Southwark Plans for Camberwell Old & New Cemeteries.

[Siduhe]

I saw it. So the "old hawthorn hedgerow" has now become fact in a national newspaper FFS.

[fruityloops]

good article

[ianr]

> Have a look in today's [1 April] Guardian Magazine.

For the 95% of readers who don't have it to hand, it's a short article entitled "'I like the idea of my body as biomass': bright ideas for your afterlife - Our cemeteries are full, so how about becoming fuel (to heat a swimming pool) or having an augmented reality memorial?"

It quotes BC, and helps outsiders by explaining that her '?Southwark Woods? refers to Camberwell?s old and new cemeteries', but is mainly a light nudge into a little more thinking about death and dead bodies. Southwark Library members can see it via Newsbank at http://infoweb.newsbank.com/signin/LondonBoroughSouthwark (search for hawthorn).

[Blanche Cameron]

Southwark Muslim and Jewish residents must change burial rites or be buried out of the borough

30th March 2017

Southwark Council is claiming that there is no religious discrimination in its Burial Service.

Cllr Wingfield, Southwark Member for the Environment and Public Realm, has claimed to the press:

?We do not discriminate against residents of the Muslim faith or any other faith in Southwark? (South London Press, 16th March).

But Cllr Wingfield claims to be unaware of the burial needs of Southwark?s 30,000 Muslim residents - whilst also claiming to provide for them.

He stated in Southwark News on 9th March:

?It could be that there is provision for them elsewhere in London. It?s not for us to second guess their needs.?

But that?s exactly the Council?s job - if it is actively working to avoid or eradicate religious discrimination as the Human Rights Act 1998 requires.

He then states:

?If the demand for Muslim burials increases we would have to make that provision for them.?

But lack of complaint isn?t proof of lack of religious discrimination. And the demand is already there - Muslim residents are 10% of the population but at least 30% of borough burial need.

The ONS reports around 9 deaths per 1,000 per year - meaning Southwark?s 30,000 Muslim residents experience approximately 270 deaths a year.

Southwark has what they laughably call a ?dedicated Muslim burial area?, with ?space for 48 grave plots?. Southwark records show fewer than 7 Muslim burials take place here each year - around 2.6% of Muslim residents? burial need.

This area is unsuitable for the burial rites of the vast majority of Muslim residents. Southwark is effectively saying all Muslim residents could be buried in Southwark - if they changed their religious burial rites.

In the Southwark News 9th March, Cllr Wingfield is quoted as celebrating Church of England approval: ?We are delighted that the Diocese has approved our plans to create more burial spaces in Southwark. Local people will now continue to have the choice to be buried locally, rather than being forced to pay higher costs for burials outside of the borough.?

But Muslim and Jewish residents are already forced to pay for burial in private cemeteries outside the borough, while Southwark subsidises burial plots suitable for other faiths in its municipal cemeteries.

Southwark Council's blatant religious discrimination is yet another reason why Southwark are unfit to run a burial service.

Our letter today to the press in response to Southwark's denial is below.

The Friends of Camberwell Cemeteries' letter to the South London Press in response to Southwark's denial of religious discrimination in its Burial Service.

30th March 2017

Dear Editor,

Unfortunately, Cllr Wingfield?s letter of 16th March far from reassuring us highlights perfectly the religious discrimination of Southwark?s burial service.

Cllr Wingfield appears to be claiming that all Muslim residents could be buried in Southwark - if only they changed their religious burial rites. This is clearly discriminatory.

He states ?we have a dedicated Muslim burial area which has space for 48 grave plots?.

The ONS reports around 9 deaths per 1,000 per year, meaning Southwark?s 30,000 Muslim residents experience approximately 270 deaths a year.

Fewer than seven burials take place in this ?Muslim burial area? a year as it is unsuitable for most Muslim residents? religious burial rites.

Southwark is aware most Muslim residents have specific religious burial rites it does not provide for.

The Council relies on Muslim and Jewish residents being buried in private cemeteries outside the borough in Tooting or Ilford while subsidising burial in its cemeteries for other faiths.

Religious discrimination is yet another reason why Southwark are unfit to run a burial service.

Blanche Cameron

Chair, Friends of Camberwell Cemeteries

Save Southwark Woods campaign

[email protected]

www.savesouthwarkwoods.org.uk

References:

Southwark News, 9th March:

https://www.southwarknews.co.uk/news/southwark-diocese-approves-council-plans-hundreds-new-burial-plots-fought-cemeteries/

Office of National Statistics death rates data 2015: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/bulletins/deathsregistrationsummarytables/2015

[Blanche Cameron]

Dear all,

FINAL weekend to object to THREE MORE ACRES of Honor Oak inner city nature space being taken for burial plots:

www.savesouthwarkwoods.org.uk/object-to-area-b-development

Southwark is deliberately ignoring their own public consultation results.

In July 2016, 86% of 454 people said 'dislike it all' and called for no burial here.

Please object now on Southwark's planning register form before Monday midnight.

Thank you to everyone who has already objected - it is really appreciated, we couldn't do it without you.

Best wishes,

Blanche

Blanche Cameron

Chair, Friends of Camberwell Cemeteries

The Save Southwark Woods Campaign

07731 304 966

[email protected]

www.savesouthwarkwoods.org.uk

@southwarkwoods

Facebook: Friends of Camberwell Cemeteries - Save Southwark Woods

Write to Sadiq Khan to stop the deforestation of polluted inner London

www.savesouthwarkwoods.org.uk/write-to-sadiq-khan

Save the Nature, Heritage and Beauty of Britain's Cemeteries

www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=2&v=1cLb1krd3Cc

Sign the petition to save the Camberwell Cemeteries

https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/save-southwark-woods

[dbboy]

Blanche Cameron Wrote:

> In July 2016, 86% of 454 people said 'dislike it

> all' and called for no burial here.

OK - so that is something like (correction it is 390 people who objected), not a large number based on both the number of residents and households in the borough). If you are going to quote figures, suggest you at least use some that are representative for the borough.

I did have a look at the article, now I know why you didn't publicise it, because it does not support your campaign!!!

Think you'll find you're mis-interpreting what the Cllr said to suit your own purposes, well nothing new then with your modus operandi.

[Sally Eva]

I don't understand you dbboy

I think you need to realise that SSW have a refreshingly irrational position.

a) Southwark is discriminating against Moslems and Jews because it doesn't provide enough burial space for them although they could choose it if they want

QED

b) therefore it shouldn't provide burial space for anyone.

[Burbage]

Sally Eva Wrote:

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

> b) therefore it shouldn't provide burial space for

> anyone.

At one point, their (b) was their (a), and there wasn't a (b) at all. The (b) only came in because some object to cremation on religious grounds and, at the time, there wasn't much of an alternative.

As the Guardian piece pointed out, however, more methods are becoming available. One it mentioned was composting, though I doubt that would be viable in London given the likelihood of fly-tipping, especially around Christmas. Reading it, I remembered a brochure for what appears to be a more practical solution. I'm no expert, so I've scanned and uploaded it here, so those who know better can make of it what they will.

[Otta]

So this group that were just cosying up to UKIP and a openly anti Semitic fucktard, are now claiming to be fighting for the rights of Muslims and Jews.

Beyond a joke now, you should be bloody ashamed of yourselves you twisted morons.

[Sally Eva]

"more methods are becoming available. One it mentioned was composting, though I doubt that would be viable in London given the likelihood of fly-tipping, especially around Christmas. Reading it, I remembered a brochure for what appears to be a more practical solution. I'm no expert, so I've scanned and uploaded it here, so those who know better can make of it what they will".

Flytipping dead bodies should be easy to track down the culprits. Cremation is very non eco-friendly as I guess the Guardian article says. Combined heat and power would be one solution -- attach area central heating systems to the crematorium. Also burial in stacks outside London which I would have thought to be the thing SSW most disapproved of. Trees are only eco-friendly upto a point and I would have thought that the composting element of burials would offset it.

[dbboy]

Next you'll find the haha pressure group objecting to people using in door wood burners because it's burning wood MAN.................................. They get sad and sadder by the day.

[Otta]

Just been given a heads up that the slightly unhinged Lewis is asking on twitter for the real identity of me (not hard to find Lewis) and various others from this thread.

[Penguin68]

I fear he is going back to his old tropes, of preparing to accuse those who don't agree with him of being partial, employed by undertakers, the council or other interested parties. That was the reason I started this thread in the first place, to focus on real issues and not personalities and insults. I find it interesting that he only seems to understand having views in terms of leveraging one's own (pecuniary) interests. For the record (again) I am employed by nobody relevant, nor do I contract to anyone relevant; I live adjacent to one of the cemeteries - oh - and I care about truth.

[nxjen]

What Lewis et al might call the "so-called" truth

[oddlycurious]

In case you missed them, Blanche...

1. Why have SSW/FOCC associated with far right groups on social media?

2. A question was raised by UKIP at the London Assembly the other week; you chose not to publicise it when you generally RT every comment that backs your point of view - why was this?

3. FOCC - who is the chairman of the friends group, how were they elected and how can the public join and steer this group?

and now with added..

4. Will you condemn Lewis for organising a witch-hunt against people who disagree with him on this forum?

[dbboy]

I care about the truth as well.

If the haha protesting group tell the truth I won't need to continue to expose the mis leading information and statements they make. Simple really.

I am Spartacus!!

[oddlycurious]

Blanche and SSW won't answer direct questions on here but want to know the 'real' identity of people?

I can see why SSW / FOCC get on so well with UKIP now.

[rendelharris]

Otta Wrote:

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

> Just been given a heads up that the slightly

> unhinged Lewis is asking on twitter for the real

> identity of me (not hard to find Lewis) and

> various others from this thread.

I don't have a dog in this fight but I must say that's extremely disturbing. In the US there is an offence covered by many state and federal laws known as "doxing": revealing documents about a person. Revealing the name of someone who chooses to operate under an alias online comes under that heading. I assume some similar provision exists in UK privacy laws, so Mr.Schaffer should be extremely cautious about sharing real names of posters on Twitter, or encouraging others to do the same.

My EDF name is my real name Lewis, in case you're wondering.

[Siduhe]

What's even more worrying is the reply from the arts reporter at Southwark News. It is possible to disagree with the positions being taken by Save Southwark Woods, particularly given the inconsistencies therein, and not be a troll. Screenprint below for those who haven't seen it.

[Siduhe]

Just to add, I also thought the Guardian article was good overall - and agree that there should be more encouragement of ways to balance different forms of end of life remembrance. But there will still be a group of people for whom burial is particularly important for religious/cultural reasons and I would support provision being made for them as well as encouraging other options which may be more suitable for people who aren't bothered in the same way.

[Penguin68]

The sad thing is that the response from Horniman Heights will be taken as serious by some people. This is frankly disgusting - anyone who reads the ED forum ouevre of those mentioned by Lewis (including mine) are welcome to draw conclusions as to whether we are trolls, or whether we simply disagree with mis-truth and lies. Starting with the invention of a place called Southwark Woods. Luckily twitter (social networking generally) is not my thing - so he can rant on that to his hearts content.

[Penguin68]

But there will still be a group of people for whom burial is particularly important for religious/cultural reasons and I would support provision being made for them as well as encouraging other options which may be more suitable for people who aren't bothered in the same way.

Exactly right. Different cultural and religious groups, indeed different people have very different approaches to addressing the disposal of loved ones. Many will choose ways of disposal which can be seen as economic of space (i.e. cremation) or ecologically sound (although simple burial can be so). But equally many wish to retain what they perceive as the body's integrity, or wish to have somewhere they can visit to focus their mourning. Indeed many wish to create a monument and memorial for their loved ones (or their families).

To impose your cultural views on others as they cope with grief is unwarranted (save, for instance, when cultural views include such things as suttee, of course!) We also legislate against open air cremation in the UK.

If you wish to reduce the impact of death on the built and lived environment (I don't, actually, even though my personal wishes are not for graves and memorials) then do so through education and debate. But don't try to hijack a space dedicated for one purpose for your own ends.

And in particular, don't use lies, half truths and obfuscations to support your case (for want of a better word) and don't pray-in-aid issues such as discrimination when you wish nobody to be buried in the cemeteries, rather than better provision for religious or cultural minorities.

And don't set up a witch hunt against people with the temerity to disagree with you or point out your lies and obfuscations.

[nxjen]

I wonder about the timing of his tweet. The deadline for responses to the consultation was I believe yesterday so he tweets something he knows will be controversial to keep this thread alive.

[dbboy]

Horniman heights - hilarious twitter feed, keep up the great work.

For he who is searching for me;

Health and Safety alert/warning, Caution, tree cutting/pruning in progress, low flying branches can cause accidents, keep away from the cordoned off area for your own safety. Chain saws are dangerous, accidents may, can and do happen, but are great for brining down trunks. The tree surgeon chops, cuts and trims whilst as a side line makes coffins in preparation of you being finally laid to rest, the stone mason makes and prepares memorials and the undertaker will finally lay you to rest.

[oddlycurious]

347 people objected to the plans (for the sake of the argument let's say they all live in Southwark)

288,283 live in Southwark (census data 2011)

Well over 99 per cent of residents have no objections to the plans.