Public Firework Displays for Haringey

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by John D on October 26, 2011 at 22:42

High on Haringey's agenda these days should be the provision of public services, not entertainment.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Charlotte on October 26, 2011 at 23:22

Of course that goes without saying but it is not a bad investment to provide a bit of entertainment.  The Ally Pally fireworks, the YMCA fun run and the greenlanes festival all make/made many people come out of their homes, spend a bit of money locally and meet local people and this creates a feel good factor and may help retain residents who contribute to the local economy.  No different to the reasoning behind a staff party. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Clive Carter on October 27, 2011 at 11:41

John I completely agree.

(And on the provision of public services, I think we could do without the livery on council vehicles that includes slogans like "we're working for you". I saw one such in the street this morning and I confess I find these slogans childish and insulting.)

 

The Council Committee known as the "Trust Board" made the decision to cancel the fireworks in July of last year, when it became clear that with security, the total cost was going to be in the order of £100,000.

The truth is that our Charity has not been able to afford these 30-minute events for several years and a decision to cancel them was probably overdue.

I enjoyed the fireworks as much as anyone but I think its going to be some time before they return, if ever.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Chris Setz on October 27, 2011 at 11:47

>>when it became clear that with security, the total cost was going to be in the order of £100,000.

Is the breakdown of what the Charity worked out the Fireworks Event would be likely to cost published anywhere?

Are there any published breakdowns of what previous events actually cost?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Clive Carter on October 27, 2011 at 12:54

£100k is the figure I seem to remember from the meeting of July last year.

Here is the best place to see our Charity's past accounts (from 1923 to 2006). For 2006, there appears to be no breakdown of the fireworks figure and I doubt it was different before or after.

Subsequent accounts can be found here if you're prepared to dig.

...

 

One small aside:

In the shady dirty deal to sell our Charity's main asset to Firoka, the Council tried their utmost to give away practically everything. But one tiny, near-worthless concession they managed to extract from Kassam, was that he was to pay for a regular annual fireworks event.

The deal was negotiated by the local council and aided by the Trust Solicitor. The continuation of fireworks condition was vague. I think the new Firoka fireworks were supposed to be comparable in some way to the old municipal fireworks.Comparable is in the eye of the beholder, and the reputation of the would-be beholder is not difficult to research.

Mr Kassam may have felt that he would be able to fulfil the condition by his coming down from his office to the park on 5 November and waving about a sparkler.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Chris Setz on October 27, 2011 at 15:37

Thanks Clive but I too can find nothing specific on the fireworks - I've dug around a bit. Anywhere else I could look?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Clive Carter on October 27, 2011 at 16:23

The only other thing I can suggest is doing an FoI request. But I would urge restraint, because it'd probably land on the plate of the new AP CEO who has only recently taken over. And his plate is already full to overflowing.

...

 

One further point on the financing of the fireworks: in the latter years, the council attempted to subsidise the cost in a questionable manner: people would hold out buckets at the entrances to the park, with small labelling on them, which may have included the words, "Alexandra Palace Charitable Trust" and a suggested donation.

The implication was that you were donating to a real charity, as I believed has happened in the past. AP is, by a number of measures, a registered charity in law, but for few other purposes.

Cash donated by some of the public was dropped into these unsealed buckets. The general manager at the time, was D. Loudfoot. At a Board meeting and in response to a question, he claimed that this cash "was not accounted for separately". That is typical of the opaque statements that one used to get and I hope this attitude will go.

It is still not clear or certain what happened to the cash-in-the-buckets.

 

.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Chris Setz on October 27, 2011 at 16:28

Agreed about the FOI - don't want to trouble them.

Hope they will detail expenditure over £500 in future.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Clive Carter on October 27, 2011 at 17:39

Chris your point about the £500 is well made. This has crossed my mind before now. It applies to councils. For better or worse, by Act of Parliament, Haringey Council is Trustee of our registered, Charitable, Trust.

This is where the similarity with advanced particle physics becomes apparent, whereby an electron can be in two places at the same time.

 

Remember that Haringey Council controls our Charity, despite the many fictions that they will erect to fool the casual observer.

Sometimes the council will say the trust board is a committee of Haringey Council and at other times, that the trust is a board of trustees, separate and independent of the council.

This normally depends on what kind of responsibliity they are trying to evade at that moment.

In turn, this variable description occasionally conflicts with AP management, who for their own reasons, may claim that either our Trust is part of the council or is a charitable trust. Again in turn, this can conflict with the trading company, which is controlled largely by councillors.

The Charity Commission will say the council is responsible for oversight and the council will say the Charity Commission is responsible for regulation. No one is responsible.

I Trust this explanation makes sense.

 

(BTW, in law, the Beneficiaries of - our - Trust are also known as The Public)

Permalink Reply by Liz on October 27, 2011 at 11:23

Actually, the Harringay Green Lanes festival has a lot of support from the council including organising traffic management, providing volunteers to steward the festival and some financial support. It couldn't happen without a lot of input from the council and cash from the Mayor of London which the council help to apply for.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John McMullan on October 27, 2011 at 18:55

Because the council like the shopkeepers more than the local residents.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by ElleCarumba on October 31, 2011 at 11:48

Tower Hamlets are not doing the Victoria Park fireworks this year but are doing three smaller events across the borough that might be of interest 

 

Saturday 5 November

7.30pm

Weavers Fields,off Bethnal Green Road

Also on same day, same time at:

Bartlett Park

Millwall Park

 

Apparently they chose to do this because the Victoria Park ones attracted too many people from outside the borough (but don't worry, they won't require proof of residence for entry into the smaller ones)

 

http://www.towerhamlets.gov.uk/news__events/news/march/fireworks_se...

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page