Artists against Artwashing

 

With as usual due acknowledgment given to the likes of Southwark Notes's posts on the matter, a smaller personal note about how artists are great - and would be even better if allowed to get on with their work - but artwashing is not. Rather it's another nasty little side effect and hustle. 

It is used mainly to get people on side with the council and their plans and to help get planning permission, to pretend that the council and developers are making plans to benefit the locals in the area they see as just another exciting and lucrative project, and as a distraction while homes are destroyed, promises broken, deals made, communities dispersed and land grabbed, it's unclear how many of the people invited to art clubs and the like truly benefit in any way that compensates for how they are treated, or really want such things suddenly available at all. When councils, councillors, mayors and local recycling businesses support such new schemes, how many truly benefit - especially when people working in the arts (or trying to, while also fighting to be treated fairly by a council showing an eagerness and impatience for demolitions and threats of bills they never do when dealing with repairs, compensation etc.) who are benefitting area organically and from within while supporting estates and neighbours they have formed good relationships with, are being priced or pushed out, or feel they want to move just to get away from the council, its behaviour, its attitude and its plans? How many who do/can stay will remain when the next predictable stage of regeneration, the inevitable super-rich influx, takes place?

As with claims of caring for the environment while chopping down trees and building on green space, claims to care for art, artists and culture, and the ways it can and does improve an area - if people are left to get on with it rather than being bought up and used by authorities - claims to be supporting estates, local lives and mental health while destroying all those are so much, well... artwashing. It remains to be seen how much support art clubs and enterprises will really get once the plans the council truly care about get through. Hopefully all this sudden rise for the support of creativity is genuine, I would love that and for it all to truly benefit and succeed and enrich the area. Support art, artists, those enabling in their communities, culture and its help to the economy, cultural life, mental health. See through, mistrust, artwashing.

Above a photo of the Elephant and Castle, taken recently.

bump

http://lifeontheokr.blogspot.com/2017/05/when-i-grow-rich.html

More than ever. 

Artists are great. Artwashing is not. 

crossroads

SE1 - The Flyover

2019 ticks over to 2020. At a bit of a crossroads, locally and nationally and, probably, internationally. Should we believe in the optimism, allow a type of Stockholm-Syndrome to wash over us and take the easy route, or remember the many lies we've been told? To get back some sort of balance, we need to sort out an effective opposition to this thing (I don't think they really know) we have on the government benches at the moment. In an early post I said it was a conspiracy mindset, and whatever else that that entails, that allowed Brexit to take hold. I also said it was an act of self-harm, and so a cry for help. This may still be true - people saying they voted Brexit/Conservative (more specifically Johnson) to 'shake things up' - but the xenophobia behind much of the rhetoric is clearly much more of a driving factor than I thought. There are reports of seeing more people feeling emboldened in these sorts of views now, thinking (rightly or wrongly) the government is on their side. It is this hate - and fear and whatever else that brings with it - that has allowed Brexit to really flourish as an ideology, a cult. The 'national desire to be heard' reasoning was maybe too generous. People voted, perhaps, not so much against Corbyn (though obviouly they did) but for Johnson. I think honesty will allow us to see that it simply comes down to wanting to follow, to be told what to think and not have to think and be told that you're exceptional, one of the gang, trusting in a leader. It may be why so many religious believers support this type of politician too. There is scary talk of us being in an age of the 'strong-man', and even in a post-democracy - terrifying, hopefully an over-reaction. But Johnson succeeded where supply teacher for the public schoolboys May who was - you can easily imagine Francois and Rees-Mogg sniggering - never could. And so, depressing as it may be, let Labour not be too lofty in their ideals - for the moment at least - in appointing their leader. Johnson and the rest are likely to be most cowed by Starmer, and for them - and apparently much of the the electorate - the posturing does count for something. Don't waste any more time allowing Johnson to think he really is king, dictator, just freely in charge of everything. That's not good for any leader of a democracy. Labour should give the job to Starmer and just get on with it. Get it done, as some might say. Perhaps Philips could be a challenge to him, but I dont think any of the others still in the running could. Not that Starmer is a bad person for the role anyway; surely he'd surround himself with a diverse group of ministers to challenge the untrustworthiness and apparent paucity (though some more is being spoken about now than just Brexit) of this government's current pledges, and seemingly he's already prioritised leaving no doubt about eradicating all anti-Semitism. What has been reported - that people said they would have voted Labour if Starmer was leader - is something I heard too. Labour are just going to have to fight dirty, else the tactics used by the Conservatives will probably continue to trump any idealism. As when Labour members in clips from the time apparently wanted Blair as leader (ahead of Prescott and Beckett) because he 'looked good', if Labour want to avoid irrelevance and to be an opposition the government won't just dismiss, the thinking probably has to be similarly cynical. 

There is room for optimism of course, a few reasons at the moment actually and not just the ones our PM wants us to trust him with (I'd like to but can't; Johnson lies...). One reason is this: someone I know who's proven to be very perceptive about things over many years, says the first 'big shock' will be in 6 months. People will realise it's maybe not what they were promised, that there are too many lies, and that is a bad thing but unsustainable. 

So much feels like 'we shall see'. 

The photo is of the flyover at the Bricklayers' Arms, SEI, London, pretty much joining the Old and New Kent Roads. A double exposure on Kodak colourplus 200 with my old Canon EOS 3000N. 

The Meaning of Research

Peckham. Heritage.

In an earlier post I wrote - rather messily, now tidied up, this was a real rambling blog and if I do it I must do better and I was even more stressed and...sorry... must do better... - that anger leads to conspiracies and comes from dishonest, self-serving authorities treating people dismissively and with contempt. If that wasn't clear, that was what  was trying to say. It's been a pretty consistent theme unfortunately throughout this blog, is one of the reasons it was started and why the posts were so erratic. It was a place to vent a little.

It also of course played into the 'B' word. Everyone now knows the win for Brexit (capital 'B') was at least partly a protest vote. Many of the people who voted this way now feel they were wrong, that the EU has nothing to do with the problems they face, and their frustrations were played on by people who had no good argument otherwise to convince enough people to vote for Brexit. Demagogues with money faking concern and for their own ends playing the frustrated, oppressed working masses that they have such contempt for.

But of course some people still do believe the arguments, still want to believe them. Brexit has taken up time that could have been spent on issues such as housing, health, education and employment (another thing the  politicians are starting to realise) and people have been left to stew. The anger is often accompanied by hatred of outsiders, spite towards those who disagree - there are enough videos of MPs and others being harangued to prove this - and suspicion of anyone contesting the conspiracies. Fake news can take hold. On ITV London news reporting the People's March this weekend said 'onlookers' booed the march as it passed Number 10. No - the protesters booed as they passed Number 10. I think. Yes, definitely...

And so we can understand the true meaning of 'research'. As in The European Research Group. Why that name, ERG? Does anyone really believe they, or their staff, are studiously delving into the detail of the true workings and nature of the EU, any more than anyone believes Rees-Mogg can suddenly be the voice of the working class? (Incidentally, as some have asked when, this must have happened the same time the EU became the choice of the wannabe liberal Left).

So ERG is playing again of what those they are...well, playing, will respond to. These guys are on our side (at least some of the way, eh, Farage?) and the good guys (eh, Francois?). They are not part of fake news media metropolitan elite. They understand. They have seen through. They have looked deeply and seen the truth. They are not mouthpieces or journalists. They are researchers. What do conspiracy theorists call themselves? Researchers. What do conspiracy theorists have to do, have to do because of the fake news? Research.

And so, with news more about personality and opinion rather than facts, and a choice available of who to believe based on who you want to be, the ERG can drop in that middle word for those who want to hear it. And because of propaganda and spin and lies and oppression and contempt and cover-ups, is it any surprise people believe - want to believe - the more comforting lies? At least some one is on their side.

The only thing is, if you really want to get at the truth, you cannot believe lies, however much you want to. Thankfully enough people now realise they've been lied to, by the self-appointed truth-seekers (that's another trigger term) and researchers.

The photo is part of a building on Peckham High Street covered by the Peckham Heritage Project. One of the fine old buildings that can, with care, serve people and last many, many years, with character that is worth preserving. This is the aim, all the while alongside plans for 48 stories agreed by councillors without, many would argue, proper consideration. Doesn't take much research to see this is happening.

The truth is out there, somewhere.

They think they're clever & we're stupid

Council double-speak dictionary, from tweets linked below. So far, possibly to be updated ~

'Settlers' (Translation: this land is ours now)

'Consultations' (Translation: token gesture of 'listening' to local suggestions and concerns, which will have no impact on decisions, which have already been taken)

'Regeneration' (Translation: moving out of everyone except the super-rich and those enablers in their pocket, usually while the area is made fit for super-rich to live in. Those already there just had to lump it).

'Affordable' (Translation: not really / as opposed to...)

'New' (Translation: area is now or will be 'regenerated' - see above)

'Reprovided' (Translation: take this drug den instead of your home, or you'll make yourself homeless)

'Opportunity Area' (Translation: if the price is right, you can do what you want)

'Engagement' (Translation: like consultation, but with even less accountability)

Sure the salespeople on councils may think we all fall for this guff, just because they do. They may even object. However, seeing through the spin only comes from experience. Have things changed? Actions speak louder than words.

From this thread: https://twitter.com/NasCostomano/status/904340415750471681

When I Grow Rich

'Would you mind please going back to Shoreditch?' reads the graffiti in New Cross, though in more robust language. Although it can't mean me, I keep this in mind when taking the 78 from outside Asda which in quite a quick journey from the Old Kent Road goes to that strange other place. My destination is actually Whitechapel (for the gallery's Paolozzi exhibition) a little before the final stop, but this is still a trip showing yet again that there are always two sides to wherever you are in London.

Making the right turn the 78 makes in this direction at the Dun Cow, there is the distant hope (or 'finger up to the rest of the country' as some see it) of The Shard. A reminder of where we are, in more than one way. It appears in the distance over a building site / industrial land or something, the tape around which suggests it's going to be something to do with tourist accommodation.

Tower Bridge Road starts to feel like you've moved somewhere else. Premier Inn is already along here. Small flats with smaller balconies that house a chair over the traffic are here, and they must cost a fortune – not sure how much but as the really posh ones around the corner were originally going for £17,000,000 they're probably in the 'unaffordable' bracket too. And along Tooley Street, the office of Southwark Council – apparently, much to their annoyance, caught themselves between the two worlds they straddle, and seemingly, for now anyway, much preferring to shake hands with those on this side of the bridge.

Behind the Tower Of London pop up buildings including the walkie-talkie (20 Fenchurch Street, with SkyGarden), the gherkin (30 St Mary Axe), the cheesegrater (Leadenhall Building) next to Lloyds – all the structures with silly names. Alien to the tower, but all symbols of power really, and the comparing of contrast and similarities between the old and new, value and cost, culture and commerce are...well, obvious I guess, but unavoidable.

And soon after Whitechapel. E1. The mix of workers leaving their office buildings for a break and, um, fresh air, and students mean there seems to be more smokers around here than elsewhere. It's funny how you notice that now.

The gallery almost marks a break along Whitechapel High Street. Right next to Aldgate East station there are plenty of office buildings heading back, but further along, towards Shoreditch, you can see the difference, for better or worse however you see it. It seems Peckham now may have taken over as the place people will love and hate and love to hate, and there are connections even here in Whitechapel – a Nags Head pub, the pub name in Only Fools and Horses, and Peckham beer in the gallery's refectory. As the website says 'The Whitechapel Refectory and After Hours are brought to you by Luke Wilson and Cameron Emirali, the duo behind 8 Hoxton Square'. Hoxton. A Whitechapel gallery serving a beer brewed in Peckham.

Coming out of the train station was a group meeting a guy dressed in character, taking a tour – the Jack The Ripper tour, of the sites of the murders. Walking to the 78 bus stop coming here I'm sure I saw a bus heading this way which was to do with tours like this, parked and leaving from the Old Kent Road gas works. Just to hammer the point home I'll say – Shoreditch and Peckham now have lots in common. One difference is we've had Only Fools... and Desmond's. Shoreditch had Nathan Barley. Maybe that will change.

It feels fortunate to so readily have this place and the exhibition within it to go to, and the beer was good too.

Save (Insert Any Estate Name Here)

So it needs to be said that a final decision has been made yet inclusding on the 'case-study' below, and may not be for years but how can we trust, in the current climate especially, that a good decision can be made?

Search 'david cameron layout for estates' and you get interesting results. 'corbusier housing' too.

'What do Theresa May and Le Corbusier have in common. Sadly the same discredited Modernist philosophy on urban planning and how to solve the housing crisis.' says https://andrewlainton.wordpress.com/2017/02/01/theresa-may-goes-all-le-corbusier-its-the-wrong-choice/


https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2017/mar/28/beautiful-place-hull-residents-bransholme-estate-50

The stereotypes are very wrong. Everyone knows they only get bad when they're allowed to by the very people who are supposed to ensure the opposite, to benefit the community and the people.

I'm sure this is the sort of thing that means Michael Gove can get away with saying we've all had enough of experts, and we are where we are. When you have something at least approaching what could be a successful example of housing build, a local council build, a council estate no less, in the heart of London, you'd think it would be held up as a source of some pride by...well, everyone. The very people who should be most supportive of it seem to be doing their best to ruin it, you can only assume for self-gain. Treating homes as a personal property portfolio, a nice 'project' for you to get a contract of some sort for, a way to take away an area from the very people who have built it into somewhere desirable is wrong on so many levels. There should not be repairs left too long until they cause distress to tenants or residents – in fact the terms of a lease mean repairs should of course be seen to by the landlord (council) but whether councils are more than just revenue collectors is another debate. You would, you'd imagine, take pride in maintaining the housing and ensure (again, as should be the case) that tenants and residents do the same. You would not overburden locals, who do appreciate what they've got, with bills while pressurising them by ignoring reports of anything that needs doing for months on end. You would appreciate a low-rise, spacious, green, open, community and realise you can have all this. You do not need high-rise, small-scale, concrete-covered, closed-off, deliberately run-down and looked-down on deliberately ghettoized areas.. You can solve a housing crisis with good planning and fair contracts that deliver on promises to help people from the area - rather than just a few millionaires. You'd realise you're dealing with lives rather than play a game. You would make the most of this green oasis in a probably most unexpected place, rather than planning to destroy it.

Here's a list of birds (wildlife sometimes more of a concern than humans) seen in the many trees (also probably going) and green environment of this estate just off the Old Kent Road, taken a case-study/example:
Green woodpecker
Lesser spotted woodpecker (yes, definitely, really)
Parakeets
Songthrush
Wrens
Starlings
European Goldfinches
Pied wagtails
Kestrels
Swallows or swifts, not sure
also dunnocks, magpies...the ones we take for granted.

There is plenty of green there, environmentally healthy areas front and back. The trees are magnificent, still very much alive – full green in summer, pink blossom in spring. They've survived the hurricane, served as play areas, sheltered when needed. If the likes of the Southwark Woods campaign didn't already, destroying here shows he council is not really concerned with the environment, unless it pays to pretend to be for regeneration purposes.

There's a community – playgrounds including a pitch, used by generations. There is even a Facebook page just for people who enjoyed growing up on the estate. However, too many are allowed to divide and conquer, grabbing for short-sighted self-interest, most not living here. And before it is mentioned - there is no NIMBY-ism from people there; this is a community of 200 homes not stacked in swaying skyscrapers, without a natural reserve. Again, would you lock the gates to the pitch so the pitch cannot be fully used? Would you plan to knock down one of the playgrounds for another small block?

The tower blocks are staying, which may give you some idea of where this is going – as noted in an earlier post. It's quantity over quality, at least where they can force it through and, they think, get away with it. The school on and very much part of, the estate, Pilgrim's Way, is to be expanded and moved – it was apparently news to planners when this was suggested that there's Ilderton Primary already not far away, and no real need to move Pilgrim's Way even closer – and in the process closer to Veolia's already rather unlovely enough recycling facility. More importantly maybe it's better to have Surestart and the school smaller but part of the community, rather than another anonymous generic building on top of the recycling plant and away from green areas.

If your home and everything you've invested in financially and emotionally is destroyed for no real good reason, you may be 'lucky' and get a new place as promised here and now elsewhere. There are now to be ownership and shared-ownership schemes, long leases and terms and fair prices paid. But will your new build home, so often complained about, be an improvement? Will the estate be an improvement? If you do have a flat in the tower blocks and can afford to try and put down some roots, get on the ladder by becoming a leaseholder, you'll probably be forced out by massive charges which the council attempt to justify by saying they need to do extensive repairs – which are mostly only extensive because they did not do ongoing small and proper work when needed and reported. Leaseholders, often targeted, put so much into supporting where they live financially and by caring for their homes but if you are one and can afford to stay, your life may be completely changed, and probably not for the better. A cap of their charges is badly needed (there are already plenty of questions about where local council money is actually going). Now the promises are that leaseholders who have their homes demolished, while of course just having to deal with the emotional and mental loss of what they have invested in and a forced move, will be given ways to stay in the area – described again as a very desirable one - and in the new builds, and tenants won't just be shipped out. Will the promises of nice shiny new modern properties come to pass, and if they do will they actually be an improvement of the more spacious current low-rise homes? It's just seemingly leading to destroying communities and lives for a few generous pay days for developers and council decision-makers. The real problem is that unless the mentality of those making decisions changes, or it is forced to by holding them to account rather than ignoring or rewarding them, what is seen as success now will just be left to run down again with more avoidable misery. All this can't help but apparently point to where the real desire to regenerate comes from, and it's not for any claims of improvement or helping an area, and certainly not about putting the people first. Listening and helping locals helps the community, not all this stress. This is how previous problems (found everywhere, not just here because it is an estate) have been sorted - and they have been sorted - now many wonder was it worth it? The community and the estate here - when looked after as it should be and so is allowed to be -  is a good one, one of the best. Let's hope we're wrong, but where then is the good in these any of these plans apart from to a very rich few standing to benefit from the deals? There's still time for this estate and others with many realising what's going on – also not just in these communities but even in new builds, which are often not up to standard or maintained as they should be. We shall see and hopefully it's not the case, but at the moment it seems like in another generation or two all parts of these plans will unfortunately be able to again be looked at as another expert mistake.

Guest Post

The Ongoing London Land-Grab

'guest post' - @rottensouthwark who I know...

Is there anything more to say? Maybe that's what is wanted, for you to be so ground down you won't or can't fight any more. But one last post, to sum up, because there probably is no more to be said and so we can say it all here. There can be no excuse that nobody knew – enough of us have been trying to get the message out there. Why the British media don't have this constantly somewhere in the news reports and why people have turned a blind eye (or will do until they come for their home too) only they know. And yes, it is that important, it is a tragedy happening here in The Greatest City In The World in the 21^st Century, and it is very relevant to what are the headline stories of the day.

Behind it all are local London councils. All seem to be involved, but from experience we will mainly refer here to Southwark, and its increasingly transparent (much like the council) leader, Peter John.

If the only thing you really care about is money and think you don't, you do in fact still have reason to dislike the choices of John, who is possibly the most disliked man in London right now (a call for suggestions on how to best 'regenerate' Peckham gained the response 'throw Peter John in the Thames'). His council is responsible, after claims of new affordable homes and job creation, for selling the land at the Elephant and Castle for a fraction of its worth, without delivering on the earlier claims. It also resulted in the displacement of many Londoners – both leaseholders and tenants - from the area that was their home, what they had helped to build and contributed much to, when it was sold off cheap. Their fight is ongoing, causing more distress and waste of council finds on legal fees rather than, say, repairs and homes. Of course, you may be interested in the type of money that means this type of deal is actually a great success. If so you may have been involved in the the attempt to throw Millwall out of Bermondsey, again with pie-in-the-sky justifications for the obvious greed and disregard for fans and community – just as Peter John was involved. Lewisham council was part of the group trying to 'regenerate' (yes again – you have to hate that word as much as we've come to) the area, but that didn't stop the likes of John trying to get in.

Now John, as is his wont, has appeared in the Southwark News to say he has resigned from the Millwall takeover to concentrate on Southwark - you know, what he gets paid hundreds of thousands for - because people have been on Twitter calling on him to leave. Nice try, but again this can be seen through by those who know what's going on. John has indeed been repeatedly told on Twitter (nice to know he gets the messages) to leave his position by people in Southwark, but this started well before the Millwall story was taken up by the likes of The Guardian. It was part of the outrage caused by his treatment of people at the Aylesbury and Heygate estates. What people really want is for John to leave as leader of the council.

Of course he thinks by cutting ties with the Millwall land-grab, trying to distance himself as much as possible from it, he can fool people into thinking he is doing what is best for the people he is supposed to be serving. That word 'serving' probably sends shivers down his spine, and judging by the general attitude displayed by most council workers in senior positions theirs too. The people of Southwark nearly all have a story of being treated with contempt, as a nuisance, someone getting in the way by the management at Southwark Council. People like John show behaviour that seems to see people not part of the council as getting in the way of their plans, which again seem to just be self-serving, super-rich pleasing schemes. Service charges are always having to be challenged, and who out of those paying really knows where the money is going? Overcharging is almost the norm – hopefully better audit laws are used, as they have already to reclaim thousands, to finally hold all councils to account.

People are not as stupid as the likes of Southwark council apparently like to believe, nor are the council so clever. John only seemingly really appears in the Southwark News for the type of self-justification mentioned above - tree needs saving, he appears with a tree; refugees need help, he appears looking solemn; a new roundabout at the Elephant – he appears in hi-visibility. Any serious answers are however not to be found.

That John was given an Honour is the final insult, and probably confirmation that he is doing exactly what he wants to serve his own needs - giving contracts to people who can get him to places like the palace - rather than what he should be.

It really does seem that many council workers are deluded, either unconsciously ('just doing what I have to') or deliberately, having something like narcissism. They perhaps spend too long in their overpaid local power bubble and start to get carried away, believing they really do own their part of London. They have gone a bit 'Kurtz', spent too long upriver believing their own hype (which, incidentally, only they create in the first place). Well of course, they don't own London, or the people in it, and they cannot just do what they want. At least, they can't if people start waking up, and increasingly it seems they have. As proof of this as well as their delusion you can point to that challenge at Millwall, which brought to wider attention their practices, and subsequent the cancellation of 'New Bermondsey' plans. Councils are seemingly getting carried away with their Messiah complex, kidding themselves and trying to fool others that they are helping people rather than doing the opposite which is what is actually happening, so they can go home at night and feel good about their bullying. That is what it is, it needs to be seen for that.

Most Londoners right now seem to have given up on the right to a home, and other rights. Be happy as you are in London, it's the coolest place anywhere right now (very important obviously...) but you'll never own that place you're renting. And it won't get any better than that place – that tiny, sky-scraping, barely affordable place. We love our city, but do get used to worrying too much about the future, and especially what the council may send next. Everyone feels this but especially a tenant who may just be thrown out, to another part of the country, or a leaseholder who will have what they've paid for devalued to the point they cannot afford to keep their home, and may be forced to move too. It is out of control, a land-grab across London of the likes that elsewhere would be seen as a disgrace and tragedy it is, a sign of the corruption at the heart of a leadership that needs change. Lives are ruined and destroyed – there is more than one way to take a life. This is what is happening right here and now. A system of greed like this leads at the polling booth maybe to Brexit, certainly to a President Trump. Social engineering and cleansing like this leads to promises made again to those in need, who will only be used and treated like this again in years to come unless the corruption is dealt with. The stress and worry created is a cause for shame and needs to be exposed and rooted out. It is felt at the root and can be dealt with there, by stopping the bad practices of the likes of Southwark and other local London councils.

Sport as a microcosm...

Can some good come of the Millwall CPO affair? Only if the club win of course, with a victory that would not just be for themselves. Anyone who has dealt with local councils in recent years, and tried to be heard – usually fairly unsuccessfully, through no fault of their own or want of trying – will not be surprised by what is happening in SE16. It's an area a short walk away from the Old Kent Road which is in developers' sights, and Bermondey which has in many parts long been in their hands. Part of Millwall's surrounds affected is known by most as Surrey Canal Road - but must now be called New Bermondsey. That small word – 'new' - is not unimportant; it signifies everything that the planners think is impressive, and that will impress those they want it to. Maybe it works – new London's newest destination for the new establishment (saw that on a magazine cover recently) all bright and shiny and MUST HAVE. This is not our home, but somebody else's 'opportunity area', a place they just must get to, have, because they want it, so they must get it and they will scweam and scweam until they make us all sick if they don't. This is probably best epitomised by neighbouring Southwark's insistence that they must be able to displace and trample on the human rights of people (some daring, shock horror, to ask for a fair price for their homes – how dare they?!) until they get what they want, especially as the land has been promised to developer friends, breaking promises to local people they should be instead helping. Maybe the good that can come from taking on billionaire Berylson and those who can make themselves heard is that the bullies, blinded by their own greed, have gone too far, and all this will shine a light on what has been happening in the whole of London.

The tactics are always the same. Firstly, pretend you care about the community, make a case not based on the deals sdone behind closed door but a pretence - talk about bringing in housing, cultural activities and regenerating an apparently run down area. Use this to try and deflect from the fact a club like Millwall is at the heart of the community, has been while the council has been absent; that the sport there is culture, that people in the surrounding area also to be evicted include artists, and that maybe those in the area while it has been left to be run-down by the council should now benefit when the funds are finally found. The idea of community and culture being a concern at the heart of plans is a joke – in the case of housing, information now shows councils do not ensure they get and deliver what is promised, and the only fans that are really liked by those who want to move Millwall are those who go to hospitality, pretending to like the game to be seen in the newest destination, or those they think they can exploit because they'll always come. This may seem like every fan, but there are those who think and care about what's happening, for example getting in the way of dodgy plans to grab land.

Secondly, blame the victims. This of course takes place after the locals have been used over many years until an area is deemed fit for the non-workers to move in. Artists may come first, no real problem when that's alongside those already in an area, but again as Millwall shows these are thrown out along with anyone else in the developers' way. As has of course been often noted elsewhere and mentioned in the 'Two Peckhams' post here, any genuine character is made by locals and not imposed by anyone, especially by people without the imagination to see before them anything but money signs. Pie-in-the-sky promises, to the people local councils should be helping, of those locals actually benefitting from plans are there only to keep them moving along, a pot of gold promised to get the proposals passed, and when the people complain this doesn't happen, they are blamed for the very actions councils should never have let happen. The club want to see benefits from the plans – again, the cheek of it...If the club has been here all this time, before it was designated a new opportunity area, improving the club and its reputation, fighting racism, providing opportunities, bringing in income (and not many clubs can have seen more ex-players go on to be top-flight household names) then when a council finally gets round to doing something too should not those who have believed and carried it this far get their reward, rather than thrown out of the way?

The problem is that the culture can sometimes get in the way – look at all the bright and shiny (and new?) things happening, and wilfully ignore what is going on beneath the surface. Blinded by greed, rather than having a sense of cooperation, Lewisham council may inadvertently finally have shone a bright light on council practice in a way that cannot be ignored, and that any right-thinking person finds shameful. That The Guardian has been at the forefront of reporting this story shows that finally it has brought people together and it is not a deserved consequence of the bullies' victims own actions, but something that is affecting people all across London, and has been for too long. The club has then brought all these people together in agreement. If there was any proof needed that Millwall is at the heart of the community, this is surely enough.

Enemies of the eState?

For the upcoming 'regeneration' of the Old Kent Road, more than one very reliable person has stated that the following promises and assurances have already been made by Southwark Council's regeneration team to locals affected:

- Legally, businesses are not allowed to be forcibly closed or disrupted to an extent that is harmful to the running of the business during the council's works.

- Lessons have been learnt from the damaging way the Aylesbury and Heygate projects were managed. The council does not want a repeat of what happened there, and will treat those affected with more consideration, also hearing their needs and concerns before making final plans.

- Tenants and residents will not be forced out of the area. Leaseholders will be offered new properties and part-ownership in any case where the price paid for a current home facing demolition does not meet the value of the new property. Homeowners will also keep the equivalent percentage if the value of their new property rises.

- There will be phased works, minimising stress and disruption to people's lives.

- Green space will be better utilised.

- There will only be one move where possible, for each property affected.

There will obviously be much more to say about when things get underway, and new laws regarding maximum charges and audits come into play, but it is worth noting now what the council is saying at this point - and whether they keep to their words.

London Minutes

The 'ideal' Dogme -
1) Shots should be 1, 3 or 6 Seconds - either combinations of these or all same (e.g. 20 shots 3 seconds each). 1 shot of 60 seconds also allowed.
2) As far as possible, edit 'in camera'.
3) Minimal, preferably no use of filters and non-natural sound.
4) Minimal, preferably no use of artificial light (especially set-ups) or staged scenes.
5) Should be shot in one day.
6) Try not to add a commentary, let the video speak for itself. Just show.
The reality -
1) Camera doesn't always stop exactly at whole second (and neither does real-life) so as near as possible to it.
2) 'As far as possible...'
3) Unless really enhances, but should be avoidable.
4) See 3).
5) As near as possible to same day and time.
6) At very least no spoken commentary.

#1:

So basically one-minute videos of London, aiming to just show what is happening, just hopefully give the feel of it.

Welcome

Hello and thanks for stopping by my blog. This will, as you've probably guessed, be about the Old Kent Road and especially what's happening at this important time for the area. The OKR of course has a rich history, has always been a culturally prominent place and now may be undergoing a change that will transform how the area is seen for many (many) years. Actually, scratch that – it's already been undergoing that change for a while.

This blog will take more than one view of the regeneration/land-grab (depending on your point-of-view). I've been here a few years now and of course like most here been aware of what a great part of the world we are in; the general depiction of hooligans, Del Boys and last place on the Monopoly board was something we had to sometimes fight, sometimes embrace and sometimes defend against during this time. Now we are apparently part of a 'destination' so can be proud of this – our - part of the Greatest City In The World ™ .

We are aware of course we're all supposed to post about only the good things: being here now, eating and buying. That will feature – it's not like there aren't many great things to do and this looks set only to increase in the near future. The improvement of an area will hopefully bring added benefits to quality of life in perhaps more substantive ways too. It would be dishonest however to ignore the problems that also inevitably come and if nothing else the one thing the posts will aim to be is honest. This is an area myself and others here have been a part of building up to this turning point in a part of the city we may however be increasingly distanced from. Let's hope not, but will the changes gentrify in the worst possible ways? Will people be forced out? Will we lose history and character, or keep it only for the sake of the most shallow image and as a cultural selling-point, rather than out of respect? There will certainly be some more changes, but most hope for the better and not only the super-rich.

There will also be posts about the surrounding areas. The OKR like much of SE15 is extremely well connected. Cycling, public transport or a walk can take you to an amazing variety of fantastic places and we shall also visit our neighbours, with their varying character; places like and including Greenwich, Peckham, Lewisham, London Bridge, Tower Bridge, Bermondsey and Surrey Canal New Bermondsey...

Whatever is happening here, this is a blog about it, a part of the history of this historic part of London.

Thanks again for visiting, hope you enjoy it.