Jump to content

Recommended Posts

mockney piers Wrote:

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

> Plus I don't think any of this is enshrined in law is it[?]


Only since 1962 apparently: LRT Byelaws - No 4 is the booze one


So it's not new - just enforcement of a law that is already in place.


Can't say I've ever thought that I'd give the tube or buses a miss because they're always full of drunks - except during the Christmas season of course when I just might have indulged in the odd sherbet myself.


I find people eating malodorous food more of a problem than people drinking but there doesn't seem to be a byelaw to cover that - although 6.2, 6.4, 6.7 and 6.8 between them might just cover it.

Miss Wheatcroft said: "It is crucial to understand how public money has been wasted or misspent in the past so that we can make sure that it doesn't happen again."


So no pre-judgement there, then. Patience is very ambitious politically (although the job she really wants is to be editor of The Times) and exactly the sort of power-suit wearing "ice maiden" that gives the likes of Boris the raging horn.


Will her audit team look into the LDA's plans (backed "Zone 5" Bromley Council) to flog off bits of Crystal Palace Park to leisure and property developers, do you think? Or is a conflict of interest only evident if it's not your kind who stand to benefit?

Do you think there is a cynical sub editor or journalist at work there or were they really completely oblivious to the irony of this statement?


?Boris Johnson vowed to root out corruption, cronyism and waste as he launched plans to "clean up" the way London is governed.?


The article is about him hiring someone who can easily be described as one of his cronies.

I suggest from now on that we use a code in order to express our approval or disapproval concerning our mayor.

During his his time in office he will inevitably make decisions that we disagree with.

When it's something we like refer to him as - 'Magic' Johnson.

When it's something we don't like refer to him as - Boris Gump.


Just a suggestion.

Boris is apparently likely to appoint Munira Mirza as "cultural adviser".


She's described as a "glamourous young Muslim woman" and she's heavily associated with Claire Fox and the Institute of Ideas / spikedonline. (The online phoenix risen from the ashes of LM).


They're a weird bunch (dodgy mc-dodge)- libertarian but ex Marxist. Generally contrarian and self styled promoters of the "enlightenment" - they still deny there's a global warming problem and insist science is the way forward.


They run "debating" competitions for schoolchildren and debates for grown ups on science and ethics sponsored by people like Pfizer and Monsanto.


She says that the problem of racism is overstated in this country.


Personally I thinks its shockingly bad news.



Munira Mirza, who argues that racism in the UK is greatly exaggerated, is to serve as a cultural adviser to the mayor.

I don't know anything about her, but who else might be best placed to give an opinion about the state of racism than a Muslim woman? She has suggested that policy decisions that are based on multi-culturalism may not be a good thing. It's apoint of view that's up for debate. Science as a way forward? I can't argue with that.As far as I'm aware there is still some arguement as to whether there's global warming (man-made) or climate change (natural) unless you decide to take it as an article of faith.

Encouraging schoolkids to engage in debate with Pfizer and Monsanto? Not such a bad thing, any kids I know would be prepared to put awkward questions, awkwardly. I can't see why it's 'shockingly bad news'

Is she just the 'wrong' sort of Muslim woman for your taste?

I totally distrust the cabal involved in institute of ideas / spiked / manifesto club / culture wars etc.


I certainly find their challenge to the received ideas useful and contrarians are good for a laugh but their idea of a debate often involves filling a panel with people whose views already align and intimating that there is a range of views around the table.


The debating competition for school children is carefully structured to direct lines of argument and I'm suspicious of them already so that doesn't sit well with me.


My statements about mm and her associates weren't supposed to be a devastating argument against her and her chums. I was just trying to give a quick sketch for people who may not have come across them before. I've come across them a lot and I don't like them one bit.


I'm interested to see how they'll reconcile their association with Bojo. They published an article recently lamenting his move away from pure libertarianism.


Sourcewatch.org is illuminating - in a conspiracy theory stylee - on this.


Its "shockingly bad news" in my opnion, given what I know of that gang and given my own feelings about them. So, of course, its an overstatement on my part!

In line with HonaloochieB's suggestion:


Boris Gump - Boris Johnson drops Ken Livingstone's lawsuit against water plant


Magic Johnson - Mayor to discuss Oyster card plans - although Ken was already doing this but never let it be said if nothing but fair and impartial!


Hahaha.


Edit: Magic Johnson strikes again: Mayor of London Boris Johnson announces the start of a programme to

deliver a manifesto commitment to plant 10,000 new trees across the capital.

david_carnell Wrote:

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

> Magic Johnson - Mayor to discuss Oyster card plans

> - although Ken was already doing this but never

> let it be said if nothing but fair and impartial!


Given that this application - Oyster validation machines at North Dulwich Station - was received by Southwark on 2 April, I don't think we can chalk this up as a plus for Boris.

My hopes of substantive improvements to quality of life in London evaporated long before Boris as mayor could even be joked about, and definitely well before this afternoon when the pollution levels made me feel ill - again. So I was heartened by the news that not everyone has been reduced to apathy (or even desperate humour). Some Oxford citizens (among others) have taken to anarchist tactics to assert their continuing interest in civic engagement - painting ED's roads in lovely colours anyone? http://www.wormworks.com/roadwitch/index.html

david_carnell Wrote:

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

> Magic Johnson strikes again: Mayor of London Boris Johnson

> announces the start of a programme to deliver a manifesto

> commitment to plant 10,000 new trees across the capital.


This one's a bit odd too. ?4m to deliver 10,000 trees over 4 years at ?400 per tree? Sounds impressive eh?


Well.... 425,000 new trees have now been planted throughout London since the start of Trees for

Cities? ?Million Trees Campaign?, which was launched in June 2002 - ie roughly 71,000 trees per year.


We were apparently on target to plant 1 million new trees by 2012. So, whilst an extra 2,500 per year is of course welcome, it's only 1.7% of the total that were due to be planted anyway between now and 2012.


All details here in a Press Release dated 18 April 2008: London's Million Trees Campaign

bawdy-nan Wrote:

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


> They run "debating" competitions for

> schoolchildren and debates for grown ups on

> science and ethics sponsored by people like Pfizer

> and Monsanto.

>

For anyone who eats food, or who has children or grandchildren who are planning to eat food in the future..if you only watch one film/read one book this year, watch/read this:


The documentary, Le Monde Selon Monsanto, by Marie Monique Robin, available to download from Arte (for PC only, not Mac); the book is currently only in French, English version available Jan 2009.


http://blogs.arte.tv/LemondeselonMonsanto

Anyone suspect this trees thing has a whiff of Zac Goldsmith about it? Everything Boris has done so far is totally out of character and looks like a sort of party election broadcast for Cameron's New Conservatives put together by people behind the scenes. Am waiting for him to slip up... it can't be long now.

bignumber5 Wrote:

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

> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7395741.stm

>

> Oyster on actual trains! Got to say I put this as the first mark

> in the Boris-Achievements column (assuming it actually happens)


Except that, as I pointed out above, this has nothing to do with Boris because Ken had virtually sorted it already:


Given that this application - Oyster validation machines at North Dulwich Station - was received by Southwark on 2 April, I don't think we can chalk this up as a plus for Boris.


Let's not get carried away folks!

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

    • Granted Shoreditch is still London, but given that the council & organisers main argument for the festival is that it is a local event, for local people (to use your metaphor), there's surprisingly little to back this up. As Blah Blah informatively points out, this is now just a commercial venture with no local connection. Our park is regarded by them as an asset that they've paid to use & abuse. There's never been any details provided of where the attendees are from, but it's still trotted out as a benefit to the local community.  There's never been any details provided of any increase in sales for local businesses, but it's still trotted out as a benefit to the local community.  There's promises of "opportunities" for local people & traders to work at the festival, but, again, no figures to back this up. And lastly, the fee for the whole thing goes 100% to running the Events dept, and the dozens of free events that no-one seems able to identify, and, yes, you guessed it - no details provided for by the council. So again, no tangible benefit for the residents of the area.
    • I mean I hold no portfolio to defend Gala,  but I suspect that is their office.  I am a company director,  my home address is also not registered with Companies House. Also guys this is Peckham not Royston Vasey.  Shoreditch is a mere 20 mins away by train, it's not an offshore bolt hole in Luxembourg.
    • While it is good that GALA have withdrawn their application for a second weekend, local people and councillors will likely have the same fight on their hands for next year's event. In reading the consultation report, I noted the Council were putting the GALA event in the same light as all the other events that use the park, like the Circus, the Fair and even the FOPR fete. ALL of those events use the common, not the park, and cause nothing like the level of noise and/or disruption of the GALA event. Even the two day Irish Festival (for those that remember that one) was never as noisy as GALA. So there is some disingenuity and hypocrisy from the Council on this, something I wll point out in my response to the report. The other point to note was that in past years branches were cut back for the fencing. Last year the council promised no trees would be cut after pushback, but they seem to now be reverting to a position of 'only in agreement with the council's arbourist'. Is this more hypocrisy from 'green' Southwark who seem to once again be ok with defacing trees for a fence that is up for just days? The people who now own GALA don't live in this area. GALA as an event began in Brockwell Park. It then lost its place there to bigger events (that pesumably could pay Lambeth Council more). One of the then company directors lived on the Rye Hill Estate next to the park and that is likely how Peckham Rye came to be the new choice for the event. That person is no longer involved. Today's GALA company is not the same as the 'We Are the Fair' company that held that first event, not the same in scope, aim or culture. And therein lies the problem. It's not a local community led enterprise, but a commercial one, underwritten by a venture capital company. The same company co-run the Rally Event each year in Southwark Park, which btw is licensed as a one day event only. That does seem to be truer to the original 'We Are the Fair' vision, but how much of that is down to GALA as opoosed to 'Bird on the Wire' (the other group organising it) is hard to say.  For local people, it's three days of not being able to open windows, As someone said above, if a resident set up a PA in their back garden and subjected the neighbours to 10 hours of hard dance music every day for three days, the Council would take action. Do not underestimate how distressing that is for many local residents, many of whom are elderly, frail, young, vulnerable. They deserve more respect than is being shown by those who think it's no big deal. And just to be clear, GALA and the council do not consider there to be a breach of db level if the level is corrected within 15 minutes of the breach. In other words, while db levels are set as part of the noise management plan, there is an acknowledgement that a breach is ok if corrected within 15 minutes. That is just not good enough. Local councillors objected to the proposed extension. 75% of those that responded to the consultation locally did not want GALA 26 to take place at all. For me personally, any goodwill that had been built up through the various consultations over recent years was erased with that application for a second weekend, and especially given that when asked if there were plans for that in post 2025 event feedback meetings (following rumours), GALA lied and said there were no plans to expand. I have come to the conclusion that all the effort to appease on some things is merely an exercise in show, to get past the council's threshold for the events licence. They couldn't give a hoot in reality for local people, and people that genuinely care about parkland, don't litter it with noisy festivals either.   
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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