I'm still shaking my head at this. The Council has spent so much on something noone wants. I don't know why the English don't stand up to this sort of thing. It would never happen in Turkey or Greece. This guy sums it up perfectly.
Replies are closed for this discussion.
Who's that you're talking to, or even about, Livi? Maybe you could try to find figures for the entire consultation results across all those who were asked, before you spread the myth, nay untruth, of an "individual or small group". I think they're quoted above somewhere.
Not a myth at all, Rosamund. The whole thing was initiated by Ejiofor and his cronies!
..and your proof that absolutely no one else prior to their initiative to take the action had ever expressed for the change in that name is where, please?
It's evident that the majority across the borough supported the change. It's unlikely that they had never thought about it before.
Plenty of forums contain posts about people disliking the name or feeling appalled by it; that's merely social media. The majority keep quiet for fear of having to deal with the tedium of the fall out of the myths & untruths perpetuated, but given the opportunity state their opinion by voting, as they did here.
That's not exactly the basis for good policy making Rosamund.
What? What exactly isn't good policy - to not listen to opinions expressed? Too short a reply to see what you're really objecting to in what I wrote. Maybe you didn't read it all properly.
Bottom line is, it wasn't up to you & your individual opinion.
Clean data from a representative sample of a relevant population which is then analysed, tested and compared to other similar sets in order to reach empirically defendable conclusions that can be used to inform policy options to solve problems and improve people's lives.
ie. Not what happened at Black Boy Lane
It's hard to engage with your posts if you alter them after people respond to your points.
Cem, I can't tell if you are directing that accusation of altering posts at me or not, but in any case I can't reply to it directly for some reason. Maybe a thread only allows 8 comments. I dunno.
You must realise that one only has 15 mins within which to edit - not necessarily alter, by the way. Is it not now permissible in your book to think on a comment & realise it could be worded better, within the 15 mins? Have you never pressed the wrong button before, or had the mouse hover in a different place to where you think it is for when you press it!? On Facebook one can see edit history, & edit a resultant reply oneself at any time, but it's different here. Maybe it's advisable to think on a reply a bit longer than dashing off one in anger or sarcasm, as I see you perhaps have elsewhere here. Hey, if it makes you feel good go ahead, but we can't all be like you.
FYI I think my initial response was "What exactly isn't good policy?" Seems to me your reply is relevant to your point, although I don't see it necessarily relevant to what I was saying in the first place, in comment no.5, which is why I haven't replied directly to it. Perhaps you were replying to something else - I can't tell any more, if people won't recognise that this format isn't ideal, & doesn't constitute the same as a verbal conversation, & therefore they should take the time to be specific to avoid confusion, then there will be confusion. I also thought initially that Sarah was talking from a Haringey process standpoint, & not Camden's as I read hers initially as a separate comment.
Rosamund — I think there were three principle triggers for disaffection:
a) The intellectual basis for the change is so unclear that the move appears tokenistic and potentially driven by one particular councillor who wanted to make a mark.
b) The decision process appears offensively undemocratic, because the consultation results (acknowledged by the council) show that actual residents of BBL were uniformly against the change but were outvoted by those who don’t live there and then overruled by the council.
Further up this thread, Sarah provided detail of Camden’s approach to a similar scheme. It appears to be a case-study in democratic involvement, in strong contrast to Haringey’s approach.
c) £180,000 may be a small fraction of Haringey’s budget, but it looks wasteful to spend this much on a move that will not alleviate any of the current problems facing Harringay/Haringey residents. The council’s overall budget may be in 6 - 8 figures, but people can see what the money spent on BBL renaming might have been spent on (teachers and TAs have been mentioned) and how this might help make a real difference to people’s lives. The renaming consequently appears ideological rather than practical, at a time when many in the borough are suffering hardship.
As to social media, HoL was set up as a discussion forum for local people to express opinions, exchange information or comment on local topics. I’d say this (and the previous) discussion shows it’s fulfilling its purpose.
a) Don... In your opinion - it all depends on one's initial stance, & what one wants to believe on the matter as to how one reads & interprets the apparent historical ideas & information behind the name - I have my right to my view as do the historians theirs, as does anyone else. There being no conclusive proof that it was/is racist doesn't mean it was/wasn't/is/isn't, but it also doesn't mean it is a matter to ignore. The motto "If in doubt leave it out" doesn't have to apply here; a friend of mine used to argue with that saying, "If in doubt, work it out" ...in whatever way applies, & that's what Haringey have chosen to do, as is within their remit.
b) Why should only residents of the road have the choice? I live in a close by street & travel along or by the road several times a week; it is in my neighbourhood & the whole of the borough's income goes to wards paying for such issues - why shouldn't the wider public express a view on something that may affect them as they go about our daily business? Of course there are more of the wider public to express a majority view, which they did in favour of the change but that doesn't make it unfair to BBL residents because their own council taxes weren't the only income to pay for it. Of course there's the administering of the change for the residents to do, but it's been compensated for & frankly isn't a hugely arduous task fir most ordinary people. I didn't have much trouble when I moved house & I'm involved with 100s of organisations - most of whom are in my email address book rather than postal, so there was little paper & ink to waste & at least there's no post office redirection to pay for.
The elected council decides on these matters anyway which is what they're elected to do, with advice from the LFB, as well as getting residents' input which in this sort of instance is regarded as advisory & not mandatory, according to how borough councils are run.
The Camden issue, as I understood it was about the name of a building not a road. Sarah has chosen to offer her knowledge of the process here, but we aren't in Camden & so the criteria doesn't have to apply however ideal it might well have been to do so - if you want to put it to Haringey that that's how it should have been done, please do & share your findings.
c) I never made this point, another person did so please don't lecture me/present your argument as if I did, as it shows disrespect to me & lack of clarity in your reasoning. I have stated that I agree that it has cost far too much for what it is.
You're missing my points about the reliance & relevance of social media - of course it's fulfilling what it's for, you again misunderstand - my point is that its effects are negligible. I'll repeat: letting off steam verbally as it may still be at neighbourhood forums, Speaker's Corner etc, & in type here, often makes people feel that they've done something about something, which is no bad thing in itself, but they haven't actually achieved anything solid with the time it takes complaining about one issue, which has many different factors for & against within, over which they have no further control currently.
Rosamund — This thread is so complex that it’s hard to keep track of who made which points. I wasn’t attributing the financial comment specifically to you, but making it one of three general points as to why I think the renaming has stirred up such a furore — at least on HoL — following your overall comments about people sounding off rather than taking action.
For what it’s worth, my view is that in a hierarchy of needs, three basic ones are housing, heating and food; I contend that renaming streets is a luxury available only once basic needs have been met. £180,000 (even if it is, as others have said, a tiny proportion of the council’s overall budget) could still be better spent instead on actually helping alleviate real problems — such as homelessness, housing repairs, fuel poverty or the need for food banks — in the borough. It appears you share my view on the amount involved, so I wonder what action you’d propose people take instead of giving their views on social media? In the current set-up, the only practical action appears to be voting concillors out, and we’re going to have to wait several years for the next chance to do that.
Yes, Don, I understand that! I got lost in who replied to who about what in another thread within this post!
Hmmm, I dunno, set up a petition; maybe get further into local politics, run for councillor etc. so as to be able to at least understand the processes & figures a bit better. Apart from that, far be it for me to give examples as to how people's action might manifest, ha ha - I certainly don't want to be accused of 'starting something'!.
© 2023 Created by Hugh. Powered by