Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Tottenham High Road is beyond saving
Haringey Council is at it again. They are putting forward yet another consultation plan on the future of Tottenham High Road. The council have 'identified' parts of the moribund centre for 'investment', while completely ignoring the fact that for so long, many of their policies have caused so much damage to the wider area.
On top of a poorly maintained environment, restrictive parking zones, and poor planning controls, many traders have now suffered a double whammy with the recent riots that has seen many shops and stores on the brink of collapse and others have closed completely. They also have to put up with the stupid "I Love Tottenham" campaign, a cynical publicity stunt trumpeted in the council's "People" freesheet.
The so-called help the council given to traders is too little too late, at a time of an economic downturn in which more public-sector staff already serving one of the most jobless and deprived areas of the country are facing the sack. Football club Spurs' recent decision to stay at White Hart Lane may please the massive number of fast-food outlets who are dependent on them for most of their income, but beyond that there never will be anything to entice people to shop and spend time locally as private investment remains nonexistent. The wider area will continue to stagnate socially, while the few locals with money to spend will continue travelling to neighbouring shopping and cultural areas instead.
The just published report by government advisor Mary Portas into the future of the High Street argues that some of main shopping areas are beyond saving. I have long said that Tottenham High Road at the present time is beyond saving, and I believe Haringey Council should divert the resources from what is currently spent in this 'black hole' to support the borough's other main shopping areas, including of course, the vibrant Green Lanes.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton on
-
Can I also point out that Neville Collins is hardly a Trotskyist. And hasn't - to me at least - done any screaming. Nor is he politically inactive. Neville has been a LibDem Council candidate in several elections - including St Ann's ward in 2010 when he was interviewed on video by Hugh.
On the other hand, Christopher, you make justified and vital points about poor turnout in elections, lack of engagement in consultations, and so on. In the face of that, you ask: "what else can they [councillors] do except follow the policies they believe to be right"?
I agree that elected councillors should vote for policies they believe are right. But too often people blindly follow their party line instead of taking responsibility for informing themselves; including talking and listening to a wide range of people, and reaching their own judgements.
We also have increasingly dysfunctional political structures - mayors and quasi-mayors (leader+cabinet) - where power is concentrated in fewer and fewer hands and a "payroll vote" is used to stifle dissent.
I don't have any magic recipes for what should be done. But I think it's well worth returning to some ideas which try to understand and tackle power imbalances. For instance, John Gaventa's writing and teaching about 'visible', 'hidden' and 'invisible' power sources. Within Gaventa's framework, Neville Collins' statement:
"There's no real point in contributing to anything. After I read the consultation paper, I threw it away",
is one which lots of people will sympathise with. But instead of criticising and dismissing either the consultation or Neville's reaction, we can take them as a starting point.
In any case, we are not restricted to reading "the message" which people with power choose to broadcast at us. (And I include: corporations; lobbyists, media owners, property dealers and developers and football clubs; as well as Governments and local councils.) Nor are we restricted to replying to them in the narrow ways they stipulate.
These days Josef K. has a support group, a blog and a website.
(Tottenham Hale ward councillor)
-
Permalink Reply by Christopher Fowler on
-
Ah, so Neville is a LibDem. Well, then we know where to point the finger when we talk about the betrayal of their entire election manifesto by Clegg and Alexander and the other closet Tories in government. They lied to the electorate, and are supporting a vicious Tory government intent on using the financial crisis as an excuse to shred public services. Meanwhile, they are enjoying the perks of ministerial office. Roll on the next election, when the entire electorate will have a chance to consign the LibDem party to electoral oblivion.
Alan, I would be happy to hear about how we do something about political structures that are dysfunctional. However, your rather opaque references to John Gaventa, and "invisible" or "hidden" power sources leaves me rather blank, and with images of conspiracy theories. No-one expects "magic recipes" (if we wanted a magic recipe, we would read Harry Potter, surely?), but some kind of ideas from a councillor might be welcome.
-
-
Apologies for not giving some links, Christopher.
John Gaventa was originally a community activist in Tennessee and involved in exposing exploitation by large corporations. He came to Oxford in the 1970s where he was influenced by Steven Lukes' theories on power. Gaventa applied and extended these ideas in practical contexts - in the southern U.S, and later teaching development professionals at the Institute for Development Studies (IDS Sussex). For three years in the 1990s he was Director of the almost legendary Highlander Centre in Tennessee. He was also the chair of Oxfam.
Click here to watch one of his IDS lectures on YouTube.
In August, after the riots, I thought of Professor Gaventa as someone we might ask to get involved in local discussions. I contacted a colleague of his, but they said he had a new job in Nova Scotia. In any case, I needn't have bothered. Nobody spoke to me or (as far as I know) other councillors for the wards worst affected, about membership of the various "commissions" and "panels" on the riot.
P.S. just in case you were wondering, Christopher, I am a Labour councillor. But if Neville Collins wants to see poorly drafted surveys, he needn't wait for the Council to put one through his letterbox. He can get entirely fake ones from his own party's leaflets.
(Tottenham Hale ward councillor)
-
Permalink Reply by Seema Chandwani on
-
Dear Alan
I agree with you, but the frustration of engaging (either on their narrow ways or our own methods like emails) and being ignored/blocked or played games with needs to be tackled if we are going to seek avoidance of social unrest
The democratic process plays a vital part in cohesion and order of a population, if this is weak (on both sides) we have problems.
I tried to email you but it bounced...
-
-
Sorry to disappoint you, Seema, but I am certainly _not_ obsessed by your bum, or anyone else's. I was using a colloquial expression, of which you can hardly be unaware, "to get off your bum and do something". And if you're offended by the use of the word "bum", then you have a more conservative view on language than people twice your age.
When is the last time I voted? I reached the age of majority in 1968 (when it was still 21) and have voted in every election or referendum since then (barring, I think two). So I can boast a much longer voting record than you, even if I have blotted my copybook by missing voting on two occasions. As for you parading your membership of the Labour party, I joined the party when you were five years old. I was at the party meeting when a Labour candidate to replace Bernie Grant was selected, and I was proud to cast my vote, with the majority there, for a person who I believed would best represent the interests of the people of Tottenham. Whatever Mr Lammy's faults, I believe he has done a good job for his constituents, and has also done his very best since the riots last year to bring to public attention the good things that go on in Tottenham, and the roots of the trouble in the socio-economic deprivation in the area. I'm sorry if you don't like his book, and also if he has put your nose out of joint by not responding to you as rapidly as you might wish.
I wasn't accusing you or Neville of being Trotskyists, simply pointing out that the line of "it makes no difference" which of the major parties you vote for is an argument the SWP and their front organisations make. I'm surprised by your bold statement that you are not a "socialist", as I had rather thought that anyone in the Labour party would be a socialist. It is, after all, a term to describe a political viewpoint, not a term of insult. And if you look at the history of the Labour movement (which goes a bit further back than the time when you were eight and pounding the streets for Bernie Grant), you will see that its roots are in socialism.
My comments about people complaining about how awful politics and politicians are, but not being willing to get out and vote when they have the chance, were aimed at those who can't be bothered to vote (which is around 70% of registered voters at local elections, and more than 30% in parliamentary ones). I wasn't aiming my comments at people like you who have been pounding the pavements canvassing for Labour candidates since they were eight. I expect Neville has also been out there campaigning since he was knee high to a grasshopper. I expect both of you have tired feet by now, and could probably do with a bit of a break.
As far as trying to "address the real causes of voter apathy", it would be jolly nice if you were to enlighten us on what these are. I'm sure you really have your finger on the pulse of the entire electorate, what with all that campaigning and pounding the streets since you were eight.
So, ball in your court, Seema. What are the "real causes of voter apathy"? Please give us the benefit of your vast political wisdom and "common sense".
-
Permalink Reply by John D on
-
Sarcasm is such an ugly literary device.
But on your point about anyone in the Labour Party being a socialist - would that make Tony Blair a socialist ?
-
-
Tony Who?
- ooops, sarcasm. Inelegant illiterate device.
-
-
Sarcasm is a rhetorical device, and is perfectly valid. It is no more "ugly" than many other such "devices". It is often used as a means of deflating those who are rather too enamoured of their own wit or wisdom.
And with reference to Mr Blair: if you look at his history in the Labour Party, you would see that he at least started out as a socialist (or social democrat, which is really much the same thing). It's true that he drifted towards the centre and then right of centre. The military intervention in Iraq was wrong, misguided and foolish. The post-war Labour government intervened (at the request of the UN) in the Korean war; I don't think that makes Atlee any less of a socialist. You can't judge a Prime Minister on the basis of an overseas war; or, in fairness, on any one event or facet; it is important to look at them in the round. Like the curate's egg, Mr Blair was good in parts; probably socialist in parts too.
-
-
"Sorry to disappoint you, Seema, but I am certainly _not_ obsessed by your bum, or anyone else's. I was using a colloquial expression, of which you can hardly be unaware, "to get off your bum and do something". And if you're offended by the use of the word "bum", then you have a more conservative view on language than people twice your age." You need to chill, you appear to be very defensive and are unable to actually debate or discuss any points I have made about the budget or process
"As far as trying to "address the real causes of voter apathy", it would be jolly nice if you were to enlighten us on what these are. I'm sure you really have your finger on the pulse of the entire electorate, what with all that campaigning and pounding the streets since you were eight" I feel I have been pretty clear about what I feel the issues are, I am unsure how to explain this further.
As for the other belittling silly immature digs around "vast political wisdom" and "Finger on the pulse of the entire electorate" These are pathetic statements and do not warrant a response as it will encourage you to believe that this is acceptable adult behaviour in a pretty focused and interesting debate about democracy.
I hope I can re-enter a debate with you when you present some points that are absent of personal attacks, until then it has been .... an experience :)
-
-
Seema: I don't think I am the one being defensive here. It was you who got upset about the use of the word "bum" and ventured to suggest I was obsessed by it. And as to your having been clear about "the issues": you have, in a rather incoherent and scattershot manner, outlined a lot of what you see as problems. However, you have been remarkably short on suggesting ways of actually dealing with the issue of "voter apathy". I would find it easier to engage with you in a debate on how to involve those voters who feel excluded if you could, for example, set out a list of (say) five clear and concise proposals to effect that re-engagement. And could you please just focus on the issue of re-engaging the apathetic voter, rather than attacking the amount of public money spent in Haringey on out-sourcing, for example, which is a separate issue. If we are to focus, let's focus on re-engaging the electorate in the political process, especially around Tottenham High Road, which is where Neville started this debate.
-
-
Firsty you confused humour with upset... in regards to my ass, I am sure even you have a small inkiling of humour?
If you feel my methods of articulation are "incoherent" or "scattershot" ask for clarity... I welcome feedback, but must admit they are crictism I have never heard before, in fact I am known for quite the opposite in regards to politics
Lastly, I have no intention of being red herringed in this thread about voter apathy, my point to the original post is around the spending and the spending consultation, this is what I am sticking to. Should you wish to discuss voter apathy with me (which is a great subject) then start your own thread and i'll contribute.
-
Permalink Reply by John McMullan on
-
"I had rather thought that anyone in the Labour party would be a socialist." - Ha ha ha, Gina isn't.
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
