Events at Finsbury Park - have your say!

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by JLJones on August 13, 2015 at 23:19

Tris, thanks, you've told me all I need to know.

Permalink Reply by Clive Carter on August 13, 2015 at 23:43

The ground was littered with hundreds of empty nitrous oxide canisters behind where the fence existed

The evidence for Jeremy's "hundreds" claim for Wireless 2015, is actually a Council press release.

I alone, picked up more than 60 (sixty) empty canisters – it could even run into the thousands.

Last year – during Wirelss 2014 – the Council actually did claim that "thousands" were siezed.

I fear a fatality in or by a future Wireless through Nox use, if the Council ploughs on with their current formula.

The security was always likely to be inadequate: something like 40 officers were to police a crowd that reached 44,000.

These events now have a reputation for attracting delinquent beahvior: both nitrous oxide use and gate crashing. It's a crowd of a character different from the typical visitor to Alexandra Palace's Knit and Stitch show.

Permalink Reply by JLJones on August 14, 2015 at 8:24

This is turning into a sit com....

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Michael Anderson on August 14, 2015 at 9:03

Definitely not The Good Life JL!

Permalink Reply by Gordon T on August 14, 2015 at 9:48

It IS 'Ever Decreasing Circles'.

Martin Bryce (Richard Briers) must be looking down and rubbing his hands! 

Permalink Reply by hob on August 14, 2015 at 10:10

"Some Mothers Do 'Ave 'Em".

Permalink Reply by Clive Carter on August 12, 2015 at 15:14

Hi Kathryn,

Thanks for beginning the thread that draws attention to the Scrutiny survey. I hope that anyone who has views about the Cabinet's Major Events policy for Finsbury Park will contribute.

a lot of people were disgruntled during the event and after with the lack of clear up

In my view, the clear-up by Wireless was rushed, and by the Council, incomplete (I continue to pick-up cable-ties well after the event. A hazard for pets). 

In many respects, it is our neighbours who are worst affected by the biggest events. Amongst the most 'disgruntled', are residents who live in the neighbouring Boroughs of Hackney and Islington and I hope they would have their say too.  

In fact, it was Islington Councillors who convened a public meeting that I attended in the Finsbury Park Mosque about this matter in January.

It's conceivable that a few residents along Seven Sisters Road might enjoy loud music for hours over three days (doubt it!). However, the noise is there whether it is enjoyed or not. The list of 'issues' over the impact of the  Cabinet's policy is long and I understand that the Friends of Finsbury Park (FoFP) will make a formal representation to the Scrutiny Review. 

The FoFP have the long-term health and interests of the park at heart. The membership surged over the recent Love Your Parks Week. The FoFP is a registered Charity and has been around for 30 years. It probably still be around after the Council-Cabinet abandons their view of the public park as an under-performing asset and as a profit-centre.

You may have noticed that one or two of the contributors to the thread you began, express views in detail, structure and language, that mirror the official line. This – and their timing – may be coincidental. There is no evidence beyond the circumstantial that it was an instance of a sock-puppetry and I hope not.

I noted the comments of experienced former Councillor Alan Stanton who suggested the Council probably doesn't put much weight on the comments of those with fictitious names.

Disclosure:
Haringey Councillor
Liberal Democrat Party

(I do not post under an assumed name and this is my sole account on HoL)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Michael Anderson on August 12, 2015 at 15:30

You know what, this anonymous post/sock puppet/council mouth piece business is getting beyond tedious. If you think this is the case please either say who or stop the innuendo.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John D on August 13, 2015 at 19:07

Now, finally,  I understand what is meant by " un dialogue de sourds "

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Michael Anderson on August 13, 2015 at 19:16

Zut alors!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Michael Anderson on August 13, 2015 at 19:59

The first is literally a dialogue between the deaf. A conversation where neither participant listens to what the other is saying. Zut alors is sort of Well I never, goodness me, aw shucks, tut tut, OMG, depending on the situation.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• Next ›
• Page