrangements to clear up afterwards - which led to a ban on all music events on Clapham Common events in the aftermath.

    In 1997 the council was not particularly seeking profit - but was of course outraged to be actually paying to clear up after a big event. Naturally Councillors such as Bernard Gentry (who recently made a political comeback) were happy to fan the flames and seek the ban.

    20 years ago it was the council who were resistant to events - but saw them as a sort of public service and clamped down heavily when it went wrong. Now it seems they have changed to turning parks and commons into a business model - and are not concerned about general amenity of residents at large.
     
    shygirl and Gramsci like this.
  2. editor

    editor Taffus Maximus

    You keep repeating this statement as a fact, so I'd love to see what you've got to back it up. What empowers you to speak on behalf of the "overwhelming majority of park users"? How do you know what they all think about events going on in their park?

    I'm no expert, but I'd imagine that most people go to the park to relax and for a bit of piece of quiet, or perhaps enjoy a run around a regular circuit, and I can't imagine they're going to like anything that gets in the way of that.
     
  3. editor

    editor Taffus Maximus

  4. Mr Retro

    Mr Retro TwentyFourThousand

    Reality is that they are not funded properly. The likelihood of them being funded properly in this governments term is nil. Therefore putting on these events is a way of raising some of the needed funds.

    Before I could make a judgement on weather I am in favour of Lambeth council doing this (and councils in general doing similar) I would like to know:
    1. The capacity of each event and how much profit is projected to be made on each.
    2. Does the profit made on each outweigh the inconvenience for other users and damage to the park?
    3. What will be done with these profits, who is accountable for distributing them and if this person(s) is being held to account for ensuring the profits are used as promised?
    This info should inform if future events can happen in future years. If councils are going to behave like the private sector the same measures, accountability and consequences must be applied.
     
  5. Brainaddict

    Brainaddict chief propagandist (provisional)

    Thanks for proving my point that many people can't see the problem with their local council becoming profit-making. It's not just about what happens on the balance sheet.
     
    Gramsci and editor like this.
  6. Gramsci

    Gramsci Well-Known Member

    You are correct that that the Tories do want Councils to become more profit making. And you are correct that this has become accepted. With some Councils it might start as pragmatic response. With other Tory councils they see this as the way forward for local government. Either way once it's started its hard to turn back the clock.

    Lambeth are a unique case. Being still run by the Blairite wing of the party they see the future of Councils as being enablers not providers. There words. Heard a senior Labour Cllr say this last week. They regard this as different to Tories push to make Councils profit making.

    The issue of Clapham common is one small example of the gradual intrusion of profit making into space that was outside the realm of Capital.
     
    editor likes this.
  7. Gramsci

    Gramsci Well-Known Member

    If common land and parks were not protected by legislation dating back years ago I think London would lose these public spaces bit by bit.

    Over in Loughborough Junction having a dispute with Council over losing the Adventure Playground. It's s beautiful site in a large green space surrounded by fully grown trees. It's not protected by legislation around parks or common land. So the Council want to sell it off to a developer in long term.
     
    Ol Nick, stockwelljonny and editor like this.
  8. Brainaddict

    Brainaddict chief propagandist (provisional)

    What do they mean by that, out of interest? It sounds very Big Society.
     
    editor likes this.
  9. Jangleballix

    Jangleballix Better living through chemistry.

    You are, of course, taking into account the four/five days on either side of any big event when the site is setting up and breaking down and therefore out of bounds to council tax payers.
     
    editor likes this.
  10. editor

    editor Taffus Maximus

    Yep. This kind of thing:

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
    Jangleballix and Gramsci like this.

Share This Page