Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
MPs again seek investigation of Haringey Council’s monopolistic customer
Wireless 2023—Melvin Benn & Peray Ahmet posing
Photo credit: Haringey Council PR.
———
A Parliamentary Commiteee is again urging the Competition and Markets Authority to undertake a ‘full market investigation into the UK's live music industry’.
In this context, full market in effect, means Haringey Council's enormous customer, Live Nation (LN).
Enormous that is, in terms of US, UK and global market dominance rather than the modest, if not measly, hire payment the council receives. Some of which may be spent on the council Events Team. A fraction of which is spent for the benefit of Finsbury Park.
In a local context, the enormity means the ticketed Event that has always been too big for our public park.
Park hire income has been largely opaque, which characteristic may overlap with the several years of external Audit Opinion from two Audit firms for the overall council accounts: Disclaimer.
I understand that of four grades of Audit, Disclaimer is the least favourable.
Wireless 2024—LN's Benn, then-leader Ahmet & former Cabinet Member Arkell
Photo Credit: Councii PR
.
"Climate of Fear"
Companies don't always achieve monopoly status by playing nice. This latest urging by the UK's House of Commons Business and Trade Committee comes after a previous urging, made shortly after this year's May local elections.
In addressing this market abuse, the CMA is moving with the same urgency as a municipal Action Plan. The USA's Justice Department began action against this gigantic global monopoly many years ago and litigation is well underway. Massive fines are in prospect in the USA, but the CMA is presumably pondering.
While the jury is out on the UK CMA's inaction, last April a US Federal Jury did take action.
LN has always appeared at least satisfied with the deal the council offered, while the previous council leader often seemed happy to be photographed with their local UK boss (above).
For more than 10 years, LN has enjoyed cosy relations with our council, but our public park—entirely within Harringay Ward—has seen little benefit. In several ways it is run down.
Another Event—Peray Ahmet, Melvin Benn and council CEO Andy Donald
Photo credit: Council PR
.
A gig, a Nazi, the greed and the feebleness
Earlier this year, the council's customer invited artist Kanye West—with public Nazi advocacy—to headline at Wireless in Finsbury Park.
The LN boss suggested that a three-night headlining might help in rehabilitation for the artist. Others might suggest that LN's invitation was evidence of avarice. Fortunately, the Home Secretary blocked entry of the artist and Wireless as such was cancelled.
The practical effect was that (for the first time ever?) the McKenzie flower-beds were not planted-out in summer. As I photographed the forlorn weed-beds, a park employee passing on a golf-cart stopped by and told me this represented a “fallow year” … before zooming off.
Under New Labour, the council did not recognise any drawback with their long-term Finsbury Park exploitation contracts. Due to legal commitments into which the council previously entered, our park and residents will suffer yet one more Wireless during the council's Borough of Culture 2027.
Many years ago, Wireless was ejected from other council's parks. Now, LN will likely lobby Haringey to continue their lucrative arrangement after 2027, with a council whose negotiating ability with the private sector is not always brilliant.
Before the election, Labour's Cabinet Member for Parks did her best to lock the council into another five year LN deal until 2032. We must trust that the new Green Administration will honour their election undertakings and that 2027 will be the last, damaging Event.
———
PDF Report May 2026: Competition and market functioning in the UK live music industry
House of Commons Business and Trade Committee
.
2026, March—two months before the election in Finsbury Park ~ Arkell, Benn & Peray Ahmet
Photo credit: Council PR
.
Tags for Forum Posts: feeble, festival republic, finsbury park, haringey council, live nation
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by wanttoremainanon
-
As usual Clive most of this rant is complete nonsense.
Whilst i too believe that Kanye was completely the wrong artist to play and he ll get no tears from me but taking that out of it the practical effect of having no second weekend i'm guessing is a 50% loss of revenue for the Finsbury Park budget this year... now i don't know the number (you probably do) but we ll use £1m as a nice round number its probably the region of 500k ish which now either council tax payers will have to fill or 500k less to be spent on all things parks... whatever way you cut it.
There is defiantly a wider debate to be had on the whole Live Nation issue and i think most music people would recognize that their tentacles are a negative for independent venues and festivals and arguably consumers But what i probably can say with confidence (having worked in the industry) is that i'd rather have the resource and infrastructure of a massive promoter than some of the smaller ones whose shows are somewhat how shall we say run close to the edge.
The context of public finances surely means that beggars cant be choosers too much here. What i do think should be done is more transparency on what the revenues have been spent on. The council cant have it all ways and i think that us local residents should be able to see (and indeed should expect) to see the monies deployed to provide improved fabric of 'our park' .... i don't know maybe a new sunken garden, brand new volleyball/basketball courts, new gym equipment, skate park refurbished, resurfaced tennis courts, lighting on the carriageway etc ..
Who knows some new/refurbished benches and some drinking fountains might appear!
Hope there's some decent gigs next year!
-
Permalink Reply by Zena Brabazon
-
Hello,
The most recent finance report to the Cabinet sets out the council's up to dater financial position. In the papers it shows Finsbury Park projecting losing £500k income for this financial year due t the cancellation of one of the Wireless weekends. As ward councillor for Harringay ward I supported the cancellation and I was pleased the Home Secretary banned Kanye West from entering the country.
However, the plain fact is that the budget for Finsbury Park comes from external event income. I know some people will not want to hear that and will simply say it isn't the case. But it is a fact, and has been the case since the huge cuts imposed after George Osborne pushed his austerity budget which affected local government more than any other area of public services.
Parks, children's after-school clubs, playschemes, youth, and adult services like old people's homes took the hit in 2010 because they were non-statutory services and the cuts in funding from central government were so deep.
From that time on, parks had to generate income. Haringey isn't alone in this as authorities all over the country were savaged. From memory, Finsbury Park earns around £1.3m in income from external events, and this is ring-fenced for the park, in accordance with the High Court judgement of some years ago. This pays for the parks salaries, equipment, maintenance, any new features, etc. The Richard Hope play area, for example cost £500k.
It is now up to the Green administration to decide about the future funding of the park. They said they want to 'strictly limit major commercial events in Finsbury Park'. Then they will have to find alternative funding for the park's upkeep and maintenance, let alone investment. I asked about this at the recent 'Town Hall' meeting with Mark Blake, Council Leader. From memory, he mentioned something about governance, meeting with Hackney and Islington but nothing concrete about the park's budget for2027-2028 or events.
Its nearly November so draft budgets for 2027-2028 must already be in place.
Zena Brabazon
Labour councillor 2018-2026, Harringay ward.
-
-
thank you Zena. You have crystallized nicely i think what i was saying!
I had guessed at £500000. I suspect with a lot of green statements they wont survive first contact with reality!
The lovely utopia that they think they can operate in just doesn't exist in my opinion.
No one can argue that two major event weekends does not cause some disruption an disturbance anyone who says that is not the case is being disingenuous. My opinion is its worth it and puts the name Finsbury Park on the map internationally and i get to see internationally acclaimed artists on my doorstep.
-
Permalink Reply by Clive Carter
-
‘Wantoremainanon’ ~
It’s polite of you to address me by my first name; unfortunately I’m unable to reciprocate as you choose to post under a pseudonym.
You claim I’ve written complete nonsense but there seem to be a few points of agreement, including the merit of the Kanye West invitation; the character of the Live Nation and the opacity of the Finsbury Park Accounts. That's quite a lot already, even before we get to the noise (not all residents enjoy), the condition of our park and exclusion of the public during the council's "Events Season".
You mention the negative tentacles of Live Nation, but the committee of MPs to which I linked are trying to take this more seriously than have “a wider debate” that you claim to seek. Ruthless monopolists are likely to tolerate your "wider debate" as long as it does not affect their business.
.
"i'd rather have the resource and infrastructure of a massive promoter than some of the smaller ones whose shows are somewhat how shall we say run close to the edge."
<—this is what Live Nation is likely to argue generally and it suggests you may be working for them—a Brief? A lobbyist? An employee? Contractor? Something else?
More than 100 years ago the USA implemented Anti-Trust legislation against the Robber Barrons. Understanding the tendency of unbridled Capitalism to build monopolies and to extinguish competition, many advanced countries now have rules about exploiting unlawful monopolies and about anti-competitive tactics.
You claim that Live Nation is merely arguably bad for consumers, but is this not actually unarguable? ~
This is a matter that—after listening to copious evidence—a Federal Jury in the US has already decided and determined. However the UK—in the form of the CMA—appears to be dragging its heels, possibly due to the cosy relationship between Labour and the company (?)
.
Of course you’ve worked in the industry!
You write that you can ”probably can say with confidence (having worked in the industry) …”, but I suggest you are able to exhibit confidence from behind a wall, but lack the courage of your convictions, which is the reason you choose to hide.
Gaining anonymity also loses credibility. You can assert that most of what you claim as a rant, is “complete” nonsense, but are are unable to point to a single clause that in your opinion is “nonsense”. Is it the MP's Committee's call on the CMA, the leading news item?
The council is contractually locked in (the "Land Use Agreement" to another gig next year, but the impression you give is discomfort with the possibility of Wireless no longer at FP after 2027, possibly stemming from the same motivation of the council: financial interest.
As you decline to identify yourself, we have no idea where you live (next to our park?) You might live next to Finsbury Park or for all we know, in the Outer Hebrides!
We don’t know what relationship you have with the industry then or now and what possible personal interests, including financial, you have had, and may still have in “the industry”. Any denial of personal pecuniary interest cannot be credible, unless and until you identify yourself. Likewise, any denial of council connections or Live Nation sub-contractor connections cannot be credible.
You are attached to ticketed Major Events, but despite your fanciful wish-list of unlikely improvements, it appears you have no interest in keeping Finsbury Park whole; specifically, a public park, fully open year-round to members of the public and free at the point of access, as the saying goes.
.
"The context of public finances”
Your confidence in council-supplied figures suggests you may be a staunch or blinkered New Labour supporter, or more Statist than Socialist.
The council’s accounts have been in a mess for years, but at the same time, some non-Statutory areas (e.g the Civic Centre) are well-funded or over-funded or unnecessary or could have been shelved or postponed … had there been better governance.
A previous Government slashed at all local government funding years ago and that is indeed the big backdrop. However since then, local Labour invested in waste, property deals that lost an eight figure sum and ever-bigger salaries for the increasingly top-heavy top management. We still don't know the result of any Police Investigation into evidence of corruption. Written evidence, supplied by the top management of the council itself, to the MET.
.
What i do think should be done is more transparency on what the revenues have been spent on.
<—Yes, I agree. It's hard to "follow the money", when that money is hidden.
The Finsbury Park Account is far more opaque than the council’s consolidated accounts. Covid caused chaos throughout local government, but after the Pandemic was over, it should have been one of the highest priorities for the council to prepare accurate, true and fair accounts.
Getting the platoon of Directors or Heads to stop working from home and to return to work at council offices was only the most basic start.
The policy of Major Events was a political decision taken some 12 years ago. In terms of park upkeep, the meagre income from dominating, exclusionary, noisy mega-events has failed to deliver a promise of solid stewardship.
Let me take you on a walk around our park!
It is obvious to a casual vistor that only a fraction of Finsbury Event Income is spent for Finsbury Park benefit. That is contrary to the High Court order of ring-fencing for FP. Labour Councillors have been less than candid about this. A sound council policy would not need the levels of dishonesty over many years and occasional dirty politics to support it.
At election time, we heard that the council publishes (separate) accounts for Finsbury Park. It’s news to me. If it’s true at all, then it’s entirely for private, internal council use and not published for the public.
.
Bench Press
The most obvious and recent untruth, is that a dozen park benches—removed from the main straight and out of commission since Wireless 2024—are "currently being refurbished and improved". This is untrue and yet (presumably) the Park Events Team who control the park, passed this untruth to the council PR Team who retailed it to the Islington Tribune.
Are we paying for municipal dishonesty?
Labour councillors tolerated reports from their employees that were untrue, reckless or careless. Another example: to David Lammy's pointed, written query, Peray Ahmet replied in writing that park damage from Event customer Tough Mudder was not deliberate.
Leader Ahmet did not look closely enough before replying to her MP.
One does not need to be a frequent visitor to see that Finsbury Park has been run down for a decade. Haringey Council’s attitude to our public park is as the proverbial Dog in the Manger. Not able or willing to fund it fully, properly and without compromise and yet at the same time, intensely proprietorial.
In my view, either Haringey Council should, one way or another, fund it properly (via the Labour Government?) or pass it to a new or different entity that has the ability to do so.
It’s a chronic disgrace.
.
© 2026 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
