Brockwell Park news, festival updates and more...

[Rushy]

FYI, here are the minutes of the Brockwell Park Partnership Board meeting on 28th August 2024

There is another meeting on the 18th - this Wednesday.

The chair said last week that they would ensure that Democratic Services would provide the necessary facilities to broadcast the meeting, record and publish it. They have now said it will not be broadcast and although it will be recorded, the recording will not be of a quality suitable for sharing with the public.

 

[Tulster218]

There is another meeting on the 18th - this Wednesday.

The chair said last week that they would ensure that Democratic Services would provide the necessary facilities to broadcast the meeting, record and publish it. They have now said it will not be broadcast and although it will be recorded, the recording will not be of a quality suitable for sharing with the public.

Ha ha. Most of Lambeth's recorded meetings aren't of a quality suitable for sharing with the public. It doesn't usually stop them

It's a pity because I'm keen to see a bit more of the various personalities behind the park politics. I can't work out for myself if they're all a bit odd, or if they just seem that way because they're frustrated by the system. And I can't find a clear explanation of the relationship between the FoBP, the BPMC, the BPMB, and the Council. Who has the final say?

And Paul McGlone is on the BPMB. Whatever you think about the 'New Town Hall' project, he's no political lightweight. Is he there because he genuinely cares, or is there a less charitable reason?

 

[Rushy]

Ha ha. Most of Lambeth's recorded meetings aren't of a quality suitable for sharing with the public. It doesn't usually stop them

It's a pity because I'm keen to see a bit more of the various personalities behind the park politics. I can't work out for myself if they're all a bit odd, or if they just seem that way because they're frustrated by the system. And I can't find a clear explanation of the relationship between the FoBP, the BPMC, the BPMB, and the Council. Who has the final say?

And Paul McGlone is on the BPMB. Whatever you think about the 'New Town Hall' project, he's no political lightweight. Is he there because he genuinely cares, or is there a less charitable reason?

All good questions. You forgot the BPCP itself!

From their website:

Brockwell Park Community Partners (aka Brockwell Park MAC) is the stakeholder forum for Brockwell Park and the main link with Lambeth Council and its Parks Department, Lambeth Landscapes

When they get together with the council they are called the BPPB (Partnership Board).

It seems to me that the BPCP / BPMAC themselves are not sure of their legal status. So the council gets to pretty much ignore them and behaves as it wishes.

FoBP is a park users group. I'm told that it has the most stakeholder votes in the BPCP* because of the size of its membership. Exactly how it represents its members is a bit of a mystery to me - it seems like a very small active group - but the BPCP has in the past said that their engagement with FoBP means they do not need to engage further with the public. [*Incidentally, a request for a list of voting stakeholder group (not individual) members and their voting allocations was recently refused on the basis that this raised privacy issues!]

Paul McG is the treasurer of the BPCP. The BPCP has a stream of active or ex councillors on the board and indeed its long time chair is an ex councillor. Again, fair question.

 

[Rushy]

I received this message from Friends of Brockwell Park. The way in which Lambeth abuses the park is quite concerning. And the chaotic and incompetent way in which Lambeth operates is worthy of a satirical novel:

- Spend on repairing and improving paths -> let heavy vehicles to smash them up

- Try to make money from festivals -> damage drainage pipes and then spend to fix it

- Spend millions on restoring Brockwell Hall -> ensure that it is unusable during its high season

- Build an air force base -> pay your own air force to bomb it

Spot the odd one out

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To: BrockwellPark CommunityPartners <brockwellparkcommunitypartners@googlemail.com>
Subject: Events in Brockwell Park

Message from the Chair of the Brockwell Park Community Partners

It is now clear that the damage to Brockwell Park is so extensive that it will not recover from the damage from Pokemon Go in 2023 and Brockwell Live this year before Brockwell Live begins again in May 2025. Tickets for the 2025 festival are already being promoted online.

Until recently, the BPCP has tried to cooperate with Events and Lambeth to try to mitigate damage to the park and loss of amenity by sports groups and park users but the devastation from major park events in 2023 and 2024 means that this is no longer a useful approach. At one point this year there were no toilet facilities in the park because of damage to underground pipes and drainage; this is an access issue and affects the most vulnerable and is not acceptable.

The ecology of the park is being damaged to a degree from which it cannot recover quickly and this damage is cumulative. Large areas of the greensward are infiltrated by invasive weeds, like plantains and tree roots are being damaged by compression. Small items of litter have been compressed into the soil.

The paths, which were restored to a high standard by the Lottery as part of the landscape restoration (completed in 2011) are now badly damaged by movement of traffic with enormous axle weights. The Lottery did not envisage that these paths would be used like major roads when major events were being set up but the set-up and de-rig vehicles have damaged them badly.

The current events strategy does not achieve a balance between use of the park for events and use of the park by the public. The damage to the park and the time taken for repairs means that large areas of the park remain unusable long after the events are finished.

We are worried about the lack of transparency about Lambeth’s Events policy. The revised Events Strategy, due to take effect when the current strategy runs out, has never been put before the community and remains in limbo at the moment.

Sadly, no consideration has been given to the planned opening of Brockwell Hall in spring 2025. If the Hall is to pay for itself and recoup the money that Lambeth has invested in it, then it has to be allowed to function freely. Major music events and the Country Show with the associated fencing means that the Hall will not be an attractive venue during the months, May and June, that are most popular for weddings.

Some possible actions that we are considering include calling for a moratorium on major events in the park in 2025, to allow the greensward to recover and for the Hall to be properly assessed.

We would welcome any feedback on this letter.

Important dates:

- Wednesday 18th December at 6pm - meeting of the Brockwell Park Partnership Board meeting in Room 101 at Lambeth Town Hall. This is an agenda-led meeting and members of the public are free to attend but cannot contribute.

- Sunday 26th January 2025 at 11am - general meeting of the stakeholders of the Brockwell Park Community Partners to further discuss park events.

Kind regards,

Ann Kingsbury

Chair of the Brockwell Park Community Partners

The park management board meeting mentioned in the letter was held this evening - between the stakeholder representatives BPCP and the council. I am told that Ann Kingsbury - chair of the BPCP - did not touch on anything from her strongly worded letter. When questioned by a guest as to why not, she apparently said that she had not yet had the opportunity to discuss the contents of the letter with the board. What is the point of the meetings, or the letters, if they are going to avoid dealing with these questions with the council?

 

[Tulster218]

The park management board meeting mentioned in the letter was held this evening - between the stakeholder representatives BPCP and the council. I am told that Ann Kingsbury - chair of the BPCP - did not touch on anything from her strongly worded letter. When questioned by a guest as to why not, she apparently said that she had not yet had the opportunity to discuss the contents of the letter with the board. What is the point of the meetings, or the letters, if they are going to avoid dealing with these questions with the council?

I've met Ann Kingsbury a few times. She seems sincere. Maybe she thinks these meetings are a bit of a pantomime, and that in reality the decisions get made elsewhere.

 

[Rushy]

I've met Ann Kingsbury a few times. She seems sincere. Maybe she thinks these meetings are a bit of a pantomime, and that in reality the decisions get made elsewhere.

I would agree that Ann comes across as sincere. I don't think sincerity is the issue here.

There is nothing panto about the meetings. It's a dry, routine, quarterly business meeting of perhaps 8-10 people from the two parties - the council and BPCP. It is where issues are tabled for discussion and decisions are made and minuted.

Although in principle open to the public to watch, the quarterly meetings are not widely publicised and individuals rarely attend in any number. On this occasion Ann Kingsbury's angry letter circulated to the BPCP mailing list was followed by a reminder in the footer for the next meeting headed IMPORTANT DATE, and reminding recipients that the meetings are open to the public. So the fact that there were more people there than normal was entirely BPCP's choice. The impromptu Q&A at the end of proceedings appears to have been in response to the number who turned up and was not standard procedure.

The formal purpose of the group is to:

a. provide a long-term strategic plan for enhancing the park and its amenity value to all sections of the community;​

b. provide open, transparent and accountable management of Brockwell Park;​

c. ensure management of the park is consistent with the agreed Parks Management Plan;​

d. enhance the role of the community in the management of the Park.​

It could not possibly work if one side feel too "above" the proceedings to contribute fully, as you suggest. But I don't think that's the case anyway.

 

[Not a Vet]

Sounds like she got all her anger out by writing the letter, disgusted of Herne Hill springs to mind. Weird given the option to discuss it with the people concerned but decline to do so.

 

[Tulster218]

I would agree that Ann comes across as sincere. I don't think sincerity is the issue here.

There is nothing panto about the meetings. It's a dry, routine, quarterly business meeting of perhaps 8-10 people from the two parties - the council and BPCP. It is where issues are tabled for discussion and decisions are made and minuted.

Although in principle open to the public to watch, the quarterly meetings are not widely publicised and individuals rarely attend in any number. On this occasion Ann Kingsbury's angry letter circulated to the BPCP mailing list was followed by a reminder in the footer for the next meeting headed IMPORTANT DATE, and reminding recipients that the meetings are open to the public. So the fact that there were more people there than normal was entirely BPCP's choice. The impromptu Q&A at the end of proceedings appears to have been in response to the number who turned up and was not standard procedure.

The formal purpose of the group is to:

a. provide a long-term strategic plan for enhancing the park and its amenity value to all sections of the community;​

b. provide open, transparent and accountable management of Brockwell Park;​

c. ensure management of the park is consistent with the agreed Parks Management Plan;​

d. enhance the role of the community in the management of the Park.​

It could not possibly work if one side feel too "above" the proceedings to contribute fully, as you suggest. But I don't think that's the case anyway.

Interesting. Thank you.

I can't find up to date minutes anywhere. These stopped in 2020 Minutes of previous meetings

 

[Rushy]

Interesting. Thank you.

I can't find up to date minutes anywhere. These stopped in 2020 Minutes of previous meetings

They repeatedly claim that their website isn't up to it anymore. They will send a copy but it will usually require multiple requests and occasionally a request for justification. Despite assurances, I've still not been sent the last one although I have now received a copy it from someone else.

 

[Not a Vet]

Noticed that the toilets near the bmx track have finally reopened. They have fixed the broken pipes as well