The coincidences of Tottenham regeneration

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Sharon on February 12, 2015 at 20:17

Surely you can keep this fantasy to yourself. To express it in a friendly community forum is well creepy.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John McMullan on February 12, 2015 at 20:29

Nope, as much as I sometimes disagree with him, I'll be there too. I love the Harringay Local Store but the corruption and nepotism required to do this is disgusting (notice how I can like craft beer and hate corruption?).

I don't mind if they do it openly and honestly but this is a LABOUR council behaving like Chingford's finest! Just WTF people?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John McMullan on February 12, 2015 at 21:05

Isn't it it wonderful how as our houses go up in value the number of people thinking that they can make right wing/thoughtless contributions to HoL increases? Is this Tottenham's future too? Well supposedly there will be fewer murdered babies, less litter, higher productivity and more "wealth". Good luck getting to work on time or your DS/DD into a local school.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John McMullan on February 12, 2015 at 21:42

How long have you been on here?

Are you Phil K back again to wind us all up?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Sharon on February 12, 2015 at 23:37

Ah, I miss Phil K. I hope he is back.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John D on February 12, 2015 at 21:39

Our houses do not go up in value: they go up in price.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John McMullan on February 12, 2015 at 21:42

Good point! I stand corrected.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Martin Ball on February 12, 2015 at 21:36

Thanks for the love. No matter how it is expressed.

For the record: I never make picket lines a gender issue. And have no objections to sourdough. Though I prefer Hovis tin loaf. But craft ale is a personal no-no. Though I am not objecting to both being available in Holcombe Market once Alan Strickland delivers on his pledge to improve it. "Remote as that might seem!"

On the gentrification v murderer axis I am firmly of the view that the local taxpayer should not be funding either.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton on March 2, 2015 at 1:17

The links between Haringey Council, Grainger plc, and John McAslan+Partners are becoming clearer.

On Saturday 28 February the McAslan Studio (i.e. taxpayer funded showroom) hosted a presentation of the preliminary designs for a 22 storey, 70 metre tower replacing Apex House near Seven Sisters Tube. You can seen the sales pitch on a new website here.

Plainly if they can build 22 storeys in South/Mid Tottenham this is likely to set a precedent for similar towers elsewhere. In fact, since these buildings are so wonderful, I'm astonished that Cllr Claire Kober didn't begin by proposing a few for her own street in Muswell Hill.

If you do take a look at the website, one note of caution.  In order to get more information and - as they put it - SUBSCRIBE to "stay up to date with progress",  you'll need to give your name and email. Next to the subscribe box there's another little box which says: "I support the redevelopment of Apex House".  To save you the effort, this is already ticked for you.

If you aren't in favour of this tower, you will need to remember to untick the box. (Below, I've drawn a swirl on the page to point it out. The same "Support" wording appears on each and every page of the website. )

Martin Ball and I pointed out to the people running the "consultation" that such a use of a default option may be seen as inadvertently misleading. At the presentation event I suggested that a proper consultation should have a yes/no box.  But having considered this further, I don't see any point at all in including the box and the sentence.

Unless of course you are persuaded by the book "Nudge" by Richard Thaler and Cass Sunstein that a default option is a way of maximising support for that course of action.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Clive Carter on March 2, 2015 at 9:00

Well spotted Alan.

I note that the site is self-described as a "consultation website".

I'm not sure what is the difference between a consultation website and a Public Consultation that is susceptible to the law (it is entirely possible for a consultations to be ruled unlawful). It's become blurred in a cynical way. Either something is or is not, a public consultation. The Council has (long) previous form in this.

Last year the Supreme Court ruled against Haringey Council for failing to show options in their reprehensible consultation about Council Tax Benefit reduction.

Recently, I compared Haringey Consultations with the "Like" button on Facebook pages. The only option is to take no action. Haringey will likely tabulate the pre-ticks, I support the redevelopment of Apex House and create statistics, as they do elsewhere.

The pre-ticks appear on each of the five pages of the "consultation website".

The conduct of our Local Authority becomes more like aggressive advertiser, whereby the default is to opt-in to (often) spam.

This is not consultation: it is a sham.

There is no an attempt to gauge opinion: this is basically a prospectus or even propaganda.

The Council need to be seen to be consulting and need to be able later to claim that they consulted. But too often, these are not merely worthless, but an active waste of money. Haringey Consultations come under the budget of their big bloated Communciations Department (i.e. the PR function).

Another term that appears to be emerging as PR-spin in our Local Authority, is "emerging". It appears on the Planning Department's Site Allocations and is pushed out on the first and last pages of the so-called "Consultation Website'.

Clive Carter
Councillor
Liberal Democrat Party

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton on March 2, 2015 at 11:12

We nearly agree, Clive.  My reservation - and it's an important one - is that this sham consultation was not  carried out by Haringey Council.  It was an organisation called London Communications Agency (LCA) which - from its website - appears to be a large, slick PR machine for hire by big corporate interests.

In other words, their job is to "sell" big and sometimes contentious projects to the public. And the particular 'other words' I have in mind are their own!  Which you and other HoL members can read by quickly scanning their website.

I don't know who hired and is paying LCA for this work.  Their Apex House website has a page called Meet the Team which refers to Grainger plc;  and John McAslan+Partners.

Of course, the KoberTories are deeply complicit in this whole scheme. But I think it's a mistake to aim all your critical fire at Haringey Council's "leading" politicians and their Communications Team - however damaging these are, both to local democracy and the interests of Haringey residents.  But Grainger plc and McAslan bring their own interests and agendas to our borough.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Clive Carter on March 2, 2015 at 14:09

Alan it seems that someone's had a word with LBH's Communications Department/London Communications Agency: the checkboxes with the pre-filled in ticks ... are now removed. Someone was selling a bit too hard.

Do you suppose that the two PR groups aren't talking to each other, even though this "consultation website" may not have LBH's name on it?

It's curious that the two communications departments both favour the term "emerging [policy/proposals]". It sounds better than "to be rammed through".

However, for the so-called "Consultation" there is still only one option given: "I support the re-development ..."

This is a perversion.

It runs parallel to the factors that led the Supreme Court decision against LBH in another Consultation.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page