High street

The place for serious discussion, announcements and breaking news about Sydenham
Post Reply
syd
Posts: 433
Joined: 23 Aug 2006 18:30
Location: lower sydenham

High street

Post by syd »

Morning

Does lewisham have planning or can anyone open whatever shop they like? If this labour council were for poorer people why would they let 2 cheque cashing shop s open? These shops cause debt traps for the most v vulnerable. I have to say I am appalled.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ] Image
sophie
Posts: 350
Joined: 8 May 2005 16:50
Location: Sydenham

Re: High street

Post by sophie »

There seems to be an increase in these types of businesses everywhere, along with betting shops, pawn shops and sell your gold places. Sadly a sign of the times?
syd
Posts: 433
Joined: 23 Aug 2006 18:30
Location: lower sydenham

Re: High street

Post by syd »

sophie wrote:There seems to be an increase in these types of businesses everywhere, along with betting shops, pawn shops and sell your gold places. Sadly a sign of the times?
I agree but why is a labour council allowing these crooks to exploit the poorest people in lewisham. Even the heartless government knows these companies need regulation.

I was a life long labour supporter but living here and seeing how sydenham has been allowed to become a dump has changed my mind.

The council are letting Sydenham run down and putting all the money into Lewisham and Deptford.
Tim Lund
Posts: 6718
Joined: 13 Mar 2008 18:10
Location: Silverdale

Re: High street

Post by Tim Lund »

syd wrote:Morning

Does lewisham have planning or can anyone open whatever shop they like? If this labour council were for poorer people why would they let 2 cheque cashing shop s open? These shops cause debt traps for the most v vulnerable. I have to say I am appalled.
Maybe not appalled, but I am troubled by this. To answer the first question, Lewisham, like every other local authority, has planning policies, which include requiring permission for changes of use between various nationally defined planning classes. Cheque cashing shops I believe require A2 permission, as do estate agents and bookmakers, so if premises have permission for one of these already, a cheque shop could not be refused. A while back, I among others objected to a proposed change of use for the "A1" 59 Sydenham Road, and we have ended up with a funeral parlour, which did not require change of use. I guess we could have objected to other applications, but we didn't pick them up. If people want to use the planning system this way, we need to be more systematic about how we do it - that was part of the point I was making in my posting Planning Aid for Sydenham. Here there is something Lewisham could do - to publish an RSS feed indicating when documents - such as applications for change of use - appear in their planning pages. This is a point I made in this posting
it would make more sense to develop an RSS feed which ICT professionals outside the council could tailor to provide the service the public actually wants.
Unfortunately Lewisham's communications policy is highly politicised, and does not have the public good as its principle objective.

The second question - the extent to which people would want a council - Labour or otherwise - to control what shops can open on Sydenham Road - is more about political philosophy. The counter to your view about cheque cashing shops - which I share - is that this is what plenty of poorer people want. What right do we have to tell these fellow citizens how they should lead their lives? If we give councils a right to control their lives in this way, who's then to stop councils deciding to control the way we want to live our own lives, in some way we have not yet anticipated? The planning system we have is some kind on break on an otherwise rampant free-market capitalism, but it's hard to say whether we should really more or less of it. More transparency, and easier access, which is what the technology I refer to above can do, is another matter - this is a no-brainer for the public good.

It's sad to read of life long Labour supporters losing confidence, because there isn't anywhere else for them to go - certainly not with a realistic chance of making any political difference in Lewisham. It might be thought that Conservatives would have a better understanding of what is needed to prevent an area becoming a dumping ground. I don't think it's fair to say Sydenham is this, but the evidence is there that Lewisham Council has generally failed our local economies - see this post on our former Deputy Mayor's failure to even see the failure. But Conservatives - and Lib Dems - show no greater signs locally of understanding what is happening, and probably live in a comforting world in which all they have to do - indeed can do - is wait till the shifting tides of national politics get them into power. In this unlikely event, they won't have a clue what to do, and will probably make the current Lewisham Labour party look a model of competence.

So it would be great if life long Labour supporters actually joined the party locally, and use this Forum to help bring some transparency into what it thinks it's doing for Sydenham.
syd
Posts: 433
Joined: 23 Aug 2006 18:30
Location: lower sydenham

Re: High street

Post by syd »

Unfortunately Lewisham's communications policy is highly politicised, and does not have the public good as its principle objective.
Good greif

So it would be great if life long Labour supporters actually joined the party locally, and use this Forum to help bring some transparency into what it thinks it's doing for Sydenham.
I wouldn't join labour to have more of the same in Lewisham
Annie
Posts: 1187
Joined: 13 May 2006 11:08
Location: Sydenham

Re: High street

Post by Annie »

Change is needed in Lewisham.
Time to give another party at least the chance to do better.
leenewham
Posts: 5886
Joined: 2 Sep 2007 11:58
Location: SYDENHAM
Contact:

Re: High street

Post by leenewham »

Unfortunately there isn't a great deal the council can do. And it isn't fair to just blame the council.

Normally there are saturation levels of certain business classes and limits on the types of financial services and bookmakers but I believe the new businesses fall within permitted limits.

We really need a strong traders/residents group here. They work. It's far better for them to define problems and solutions and then pressure the council to make them happen than to reply or blame the council, no matter who they are, Conservative, Liberal or Labour.

Your local councillors should be just that first. A local councillor, fighting for their local area rather than being a local representative for their political brand. They should be fighting to keep your local libraries open rather than saying that the council just doesn't have enough money. Sod the council, get them to close another library, not yours! They should go against their political party for the benefit of their local area.

I've met officers from a lot of councils now (14 councils so far) due to our work with the High Streets improvements from the (badly named) Outer London Fund, many of whom I hold in high regard, which includes Lewisham and Bromley. Lewisham has some great people working for them. They are hard working and often visionry. Often the vision is held back by political nonsense which really is playground stuff (I have little respect for politics, even less so now that I've seen a lot of it close up in the last year). These people work for the council no matter who is in charge and they are the ones that make things happen.

In short, if we want Sydenham High Street to improve, you can't leave it to the council. Our local councillors should be fighting their own parties more to improve our local area, get it on the councils radar rather than just going with the political flow. But we really need a strong traders group (and residents) that will work together, that will fight tooth and nail for Sydenham, with a singular vision. I'd do that rather than get involved in the Lab/Lib/Con merry go round which seems to be more interested in scoring political points against their opposition than doing anything constructive. I've never understood why opposition parties never seem to do anything.

Without a group focusing on the high street there will be no strategy and we will fall behind other areas, which is already happening.
syd
Posts: 433
Joined: 23 Aug 2006 18:30
Location: lower sydenham

Re: High street

Post by syd »

This council seems to be totally selfserving.

2010/2011 budget

£18m or 25% of the capital budget was spent in Deptford.
No capital expenditure in Sydenham.
Pension fund payments £25m pension pot £760m

Barry Quirk
Chief Executive​ £192,387​ Full​
Janet Senior
Executive Director for Resources​ £141,123​ Full​
Lesley Seary
Executive Director for Customer Services​ £141,123​ Full​
Aileen Buckton
Executive Director for Community Services​ £138,495 Full​
Frankie Sulke
Executive Director for Children and Young People​ £141,123​ Full​​


(c) Members and Chief Officers
Members of the Council have direct control over the Council’s financial and operating policies. The total cost of members (inc allowances) are shown in Note 29.
This note has been compiled by using the Council's Register of Members and Chief Officers' Declarationsof Interests. This is open to public inspection at the Civic Suite at Lewisham Town Hall. Declarablerelated party transactions over £2,000 are as follows:

• Councillor Affiku is employed by Lewisham Primary Care Trust with whom Lewisham operates
joint commissioning arrangements for health and social care, worth approximately £200m in
2010/11.
• Councillor Best is a member of Sydenham Gardens to whom Lewisham paid £7,300 in 2010/11.
• Councillor Bonavia is a member and trustee of Age Exchange Theatre Trust to whom Lewisham
paid £53,000 in 2010/11.
• Councillor Clarke is employed by the National Society of Epilepsy to whom Lewisham paid
£0.16m in 2010/11 and a member of the Grove Park Community Group to whom Lewisham paid
£35,800 in 2010/11.
• Councillor Clutten is a student member of Goldsmith University College Council to whom
Lewisham paid £40,600 in 2010/11.
• Councillor Egan is a member of Hither Green Community Association to whom Lewisham paid
£2,000 in 2010/11.
• Councillor Fletcher is on the Council of Management of the Lewisham Youth Theatre to whom
Lewisham paid £62,300 in 2010/11, is a board member of the Ilderton Motor Project to whom
Lewisham paid £10,000 in 2010/11 and is a board member of Phoenix Community Homes to
whom Lewisham paid £1.38m in 2010/11.
• Councillor Foreman is employed by Haberdasher’s Askes Knights Academy to whom Lewisham
paid £0.61m in 2010/11.
• Councillor Hall is a board member of the Phoenix Community Homes to whom Lewisham paid
£1.38m in 2010/11.
• Councillor Johnson is a member of the London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority to whom
Lewisham paid £35,000 in 2010/11.
• Councillor Long is Chair (remunerated) of the South London and Maudsley NHS Trust to whom
Lewisham paid £3.59m in 2010/11.
• Councillor Mallory is a member of Lee Green Lives to whom Lewisham paid £5,200 in 2010/11.
• Councillor Millbank is a member of Voluntary Action Lewisham to whom Lewisham paid £0.355m,
a member of the Ackroyd Community Association to whom Lewisham paid £0.22m and a member
of the Oak Hill Community Nursery to whom Lewisham paid £70,300, all payments made in
2010/11.
• Councillor Morrison is employed by the North Downham Training Project to whom Lewisham paid
£0.25m in 2010/11 and is on the Management Committee of the Ackroyd Community Centre to
whom Lewisham paid £0.22m in 2010/11.
• Councillor Muldoon is a board member of the South London and Maudsley NHS Trust to whom
Lewisham paid £3.59m in 2010/11, and a member of the Noah’s Ark Children’s Venture to whom
Lewisham paid £53,500 in 2010/11.
• Councillor Nisbet is a member of Lewisham & Southwark Age Concern to whom Lewisham paid
£0.22m, is a member of Sydenham Music to whom Lewisham paid £18,500 and is a member of
Sydenham Gardens to whom Lewisham paid £7,300, all payments were made in 2010/11.
• Councillor Onuegbu is a member of the South London and Maudsley NHS Trust to whom
Lewisham paid £3.59m in 2010/11.
• Councillor Paschoud is a member of the Ravensbourne Project to whom Lewisham paid £0.26m,
a member of Contact a Family – Lewisham to whom Lewisham paid £0.15m, a member of the
Lewisham Disability Coalition to whom Lewisham paid £0.145m, a member of Platform 1 (Forest
Hill) Youth Project to whom Lewisham paid £22,200 and a member of Forest Hill and Sydenham
Youth Forum to whom Lewisham paid £7,800, all payments made in 2010/11.
• Councillor Peake is a member of the Lewisham Citizen Advice Bureau to whom Lewisham paid
£0.49m in 2010/11 and a member of the Forest Hill Society to whom Lewisham paid £2,100 in
2010/11.

http://www.lewisham.gov.uk/SiteCollecti ... 102011.pdf


I must be a mug
leenewham
Posts: 5886
Joined: 2 Sep 2007 11:58
Location: SYDENHAM
Contact:

Re: High street

Post by leenewham »

With regard to Cllr Best and Cllr Nesbit, I think it's absolutely right that they be involved in things in Sydenham and that they fight to get funding for them from the council.

In all of these instances it looks like they are good causes such as hospitals, community enterprises etc rather than lining their own pockets.

I'd be more worried if a local cllr was involved in something like the Sydenham Community Garden and DIDN'T manage to get funding from the council. To me that would say that they wen't doing their job properly.

So well done to all in the list for securing the funding.
syd
Posts: 433
Joined: 23 Aug 2006 18:30
Location: lower sydenham

Re: High street

Post by syd »

Seems like you have to be a Cllr to get funded
Tim Lund
Posts: 6718
Joined: 13 Mar 2008 18:10
Location: Silverdale

Re: High street

Post by Tim Lund »

syd wrote:Seems like you have to be a Cllr to get funded
I'm not sure we have the evidence to back this up, and in any case, if the Council does fund anything, there ought to be some oversight from the Council to see that the money is well spent, and spent in accordance with the reasons the Council gave the money. Having Councillors on boards of Trustees is one obvious way to allow this, although it will not be fool-proof. Councillors are to a large extent community activists, such as are, in effect, many of us contributors to this thread, and non Councillors who also devote time to these local good causes. They differ from us in having more actual power to 'make a difference' in their communities - and along with that are subject to greater scrutiny - as you illustrate from the link to Lewisham's published statement of accounts. And at which point I should perhaps declare, that I am a Trustee of one of the organisations you mention - the Sydenham & Forest Hill Youth Forum, and I'm also a Life Member of the Sydenham Garden - but that's just because I gave them some money when they were starting up.

So, if anyone wants to criticise the Council, or anyone one else for how they use public money, you need to make the case that they could have spent the money better. I would say this is what I do in pointing out in that posting I did on Lewisham business, that they have no decent excuses for why businesses do not flourish as much in Lewisham as they do in comparable London boroughs. On a smaller scale, when it comes to spending money for
Priority 3 - Vibrant high street including inclusive community
...

Sydenham Mosaic - sponsorship of a roundel - £3,000
Agreed to go forward

Forest Hill Community Church/Sydenham ESOL Project at Here for Good - £1,800
Does not meet Assembly priorities
Sydenham Assembly Coordinating Group Meeting, 28 April 2011

we see a specific example of how, I would say, spending is misallocated.

It also helps if those who criticise are prepared to do something practical about it - such as perhaps joining a local party. I'd also say that taking the time to look through Lewisham's accounts on line is doing something practical - so this is not having a go at you, syd. Once upon a time (1983) I was a member of the Labour Party, but it really wasn't for me, and I'm not a life-long Labour supporter anyway, so I can hardly blame others for not wanting to join. On the other hand, I think political parties are an inevitable result of our democratic system, and that I would not want to change. So I can't really complain about them, per se.
Tim Lund
Posts: 6718
Joined: 13 Mar 2008 18:10
Location: Silverdale

Re: High street

Post by Tim Lund »

Just saw Mark Bennett, who stood for the Lib Dems in Perry Vale ward in 2010, and shared this thread with him. For which he thanked me.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ] Image
Post Reply