editor
hiraethified
Yet the first two definitions from that page are:https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/trouser#Verb
To "trouser funds" has connotations of misappropriation to me.
Yet the first two definitions from that page are:https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/trouser#Verb
To "trouser funds" has connotations of misappropriation to me.
I was making the point that their lies were read by a lot of people and locals were discussing the fabricated allegations. The 'reach' of defamatory claims may prove an important factor later. I'm certainly not letting this one go because the suggestion that I endangered the safety of children is fucking outrageous.I managed to retrieve the original statement using Google cache. It seems pretty much the same as was posted up in 8 sections here in this thread on 25th June by a new user from Brixton Green apparently.
It seemed to me that what editor was complaining about was a local property developer compounding the agony by citing this information, or verbal rumour based on this, or from the same source.
I can't see how these issues are resolvable without a bit of compromise. Its all a bit complicated - and difficult.
Yet the first two definitions from that page are:
Only the third one supports your assertion and that's from a P. G. Wodehouse book. I'd say that would make it very difficult indeed to make a credible case that anyone was being accused of misappropriating money.And the other definitions? My point was they can be used both ways so it is not unreasonable for a reader to assume you are implying something bad
Private Eye always uses it in the context of barristers consultants chief executives MPs etc "trousering" outrageous fees, expenses etc.The Wiktionary link confirms that "trousering" has essentially the same meaning as "pocketing", anyway.
So it's up to readers of the Buzz article to decide for themselves whether the word was chosen to give a hint of misappropriation of funds. I guess BG took their cue from the general tone of the rest of the piece.
I'd say they are guilty of an emotive response to a sustained series of low-level proddings. Sounds familiar perhaps?
Yep. Exactly. That's the common understanding of the meaning.Private Eye always uses it in the context of barristers consultants chief executives MPs etc "trousering" outrageous fees, expenses etc.
THEY don't allege those trousering the money are not legally entitled to it - merely that the system is rigged in their favour. G & Ts all round!
You can dismiss them as 'proddings' if you like, but I'd call them entirely reasonable requests for clarification and openness myself. Thank fuck someone is questioning what's going on here.I'd say they are guilty of an emotive response to a sustained series of low-level proddings. Sounds familiar perhaps?
Private Eye always uses it in the context of barristers consultants chief executives MPs etc "trousering" outrageous fees, expenses etc.
THEY don't allege those trousering the money are not legally entitled to it - merely that the system is rigged in their favour. G & Ts all round!
Well, there's a loaded question right there.So you would interpret that buzz article as suggesting the two named members of BG were taking the money for themselves in fees/expenses, rather than passing it on to others to spend on the various community projects etc?
Did you read what I wrote?So you would interpret that buzz article as suggesting the two named members of BG were taking the money for themselves in fees/expenses, rather than passing it on to others to spend on the various community projects etc?
Or that they were using the money for projects which brought the two named individuals financial gain?
Other conversations came about through Brixton Green’s ongoing community
engagement
Extensive consultation is still taking place,for example at the community event which took place
on Saturday 27th June 2015 when all the emerging designs were shown and generally supported by the local residents.This dialogue will remain a key aspect of what makes the Somlerleyton Road project unique and will continue until the project is fully complete.
I'd like to see some figures to support the claim that the designs were "generally supported by the local residents".
How many residents? 5? 20 100?
Hmm. What happened the last time an Edible garden was proposed around Brixton?It was clear that people were very supportive of the new outdoor spaces. The community-growing garden was especially popular. You had some interesting ideas for this space including an edible garden, a seating area and opportunities for children to grow food.
Their report adds:
Hmm. What happened the last time an Edible garden was proposed around Brixton?
I see that chef's school is still on the, err, menu. I winder how many local people said they wanted that?> And who's going to run it?
http://futurebrixton.org/somerleyton/feedback-from-the-somerleyton-street-party/
http://futurebrixton.org/somerleyton-road/designing-somerleyton-road/
BG were supposed to be the experts on "community engagement". It was telling that the Saturday event was an Igloo event not BG. Not an accident. I think some in Council know that BG brand is not universally liked.
Lambeth Labour/Jack Hopkins setting out their stall prior to tonight's report back at Cabinet http://lambethlabour-labourclp132.nationbuilder.com/somerleyton_redevelopment_takes_a_step_forward
he other distinctive thing about development is the genuinely collaborative approach to planning and design. Residents have been involved right from the start, providing ideas for what they and their neighbours need in this part of Brixton
Even after the last brick has been laid at Somerleyton, residents will continue to be in control as the final development will be managed by local people through a new housing cooperative.
Actually there was a mention of this in the cabinet item about Somerleyton Road.And no mention of the debacle around Number 6 managed by Brixton Green.
It's not even slighted sorted with most of the parties involved furious with Brixton Green. They've been an absolute disaster and it's going to get a lot worse for them.Actually there was a mention of this in the cabinet item about Somerleyton Road.
Cllr Jack kind of glossed over it, saying words to the effect that there had been a problem and people had fallen out, but it was now all sorted.
Sorry about that. I can only speak for myself, but it had been a very long day and some of us had only eaten once since breakfast in order to get there on time*.<snip> I don't think Tricky Skills was around to record audio on Somerleyton - it was as if everyone evacuated at the end of the Cressingham item.
I'm not criticising anybody at all - and the Somerleyton Road item was not for decision, but a report on progress to date.Sorry about that. I can only speak for myself, but it had been a very long day and some of us had only eaten once since breakfast in order to get there on time*.
*To clarify: In order to get into the cabinet meeting, and attend the protest before it, I set off at 5.20ish, and was either waiting around, walking, or protesting every minute until 7pm. The meeting began at 7pm and our segment took until (I think) 8pm, maybe later? Sorry that Somerleyton people were let down. I had a voice recorder with me, and switched on; I suggest that anyone who can attend such a meeting does likewise.
Looks like Councillor Jack feels his remit is to present an appearance of normality then. I guess people wanting to challenge this at councillor level would have to take it up with him, since he seems to have been given oversight of the project at the moment.It's not even slighted sorted with most of the parties involved furious with Brixton Green. They've been an absolute disaster and it's going to get a lot worse for them.
The definitely not-local Jordan oversaw the Kings Cross development - a 'public space' which is in fact a private estate. A bit like Pop Brixton, if you will.Because of this the chairman of Brixton Green (Stephen Jordan),
Not much like Somerleyton Road is it?The definitely not-local Jordan oversaw the Kings Cross development - a 'public space' which is in fact a private estate. A bit like Pop Brixton, if you will.
Who knows the secrets of Brixton Green's ever shifting plans. Who knew that Phillipe would become involved in Pop?Not much like Somerleyton Road is it?
Actually there was a mention of this in the cabinet item about Somerleyton Road.
Cllr Jack kind of glossed over it, saying words to the effect that there had been a problem and people had fallen out, but it was now all sorted.
I don't think Tricky Skills was around to record audio on Somerleyton - it was as if everyone evacuated at the end of the Cressingham item.