Jump to content

Recommended Posts

The BBC is flagging its research into the impact of public sector spending cuts. The story is on their Website - Here.


Surprisingly, Southwark is reported as being fairly well placed with the overall ranking being 97 / 324 - certainly well above the median mark and on some measures way ahead of the pack on things such as vulnerable jobs (8/324), insolvencies (174/324), no of startups (14/324), house prices (19/324) and so on. Vulnerabilities include - "low social cohesion (322 / 324), high benefits claim rate (277/324)


Do you agree?


Edited to include more data

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/13189-spending-cuts-resilience/
Share on other sites

I think it's intersting and does reflect some unique social change in the borough - for instance Lambeth and Lewisham (both next door) fair much worse. The Social change is that an area - the whole Southbank,Bermondsey Street and surround and borough - that were basically empty, abandoned wharfs 20-30 years ago is now chocker with very expensive flats/conversions and shops and restaurants and businesses. This regeneration has been unique to Southwark (in the south) as Lewisham has less nice riverside wharfs and Lambeth's Riverside is less extensive and mainly road. The south of Southwark has always been reasonably rich but the gentrificatin of SE22 for instance has also helped these figures, but they are after all just averages, the central bit of Southwark has some of the worse poverty in the country.

That was my first impression too Quids. Southwark comes out well only because the figures are an average. Perhaps like a microcosm of the country there is a massive gap between very wealthy and very poor with very little in between. So areas like the Village, some parts of Camberwell trendy bits of the Borough and Bermondsey and bits of ED bump the figures up.


The reality though is that the vast population vulnerable to spending cuts in Southwark are going to get trampled on and have opportunity taken away from them just as viciously as the conservatives are Jonesing for.

Yep you are right, yes we understand cuts have to be made but remember this is the Tories this is what they do all the time when in power what happen to the speech David Cameron made that the venerable and the poor will have help that is a fat lie they are thinking of cutting winter fuel and child benefits and other benefits that will hit the most poor any cuts this Tory government make always effect the most worst off. Lets be perfectly honest the handbag Lib/Dem because that is what they are the Tories handbag and public executioner will pretend to disagree but nod there heads like the Church hill dog.


At the moment the cuts have not hit people were it hurts as yet and as a country once again we are a bunch of noddy?s we nodd to everything to the heirs of Thatcher :X

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

    • "Mysterious owners" 😆  If only there was a powerful search engine at our fingertips to find out such deep secrets.        
    • It's the "due to commercial reasons" line again that is vexing. Last year it seemed, although there was a similar level of objection, that the reasons were commercial - Gala didn't appear entirely prepared to run 3 more events, or more likely didn't have sufficient interest from other promoters / organisers who could 'sub-let' the site as with Brockwell Park (I believe?). This year they appeared more organised, had another year to plan & prepare, to the extent they actually had names for two of the three new events which indicated to me that they had third party promoters / organisers in place.  So yes, it does make you wonder whether the repeated level of objection, combined with the impending elections, led to the council 'advising' that maybe they shelve it again? I'm afraid I can't see the whole extension application just being a ruse to guarantee permission for the 'regular' event. Gala are a commercial venture with ambition - every festival's business plan is to expand, expand, expand, year on year on year. Gala won't give up until they have taken over the whole park for a Summer of Raves, and the mysterious owners are on their yachts counting their ££££
    • Thanks for that. Maybe forthcoming elections have stymied the 7 day request? If Labour get back in, do we think GALA will try with greater success in 2027?
    • Better late than never, same obscure reason as previously for not going ahead with the extended plan... "Due to commercial reasons, the event organisers have withdrawn their application to hold a 7- day event over two weekends. The application has been revised to request the use of Peckham Rye Park to hold a 4-day event over one bank holiday weekend with the following schedule: • Onsite: Monday 11 May 2026 • GALA: Friday 22 – Sunday 24 May • On the Rye Festival: BH Monday 25 May • Off-site Sunday 31 May 2026 This is the same event programme that was delivered in 2025."  GALA 2026 consultation findings report 1519.pdf
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...