Syringe Exchange/Methadone Services: Crystal Palace Rd

[snorky]

this entire BARA plan is shorthand for " nmove it to a scummy area like peckham where they will be well out of our way"

everythinge else suggested is a diversion from this basic truth

[ChavWivaLawDegree]

Pretty sickening. I might just have to get my arse down to the next Bara meeting for real. I haven't been involved in any community stuff here, but if people like us don't bother, people like them will be 'the voice of the community' to the exclusion of others.

[ratty]

I agree CWALD, I do not want people to think that ED is full of reactionary know nothings. I am a qualified needle exchange worker myself and cannot praise the benefits of these services enough. The sort of people using a NX (not just heroin / crack users by the way) are the people that are taking up these services to make themselves and their environment safer. Not the sort of people that want to collectively attack our children, devalue our precious houses or whatever other unfounded fear the ridiculous rebel rousing NIMBY's can come up with.

[mightyroar]

reactionary know nothings?

Pot..........kettle...............

were you at the meeting? or perhaps that might have brought you too close to some actual facts or even real members of your community?

if only we could get rid of all these foolish petition signers then we might get back to the real old style ED withough expensive pushchairs and crappy gift shops and (fill in your own blank) eh? .............ad infinitum......

[ChavWivaLawDegree]

So mightyroar, do you think the "Local residents are angered that the opening of a new drugs clinic will mean that schoolchildren will be attacked by crazed junkies" quote to be a reasoned response to the needle exchange request?

[mightyroar]

no i think it's typical journalistic scaremongering. Good news is no news after all.

But equally i dont think you should either endorse or condemn this application without finding out the full facts.

Which is what BARA wanted to do after all.

Surely endorsing it purely because you sympathise with users and their predicament is as 'unfounded' and 'ridiculous' as the nimbyism you are so quick to villify?

Finally I think that this thread is missing the point about Mediquick's empire building in this area. Nobody identified a need for this service....they just want to expand their business. One of things you see on the forum all the time is the 'antichain' issue. Mediquick are trying to become a medical chain in South London and who knows where else. This is just one of their proposals and look how badly it's been handled. They didnt inform the local community of the application, and as pointed out before on this thread, they or the PCT had a duty to.

[Thequietone]

As an observer in this matter can someone estimate how many junkies will use this service and where do they obtain supplies at present ?

Paul

[Ganapati]

So is this true or not? Does Maceys the chemist already dispense Methadone? I was told this by the guys manning the petition table in front of their store yesterday. I was also sort of disturbed that it seemed they were whipping up the fear factor when all THEY really cared about was the money/loss of trade. I'm fine with it if they want to make a point about loss of trade, but when they start trying to play on fears to hide that, well, then I find that very annoying.

[SimonM]

Myself I was somewhat reassured by how many people (the overwheleming majority for the short time I was watching) just walked past and ignored the trestle tables festooned with photocopies of scaremongering rag sheets...

[Ko]

Ganapati Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> So is this true or not? Does Maceys the chemist

> already dispense Methadone?

True. I was surprised to hear this after the pharmacies were the ones who started the petition going on about a needle exchange, but not mentioning about their methadone services. It doesn't change my view about having a needle exchange next to the community centre/playground/after-school club etc without a risk assessment etc.

Not got time now, but I will get round to writing what I thought of the meeting at some point. Suffice to say, Mediquick will make a lot of money from the proposed pharmacy and their motivation didn't seem to be the community, nor did they once answer any questions about the impact on the community centre etc and how they would go about managing things in a responsible way. I've already written 2 parargraphs and still have lots to say, but I will do it next week when I have more time!

Forgot to add in earlier - Right from the start my personal opinion is that if a late-night-opening needle exchange etc is needed, I would be happier if it were on a well lit main road, and not at the DMC location - and then only happier if at least a risk assessment was carried out beforehand. I live 4 minutes walk from DMC, and 5 minutes walk from the pharmacy on Lordship Lane (top of Barry Rd). I've always said I would be happier if it went on the main road at Lordship Lane. I'm not happy about the DMC location because still no one has set out a responsible, comprehensive approach on dealing with the situation. I have long been on at the council to improve lighting around the residential roads where I live (which I've discussed elsewhere on the forum). If something can go wrong, it certainly won't be helped by the attitudes of some of those involved.

Edited to add in last para.

[Ko]

Ko Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> BARA Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > We had invited the local police just in

> > case we had a few extremists turn up to cause

> > mayhem but everyone was remarkably 'restrained'

> in

> > their behaviour!

>

> Ko Wrote:

> I've been thinking about this and I'm absolutely

> shocked to realise that the people 'causing

> mayhem' might have been people like moi and AFN

> who were happy to have a bust-up and prevent the

> debate carrying on!! The shame!

Er... I was serious when I wrote this. After that post about the police being requested to come along, I asked about it. Bara were obliged request police presence because the meeting was wrongly announced in some places as being a 'public meeting' - when in fact it was just the usual Bara meeting.

It is a legal (or council) requirement that the police attend a 'public meeting'.

Emotions often run high and people, on both sides of the argument, can get upset, angry and even aggressive. In terms of people being afraid of drug users, I wouldn't have minded if a drug user sat next to me, but at the same time I'm guessing some people may have felt differently!

[Maurice]

Ko it takes a top man to admit such a mistake. Kudos. I think anyone being faire handed would read this post and realise BARA has responded sensibly and with great professionalism. The scaremongering either way has come from other sources.

I've no idea who BARA are but salute their (no doubt all volunteer) efforts to bring an important issue before the entire community for conversation and hold public bodies up to high scrutiny. Those throwing grenades from the sidelines and supporting the medical chain profiteering off the vunerable aren't worth acknowledging.

[Ko]

(Btw, I'm only speaking for me, not Bara. Although I am a Bara member as I've said elsewhere):

Put it this way, it transpired at the meeting that it took Tessa Jowell, the PCT and DMC *15 days* to put a response together. Then all 3 parties responded one after another, within two working days of each other. During those first 15 days, all 3 had received detailed questions/letters etc, but none of them responded despite being pressed for an answer.

I don't think that timing was a coincidence. If there were no issues to cause concern, there would have been an immediate response to explain the situation. This is not the first time the PCT has had to deal with such an issue.

My personal opinion is that they were carefully trying to think of a response which would minimise the impact of the proposals (a damage limitation exercise?), and that response was eventually put forward at the last minute at that Tuesday meeting. As Jonathan Mitchell said, why did the PCT wait until 5 minutes before the meeting (held on *Day 19* after the issue had come to light) to give any sort of proper response, despite having been asked some very comprehensive questions on Day 1??

The issues are still complicated and set around some complex and completely barmy rules and regulations which defy common sense. DMC are still determined to push ahead, and not once did they even respond to any concerns voiced about Gumboots after school club, the youth club etc.

I will write more next week as the situation can't be explained in a couple of sentences and isn't as straightforward as what's being argued above. I could easily sit here and write for the next half hour (you're probably thinking - spare me!)

[Ko]

Maurice Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> BARA... efforts to bring an important

> issue before the entire community for conversation

> and hold public bodies up to high scrutiny.

Various community groups are involved in this and are publicising what is going on and what their views are - even amongst those against the proposals, views do vary. Similarly, amongst those for the proposal, people have diffrent reasons for supporting the proposals.

Jane Fryer of the PCT did a very good job at the meeting, but her version was a bit too simplistic for my liking because the issues are more complicated and she admitted herself that she was not an expert on the technical points. I liked the woman though and she is the only sensible person from the PCT I have ever met - can someone make her Chief Exec of the PCT please?

If the issue had not become public, the end result may or may not have been the same. I have no doubt, however, that now the process in reaching that end result will be more transparent (although probably not completely see through!) and hopefully more responsible, trying to minimise problems before they happen. Bara did obtain a firm commitment from the PCT that the PCT would consult on the services - there is no formal consultation process in the rules, so getting that commitment from the PCT was important and a good outcome.

[ChavWivaLawDegree]

I've got a question for BARA and everyone who think the DMC acted wrongly by not consulting properly. I wonder what it is they are obliged to consult on.

If they were proposing to close down a service, then I could understand the need to consult.

If they were to decide to add another service, e.g an altenative therapy clinic, would you expect them to consult the wider community and do impact assessments on that service?

I don't really think the community should have a right to veto a service to it's patients, regardless of the private nature of the medical centre, or any profits made.

I disagree with privitisation of the health service, but I would really like to know, if it is purely because this is an issue regarding addicts, that you expect to be able to have a say in this.

[Sue]

Ganapati Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> So is this true or not? Does Maceys the chemist

> already dispense Methadone? I was told this by the

> guys manning the petition table in front of their

> store yesterday. I was also sort of disturbed that

> it seemed they were whipping up the fear factor

> when all THEY really cared about was the

> money/loss of trade. I'm fine with it if they want

> to make a point about loss of trade, but when they

> start trying to play on fears to hide that, well,

> then I find that very annoying.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

If Macey's is the chemist in North Cross Road, I was also told this on Saturday morning - not only that Maceys dispenses methadone but that it is a needle exchange.

I strongly object to the way this issue was being presented by these people at the stall trying to get people to sign their petition. (it was the first I had heard of it). Amongst other things I was told that if the new needle exchange was opened, needles would be strewn all around (eh? I walk down North Cross Road every day, and I haven't seen any near Macey's!! Or anywhere else in the area for that matter) and that this wasn't nimbyism BUT the objections were because it would be "right next to a nursery school and community centre."

What do they think is going to happen, bad bad druggies attack the dear little kiddies? Talk about stereotyping drug users.

I had the petition shoved at me with what would have been no opportunity to consider the arguments for and against, and if it is true that people were just walking past, then good for them - I didn't sign it.

Forgive me if this post is just repeating what others have said - I don't have time to read ten pages of the thread, just wanted to state my viewpoint, because I was still fuming on Saturday when I got on the bus !!

[Frisco]

_Forgive me if this post is just repeating what others have said - I don't have time to read ten pages of the thread, just wanted to state my viewpoint, because I was still fuming on Saturday when I got on the bus !!_

Good for you. On the syringes being strewn around the streets issue, it appears that many can't grasp the meaning of the word 'exchange' or how it works in terms of a needle exchange. I loathe NIMBYism.

[Ganapati]

So is this basically all about loss of trade? Is it just about local businesses being worried about the DMC having a monopoly on prescriptions because they are also the GP? Because if there is already a methadone clinic/needle exchange what else is there to worry about? The man I spoke to seemed very indiginant over the idea that the DMC would get 90K for opening up a pharmacy with methadone clinic/needle exchange.

[Sue]

Yes, I also got the impression they didn't like the idea of somebody making any money !

Are you from the Ganapati restaurant??(tu)

[Ganapati]

Unfortunately not. I just happen to love it. :))

But back to the clinic. So we have the DMC (being characterised here as "big business) and the addicts on one side vs. local trade and concerned residents/ BARA on the other? This is getting too bizarre.

[Ko]

Sue Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> If Macey's is the chemist in North Cross Road, I

> was also told this on Saturday morning - not only

> that Maceys dispenses methadone but that it is a

> needle exchange.

>

I've asked the pharmacist at Maceys and was told Maceys does methadone, but it is NOT a needle exchange.

[Sue]

Ko Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Sue Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > > > So is this true or not? Does Maceys the

> chemist

> > > already dispense Methadone? I was told this

> by

> > the

> > > guys manning the petition table in front of

> > their

> > > store yesterday. I was also sort of disturbed

> > that

> > > it seemed they were whipping up the fear

> factor

> > > when all THEY really cared about was the

> > > money/loss of trade. I'm fine with it if they

> > want

> > > to make a point about loss of trade, but when

> > they

> > > start trying to play on fears to hide that,

> > well,

> > > then I find that very annoying.

> >

> > XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

> >

> > If Macey's is the chemist in North Cross Road,

> I

> > was also told this on Saturday morning - not

> only

> > that Maceys dispenses methadone but that it is

> a

> > needle exchange.

> >

>

>

> I've asked at the pharmacy and was told Maceys

> does methadone, but it is NOT a needle exchange.

XXXXXXXXXX

So the people trying to get me to sign their petition lied to me, then :(

[Ko]

I can't speak for anyone, but I'm guessing that as with anything individuals have a variety of motivations for and against the proposals.

About those against the proposals:

Some people may think 'its a waste of money and there's no need for the services/its an inefficient use of money'

Others may think 'they have no regard for the value of my house'

Others may think 'they are setting up in a residential area and have not considered or assessed any potential impacts'

Others may think 'they are setting up next to a community centre and/or nursery and have not committed to doing a risk assesesment'

Others may think 'I will loss trade over this and may lose my business'

Others may think 'public bodies acting as usual without accountability or transparency - what are they up to?'

About those for the proposals:

Some people may think 'I want a pharmacy open late'

Others may think 'I want to make a ton of money out of this pharmacy'

Others may think 'they've just got it in for drug users'

Others may think 'there aren't any issues I can think of - what's the fuss about?'

Etc. And some individuals may just have one of the above views, or may have a mixture of the above views, or have some views that fall under both for and against. A consultation would let all those views be heard. Just like a consultation about Harris Academy would allow all those views to be heard - some seemed to be against the proposals just because of increased parking on their road; others were concerned about the quality of education on offer; others had a variety of other concerns. Consultation is only that though. One has to hope that those making the final decisions do a good and, importantly, fair job.

Personally, I thought the meeting was good because everyone was in the same room to discuss it and it was discussed for over 2 hours and then people continued talking for quite some time after (the PCT stayed until late). As someone said above, there was far more to discuss than one can put on this forum.

I am spending too much time typing today and not getting other things done!

[the-e-dealer]

I can confirm that there is no requirement for police to attend mettings.

There is a requirement to consult when a new chemist opens.

[AnotherPaul]

Wow, after snorky and I exchanged various ageddons last week this thread seemed to wither. Then BARA get out there and stir it up when there is nowt to stir. So?

I feel I was too conciliatory last week and some may have got the wrong idea about the meeting. I see now it was an error on my part to stress the positive impressions of the meeting. It seems that BARA don't want that so what follows is an unabridged account of the meeting inspired by the knowledge that the Police were there at BARA's behest to protect them from others. Daft to be that paranoid but moronic to come on here and tell us that's what you did.

The only people who felt scared at that meeting were probably those from the DMC and Mediquick. Irrespective of the rights and wrongs of the need for a pharmacy/needle exchange the way they were treated was vile. They were shouted at and down by David, the Chair of the meeting, Jonathan the councillor and an assortment of other flat-earthers present.

I address the chief shouters in turn;

David, leader of the angry mob. Please get out there and and keep talking, the more you do the fewer supporters you shall have. BARA, I did not say that David was actually eloquent. Rather he was close to being so. David's speech was considered, he'd obviously rehearsed so it came over quite well. What he didn't need to rehearse was his rude, relentless and aggressive heckling of anyone who didn't agree with him.

The Chair. Didn't understand how to be a chair. Got caught up in the argument, was even inspiring it by the end.

Jonathan the Councillor. If it possible to report politicians to trading standards then this bloke needs to experience that, Liberal he was not. So sickeningly chasing votes, he seemed to perceive this as his chance to be a little bit like Churchill, all "we shall fight them on the beaches?" but missing the point that Churchill didn't look like a radish in a suit. And it is worth repeating, he suggested that the DMC was like a nuclear explosion in our midst.

I'm sure BARA would like you to think the meeting was impassioned but it was actually not far being a witch hunt. What tempered my view slightly was that the rage being poured forth was both farcical and missed the salient statement of the evening came ten minutes in - that the pharmacy probably isn't going to happen.

I do not suggest for one minute that everyone there was horrible, a few of the old women seated behind me did on occasion suggest that people should be heard. However there was a palpable atmosphere of intollerance and NIMBYism. This issue has give a few otherwise unheard voices in our community the chance to offload their dislike for the other, secure in a delusion that they are right and others are wrong. Well it's just not that simple.

BARA, Your handling of this issue has been as poor as the DMC's. You seem to have on gear, angry. You were right to invite the Police. Not to control others but to make sure that when your impotent fury finally boils over the right people are there to put you away.

ap