Sydenham Society

[JayB]

But how can a group that so clearly represents only one demographic in a very diverse area ,and seems comprised of committeees run by people from the more affluent geographic areas of Sydenham possibly be taken to be "representative"? Any one could form a group with a few mates and claim to speak on behalf of other people. I do not have any problem at all with the Sydenham Society speaking up for itself- good luck to them, but I have never asked anyone to represent me, have never been asked if I want them to represent me and I do not want anyone to claim that they are doing so.

This is a very flawed consultation for local planning if what you say is correct about the council seeing them as representative ( not least because i can't see where the SS say that themselves!) because it not only allows, but actively promotes the emergence of cronyism and elitism across the country. There are plently of other governemnt departments where one submission =one comment, be it from an organisation or an individual. That is exactly how public consultations are conducted at MOJ,DFE and DOH. Otherwise they are not public in the truest sense, are they?

[JRW]

I think that this problem is actually about the way Lewisham runs planning meetings. Twice I have wanted to speak at meetings about local developments, but objectors get only 5 min total to speak, which in effect means that only one view is heard. If the Syd Soc gets privileged access, that means no one else can speak. That is not the Syd Soc's fault, and it sets them up for criticism.

Giving equal time to applicants and objectors is unfair, as developers, by definition, have got a single, clear plan which they have already thrashed out with the planning officers. By contrast, there may be several valid objections brought up by different neighbours, who haven't had a chance to coordinnate.

This is how we get appallingly ugly developments like the school of Our Lady & St Philip Neri. Looking like something off an industrial estate, its red brick cladding and wall clashes terribly with the yellow bricks of surrounding houses. Flush windows and flat shiny white cliffs of facades are totally insensitive to its neighbours.

Despite living opposite, I received no invitations to public meetings or notifications, so had little opportunity to comment. I couldn't speak at the meeting, which was rushed through by councillors, none of whom declared an interest, despite admitting close links to the school.

It is in this context that privilege given to Syd Soc raises hackles, and the personal attacks on its organisers are neither helpful nor fair.

[TredownMan]

It would take one minute to post their proposed submissions on this forum.

Or they could update people on the cases they plan to intervene in via their weekly email.

So why not?

[JRW]

I think that insulting and vilifying people isn't the best way to get them to listen. This forum does have a rather macho aggressive element, and I have personally found the tone a bit much at times. Forums need to involving listening and considering other perspectives, not just slinging mud. If we want the volunteers of Syd Soc to liase with STF, then people need to self-moderate.

[admin]

I'd like to echo JRW's last comment, and I would urge posters to bear his excellent points in mind before posting on this thread from now on.

Best wishes

admin

[JRW]

Thanks for that. Admin. I am amused that, not for the first time, it is assumed I am male.

[Pally]

I think that insulting and vilifying people isn't the best way to get them to listen. This forum does have a rather macho aggressive element, and I have personally found the tone a bit much at times. Forums need to involving listening and considering other perspectives, not just slinging mud. If we want the volunteers of Syd Soc to liase with STF, then people need to self-moderate.

I agree. The problem is that those of us who do not insult and villify, get no response either or in fact sometimes unfairly get a response that is rude or defensive. Nothing ever moves on in terms of the ongoing concerns/ comments related to the Sydenham Society, from genuine people interested in Sydenham, on this forum!! I don't understand why there is no response to polite comments, suggestions etc !
The fact remains that this forum is potentially a great way of communicating with the Sydenham Community for the Sydenham Society and it is a great pity that potential is not being developed ...or even commented on when very good suggestions are made.

[admin]

JRW wrote: Thanks for that. Admin. I am amused that, not for the first time, it is assumed I am male.

Many apologies!

[JGD]

I think that insulting and vilifying people isn't the best way to get them to listen.

I have been following this post carefully.

However unless I have missed a post or one has been deleted, I can see none that is either insulting or vilifying.

I have seen different points argued - and constructively so on both sides - but none in the negative sense as described in admin's comment in support.

Am I missing a point or is there some historic context present here that I am not party to.

[Pally]

I agree there is nothing rude on this thread. There have been other threads where there has been rudeness/villifying. Historically from what Tim has said, there has been a problem. It seems though that the site is ignored as a potential link, despite polite and helpful suggestions

[Tim Lund]

...Historically from what Tim has said, there has been a problem.

Yes - there is quite a lot of history. It's good that on this thread it is being left behind - or maybe just skirted. OTOH, on this other recent thread

https://sydenham.org.uk/forum/viewtopic ... 11#p168811

I did include links to some of the history, and some direct criticism of both Chris Best and SydSoc.

I'm sure some will feel it is wrong of me to mention this now, or on that recent thread, since it risks dragging us all back into quite unpleasant shouting matches, but without this context, I think newcomers will find it hard to understand what is going on here.

[Pally]

...Historically from what Tim has said, there has been a problem.

Yes - there is quite a lot of history. It's good that on this thread it is being left behind - or maybe just skirted. OTOH, on this other recent thread

https://sydenham.org.uk/forum/viewtopic ... 11#p168811

I did include links to some of the history, and some direct criticism of both Chris Best and SydSoc.

I'm sure some will feel it is wrong of me to mention this now, or on that recent thread, since it risks dragging us all back into quite unpleasant shouting matches, but without this context, I think newcomers will find it hard to understand what is going on here.

I agree the cvontext/history is relevant Tim. However that is the point - there ARE new comers (and quite a few "oldcomers"!!) who have never been rude, unhelpful or anything else other than constructive) - and are being completely ignored ina way that could be considered rude in itself! I don't get it!

[Robin Orton]

Perhaps this is really something for the Town Asylum, but in the light of recent postings about machismo and gender confusion, is there anything to be said for having two separate forums, one for those identifying as male and one for those identifying as female? Wouldn't that mean that everyone would be able to relax and be themselves, without the risk of irritating or offending those of the opposite persuasion?

[Pally]

Why does anyone believe this forum as an entity is owed any deference? It’s mainly the ramblings and subjective opinions of a few.

I haven't seen anyone suggesting deference !!!! The potential is there ...used well it could be realised.

[Pally]

Perhaps this is really something for the Town Asylum, but in the light of recent postings about machismo and gender confusion, is there anything to be said for having two separate forums, one for those identifying as male and one for those identifying as female? Wouldn't that mean that everyone would be able to relax and be themselves, without the risk of irritating or offending those of the opposite persuasion?

I really hope that wasn't serious Robin!

[TredownMan]

My post was rather abrupt, for which I apologise. This should remain a civil space and certainly shouldn't make individuals feel criticised.

However, once again, here's another recent council decision, which affects us all, which the Sydenham Society objected to on aesthetic grounds. I dont recall this ever being discussed, and I think it's ok for people to grumble about not being asked their views. It will now go to a planning committee hearing.

http://councilmeetings.lewisham.gov.uk/ ... Report.pdf

[simon]

So are you going to make any representation to the planning committee about your views on the application?

[mosy]

Wouldn't it make sense to ask Lewisham council directly how they regard societies both under any statute or byelaw and also in practice, i.e. weight given to submissions presumably in all things not just planning by comparison with individual voices?

I acknowledge that individuals might not know what a council can or can't take into account, but let's assume an individual does for the sake of argument. To me, the issue isn't how Syd Soc uses any power bestowed on them but how much power actually is.

For example, a post earlier said that Syd Soc does not purport to speak for the community (and seemingly it doesn't if no-one is either consulted or even knows what they're doing and even members can be overridden at committee level) but that is different from how the council perceive them and their submissions. So isn't that the first question to be answered?

[JayB]

Wouldn't it make sense to ask Lewisham council directly how they regard societies both under any statute or byelaw and also in practice, i.e. weight given to submissions presumably in all things not just planning by comparison with individual voices?

I acknowledge that individuals might not know what a council can or can't take into account, but let's assume an individual does for the sake of argument. To me, the issue isn't how Syd Soc uses any power bestowed on them but how much power actually is.

For example, a post earlier said that Syd Soc does not purport to speak for the community (and seemingly it doesn't if no-one is either consulted or even knows what they're doing and even members can be overridden at committee level) but that is different from how the council perceive them and their submissions. So isn't that the first question to be answered?

Indeed so Mosy. But in line with Pally's helpful observations on this somewhat exasperating topic it is also disappointing that as yet no one from the SS has cleared this matter up for us.So now I am left wondering if, as well as writing to the council, i should also write to my MP to ask what her understanding of the SS is. Were she to assume any level of representation in their submisssions beyond the individuals approaching her (it has been said on here they don't take votes from members) I would be extremely concerned.

The SS of course are perfectly entitled to lobby her, maybe they do, maybe they don't, who can say?) but as you say, the question is how an MP might view the status of such approaches.What of TFL? The mayor's office?- the list is endless if it is down to those not in the SS to clarify the position!This is in a democracy unacceptable. Perhaps it is something the SS might like to do for themselves to foster good relations with the community with which they share a name? it would take no more than a paragraph, why is this too much to ask? If i were running for example, a Bell Green society I would be upfront and crystal clear about, citing such important matters on the web site, especially if people paid money to join as they should know exactly what they are buying into don't you think?.Ambiguity would surely lead to frustration and the BG society being accused of seeking undue influence without reference to the wider community- why wouldn't it? It just seems sad that the practice of the SS does not to help itself to foster wider trust because it seems to many to be rooted in times gone by.

[Sydenham]

Also suggest attending Sydenham Assembly next week to raise this subject - councillors will be there. Perhaps you could ask beforehand your question so that some preparation can be done to bring to meeting.

Wednesday 14th 7pm at Sydenham Centre