# Brockwell Park: Annual Cannabis March & Festival 5th June 2004



## editor (Mar 26, 2004)

(forwarded press release - wooohoo! Nice work Shane!)

The 6th Annual Cannabis March & Festival.
Saturday May 8th 2004 - London and worldwide

On Saturday May 8th the 6th Annual March and Carnival to Re-Legalise
Cannabis will be happening in London and an expected 280 cities worldwide. 

Many thousands of people have attended in previous years, to show their
support for the re-legalisation of the law on Cannabis. The day will begin
with a carnival style march from Kennington Park (assemble 12pm) with
floats, banners, costumes and samba beats leading to an all day free
festival in Brockwell Park, Brixton - licence permitting. The festival will
present an educational, entertaining global perspective on cannabis, whilst
calling for the re-legalisation of the drug in the UK.

There will be a main stage with prominent pro-cannabis personalities as
speakers, as well as bands & musicians. A second stage will showcase local
bands, poets & rappers. Soundsystems present on the day will include
Brixton dub sounds RDK Hi Fi, SQUALL, Brighton Alliance of Soundsystems
(BASS) & Negusa Negast, with more to be confirmed. There will also be a
live acoustic stage, run by Small World & powered by wind, sun & bicycles.
This year's event promises to create a genuine large scale community event
with a grassroots mixture of music, culture, dugs info, hemp products,
debate and live performance. 

Stewarding and  volunteering contact Rachel Zatz on ray@zatz.fsnet.co.uk.  
For a Stall contact Nadine 0117 963 8815. 
Media: Shane Collins 0208 671 5936
Email: info@thecannabisfestival.co.uk 
www.thecannabisfestival.co.uk


----------



## milesy (Mar 26, 2004)

nice one


----------



## newbie (Mar 26, 2004)

editor said:
			
		

> There will be a main stage with prominent pro-cannabis personalities as
> speakers, as well as bands & musicians. A second stage will showcase local
> bands, poets & rappers. Soundsystems present on the day will include
> Brixton dub sounds RDK Hi Fi, SQUALL, Brighton Alliance of Soundsystems
> ...




Didn't I read somewhere that the caucophany last year wouldn't be repeated?  3 stages and 4 soundsystems with more to come rather implies that's not the case.


----------



## Choc (Mar 26, 2004)

cool,... it is also my birthday


----------



## William of Walworth (Mar 26, 2004)

newbie said:
			
		

> Didn't I read somewhere that the caucophany last year wouldn't be repeated?  3 stages and 4 soundsystems with more to come rather implies that's not the case.



Maybe the volume levels will be somewhat reduced. And most of the soundsystems are inside tents, which will inhibit the sound from carrying to some extent.

OK so yes, it _is_ quite noisy (it's a FESTIVAL!!  ), but so were the fireworks, and not many locals were complaining about them I shouldn't think, and they were later at night.

For a Glasto regular such as yourself, newbie, to use the word caucophony sounds just a little surprising -- a bit judgemental-looking don't you think? And I know you're not like that really. 

It's only for ONE DAY and finishes at 8 pm.

In my opinion Shane and the other organisers have bent over backwards generally over the years to mollify local objections, the more reasonable of them anyway -- but then some people (I'm sure not you newbie) would object to an event like this on any and every ground they could find.

Edit to add this from the festie website :



> That said it is fair to say that many of the organisers felt (something feedback confirmed) we do need to make changes to the festival. Overall the level of sound from about 12 sound systems and five music/dance stages was too much. This year we are cutting back the number of sound systems to four, with a dance tent, hip hop stage, and main music stage.


----------



## William of Walworth (Mar 26, 2004)

Can it be inferred from this Press Release that they now have a LICENCE?

Edit to add : Not yet -- this from the festie website :



> The festival has not yet been confirmed for Brockwell Park, Brixton.
> Applications are in and we will know soon.



I will spread the word though that this is very likely to be happening ....

We will next week get in touch with that stewarding email address -- we have already promised Shane that we'll be volunteering for stewarding on the march.

After the march we'll be free to enjoy  the 
*
First festival of the summer!!!
*


----------



## SwizzleStiX (Mar 27, 2004)

*Red Jezza Posting As Rad Nance, And Don't Ask*

Errm, jezza here, posting from me mate Rad Nance's access (and, just to complete the hat-trick, The Doctor's PC), and if some kind person can PM me on how to do the log out/separate user log in thing, it would _really _ help...   
FUCKIN' BRILLIANT! WOO HOO! One of the best days of the year! And, whilst I know it's important to make the campaign the central focus and point of this, I love the fact that it's also a celebration of a certain culture
having missed last year's, I can't bleedin' wait....
on the point of the licence; shane's experienced in these sorts of things. If he's reached the point of a press release _that_ definite, it's a done deal.
bloody well done that shane!!


----------



## Bond (Mar 27, 2004)

Can't wait.


----------



## newbie (Mar 27, 2004)

Woah William. I'm not objecting to the day.  Why would I?

As to 'caucophany', that's what I came away from last year thinking.  Competing sound systems in a ring around a smallish space led to a loud, messy and rather unpleasant noise in the middle.  Within the sphere of each system it was fine, but the sound in the common area in the middle was too messy to be fun.

That many systems spread out over a larger area, or pointing the noise out rather than in would work much better.  But licence conditions would preclude that.  So, for my taste, fewer competing systems would make for a better day.

I thought other people said similar after last year?


----------



## dervish (Mar 27, 2004)

Agree with newbie the noise was a bit much at times. It's not much fun when you have 4/5 competing sound systems in a small area. It's fine if your in the tent but for anyone outside it makes it quite difficult.

That said last year was wicked, definatly up for it this year!


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 27, 2004)

what i don't like about free festivals is the way the price of food sold at them seems to increase as if to compensate...


----------



## editor (Mar 27, 2004)

I wonder if the Synergy Project will be there


----------



## the B (Mar 27, 2004)

I wonder indeed...


----------



## Streathamite (Mar 29, 2004)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> what i don't like about free festivals is the way the price of food sold at them seems to increase as if to compensate...


true in general - this one seems to be better than most on that score


----------



## Rollem (Mar 29, 2004)

sound systems competeing for ear space is half the fun  as for the expensive food stalls, take a packed lunch innit

i shall be there, though i may, for the first time in a long time, give the march a miss...bit of a trek for me at the mo. will head to the hob and join it from there no doubt (well, you gotta do a little bit of the march innit, else you're just free-loading on the fun  )

stewarding (in the park) could be an option though... will have to think on....

free the weed!






why can I never find the walking leaf gif when I need it….


----------



## han (Mar 29, 2004)

William of Walworth said:
			
		

> *
> First festival of the summer!!!
> *



YAAAAAAYYY!!!!

Definitely am up for going to the march this time as well


----------



## hatboy (Mar 29, 2004)

newbie said:
			
		

> Didn't I read somewhere that the caucophany last year wouldn't be repeated?  3 stages and 4 soundsystems with more to come rather implies that's not the case.



It's only one day Newbie!!! Go there, lots to see and do for everyone. Lovely day. Enjoy it.


----------



## Rollem (Mar 29, 2004)

just taken a fresh look at the webiste.....lmao of the piccie of urbanites giving it "yay"


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Mar 29, 2004)

YES! Great to see that it's confirmed for Brockwell Park after all - a feat to be proud of I think, esp after the tories wasted loads of public cash on trying to prosecute Shane for last year's festival. The Tories don't want the festival in Lambeth but we've got it, hahaha! 

Coming down for a smoke with us, Mr BC?


----------



## Streathamite (Mar 29, 2004)

Now come on BH, mr BC's one of their more reasonable people!


----------



## Blagsta (Mar 29, 2004)

Just a shame its not on Bank Holiday weekend.  I guess I'll have to book Monday off work then.


----------



## newbie (Mar 29, 2004)

hatboy said:
			
		

> It's only one day Newbie!!! Go there, lots to see and do for everyone. Lovely day. Enjoy it.


 I go most years.  I enjoy it.  But, like I already said, standing in the space in the middle with heavy bass coming at you from umpteen places at once is just messy.


----------



## hatboy (Mar 29, 2004)

Oh I see. Well that's fair enough. Thought you were doing a "Herne Hill Society" on me!


----------



## newbie (Mar 30, 2004)

I know.  'Salright, I'm used to being misunderstood


----------



## Ol Nick (Mar 30, 2004)

hatboy said:
			
		

> Oh I see. Well that's fair enough. Thought you were doing a "Herne Hill Society" on me!


Quite. What about the effect on house prices in Brockwell Gate, hmmm?


----------



## William of Walworth (Mar 30, 2004)

*Only just got back to this*




			
				newbie said:
			
		

> I go most years.  I enjoy it.  But, like I already said, standing in the space in the middle with heavy bass coming at you from umpteen places at once is just messy.



Apologies for my slight misunderstanding before, newbie -- in fact I agree that they were probably overdoing it a little in too small a space last time, and I was quite glad to see on the site that they're being a bit smarter about it this time ....  

With still plenty of quality noise coming up!!!  
But organised a bit better by the looks ..

See you down the park then!


----------



## William of Walworth (Mar 30, 2004)

Blagsta said:
			
		

> Just a shame its not on Bank Holiday weekend.  I guess I'll have to book Monday off work then.



We're actually quite glad about that as it happens, as it leaves the previous (Bank Hol) weekend before free for us to go to France ....  except the France idea has now fallen through, so instead we're off to Stig's old territory of Kent for our Bank Holiday/second anniversary break ...  

I won't be able to take Monday 10th May off, but who cares, a Sunday pub session should sort the head out after JayDay!! 

Mmmmm Festies!


----------



## Bond (Mar 31, 2004)

Love this group pic of some of us from 2002.


----------



## Dubversion (Mar 31, 2004)

this is the same day as NoFX at Brixton Academy. which means i can have a dance in the Negusa Negast tent, slaughter a few hippies and then go pogo.

lovely


----------



## Streathamite (Mar 31, 2004)

Dubversion said:
			
		

> this is the same day as NoFX at Brixton Academy. which means i can have a dance in the Negusa Negast tent, slaughter a few hippies and then go pogo.
> 
> lovely


oh, this from the grumpy bastard who was threatening to hold a rival 'vodka day' anti-Jayday event last year!


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Apr 1, 2004)

Brixton Hatter said:
			
		

> The Tories don't want the festival in Lambeth but we've got it, hahaha! Coming down for a smoke with us, Mr BC?






			
				Red Jezza said:
			
		

> Now come on BH, mr BC's one of their more reasonable people!


Yes, ok, fairplay, I put my hands up   I was just being mischevious. I know Mr BC is ok and has contributed some decent stuff here. 


Still - wouldn't it be interesting if we had a Conservative BC attend the festival to show their support for the cause, even if they themselves weren't a smoker?


----------



## TeeJay (Apr 1, 2004)

Brixton Hatter said:
			
		

> YES! Great to see that it's confirmed for Brockwell Park after all - a feat to be proud of I think, esp after the tories wasted loads of public cash on trying to prosecute Shane for last year's festival. The Tories don't want the festival in Lambeth but we've got it, hahaha!


Hehehe - Mr and Mrs Whelan deny everything - didn't he actually say they are pro-cannabis even? Well - I wonder which of the local Labour, Lib Dem or Tory VIP/politicians will come and show a bit of solidarity? Keith Hill? Or maybe some of the more "hip" Lib Dems from Southwark?


----------



## Blagsta (Apr 1, 2004)

I've got the Monday off!  Yay!


----------



## LDR (Apr 1, 2004)

Bond said:
			
		

> Love this group pic of some of us from 2002.



That's the first time I've ever seen that picture.


----------



## Dubversion (Apr 1, 2004)

Red Jezza said:
			
		

> oh, this from the grumpy bastard who was threatening to hold a rival 'vodka day' anti-Jayday event last year!




and i think you'll find a managed perfectly well. the fact that i chose to hold it IN THE SAME PLACE as Jay-Day is an irrelevance. i smoked no hash but i did drink a FUCK of a lot of vodka.


----------



## Mr BC (Apr 2, 2004)

Brixton Hatter said:
			
		

> Still - wouldn't it be interesting if we had a Conservative BC attend the festival to show their support for the cause, even if they themselves weren't a smoker?



Is someone offering to buy me a pint then?


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Apr 2, 2004)

I'm sure that can be arranged. Hope to see you there!


----------



## Streathamite (Apr 2, 2004)

Mr BC said:
			
		

> Is someone offering to buy me a pint then?


on me, as I owe you thanks anyway (and as both hendo and Ms T were merciful on my round last night)


----------



## milesy (Apr 2, 2004)

Bond said:
			
		

> Love this group pic of some of us from 2002.



i'm surprised i managed to survive that day, i had to end up running home through the park at one point....

mushrooms


----------



## Bond (Apr 2, 2004)

milesy said:
			
		

> i'm surprised i managed to survive that day, i had to end up running home through the park at one point....
> 
> mushrooms




Yeah remember while you and the Cambridge crew went back to yours I ended up at William's when him and Stig had just got together  - the memories! 

Looking forward to this one, let's hope there's a good afterparty as well, don't particularly fancy the Hob.


----------



## Maggot (Apr 4, 2004)

Shouldn't this thread be in the music and festies forum? Especially as people come from far and wide for it, and you now have to be a Brixtonite to post here   .

Looking forward to it   










			
				Dubversion said:
			
		

> i smoked no hash but i did drink a FUCK of a lot of vodka.


 I can vouch for that after seeing your amazing zig-zag walk


----------



## Velouria (Apr 4, 2004)

I may be down for it (and indeed up for it)  accommodation permitting

Almost tempted to line up some job interviews down there too (Currently having a shit time at work )

Oh shit, hope my boss doesn't surreptitiously read urban75


----------



## shaneC (Apr 4, 2004)

*Cannabis Festival Update*

Whilst the march is definately on, we still need to come to agreement with Lambeth Parks over the cost of using the Park.

Over the year they have increased the cost of using Brockwell Park to £1.80 per head.  This can be reduced by 50% if the event is put on by a community / not for profit group.  In the past we have always been recognised as a non commercial group - by Parks and Regulatory Services (for the Ents Licence). This year Parks say we are a political event and therefore they are trying to charge us £9,000.  This we cannot afford.... If there is a not for profit 50% discount then we can afford £4,500, - although we still have to raise it.

We are having a meeting with Parks to make our case on April 20th and also on Tuesday 20th April there is the Entertainment Licencing Meeting 6.30pm at Lambeth Town Hall Rm 8.  Support needed. Meeting is open to the public to please come and support the application to dance and entertain.

more info www.thecannabisfestival.co.uk


----------



## editor (Apr 4, 2004)

LD Rudeboy said:
			
		

> That's the first time I've ever seen that picture.


The _cheeky wascals _ have half-inched the pics from urban75!

You can find the originalshere and here 

Shane: you're welcome to freely use as many of my pics as you like, but can I have wee credit, if you please!


----------



## shaneC (Apr 4, 2004)

If that is from the festival website then i'll ask webmaster to credit U75. 
Apologies, many thanks and top photos.


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 4, 2004)

shaneC said:
			
		

> Whilst the march is definately on, we still need to come to agreement with Lambeth Parks over the cost of using the Park.
> 
> Over the year they have increased the cost of using Brockwell Park to £1.80 per head.  This can be reduced by 50% if the event is put on by a community / not for profit group.  In the past we have always been recognised as a non commercial group - by Parks and Regulatory Services (for the Ents Licence). This year Parks say we are a political event and therefore they are trying to charge us £9,000.  This we cannot afford.... If there is a not for profit 50% discount then we can afford £4,500, - although we still have to raise it.
> 
> ...



Best of luck shane!!


----------



## Bond (Apr 4, 2004)

William of Walworth said:
			
		

> Best of luck shane!!



Seconded.

Good meeting you for the first time last night as well.


----------



## squashed friend (Apr 5, 2004)

Can I third that!

I'll be there


----------



## Streathamite (Apr 5, 2004)

shaneC said:
			
		

> Whilst the march is definately on, we still need to come to agreement with Lambeth Parks over the cost of using the Park.
> 
> Over the year they have increased the cost of using Brockwell Park to £1.80 per head.  This can be reduced by 50% if the event is put on by a community / not for profit group.  In the past we have always been recognised as a non commercial group - by Parks and Regulatory Services (for the Ents Licence). This year Parks say we are a political event and therefore they are trying to charge us £9,000.  This we cannot afford.... If there is a not for profit 50% discount then we can afford £4,500, - although we still have to raise it.
> 
> ...


right, soddit, I'll be there


----------



## TeeJay (Apr 5, 2004)

shaneC said:
			
		

> Whilst the march is definately on, we still need to come to agreement with Lambeth Parks over the cost of using the Park.
> 
> Over the year they have increased the cost of using Brockwell Park to £1.80 per head.  This can be reduced by 50% if the event is put on by a community / not for profit group.  In the past we have always been recognised as a non commercial group - by Parks and Regulatory Services (for the Ents Licence). This year Parks say we are a political event and therefore they are trying to charge us £9,000.  This we cannot afford.... If there is a not for profit 50% discount then we can afford £4,500, - although we still have to raise it.
> 
> ...


This is fundementally a political decision - do people think that the cannabis festival is a not-for-profit event or not? All the evidence points clearly to it being not-for-profit and free events for the people of Lambeth must be welcomed, especially if they are organised and put on in a sensitive way and with dialogue with other park users and local residents. 

I would really love to hear what the people of Lambeth think about having a free event in Brockwell Park? Do they think it should be charged the full 100% commercial rate or the reduced 50% rate? I'd love the South London Press to run an opinion poll. What do the 60-plus local councillors think? I'd love to know if they support the free cannabis festival or not, and if they think it should be charged the full 100% commercial rate just like any other money-making business enterprise that seeks to hire out Lambeth property for private functions or to make money, or if they feel that it should get the 50% not-for-profit rate?

Has anyone here got any contact with their local Lambeth councillors? What is the Lib Dem line on this? What about the Labour party line on this? I wonder if someone could even get an opinion out of Tessa Jowell who is the MP for Brockwell Park after all.

I will see if I can find out what some of these people think about this, and if they think it should be charged at 50% or the full commercial rate and try and let people know what their local councillor believes and is doing about it. If anyone else could do this as well it would be excellent!


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 6, 2004)

Good post TeeJay (and apologies for my wrecked insults on Saturday!!  )

What does Mr BC think, and others who know more than me about the inner workings of Lambeth Council?


----------



## Streathamite (Apr 6, 2004)

teejay-the key wards are Coldharbour (3 labour, and I'm told the 2 Sharons, Ward & Erdman, are quite good) and Herne Hill (3 Labour, don't know f-all about 'em). 
the chances of getting anything even remotely useful out of Jowell or that Useless placewoman Hoey are zero, but I feel that useful political pressure can be brought to bear on the councillors. this is a marginal now, and both Lab and Lib have a huge vested interest in currying favour with Brixton voters-and my bet is that JayDay is a vote _winner_ 
So-I can think of Five Coldharbour people and 2 Hill-ites, without even trying.
full list of councillors 
so-get writing


----------



## newbie (Apr 6, 2004)

shaneC said:
			
		

> Over the year they have increased the cost of using Brockwell Park to £1.80 per head.  This can be reduced by 50% if the event is put on by a community / not for profit group.  In the past we have always been recognised as a non commercial group - by Parks and Regulatory Services (for the Ents Licence). This year Parks say we are a political event and therefore they are trying to charge us £9,000.  This we cannot afford.... If there is a not for profit 50% discount then we can afford £4,500, - although we still have to raise it.



How does this make sense?  How does the fact that they want to call it a political event turn it from being not-for-profit into being commercial.  Surely the whole point about a political event is that it's not commercial?

How can an event without an entry charge be commercial?
What other political events are held in Lambeth parks?
Are events such as the Mela or the kite day on Streatham Common counted as commercial or community?


----------



## TeeJay (Apr 6, 2004)

William of Walworth said:
			
		

> Good post TeeJay (and apologies for my wrecked insults on Saturday!!  )


Hehe. No problem!


----------



## TeeJay (Apr 6, 2004)

newbie said:
			
		

> How does this make sense?  How does the fact that they want to call it a political event turn it from being not-for-profit into being commercial.  Surely the whole point about a political event is that it's not commercial?
> 
> How can an event without an entry charge be commercial?
> What other political events are held in Lambeth parks?
> Are events such as the Mela or the kite day on Streatham Common counted as commercial or community?


Yestreday I phoned up Lambeth Parks and asked for the written criteria they use to determine if a groups is a not-for-profit or community group, or whatever term they use to describe the discounted category. I was told that my request would be passed on to the relevant person and I can expect a reply "in the next few days". As soon as I get a reply I will post it here. Obviously if LBL have a schedule of charges and a park use policy, they will need to have clear (and possibly legally binding?) criteria for who qualifies under the not-for-profit category. However, in the abscence of any such criteria it might be at the discretion or within the power of a council officer, using some sort of general guidelines perhaps. It might be that there is guidance on this issue provided by central government or the association of local government or some other body. If there is then it should be clear enough whether the cannabis festival qualifies or not. If there isn't then presumably the judgement rests with an individual or group of people, although so far noone at the council has been willing or able to name these people. I wonder how we could find out?

It would also be nice if they could itemise their charges, since they have said that part of the payment includes a 'damage deposit' but they have not specified how much this is. They have also said they have conducted a risk assessment in drawing up the charges and costs that will be incurred by the council over the event, so it would be helpful to see this also. Obviously Lambeth Parks may well want to provide staff (and equipment and notebooks and pens) to monitor the event on the day and will incur various other costs and it is only fair that even community and not-for-profit events cover these costs incurred. It is, after all, important that accurate records are kept of what is going on.


----------



## TeeJay (Apr 6, 2004)

I have just sent this email to Cllr Jim Dickson jdickson@lambeth.gov.uk
__________________________________________________________________

Dear Mr Dickson,

I am writing to ask your opinion concerning the charges for use of Brockwell Park for the forthcoming Cannabis Festival on May 8th. It seems that the council are as yet undecided as to whether they should charge the full 100% commercial rate of £9,000 park fees or the not-for-profit 50% rate. As you know the festival is a not-for-profit event and it is provided to the public entirely free of charge. The accounts for the 2003 festival are here: http://www.thecannabisfestival.co.uk/budget.html

As one of the local councillors for Herne Hill ward, which includes Brockwell Park, I would be very interetsed in your view of the festival and on the possibly charges. I look forward to hearing from you.
__________________________________________________________________

I'll let everyone know when I get a reply.


----------



## Streathamite (Apr 6, 2004)

right, Local Democracy update!
parks etc are accountable to You, The People in 2 ways- the Finance & environment Scrutiny sub-committee (comparable to a select committee); chaired by Cllr Bernard Gentry (Con, Clapham Town), but I believe Sharon ward also sits on this one, and the environment committee (there to decide, not scrutinise) chaired by Claire whelan (Con, Thurlow park ie Norwood). THAT'S where to apply the thumbscrews!


----------



## Rollem (Apr 6, 2004)

right, i've decided i am deffo giving the march a miss, due to being a pregnant wuss who can't walk at such a slow pace for so long  - will have to get brixton hatter to carry a cardboard cut-out of me along with him or something 

see you all in the park though for sure.......assuming we are allowed in the park that is 

good luck shane, keep us posted


----------



## TeeJay (Apr 6, 2004)

The following document  http://www.lambeth.gov.uk/intradoc/groups/public/documents/report/003853.pdf
(last updated 1st April 2004) includes the following:   

FINANCE & ENVIRONMENT SERVICES SCRUTINY SUB-COMMITTEE
Five members.

Liberal Democrat (2)
Cllr Geoff Bowring gbowring@lambeth.gov.uk (Oval ward)
Cllr John Pindar jpindar@lambeth.gov.uk (Thornton ward)

Conservative (1)
Cllr Bernard Gentry (Chair) bgentry@lambeth.gov.uk (Clapham Town ward)

Labour (2)
Cllr Sharon Ward (Vice-Chair) SWard@lambeth.gov.uk (Coldharbour ward)
Cllr Lib Peck lpeck@lambeth.gov.uk (Thornton ward)


----------



## TeeJay (Apr 6, 2004)

Rollem said:
			
		

> see you all in the park though for sure.......assuming we are allowed in the park that is


If the council refuse the license then presumably there will be a giant jayday picnic. The park is not being closed, and the license only relates to permission to set up the stages and put on entertainments etc. Whatever else happens the march is going ahead and I am sure people can work out a whole bunch of ways to legally entertain themselves and any visiters and guests to Lambeth in our lovely Brockwell Park on a gourgeous Saturday afternoon in May!  

I've got a feeling, however, that the people of Lambeth don't want the council cancel this festival. If only there was a way that local people could democratically vote on it or something.


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Apr 6, 2004)

*get involved*




			
				Rollem said:
			
		

> right, i've decided i am deffo giving the march a miss, due to being a pregnant wuss who can't walk at such a slow pace for so long  - will have to get brixton hatter to carry a cardboard cut-out of me along with him or something



He he, no problem!   That'll make up for my total failure to produce our "amusing" placards last year. Alternatively, you could just make me a massive spliff and I'll wave that around for a bit until it's all gone   

I think *we should all write to as many councillors as possible * to put pressure on them to a) allow the licence for the event, and b) categorise it as a not-for-profit event. Teejay has done a decent note further up the page that can be cut and pasted, and the email addresses are also on this thread. Nice one people.


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Apr 6, 2004)

The Councillors on the licencing committee are:

Labour
Liz Atkinson latkinson@lambeth.gov.uk
Peter Bowyer pbowyer@lambeth.gov.uk
Kirsty McHugh kmchugh@lambeth.gov.uk 
Alex McKenna amcKenna@lambeth.gov.uk 
Peter O'Connell po'connell@lambeth.gov.uk 

Conservative
Janet Grigg jgrigg@lambeth.gov.uk

Lib Dem
Marietta Crichton Stuart (Chair) mcrichtonstuart@lambeth.gov.uk 
Jane Fewtrell jfewtrell@lambeth.gov.uk
Julian Heather jheather@lambeth.gov.uk
Clive Parry cparry@lambeth.gov.uk 

Email them.


----------



## Bond (Apr 6, 2004)

Rollem said:
			
		

> right, i've decided i am deffo giving the march a miss, due to being a pregnant wuss who can't walk at such a slow pace for so long  - will have to get brixton hatter to carry a cardboard cut-out of me along with him or something



Haha  Will keep a look out for the cardboard cut-out in that case. Being the lazy git I am, I'm just going to join the march from Shippou's round Max Roach park. So will have at least a good 20 mins of the march to enjoy.


----------



## Streathamite (Apr 6, 2004)

well done, BH! I'm emailing them. and the Scrutiny people> Has anyone recently gone through the existentially futile and unproductive exercise of writing to that useless placewoman Hoey?
edited to add; well done TeeJay, for your digging out the Scrutiny 'posse' (as the yoot call it).
I think our email servers about to catch fire...


----------



## TeeJay (Apr 7, 2004)

Ok I've now finally finished emailing every single Lambeth councillor personally.

I've already had 6 replies including this statement of support from one of the local Cllrs (Tulse Hill Ward next to Brockwell Park)


> _The commercial rates should only be charged for organisations with a clear
> commercial mission. I think it should be clear to nearly everybody that your
> event has no such objective. I hope Lambeth Council charges you a
> not-for-profit rate and that your event takes place successfully._
> *Councillor Toren Smith* Labour, Tulse Hill Ward



Another 4 Cllrs have promised replies:
McHugh, Labour, Herne Hill
Bennett, LibDem, St Leonard's
McConnell, LibDem, Knight's Hill
Parry, LibDem, Bishop's 

And finally this from Cllr Lumsden, Lib Dem, Streatham Hill 


> _Issues about fees for events in parks are the responsibility of Cllr Clare
> Whelan, the Executive Member for Environment. However I recall last year
> when this issue arose the council agreed a one off reduction in the fee
> charged to this particular event. From what I recall this was because
> ...



It does indeed appear that Cllr Clare Whelan (Conservative, Thurlow Park) is the person responsible for making this decision, possibly in consultation with the "Environment Committee" - although I can't details or membership of this on the Lambeth website - and maybe in consulatation with the other 7 Conservative Cllrs in Lambeth?


----------



## TeeJay (Apr 7, 2004)

OK here's another relevant bit of information:



> _Many thanks for your e-mail. I appreciate you taking the time to contact me.
> 
> I'm afraid, however, that as a member of the Council's Licensing Commitee,
> which I understand will be hearing the application on 20 April, I feel it
> ...


(Slightly confusing but, I assume the festival does have several different aspects as well as the actual *level* of the fee, where it needs green lights from the council, ie licensing conditons, police, emergency services and health and safety etc.)


----------



## shaneC (Apr 7, 2004)

*Pressure on*

Further to Teejay & others excellent suggestions and work in contacting Councillors for their opinion as to whether we are a community or commercial group. 

Two other useful people to contact.

1.  Regulatory Services are looking for comments for and against the festival.  This will be very relevant at the Licenceing Meeting on Tuesday 20th April at 7pm, Room 8, Town Hall. (All welcome, Albert afterwards). So far we have had an objection from Friends of Brockwell Park - which has been withdrawn after our reply to them, the Herne Hill Society and one individual.  It would be useful if there was scores of positive comments in favour of this free event in Lambeth.  
The email to write to is BPape@lambeth.gov.uk

2. Clare Whelan, Executive Member for Parks and Tory Councillor for Knights Hill  and Paul Grobler, (assistant director of operations) will decide whether we are a commercial or not for profit group.  
Clare Whelan can be contacted on CWhelan@lambeth.gov.uk

3. Use of Park Fees paid in the past.
In 2003 we paid £5,250. 
In 2002 we paid £2,500, 
in 2001 we paid £4,000, 
in 2000 we paid £3,000
in 1999 we paid £2,000.
Last year was double the price of the year before, this year Council propose to
nearly double the price for half the crowd figure.
We also pay the Council for a licence to entertain, this year only £1,300, - including the community group discount.

pressure on

shane
www.thecannabisfestival.co.uk


----------



## Streathamite (Apr 7, 2004)

err for correspondence purposes is that Mr or Ms Pape, shane?
Top work there, TeeJay. i've just 'done' Ms Whelan, so to speak


----------



## shaneC (Apr 7, 2004)

Red Jezza said:
			
		

> err for correspondence purposes is that Mr or Ms Pape, shane?



That's Mr Bill Pape, Regulatory Services.


----------



## Streathamite (Apr 8, 2004)

cheers. just done Truesdale, Pape I'll do at lunchtime


----------



## TeeJay (Apr 8, 2004)

I have received two further replies from:
Cllr John Whelan (Leader of the Conservative group and Deputy-Leader of Lambeth)
Cllr Paul McGlone (Labour, spokesperson for Environment)
...both of whom requested some further information. I have passed these requests on to the festival organisers and hopefully I will be able to report back their responses soon.


----------



## eco2man (Apr 13, 2004)

*420 greetings!*

I see in Shane's message that the licensing meeting is on 4-20. 

Something we notice on this side of the pond. 

Isn't the date listed as 20-4 on your side of the puddle?

There is a busy international MMM discussion thread on this forum:
http://www.cannabisculture.com/forums/postlist.php?Cat=&Board=current

151 cities signed up so far worldwide for MMM 2004! Global Cannabis March:
City list: http://www.geocities.com/tents444/mmm2004.htm 
World map: http://www.geocities.com/tents444/mmm2004map.htm


----------



## Baub (Apr 14, 2004)




----------



## shaneC (Apr 14, 2004)

*Allegation of Cannabis Festival Spamming*

Greetings, 

We have checked and got replies from most of the core group of the festival regarding allegation of spamming. 
So far the festival has only sent out press notices on 26.3.04 to the media advising of the revised date for the march and festival.  
If anyone has mistakenly got on our press list then please contact info@thecannabisfestival.co.uk to be removed, (or to be added to the info list).  Our apologies to anyone who has been sent a message in error.
When we get the licence (hopefully) on Tuesday 20th April we will be sending out email flyers.  

In the meantime many thanks to the people contacting councillors and Bill Pape at Regulatory Services, and the people volunteering to steward the march. 

www.thecannabisfestival.co.uk


----------



## lang rabbie (Apr 14, 2004)

*Licensing Committee 20 April*

For your delectation and delight, relevant docs from the Lambeth website (both documents posted 8 April):

Agenda for the meeting

Report on applications (pages 9 and 10 only relate to Cannabis Festival)



> Consultation:
> During consultation no adverse comments were received from the London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority, Police, Ward Councillors. Councillor Smith (Tulse Hill Ward) has submitted an Email supporting the application (copy appended). Letters of objection have been received from the Herne Hill Society and the Friends of Brockwell Park (copies appended), an objection has also been received from a resident (copy appended)



None of the consultation comments have been scanned into the version on the website.   Presumably the report was drafted before Shane spoke to FoBP?


----------



## Mr BC (Apr 15, 2004)

lang rabbie said:
			
		

> None of the consultation comments have been scanned into the version on the website.   Presumably the report was drafted before Shane spoke to FoBP?




FoBP have definitely withdrawn their objection.


----------



## Streathamite (Apr 15, 2004)

But what are _your_ views on The Cannabis Festival, MrBC?


----------



## Mr BC (Apr 15, 2004)

Red Jezza said:
			
		

> But what are _your_ views on The Cannabis Festival, MrBC?




In favour of the objective (legalisation).  In favour of parks being used for big events as long as the organisers comply with the rules.  Not in favour of this event being given the lower preferential hiring rate because it is self-confessedly a national rather than community (as in local community) event.

... and looking forward to holding you to your promise of buying me a pint.


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 16, 2004)

Mr BC said:
			
		

> Not in favour of this event being given the lower preferential hiring rate because it is self-confessedly a national rather than community (as in local community) event.



Not sure if I'm right here but I thought the higher rate was meant to apply to commercial/profit-making events which this one (from the evidence of its own accounts publicly and clearly posted on its own website, links earlier) is surely NOT!

Feel free to clarify or correct ...


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 16, 2004)

*Stig and I to be march stewards on the day ...*

We've now finally got our act together and applied to be stewards for the march, as always intended/volunteered. 

Email sent tonight to the march stewards address on the 
http://www.thecannabisfestival.co.uk site, with a copy sent to Shane personally by PM 

We're responsible people, and Stig has stewarding experience, and lots of campaign experience (double  ). We're able to attend local training meetings (especially if they're in the evenings, midweek  )

For technical reasons (my own email address is  at work, and I have very limited Urban access at work  ) I've not been able to email any councillors or officers, not sure if that would be advisable anyway given that I'm not a Lambeth resident.

But good luck with the hearing next Tuesday  

By the way (corporate whore will be interested here) I'm keeping people posted regularly on the Other Festivals forum at http://www.festivals.co.uk 
Beware about what times you check there though -- that website allows access to its forums at very sporadic/haphazard times, as its server seems a bit feeble to cope with very busy pre-Glasto traffic, very frustrating. To be fair the webmaster there is very short of money indeed ... there's advertising there (annoying) but not much at all.

Apologies for that semi-relevant digression. I'm very committed to this campaign, event, cause. So is Stig and she doesn't even smoke! Neither will I on the morning of the march. 

I wish I had time to do more!


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 16, 2004)

Mr BC said:
			
		

> FoBP have definitely withdrawn their objection.



So the minutes for the hearing (which I've looked at) should reflect that clearly 

And they don't, or don't seem to. Apologies if the minutes _have_ been updated and that the Lambeth website is just too dozy to be updated quickly.

Notice from the minutes that there are strict conditions relating to toilets being in place well in advance following last years cock up. Were last year's toilet suppliers ever sued? Presume there are different suppliers planned this year 

All seems fair and sensible.

I also notice that the associated alcohol licence is recommended by council officers to be only til 7. No worries there ... 

And that music is recommended similarly to be only til 7:45. Take note everyone!

BTW Police, Fire Service, Ambulance Service have not made any objections.
Objections seem to stem from council officers (and possibly indirectly from councillors?) only, presumably in response to one or two local objections ... or from some other place or mindset?

Can I join the organising committee next year Shane?  
Experienced festographer needs work!


----------



## Streathamite (Apr 16, 2004)

William of Walworth said:
			
		

> Not sure if I'm right here but I thought the higher rate was meant to apply to commercial/profit-making events which this one (from the evidence of its own accounts publicly and clearly posted on its own website, links earlier) is surely NOT!
> 
> Feel free to clarify or correct ...


err, yeah, that would be my point. Also, it would surely have entirely positive _local_ ramifications were the campaign (of which this is an integral part)  to achieve its' end aim, so...
and,c ome to think of it, Brixton's on a national stage half the time anyway, one way or another


----------



## Mr BC (Apr 17, 2004)

William of Walworth said:
			
		

> Notice from the minutes that there are strict conditions relating to toilets being in place well in advance following last years cock up. Were last year's toilet suppliers ever sued? Presume there are different suppliers planned this year


It is, of course, for the event organisers to ensure that there are toilets.  The absence of toilets last year did lead to the park being left in a truly disgusting state and cost the council a fortune to clear up.

As I said, I support this event going ahead but I don't see why local council tax payers should subsidise a national political event.


----------



## Cioran (Apr 18, 2004)

Why did it cost the council a fortune to clear up? As I understand it the clear up is paid for and contracted by the festival organisers....if theres more mess it costs the event more not the taxpayer, or am I missing something?


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 19, 2004)

I'm sure I speak for most in saying *Good luck for tomorrow, Shane and organisers!*


----------



## TeeJay (Apr 20, 2004)

Mr BC said:
			
		

> As I said, I support this event going ahead but I don't see why local council tax payers should subsidise a national political event.


Well firstly this is a *free* event - one that can be enjoyed by all types of people, just like any other free event that Lambeth council or other local authorities might spend council tax money on. How much public money does Lambeth spend on events every year (eg the L.C.Show). It doesn't restrict these to Lambeth residents does it? Surely it simply holds them locally and doesn't lay on car parking or do other things to the detriment of locals etc? By your criteria, what makes the LCS a 'local' event then?  What about stuff up at the South Bank or Coin Street? Surely you get people from all over the world enjoying events there? I'd love to see some actual legal criteria rather than this 'make-it-up-as-you-go-along' type stuff. If people are going to 'make it up' then I'd like to know what local councillors think. Unfortunately most of them haven't bothered replying and some who have either have refused to voice an opinion of their own or have even said they don't have any knowledge of what is going on.     

Two more points about money: many of the people who come to the event will spend money in local shops, pubs and restaurants etc. Secondly, is the council actually willing to publish what it is spending this £10,000 on? It is being claimed that the council is running up costs becuase of this festival that is being provided freely to the public, including local people, who will make up a very significant percentage of people attending, noit least because it is free entertainment right on their doorstep. Is the council actually prepared to break down these costs and tell the taxpayer where it is spending the money?

In fact, the organisers are underwriting this event - they are the ones who will be finding the money and providing an event to the public for free. It is a fallacy to suggest that the council has to pay for things such as litter collection as this is done by the event organisers. In fact the people doing it have collected rubbish onj contract for the council at their evejnts in Lambeth Parks in previous years - for example at the Stella Artois films on Clapham Common etc. I have personally picked up stuff for no pay. I doubt if many current councillors ever got down and picked out cigarette butts from out public parks, so to get a lecture on how we are messing up the parks is a a bit rich. 

The council are demanding money for the use of a public place, yet the council can't event put on a decent Brixton festival (ie one that reflects Afro-carribbean culture like the notting hill one) it doesn't really provide many 'free' public events, and in any case, unlike the cannabis festival the events are not 'free' anyway - they are paid for out of taxpayers money.

Noone is asking that the council 'subsidises' this event. We are simply asking that they set out the details of the actual costs incurred by Lambeth Council and that they are *reasonable* - just like previous administrations have been for the past five years.

It is beyond me why the Lib Dems of all people are seeking to block this event by charging well over the odds - or at least making life exteremely difficult for the festival organisers and sucking money from other areas of the event, whereas New Labour, who people would have thought of as being 'the establishment' who wouldn't want a festival that challenged the status quo - are the ones who have been the loudest in support of the festival and have been fairly reasonable on prices in previous years.

Is it a coincidence that the council has spent the best part of £30,000 trying to take the festival to court over last year, only to have the case threowbn out by a judge who asked why the council persued the case in the first place. Maybe this money is going towards trying to bring some kind of trumped up case against the festival again this year. Except they will have to top it up with another £20,000 odd from taxpayers money.  

And while I am at it - I'd like to know what the official Lib Dem line is on cannabis. Does anyone actually know?   

Anyway, lets hope that tomorrow a wave of sanity sweeps over Lambeth Town Hall, eh? And they think the stoners are scatty?


----------



## Streathamite (Apr 20, 2004)

TeeJay said:
			
		

> And while I am at it - I'd like to know what the official Lib Dem line is on cannabis. Does anyone actually know?


Er, TeeJay, mate, you're asking the wrong man (ie MrBC) about the LibDem 'line' on this, like.
Also, this being the LibDems, as usual they are ideologically all over the shop
this is the nearest I could get to a 'policy' for them


----------



## Rollem (Apr 20, 2004)

*on a totally feeble note*

whats the predicted weather for the 8th?


----------



## lang rabbie (Apr 20, 2004)

I'm not going to try and explain the attitudes of the Lambeth administration, but the Lib Dem's national party policy is readily available on their website.    It was endorsed by their Spring 2002 party conference leading to much denunciation in the Daily Mail.  In particular...



> [Conference endoreses the proposal to....]
> Break the links between cannabis use and organised crime and release police resources for higher priority tasks by:
> 
> a)	Re-classifying cannabis as a Class C drug.
> ...


----------



## Anna Key (Apr 20, 2004)

The licence will be decided by licensing committee tonight (room 8, Lambeth Town Hall). Here's a C&P from the Officers' report.



> Applicants Name: Shane Collins
> Name and Address of Premises Brockwell Park
> Ward : Herne Hill, Tulse Hill, Thurlow Park.
> Nature of Application: Occasional Weekday Music & Dancing Licence
> ...


----------



## newbie (Apr 20, 2004)

Mr BC should the use of Windrush Sq for an olympic flame sendoff event on 26 June to be licensed at the commercial or non-commercial rate?


----------



## corporate whore (Apr 20, 2004)

> many of the people who come to the event will spend money in local shops, pubs and restaurants etc.



The last few years Lambeth police haven't allowed Herne Hill's pubs to stay open past 9 on the day of the CF   Last year this led to the cancellation of The Counterfeit Stones in the Half Moon    which would have been a nice way to round off the evening, rather than getting all moody in the Hob...

Still, good luck tonight to ShaneC _et al_ - I'll try and pop down (is it a public meeting?). I live VERY close to the park and have no complaints about the fest   .

Interesting to note Lambeth have received objections from a resident (singular), giving the lie to HH NIMBYism I hope...

PS cheers for the tip WoW!


----------



## Anna Key (Apr 20, 2004)

corporate whore said:
			
		

> Still, good luck tonight to ShaneC _et al_ - I'll try and pop down (is it a public meeting?). I live VERY close to the park and have no complaints about the fest   .


It's a public meeting. Anyone can wander in. I've just double-checked the Events Diary on the Lambeth website:


> *Tuesday April 20 2004
> 7:00pm  Licensing Committee
> Room 8, Lambeth Town Hall, Brixton, SW2 1RW
> Status: Public
> ...


----------



## corporate whore (Apr 20, 2004)

Thanks AK


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Apr 20, 2004)

4900 seems quite a small number of people - still, if that helps get the licence then fairplay. 

Interesting to hear about the pubs closing early last year - I don't remember this. I'm sure I was drinking in the Regent after 9.... The landlords must've been well pissed off - it's probably their best day of the year, bar the Country Show. Still, it's not as if the area is short of pubs is it?!!



> whats the predicted weather for the 8th?


Cloudy, smoky......   

Anyone going to the licencing hearing later? It's a 7.00pm in Room 8 - maybe see people there....


----------



## Anna Key (Apr 20, 2004)

Tonight’s meeting could be either deadly dull or utterly riveting. The last licensing committee meeting I went to almost caused a riot. 

The Chair was going spare, members of the audience were shouting that one of the Councillors was drunk, and a group of yuppies objecting to a long-established late bar messing up their property resale values looked positively scared.

It will be interesting to hear what objectors - if any - have to say, and how Shane deals with their arguments. It's a good opportunity for him to show how effective a politician he is (I'm assuming he'll be there, representing himself without a lawyer).

I suspect he’ll win on a vote of about 7:2. Anyone care to offer odds?


----------



## IntoStella (Apr 20, 2004)

Any idea, anyone, if it'll be first on the agenda tonight? I've got to go and help someone with an essay at 8 (in that ivory tower of Academe, the Albert, natch!  ) but I might come for the first hour.    As AK says, licensing ain't half as boring as you might think, especially when something like this is on the agenda.  A must, I'd say.  

Will you be there, hatter?


----------



## KeyboardJockey (Apr 20, 2004)

Slightly off topic but Fuchsia (Ms KJ) and I are really looking forward to the march.  Does anyone know if it is acceptable to come in a hemp themed costume for the march / parade?  Got a not too original but doable idea forming in my head.


----------



## Anna Key (Apr 20, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> Any idea, anyone, if it'll be first on the agenda tonight?


There are three items on the agenda. The cannabis one is last. So it might not come up until quite late - say 9pm or later (or earlier, you can never tell).

But if loads of people turn up at 7pm the chair could bump it.


----------



## IntoStella (Apr 20, 2004)

Anna Key said:
			
		

> There are three items on the agenda. The cannabis one is last. So it might not come up until quite late - say 9pm or later (or earlier, you can never tell).
> 
> But if loads of people turn up at 7pm the chair could bump it.


That is an excellent point. I'm sure they did that for J  Bar when they saw how many people they had brought. So come one, come all at 7 o clock if you can!


----------



## newbie (Apr 20, 2004)

double post. repeated many hours after the original.  No idea how or why.  deleted anyway.


----------



## rennie (Apr 20, 2004)

So? what happened AK?


----------



## corporate whore (Apr 21, 2004)

The licence was approved!

There were no objectors present, with a guy from FoBP showing up to lend their support. Written objections were received from the Herne Hill Society and one resident, who ShaneC described as having 'cultural differences' with the festival.

Mostly thanks to an impressively professional presentation, the committee voted against the licensing officers' proposal that it all shut down by 7.30. ShaneC argued the extra time asked for was important for the festival's financial well-being. So now it'll shut at 7.45.   

Kudos for the approval goes to Cllrs Myerson and O'Connell, who championed the licence application through on the organisers' terms, rather than the amended terms.

I was impressed with Shane's presentation (though anything would have looked good following the fairly shambolic one made beforehand by 'Medusa'). He made some good points about the lack of free events in Lambeth parks, and made the contrast with the paid-for events on Clapham Common every year, which are legion.

He stood his ground in the face of some fairly ridiculous, if well-intentioned, questions from Cllr Feutrell (sp?), who knows her festivals   , and some humourless stuff from Cllr Grigg, who had a touch of the Widdecombes about her   

Anyhoo, it's all go.    Given the £5000 deposit put down on the event, I think it's only fair to say *Don't fuck with the park!*


----------



## aurora green (Apr 21, 2004)

Woo hoo!!


----------



## newbie (Apr 21, 2004)

at the commercial or community rate?


----------



## corporate whore (Apr 21, 2004)

Is costing £7000 which works out at 140p per person assuming 4,900 turn up, which is how many the license stipulates.

Plus £5000 deposit against damage, naturally. So don't fuck with the park, as I may have already mentioned...


----------



## liberty (Apr 21, 2004)

Rollem said:
			
		

> whats the predicted weather for the 8th?

















Of course 





Fingers crossed


----------



## Ol Nick (Apr 21, 2004)

corporate whore said:
			
		

> Is costing £7000 which works out at 140p per person assuming 4,900 turn up, which is how many the licence stipulates.


So I was wondering how they'll enforce that. Stewards on the fence and bouncers only allowing one in for one out? "You'll have to wait here. Fire regulations, mate. Oh and in you go, love."


----------



## newbie (Apr 21, 2004)

corporate whore said:
			
		

> So don't fuck with the park, as I may have already mentioned...



Hey it's my local park.  It's sustained me in times of woe and provided the backdrop to many happy moments.  I love it like the sister I never had. I even laboured in the 1o'clock club once upon a time.  

So I don't. OK?  

That demand appears to be midway between the £4500 non-commercial and £9000 top whack that Shane mentioned.


----------



## Rollem (Apr 21, 2004)

corporate whore said:
			
		

> Anyhoo, it's all go.    Given the £5000 deposit put down on the event, I think it's only fair to say *Don't fuck with the park!*


and also fair to say, *put your cash in the buckets!*

well done shane and co for getting this approved, 'tis gonna be a hum dinger of a day!


----------



## Anna Key (Apr 21, 2004)

corporate whore said:
			
		

> I was impressed with Shane's presentation (though anything would have looked good following the fairly shambolic one made beforehand by 'Medusa'). He made some good points about the lack of free events in Lambeth parks, and made the contrast with the paid-for events on Clapham Common every year, which are legion.
> 
> He stood his ground in the face of some fairly ridiculous, if well-intentioned, questions from Cllr Feutrell (sp?), who knows her festivals   , and some humourless stuff from Cllr Grigg, who had a touch of the Widdecombes about her


The main vote was 6:0 with two abstentions (Marietta Crichton Stuart, the Lib-Dem Chair of the Committee and Janet Grigg, the sole Tory on the Committee).

I've a soft spot for Janet Grigg. She's on planning committee also and was first rate when a Merrett nightclub tried to colonise the old Brixton Cycles building on Coldharbour Lane.

I hate to say it but suspect she's a very good constituency councillor. I expect Tories to be venal and corrupt and it's irritating when they're not.

Because the application was so strong - Shane and his colleague were excellent - the vote was interesting. I was expecting at least one, possibly two, "political" votes. But it didn't happen.

As gentrification gathers pace in Brixton there'll be stronger and stronger forces out there which do not want a cannabis festival in Brockwell Park.

It could lower property prices!

It could give Brixton the reputation of being full of drugged-up hippies! 

It could piss off the Herne Hill conservatives! 

Brixton needs 'nice' festivals, run on good commercial lines by respectible companies catering for the gentrifying middle classes!

But Shane (and colleague - sorry, can't remember his name) scored a 6:0 victory. Very clever of them.

One good point made by Shane was that a third of Lambeth residents are on benefits. So a free festival in a community space is important on straight economic grounds.


----------



## hendo (Apr 21, 2004)

Anna Key said:
			
		

> As gentrification gathers pace in Brixton there'll be stronger and stronger forces out there which do not want a cannabis festival in Brockwell Park.
> 
> QUOTE]
> 
> Don't worry. We're too busy earning money to pay off our enormous mortgages to worry about who's doing what in a park of a sunny afternoon.


----------



## rennie (Apr 21, 2004)

Wooohoooo... great news!!!!


----------



## pooka (Apr 21, 2004)

Well done Shane - good to see common sense ruled. I think a benign attitude to the cannabis festival is pretty widespread in the borough, one or two axe grinders aside.




			
				Anna Key said:
			
		

> One good point made by Shane was that a third of Lambeth residents are on benefits. So a free festival in a community space is important on straight economic grounds.



That's a striking statistic. Is it one you're familiar with and know the provenance of, Anna? Does it include stuff like retirement pensions?




			
				Anna Key said:
			
		

> As gentrification gathers pace in Brixton there'll be stronger and stronger forces out there which do not want a cannabis festival in Brockwell Park.



Well, they'll need the park for the slaughter of the first born.


----------



## IntoStella (Apr 21, 2004)

I had to leave before the end to help a neighbour with something but yeah, excellent stuff. (Now wondering which person at the meeting was CW).


----------



## hendo (Apr 21, 2004)

pooka said:
			
		

> Well, they'll need the park for the slaughter of the first born.



I'm not sure Brockwell Park couldn't be better utilised for some of those individually designed Barrett homes with rolling landscaped drives, a branch of Heals and a big gated area for my Volvo, TBH.


----------



## newbie (Apr 21, 2004)

pooka said:
			
		

> That's a striking statistic. Is it one you're familiar with and know the provenance of, Anna? Does it include stuff like retirement pensions?



The census info here shows that Lambeth has 62% working 16-74s, slightly higher than nationally, plus a few other economically active people.  If all the rest are taken as being on benefits of one sort or another they amount to about 1/3rd.  Much the same as nationally  

But there are more than double the national average of people with degrees


----------



## pooka (Apr 21, 2004)

newbie said:
			
		

> The census info here shows that Lambeth has 62% working 16-74s, slightly higher than nationally, plus a few other economically active people.  If all the rest are taken as being on benefits of one sort or another they amount to about 1/3rd.  Much the same as nationally
> 
> But there are more than double the national average of people with degrees



Yes, I was familiar with the 62%, which is as you say a bit higher than the national figure. Presumably the remaining third includes eg spouses raising kids, or people receiving a state pension and so on?

As far as I recall, overall Lambeth is not so very different from the national average (in terms of household income and such like), but is a bit more polarised, like many inner London boroughs - whereas Shane's use of the statistic suggests the whole borough is impoverished. A forgivable ploy in the circumstances!


----------



## Streathamite (Apr 21, 2004)

polarised as in 'geographically', pooka?


----------



## pooka (Apr 21, 2004)

Red Jezza said:
			
		

> polarised as in 'geographically', pooka?



Geographically and economically - Colharbour, Vassel and Prince's on the one hand and wards in the south of the borough on the other.


----------



## corporate whore (Apr 21, 2004)

> I had to leave before the end to help a neighbour with something but yeah, excellent stuff. (Now wondering which person at the meeting was CW).



Was it the bald man on the front row?
Was it the blonde woman in the second row?
Was it the bloke with half a bike?
Was it the mild mannered janitor?

 

I love a bit of mystery, me...


----------



## IntoStella (Apr 21, 2004)

GISS A CLUE!!


----------



## corporate whore (Apr 21, 2004)




----------



## Brixton Hatter (Apr 21, 2004)

Excellent news - although it is a shame the cost has been fixed at £7000. Still, at least the festy is on.   




			
				IntoStella said:
			
		

> Will you be there, hatter?


Well yes, I planned to be but I ended up having to stay late at work. Buggery. One day soon our paths will cross!!


----------



## TeeJay (Apr 21, 2004)

Just a personal update and opinion on things … I think ShaneC will be posting something official soon – so apologies if I have any facts wrong…  

I was at the town hall last night and there is some good news and some bad news…

The good news is that the Licensing Committee were so won over by the cannabis festival organisers that they overrode their own officers and backed the festival organisers’ requests regarding later finishing times.  There was no opposition to the festival except from the one Conservative Councillor - Cllr Grigg – and many postive and supportive comments from local people and groups, councillors, council officers and so forth, but…    

The bad news is that ‘apparently’ on Monday the Lambeth Executive/Cabinet  “decided” that the cannabis festival doesn’t qualify for the 50% Discretionary/Community/Not-For-Profit rate. Or at least Conservative Cllr Clare Whelan has ‘decided’ on behalf of the people of Lambeth, and the Lib Dem leadership seem to have capitulated, although no actual statement or comment has been forthcoming, no one seems to want to go on record, take responsibility or explain to the public, media or even their own councillors their reasoning behind their position.      

So the bottom line: Lambeth are threatening to refuse a “use of park” license unless it gets £12k up front this Friday, including a 5k ‘safety deposit’ and £7k fees. The march will still go ahead. People will still, perfectly legally, have an ‘acoustic picnic’ in Brockwell Park come what may. But the free entertainment, stalls, debates, kids area and so forth, along with any kind of stewarding in the park etc may not be provided, simply because Lambeth are being greedy and trying to shake the festival down. 

Just when the organisers need good cash flow – to book equipment, do flyers, pay for various things – the council are demanding a vast chuck of money up front and immediately. They have also refused or been unable to produce their costings and risk assessments that they claim to be basing their figures on, leaving the impression that this is simply profiteering by the council. Ironically they already wasted several times this amount of money – probably about £20k or £30k - in pointless prosecutions of the festival last year. The fact is that every single Lambeth Councillor has been provided with information about the festival finances and they are fully aware of the consequences of their actions. They want to shut the festival down – and they know exactly what they are doing. Apparently legal advice is being taken

I had a chat in the pub afterwards with the the organisers and as  understand it press releases and a general appeal and phone-around to all sympathisers/sponsors/donors is going to happen today seeking immediate help to sort out the £5k deposit (returnable) and the £7k fees.

Its also worth saying however that there are a good three weeks to go before the event in which time the full council meets, along with the parks scrutiny committee and there is also plenty of time for Peter Truesdale to explain to the people of Lambeth why he has effectively cancelled the free, community-provided annual event that a whole load of volunteers and local well-wishers are wanting to put on for free! Please will all Lambeth residents contact their local councillor or the leader of the council, tell them what you think and demand they allow the festival to go ahead at the ‘not-for-profit’ rates.


----------



## IntoStella (Apr 21, 2004)

TeeJay said:
			
		

> I was at the town hall last night


 YOU AS WELL!!  (Tries to remember if there was anybody there who looked like they might be a ''gender radical''  ). I now know who Corporate Whore is because I trippped over his bike.


----------



## IntoStella (Apr 21, 2004)

TeeJay said:
			
		

> Please will all Lambeth residents contact their local councillor or the leader of the council, tell them what you think and demand they allow the festival to go ahead at the ‘not-for-profit’ rates.


 Definitely. 

Very sorry to see this ugly, naked grasping  on the part of the council.


----------



## lang rabbie (Apr 21, 2004)

TeeJay said:
			
		

> Ironically they already wasted several times this amount of money – probably about £20k or £30k - in pointless prosecutions of the festival last year.



In this letter quoted in a post on a previous thread  Cllr John Whelan reckoned that the council's costs in the abortive prosecution were only c.£1,000.   What is the truth on this one?


----------



## shaneC (Apr 21, 2004)

Many thanks to the people who came and supported us last night.  As Teejay and others have explained we are still in a huge dilemma.  Although we now have a licence to entertiin it is dependent on coming to some agreement over the cost of the park.  Last year Parks charged us 52p per head of expected crowd.  This year it has gone up to £1.40p per person.  If we got the 50% non commercial discount then we would be fine.  Currently Lambeth want £7,000 use of park and £5,000 deposit.  (Normally the deposit is 15% of the fee, but for us it is around 80% !)

After the court case, huge rise in costs of use of park and deposit increase we do get the feeling that someone might be out to get us - out.  And it looks like the Council Executive of Lib Dems and Tories are doing it.

Basically we have set ourselves until Monday to raise the £5,300 we still need to responsibley start the festi and still be able to pay for services, bogs, stewards etc etc.  see open budget on website for the full run down.

So we need you to dig deep and send us whatever you can as a donation or a loan (which would be used for the deposit).  
If you can help please contact the event treasurer David Crane on dc@23.co.uk or cheque payable to 'cannabis coalition' to 87 Goddard Place, London N19 5GT.
If anyone has any 'popular music recording artistes' contacts who may be able to help do send me the details.

If we don't get the money in we can't really go ahead without being in debt all year, but the march will still take place, a large pic nic but little else.

If you feel pissed of, cos I do, then do write to the Leader and ask them to recognise us as a not for profit group and please to not price us out of Lambeth. PTruesdale@lambeth.gov.uk


----------



## Anna Key (Apr 21, 2004)

lang rabbie said:
			
		

> In this letter quoted in a post on a previous thread  Cllr John Whelan reckoned that the council's costs in the abortive prosecution were only c.£1,000.   What is the truth on this one?


Absolute load of old bollocks. What Council lawyer _gets out of bed_ for a measly grand?


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 21, 2004)

I wish I had money but I don't ... 

Excellent news re the licence  from Corporate Whore. and terrible news re the money  from Tee Jay and Shane  at the same time ...

I think those councillors should have some pretty tough questions to answer ... naked political axegrinding as has already been said ...

Will crosspost this on efestivals when I get a moment ...


----------



## Streathamite (Apr 21, 2004)

sample Truesdale letter. comments/criticism welcome, comrades;

Dear Mr Truesdale
I am appalled at the prohibitive charges you propose to levy on The Cannabis Festival. This event is run on a not-for-profit, non-commercial basis, and is a popular feature of the Lambeth Cultural year. I would expect a member of a party which is still nominally Liberal to take a positive and co-operative (I hardly dare to hope for 'progressive') attitude to this event. 
The costs due to Lambeth Council for Jayday are NOWHERE near £7,000 (and the proposed £5000 is a baffling 65% greater proportion of the fee than is your normal policy & practice). Be assured the voters of Lambeth will interpret this as a deceitful, 'backdoor' attempt to remove the festival from Lambeth, coming as it does after a failed prosecution which the Judge himself criticised.
Now the festival's licence has been granted, I implore you to recognise the not-for-profit nature of the event-and levy charges in line with last year's. Please reply (by email) with your comments on the above
Yours Faithfully


(sent 5 mins ago, was a bit rushed)
c'mon folks let's drown the grasping fucker's inbox


----------



## KeyboardJockey (Apr 21, 2004)

I've been following the tribulations re the festival and Lambeth Council with interest and it seems that they are tying to harrass the festie out Lambeth by pricing it out.  Unfortunately having the accounts publicly accessible is a great idea (and one I have supported in events that I have been involved in) but it also give ammo to Cllrs who can then pitch the fee to a level that stymies the fest but without appearing to the mainstream observer to be using boot boy tactics because they know in detail what can and cannot be afforded by the fest.

Please excuse me my sticking my oar in on this but if Lambeth are behaving like shitheads then why not move the festival to a more responsive local authority.  
It is a bit of a trap for voluntary orgs that historically had roots in one auth (usuually because of long ago funding deals or the fact that there was a local need that needed adressing) and fail to see or grasp opportunities that are outside the boroughs borders.  
One vol group I'm involved in has taken 10 years to start to look further afield for funding and customers -- something that should have been done a decade ago.

Good luck with the festie anyway and I will definitely be there.


----------



## shaneC (Apr 22, 2004)

I forgot to put the web address which is so simple www.thecannabisfestival.co.uk.  

A couple of other points.  We are awaiting an opinion from Liberty on prohibitive charging.

In answer to earlier points the festival employs a full & local litter and recycling crew, who have experience doing litter picking at events in Brockwell Park since 1992.  At no point has it cost the Council to clean up after us.  
We have in the past worked closely with the Brockwell Parkies team, Victor, Kenny Andre, Hector have played a big part in providing back up,  however they have all been sacked.  Other than some graffitti last year which cost us £200 (ta lads) we get our deposit back and treat the park well.


----------



## chegrimandi (Apr 22, 2004)

nice one Jezza I nicked yr email and sent it.


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Apr 22, 2004)

lang rabbie said:
			
		

> In this letter quoted in a post on a previous thread  Cllr John Whelan reckoned that the council's costs in the abortive prosecution were only c.£1,000.   What is the truth on this one?


Yeah, he emailed that to me. I think it's bollocks. Their legal costs _may_ have been only a grand but what about the staff time used up in with councillors and officers trying to persue the case? That must run into thousands easily. If they hadn't been doing that stupid legal case, they could have been working on things far more important, like thinking about Brixton's housing and drug problems. 

We should *all * email PTruesdale@lambeth.gov.uk to complain.


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Apr 22, 2004)

*Forgot to say....*

......if you're looking for soemthing to do after the festival, come down to the Hobgoblin (right next to the Brixton entrance to the park) for BATCH where we play house, breaks and old skool tunes. It's free and open til 2.30am.


----------



## TeeJay (Apr 22, 2004)

If anyone doesn't realise it, the festival is facing a *SERIOUS* problem that needs to be sorted out *THIS WEEKEND*! 

This is from the front page of the festival website: http://www.thecannabisfestival.co.uk/latest_news.htm



> *Cannabis Festival Makes Emergency Appeal To Supporters (and to Lambeth Lib Dems)* Wednesday 21st April 2004
> 
> We now have the ents license but the free event is threatened by the massive fees and deposit being demanded by Lambeth Council for the "use of the park". They want £12,000 by this Friday (23rd April) or they will not allow the event (although the march will still be going ahead). We are £5,300 short!
> 
> ...


I have volunteered to help try and raise some money from "rich celebrity sponsors". If you can think of any good names then PM me with lists of suggestions. I think anyone who has said anything publically, or in a film or record, that is postive towards cannabis, or any rich lawyers, senior police officers, politicians, Richard-Branson-alike and that type of person, would make good taregst for a begging letter/phonecall/email (via their agent's office of necessary). I reckon that we can cover the money if we make intelligent and targetted requests and get X number of people giving £50 or £100 each.


----------



## Ol Nick (Apr 23, 2004)

Shane's got this in the SLP.


----------



## TeeJay (Apr 23, 2004)

Ol Nick said:
			
		

> Shane's got this in the SLP.


OK - that looks like it was written on Tuesday - the day of the licensing committee. I think the SLP are going to be talking to him again today, and there have been some other journalists making enquiries, so everyone should keep their eyes out. Even better - start writing some letters or pimping around the information from here. In fact urban75 has the best and most up to date information about this and I get the feeling that more clued up journalists actually use this site to help them write their stories.


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 23, 2004)

I'm about to PM you TeeJay with 2 celebrity suggestions. Well semi-celebrities anyway ...

I have also this lunchtime posted a cheque to the Emergency Fund through the Cannabis Festival Website. Access All Areas are administering the fund but there's a glitch in their Switch-(non)-accepting software at the moment.


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 23, 2004)

I have also posted up information on http://www.festivals.co.uk (as has wiskey) and I have also asked their webmaster to make it more prominent there than just the bulletin boards. 


GOOD LUCK!


----------



## eco2man (Apr 25, 2004)

I sent out a London MMM info email and appeal to many Yahoo Groups, etc.. I already got one reply saying that they sent some money in to London MMM.

Here is an archived copy of the appeal in an MMM Yahoo Group:

Flagship London MMM needs money. HELP!! Million Marijuana March.
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/cannabisaction/message/993


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 26, 2004)

*Good Luck Jayday Appeal And Organisers!!!*

<I've just posted this on the General Forum thread, which like this one is now bumped> :

I'm sure (in fact I know) that TeeJay, Shane and others have been franticly busy today, attempting to pull everything together.

I can only offer them support and crossed fingers on behalf of many many Urban regulars.

Good luck folks!!  I know the key deadline is sometime today ...

When you have a minute, let us know the latest 

  <unsure emoticons>


----------



## TeeJay (Apr 26, 2004)

Thanks everyone for all the help. Lambeth have actually given us a slight extension - until tomorrow morning - but I think the decision about going ahead is going to be taken tonight by the actual event organisers (ie not including me) since they need to be happy that they will be able cover all the costs from expected incomes etc after the 12k is paid out to LBL tomorrow. I will let everyone know as soon as I find out the decision - hopefully sometime later tonight...


----------



## shaneC (Apr 27, 2004)

*Roll Up Roll Up Cannabis March and Festival is GO*

As of monday night we reckon we are within reach of the £5,300 we need to make the books balence and put on the festival and pay the contractors.  

We are probably around  £600 short with another £2,300 estimated in future benefits stalls, tea & flapjack stalls (see u at US Embassy thurs 6pm ish & mayday traf sq),  but if the momentum keeps up then we reckon we should get the remainder in the next two weeks. 

What we still do need is the deposit for use of Brockwell Park, which our exulted reps in Lambuff Council have set at £5,000.  So far we have £2,800...... ta to the poeple who have emptied their deposit a/c to loan the festival money for the deposit.  Which comes back.  

Many thanks to people who have donated online via www.thecannabisfestival.co.uk.  So far around £520 in online donations.  A big nod also to people who are spreading the message on other web forums.   Hopefully it may make up for a sparse publicity budget. Will be interesting to see how many people turn up at noon Kennington Park. 

It would be good to carry the momentum of local support into a more formal something for the future...  

Wierd wants & needs: two flatbed trucks to convey a sound system & drumming roup through Brixton on the march.

Roll up, roll up CANNABIS MARCH AND FESTIVAL IS GO


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 27, 2004)

Wicked!!! Well done ...


----------



## Streathamite (Apr 27, 2004)

well done, chaps!   


and I still wanna kill LBL for all the shenanigans they've caused, for no earthly good reason


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 27, 2004)

The Relegalise Cannabis March and Free Festival (8th May) is only a week on Saturday, and it needs your support ....

Those interested in the ins and outs of recent Lambeth Council shenanigans concerning the depoisit and fees (described with admmirable clarity by TeeJay earlier in this threade) may also be interested in what another Urbanite, Free Spirit, has to say about a  similar(ish) event he is heavily involved in organising in the North.

This (and some other stuff) was posted by him in the Cannabis Festival Emergency Appeal thread on the main forum :




			
				free spirit said:
			
		

> i'm heavily involved in running newcastle community green festival, a 2day annual community environment, music and art festival for 8-10,000, with 4 stages of music + cinema, kids stuff, arts and crafts, stalls, etc. Basically sounds pretty similar to the cannabis fest in size etc. All on the same weekend as the cannabis festival.
> 
> We currently pay £450 license fee, £500 police, no park hire, no deposit etc. and funding of roughly £15-16000 from the council parks, arts and local area subcommittees, + additional funding form all over the place up to about £30k total per year.
> 
> ...



A few discrepancies between the Lambeth approach and the Newcastle approach, no?


----------



## eco2man (Apr 28, 2004)

Thanks for the info about the other thread. Here is a direct link to it:
http://urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=73927

I hope this London MMM thread and the one linked above are archived permanently here at urban75, because lots of people worldwide could use this info, how-to, and history. 

Global Cannabis March. 162 MMM cities worldwide for MMM 2004 in May. And counting.... Detailed MMM 2004 city info is mirrored on these 2 webpages:
http://www.geocities.com/tents444/mmm2004.htm and
http://www.corporatism.netfirms.com/mmm2004.htm


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 30, 2004)

Resuming the more local theme ...

Who's up for meeting in the Park (or beforehand, on the march) next Saturday then?

Only a week to go. The weather had better improve!


----------



## Streathamite (Apr 30, 2004)

if Shane, teeJay or any of the organising team are reading this;
one thing I would recommend VERY strongly is getting up & circulating a petition criticising LBL's antics over the past few weeks, and demanding that the councils charges for using Brockwell Park for future JayDays are those given to 'noncommercial' events & organisations. They've acted like complete cocks over this, and I am certain that public opinion is pro-Jayday. time to bring the weight of popular support to bear. 
William - for the meet up, can I suggest a thread in both Brixton & Community forums?


----------



## TeeJay (Apr 30, 2004)

Red Jezza said:
			
		

> if Shane, teeJay or any of the organising team are reading this;
> one thing I would recommend VERY strongly is getting up & circulating a petition criticising LBL's antics over the past few weeks, and demanding that the councils charges for using Brockwell Park for future JayDays are those given to 'noncommercial' events & organisations. They've acted like complete cocks over this, and I am certain that public opinion is pro-Jayday. time to bring the weight of popular support to bear.
> William - for the meet up, can I suggest a thread in both Brixton & Community forums?


A very good suggestion. The only thing about doing this right now is that everyone is busy doing stuff for the big day. I think that any campaigning etc about that particular issue will have to wait for after the event.

The other point is that this is just one instance of Lambeth Council screwing over local community groups or people who are trying to do something postive locally. It might well be worth making common cause with all the local groups and organisations who are getting locked out of local facilities by the Borough's biggest landlord or who are receiving no help or supoort for the work they do for local people. There are some bigger issues involved around the way the council runs Lambeth - not least things like housing, social services, education transport and so forth.

(It is also worth pointing out that the London elections are coming up on June 10th and people might want to question whether they really want to vote for the same people and parties which have been behaving like this.)


----------



## lang rabbie (Apr 30, 2004)

At the risk of getting shot down in flames....

I don't think that Lambeth's approach is very different from Newcastle's when it comes to genuine community events, arts festivals with a strong commitment to involving local kids, and various music gigs with an anti-racism/ anti-domestic violence agenda.   There is a long history of charges being waived under administrations of all political colours, despite the "challenging" income-generation targets set for the parks service over the years.

It would almost certainly be illegal for Lambeth to give direct cash support to an event that campaigns to change national legislation.   

The JayDay team have raised a good question on the level at which charges for non-commerical political/campaigning events directed at a London-wide audience should be set?   In my view the fee they are being asked to pay is too high, but I think that there is more mileage in a broader argument that the 50% differential between commercial music events and the assumed charge for local community events doesn't make any sense.    Has any community event actually been invoiced at this 50% rate?   If they have, I suspect the budgets of quite a few events planned for this summer will fall apart!

There is a separate problem that, unlike other town centres in Lambeth, in recent years Brixton has had no general summer Festival distinct from the Country Show.   There are a series of smaller scale festivals and events in other open spaces organised by volunteer effort.




			
				Red Jezza said:
			
		

> I am certain that public opinion is pro-Jayday.



After the fiasco of last year's JayDay "shit in the bushes" situation due to the non-arrival of portable loos, don't be so sure.   The organising team need to show that they can deliver a really well-run event this year to live that down (and hopefully see the deposit return to a more normal level.)

To do that they'll need a hell of a lot of volunteer support.   Good luck!


----------



## Streathamite (Apr 30, 2004)

fair enough LR - that was a right cockup on the bogs front last year-but there had been several successful Jaydays before that, and that was the only real part that went titsup. what's more important is that no-one I know can ever recall any trouble or flare-ups OF ANY KIND at Jayday - only happy crowds of people. All told, I'd strongly suggest that the festival by now has accumulated sufficient goodwill - enough to outweigh the annoyance factor of a few non-arrived lavs and enough to be brought to bear.


----------



## lang rabbie (Apr 30, 2004)

I get the impression that FoBP have recognised that, hence withdrawal of their objection.   Unfortunately one-off problems tend to stick in Council officer's minds more than umpteen years of successful problem-free events.


----------



## Mr BC (Apr 30, 2004)

lang rabbie said:
			
		

> I get the impression that FoBP have recognised that, hence withdrawal of their objection.   Unfortunately one-off problems tend to stick in Council officer's minds more than umpteen years of successful problem-free events.



I honestly don't think the reason the fees were increased has anything to do with the toilet problems.

The fees were supposed to go up last year and the cannabis festival organisers were told this.  They were also told they were paying a lower fee last year as a one-off, so that the fee increase could be phased and not therefore prevent the event going ahead.  They have therefore known for a whole year that they faced a fee increase this year.

I also continue to believe, that a national, political event like this should not be treated in the same way as local community events. 

It is worth noting that not a single councillor objected to the event getting a licence.  It would have been perfectly possible for them to do so, given the toilet fiasco last year.  I think that illustrates that there is no 'political agenda' to stop the event. On the contrary, many local politicians support the campaign's objectives. The fee thing is about money.  Ain't it ever so in Lambeth?


----------



## lang rabbie (Apr 30, 2004)

Mr BC
I was assuming that only the deposit had been raised for that reason, which would have seemed the logical way to deal with it.    

The point I was trying to make, however inarticulately is that the charging regime doesn't make sense - are the various Friends of Parks groups really going to be charged 50% of commercial rate for the Vauxhall Festival, Myatts Field Fair and Streatham Common Dog Show ?


----------



## TeeJay (Apr 30, 2004)

Mr BC said:
			
		

> I honestly don't think the reason the fees were increased has anything to do with the toilet problems.


It was mentioned as one of the reasons that the deposit was so high - ie £5,000 instead of £1,350.


> The fees were supposed to go up last year and the cannabis festival organisers were told this.  They were also told they were paying a lower fee last year as a one-off, so that the fee increase could be phased and not therefore prevent the event going ahead.  They have therefore known for a whole year that they faced a fee increase this year.


Can you explain why the fees were "meant" to go up last year? Just because the council "tells" people they are going to mug them, doesn't mean that it makes it any less wrong. The fact is that there are so many ways in which the council can try and screw up the festival - refusing licenses, prosecuting the event year after year, people trying to character assassinate the organisers (even grass them up on trumped up "dealing" charges) - that if the organisers packed up and went home every time the council or other 'bigshots' told them that "next year we are going to do X or Y to you" then they would have given up a long time ago. Your attempt at trying to look reasonable by supposedly flagging up the mugging way in advance is disingenous. I will leave the details to the organisers to set straight, if they have time to come and read this.



> I also continue to believe, that a national, political event like this should not be treated in the same way as local community events.


Are you saying that the festival isn't providing free entertainment for local people? Are you saying that its value for local people is totally negated because of its overall association with cannabis? You are trying to make out that this is some kind of boring political rally which is imposing itself on a Lambeth Park. The fact that there is a hell of a lot of local involvement, and that *any* decent event - including things such as the Lambeth County Show etc - will draw people from across London, the region, the UK and even internationally. I feel some consistency would be in order.    



> It is worth noting that not a single councillor objected to the event getting a licence.  It would have been perfectly possible for them to do so, given the toilet fiasco last year.  I think that illustrates that there is no 'political agenda' to stop the event. On the contrary, many local politicians support the campaign's objectives. The fee thing is about money.  Ain't it ever so in Lambeth?


Were you at the licensing meeting? Did you see the several rounds of voting where people chooped and changed their votes? Do you know what the contribution of Councillor Grigg (the only Conservative councillot there) was during the course of the evening? Lets just say that she was veru hostile and only abstained at the very last vote - a vote that she changed from "Oppose" becuase she wanted to avoid the embaressment of being the only person in the room who was against the event, and so that she didn't have to vote against the chair, who had just chaged her "Oppose" to "Abstain" - presumably because the Conservatives have agreed to be loyal to the Con/LibDem administration? 

Just because there was a rebellion on the licensing committe and Clare Whelan and her Parks department were over-ruled, doesn't mean that there was not an attempt to vote against the license. Just because it failed you are now claiming that there was no attempt in the first place? Come on - be honest about the facts: there are a siginificant minority of councillors and theior local supporters who have always hated the cannabis festival and are constantly looking for ways of getting it stopped. They represent a much larger consitituency in the UK and the thinking is very similar to the way that the Daily Mail et al had it in for Paddick.

Anyway, all this is just about the typical back-stabbing and bitching behaviour of politics. Lets be more specific. Has anyone else here (like me) seen the new startegy and policy on parks which includes the new pricing schedule and the criteria for groups trying to claim the 50% "community rate"?

Would anyone like to link to this document so that everyone can read it and make up their mind about it?

Who draughted it? How were the prices arrived at? How many events (based on those held last year for example) will be affected? Is it true that parts of it were draughted in direct response to the cannabis festival? Isn't it true that uit actually gives a massive amount of discretion to Lambeth council (althoug unfortunately with the new-fangled 'executive cabinet' sytem elected coucillors get only to 'scrutinise' decisions retrospectively and seemingly once in a blue moon - they are never actually allowed to vote on them. 

I am not against charging commercial rates to profit-making companies, involving parks user groups to have a large say in how events are put on and how large they should be, I am not against holding organisations to account for *all* damage they cause in Lambeth Parks and so forth. But it is interesting to look at the actual teack record of the council in having one rule for the large corporate events and another for 'undesirables' who aren't able to shell out large amounts of money and which are 'dangerous' for the coucnil because they are community based or maybe are deemed to have a 'political' aspect. The council likes to claim the monopoly on representing the community and being political - despite more often being very cosy with the big corporate people and shit scared of 'the community'.


----------



## TeeJay (Apr 30, 2004)

lang rabbie said:
			
		

> At the risk of getting shot down in flames....
> 
> I don't think that Lambeth's approach is very different from Newcastle's when it comes to genuine community events, arts festivals with a strong commitment to involving local kids, and various music gigs with an anti-racism/ anti-domestic violence agenda.   There is a long history of charges being waived under administrations of all political colours, despite the "challenging" income-generation targets set for the parks service over the years.


I'd like to hear of some examples - especially about some of the larger events. 

Has this changed over time ie:
1990 - 1994 Labour
1994 - 1998 Labour/LibDem (is this right btw?)
1998 - 2002 Labour 
May 2002 - now LibDem/Conservative



> It would almost certainly be illegal for Lambeth to give direct cash support to an event that campaigns to change national legislation.


Noone has ever asked them for direct cash support.   



> There is a separate problem that, unlike other town centres in Lambeth, in recent years Brixton has had no general summer Festival distinct from the Country Show.   There are a series of smaller scale festivals and events in other open spaces organised by volunteer effort.


It is pretty pathetic when you compare the Notting Hill carnival with what the council allows or supports in Lambeth. I have seen directly how the council (and local businesses and sponsors for that matter) make supportive noises but totally fail to come thorugh with any meaningful support when it actually matters - I am thinking here of a previous attempt to start a "Brixton Carnival". 



> After the fiasco of last year's JayDay "shit in the bushes" situation due to the non-arrival of portable loos, don't be so sure.   The organising team need to show that they can deliver a really well-run event this year to live that down (and hopefully see the deposit return to a more normal level.)


Its worth ntoing that legal action was started on this issue but after it had been looked into the charges and complaints about that issue were dropped. Regardless of what anyone has said, I'd ask you to go and check to see if any of the deposit was lost last year, or if the festival organisers were found legally liable for the fuck-up that happened. I'd like to say more but will leave it to someone who knows the details - as I was not involved with last years event at all and don't want to get my facts wrong. It is my understanding however that the porganisers were absolved of blame for the screw up and legal action is still being taken against the person/company who took the money for the toilets but didn't turn up on the day.  

I'd just like to add that there has been at least *one* Lambeth LibDem councillor who has supported the festival in defiance of the 'party line' - ie Councillor Jane Fewtrell who backed the Labour amendment on the licensing committee to allow the full amount of hours requested, so that the event can maximise the money made from selling beer at the bars - an important factor as to whether the event will break even.

lang rabbie - am I right in thinking that you are a local Lib Dem member or supporter? I am sorry if you feel that Peter Truesdale has come in for unfair blame, but the situation has in no way been helped by the complete lack of public statements about this issue by the Lib Dems. While the 7 Conservative councillors can't really be expected to lay into one of their own number (ie Clare Whelan) and the Labour Party can be expected to give the council a good kicking whenever they can (but should be careful unless people look too closely at their own historical record in Lambeth) - the Lib Dems seem to have gone completely quiet on this issue.

While this might be a seemingly "intelligent" tactic, I'd have much preferred if at least a few of them had had the guts and honest to simply stand up and publically defend the schedule of charges for Lambeth Parks, and at least try and pretend that they supported the festival. They could even have counter-attacked the Labour record and pointed out the times they had suppoirted the festival in the face of Labour obstruction and reluctance when they were in power (if this was true - I expect some of the the people who have been involved in the event every year could set the record straight - for example the first prosecution by Lambeth was back in 1999 "for dancing on MayDay" - and that was during the Labour tenure.

What I am less than impressed with however is the way that noone from the Lambeth LibDems has even answered any of our emails asking for their views, and apart from the Lib Dems on the licensing committee, none has seemed to have the guts to speak out of turn. Surely they are not all so scared of being a bit naughty? 

Why is it that Lambeth Lib Dems and Labour can't actually cooperate? Is it all a big macho game or a way for people to kick-start their political careers? What will happen when Lambeth gets its first Green councillors? Which way is ewveryuone going to start swinging then?


----------



## TeeJay (Apr 30, 2004)

lang rabbie said:
			
		

> Mr BC
> I was assuming that only the deposit had been raised for that reason, which would have seemed the logical way to deal with it.
> 
> The point I was trying to make, however inarticulately is that the charging regime doesn't make sense - are the various Friends of Parks groups really going to be charged 50% of commercial rate for the Vauxhall Festival, Myatts Field Fair and Streatham Common Dog Show ?


The current policy document allows Clare Whelan to exercise 'discretion' about fees. Basically any event that is being put on by a group that is important to a local Lib Dem or Conservative councillor will get charged whatever is deemed "fair". Anyone they don't like for whatever reason will be priced out. There is a whole list of criteria, any one of which can  be used as an excuse to disqualify an event from getting the 50% rate, but at the same time there is a carte blanche 'get out clause' allowing Clare Whelan and the exective cabinet to vary fees downwards whenever they want.

If these documents (that I have seen - although they were stamped "for consultation"   ) were publically available - in fact if they were even available to councillors - then we wouldn't be sitting here having this stupid conversation.


----------



## lang rabbie (Apr 30, 2004)

I've no idea what the dynamics in the joint administration are on this issue.  It would be understandable if they have a policy of collective responsibility i.e. don't criticise the decisions of a fellow executive member in public. 

I heard rumours that the overall state of the parks department (e.g. the recent redundancies when TeamLambeth were replace by Cleanaway) came as a bit of a shock to councillors in both the Lib Dem and Tory groups and that Clare Whelan got a mauling from the backbenchers.

Several key posts in the parks department are unfilled (and one guy has spent most of the last year serving with the TA in Iraq).   I get the impression of a service approaching breaking point despite best efforts.

I assume this is why the events policy never got agreed - having been circulated in draft a year ago.

Report on Strategy for events within Parks & Greenspaces - Exec 10/03/03 

Draft strategy for events within Lambeth's parks and green spaces  

Guidance notes on Lambeth's events strategy


----------



## TeeJay (Apr 30, 2004)

lang rabbie said:
			
		

> I assume this is why the events policy never got agreed - having been circulated in draft a year ago.
> 
> Report on Strategy for events within Parks & Greenspaces - Exec 10/03/03
> 
> ...


I have had a look at these documents and the version I have seen is basically the same, but with a fair number of details changed - such as the fees and the criteria for community events.

If this has never been approved, then why is the version I have seen dated February 2004, and is being refrred to by the Parks Department as their "official policy"?

Why is the version I have seen, and which is currently in operation - I believe that the Cannabis Festival is the first event to be charged under the new schedule and judged under the new criteria - not freely available to councillors and the public?


----------



## Streathamite (Apr 30, 2004)

lang rabbie said:
			
		

> Unfortunately one-off problems tend to stick in Council officer's minds more than umpteen years of successful problem-free events.


due to the lack of any other idea competing for space in their heads?


----------



## TeeJay (Apr 30, 2004)

lang rabbie said:
			
		

> I get the impression that FoBP have recognised that, hence withdrawal of their objection.   Unfortunately one-off problems tend to stick in Council officer's minds more than umpteen years of successful problem-free events.


To me that is the sound of a Lib Dem passing the buck.  

Council officers are not allowed to make public statements, so it is very easy for councillors to blame the officers for any unpopular decisions the  councillors have made. There is no getting around it. I have read the rules - elected coucillors have the power to set the fees and they have the power to publish the risk-assessment which was supposedly done to calculate the £5,000 deposit. They have the power to publish the cost breakdown of how much the council will actually be contributing to this event, which is supposedly part of the basis for setting the £1,40 per head. They also have the power to make available council policies documents so that everyone knows where they stand - por conversely, not bother publishing them. To me it is nonsense for Clare Whelan and the Lib Dem cabinet to hide behind low level council officers who neither are allowed to speak out of turn nor have the decision-making powers to set parks policies, criteria or fees.

While I have said a lot of bad things about "Lambeth Parks" I am not blaming this anything on the behaviour or decisions made by any officers, since they have no choice but to operate strictly within a framework laid down by the elected councillors. The buck stops with Clare Whelan and the Lib Dem cabinet.  The only exception to this is departments with statutory powers - such as Regulatory Services etc - and surprise surpise - *they* have recognised us as a not-for-profit organisation for the purposes of setting the fees for the entertainment license!


----------



## lang rabbie (Apr 30, 2004)

TeeJay said:
			
		

> To me that is the sound of a Lib Dem passing the buck.



Err... no.   Speaking as a sometime organiser of public protests against road building, and more recently community festival events in other spaces, who knows how risk averse some Lambeth officers can be.


----------



## lang rabbie (Apr 30, 2004)

Using my trusty search tools, I have found the minutes of the Executive  meeting from last March (they don't come up in the list of documents mentioning Events Strategy     )



> *A STRATEGY FOR EVENTS WITHIN PARKS AND GREENSPACES*
> (Agenda Item 4 Report 355/02-03)
> (Key Decision – call-in period ends at 5 p.m. on Friday 21st March
> 2003)
> ...


----------



## TeeJay (Apr 30, 2004)

lang rabbie said:
			
		

> Err... no.   Speaking as a sometime organiser of public protests against road building, and more recently community festival events in other spaces, who knows how risk averse some Lambeth officers can be.


OK sorry about that. But the point I am making about not balming the officers too much still stands. I often get the impression that if it was up to the people who actually *work* for Lambeth, things would be run very differently. It is one thing being a "director" or "decision-maker" in the Town Hall and an entirely different thing being someone who actually works out in the Parks (for example) and has day-to-day contact and works closely with the event organisers and other people in the community. Its true that someone working in a Lambeth department does have their own interests and perspective on what will make their life easier, but generally almost all the people I have known personally are actually reasonable, intelligent, honest and fair - even when they are being ordered to do some really stupid things. Its true that there are sometimes arseholes brought in to "troubleshoot" things, and then there is the whole issue of the privatisation of whole areas of local government services, which brings in a whole new set of private sector managers, with their own culture, interests, bottom lines, business philosophies and management styles.


----------



## TeeJay (Apr 30, 2004)

lang rabbie said:
			
		

> Using my trusty search tools, I have found the minutes of the Executive  meeting from last March (they don't come up in the list of documents mentioning Events Strategy     )


Thanks for the details about the March 2003 executive meeting. What I am wondering though is when the 2004 document - ie the one they are using now - was agreed? And is it available on the Lambeth website? There have been a fair number of details changed in the February 2004 document, when compared to the earlier versions that are available and that you linked to - including the very issues we are discussing: criteria for community events and the discretionary powers of the council to vary fees, and the schedule of charges and deposits. It is interesting that mention is made of 'covering costs incurred' but also of 'using surplus funds for the parks'. It seems that on the one hand charges are meant to be 'at cost' while on the other the parks are seen as an asset to be rented out to gain the maximum amount of funds for Lambeth (and specifically the parks) as possible.

I know that Friends of Brockwell park, the Herne Hill Society and other groups will be very interested to know how much profit LBL are going to be making out of the Cannabis festival and it seems that there has been a promise made by Clare Whlean that these profits will be used to improve Lambeth Parks. I am sure she will be able to tell them how much of the £7,000 fees we paid on Tuesday they will be benefitting from. Festival goers and local people would also obviously appreciate it if she told everyone how much the council will be spending on providing services on 8th May.


----------



## lang rabbie (Apr 30, 2004)

Having diverted almost a page worth of thread, thought I should reinstate this at the top...






			
				William of Walworth said:
			
		

> Resuming the more local theme ...
> 
> Who's up for meeting in the Park (or beforehand, on the march) next Saturday then?
> 
> Only a week to go. The weather had better improve!


----------



## eco2man (May 3, 2004)

*Festival press releases.*

Is the festival on? Or just a march and a picnic? I can't tell from the website here:
http://www.thecannabisfestival.co.uk

It doesn't seem to have been updated in awhile. 

I see a "press release" here:
http://www.cannabisculture.com/articles/3417.html

but there is no date there saying when it was released. Is it the latest press release? I would like to have the latest one to spread widely. I will also archive it here:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mmmworld


----------



## TeeJay (May 3, 2004)

eco2man said:
			
		

> Is the festival on? Or just a march and a picnic? I can't tell from the website here:
> http://www.thecannabisfestival.co.uk
> 
> It doesn't seem to have been updated in awhile.


The festival *is* on. Sorry about the website - its maintained someone who just sticks up what he's requested to and I think that everyone else has been so busy they have kinda forgotten to update the front page since last weekend. I will get on the phone to them tomorrow and get it updated.


----------



## William of Walworth (May 4, 2004)

*I've read all this ....*

Keep on keeping on TeeJay!! 

Nice one on asking the tough questions 

Meanwhile, we'll all see as many people as possible next Saturday


----------



## TeeJay (May 4, 2004)

Like I said on the other thread - the website has now been upated and everything is ready to go. Hope to see everyone next Saturday 12 noon at Kennington Park for te march and 1pm onwards in Brockwell Park for the festival.


----------



## William of Walworth (May 4, 2004)

Here we Go!! 



> Latest News
> 
> Roll Up Roll Up - Cannabis march and festival is go
> 
> ...



From 
The Official Cannabis Festival Website


----------



## editor (May 4, 2004)

News just in:



> Greetings from a very wet Brixton,
> 
> We have had to POSTPONE the 6th Annual Cannabis March and Festival until
> Saturday 5th June 2004.
> ...


----------



## Onket (May 4, 2004)

So is that the same day as Strawberry Fair then?


----------



## chegrimandi (May 4, 2004)

oh dear thats a bit of a shitter.....


----------



## TeeJay (May 4, 2004)

Re. June 5th and Strawberry Faire: I've just got off the phone with Shane and he's asked me to say that due to the clash with Strawberry Faire on June 5th they are actually reconsidering the re-scheduled date. He is discussing it with people now and they will decide 'within the hour' ... so if people could hold back slightly from forewarding on the June 5th date until it has been confirmed, as it is possible that it will be shifted to the following week instead (especially since many of the Cannabis Festival traders and stalls are going to be at Cambridge on 5th). I (or ShaneC) will update this thread with the news as soon as a decision is reached.


----------



## Streathamite (May 4, 2004)

teeJay-it might be an idea to phone him again, and get him to update the website


----------



## Brixton Hatter (May 4, 2004)

very disapointing, but a fair enough decision. This actually happened once before, two or three years ago. The irony was that the original day was actually sunny and when the re-planned day came round, it poured down with rain!


----------



## DJWrongspeed (May 4, 2004)

The right decision, if anyone was on Dulwich rd last week you'll know the rain's been pretty mental of late.  Brockwell park does suffer from poor drainage and the last thing Jday needs to do is mess the park up.  More time to raise money and get stuff sorted ,   looking on the positive side.


----------



## TeeJay (May 4, 2004)

Red Jezza said:
			
		

> teeJay-it might be an idea to phone him again, and get him to update the website


Have done so (although to be fair Shane hates computers and it is someone in North London who is doing the website   )

www.thecannabisfestival.co.uk


----------



## William of Walworth (May 4, 2004)

This is really really disappointing, although after the gargantuan amount of rain we've had lately, not that surprising (I remember the postponement of JayDay 2001 ... it was put off to mid-June that year. Then it rained torrentially! 
 )

*Saturday 12th June* would be an ideal replacement 

Whoever came up with 5th June needs to ahem clear their heads a little bit 
-- as already stated this is Strawberry Fair date.

For these two rare free festivals to clash would be

*TRULY TRAGIC!!*  

People are so forgetful and disorganised about dates .... no offence to the JayDay organisers who have been working really hard to put on an excellent event, but 5 June??!!

Honestly ... !!! 

Reassurance that this is being sorted out please!


----------



## William of Walworth (May 4, 2004)

*5th June is all wrong on every level ...*




			
				TeeJay said:
			
		

> Re. June 5th and Strawberry Faire: I've just got off the phone with Shane and he's asked me to say that due to the clash with Strawberry Faire on June 5th they are actually reconsidering the re-scheduled date. He is discussing it with people now and they will decide 'within the hour' ... *so if people could hold back slightly from forewarding on the June 5th date until it has been confirmed*, as it is possible that it will be shifted to the following week instead (especially since many of the Cannabis Festival traders and stalls are going to be at Cambridge on 5th). I (or ShaneC) will update this thread with the news as soon as a decision is reached.



Please *do not* confirm that 5th June date!!!!! 

Who on earth came up with that stroke of genius?? 

<really really nervous>


----------



## han (May 4, 2004)

William of Walworth said:
			
		

> Whoever came up with 5th June needs to ahem clear their heads a little bit
> -- as already stated this is Strawberry Fair date.



God yes - what a very unfortunate (and rather un-thought-out) clash!!!

Ho well - better late than never, eh, and we HAVE been having downpours of biblical proportions recently....

Sat 3rd July would be a good date too perhaps? Not much going on in the festie calendar then....


----------



## William of Walworth (May 4, 2004)

Strawberry Fair clash idiocy aside (and they'd better be changing that!!), I'm actually fairly glad it's being postponed, the forecast for this coming Saturday (8th May) is pretty shit from what I can see so far ...

5th June would be unacceptable though ...


----------



## TeeJay (May 4, 2004)

Sorry, but the latest is that June 5th is going to have to be the date because apparently after that many of the crew are going to be doing other events and simply aren't available. Shane is sending out an email now, so I will post it as soon as it arrives.  I have also told him that people are a bit upset about the clash of dates and have asked him if he gets a bit of time, if he would come here and explain in more detail the reasons behind it and why the next week wasn't possible. 

(...and please don't shoot the messenger!  )


----------



## TeeJay (May 4, 2004)

> Saturday 5th June CONFIRMED as the NEW DATE for the 6th Re-Legalise
> Cannabis March & Festival
> 
> PLEASE PASS THIS ON.
> ...


_____________________


----------



## William of Walworth (May 4, 2004)

For fucks sake!!!!

Did the clash of dates not even occur to them? I know that some of the organising committee are involved in other festivals, and Strawberry Fair is written large on many peoples' festival calendar.

I am really pissed off now!!!   

Please, please, please can I urge and re-urge the JayDay orrganising committee to rethink this through properly.  Many JayDay loyalists will be very dismayed and disappointed, and will be undergoing a large conflict of interest about which one to go to. The same will be true, even more so, of stallholders, many of whom as you said will have pre-existing Strawberry Fair commitments.

You could not have picked a worse replacement date. I'm going to find it very hard to promote the new date amongst festival lovers on efestivals. Many of them while committed to the Legalise It cause, will be feeling much the same as me about this.

Cannot those crew who are genuinely unable to make the 12th (are they getting involved in Glastonbury so early??) be replaced? There'll be one or two Urbanites, including myself, very happy to help for a replacement date of June 12th.

I have so much respect for the JayDay organisers and for everything they do, but this is a pretty fundamental mistake in my opinion. In fact I'm finding it pretty hard to forgive their total lack of consideration of a really obvious, and particularly unsuitable, date clash!

People are so fucking disorganised about dates!!

Sort it out -- please.


----------



## William of Walworth (May 4, 2004)

Buzz sw9 said:
			
		

> So the Kingston green fair is 31st May (bank holiday Monday) The LCF is on the 5th June.



Correct on both accounts. For fucks sake, 5th June for Legalise Cannabis -- and they have to go and fucking pick the same sodding day as Strawberry Fair!

<fuming>


----------



## Streathamite (May 4, 2004)

Shane, mate-ffs try and find an alternative date-ANY alternative date. I know it's never easy, and I know your options are limited, but that's just about the worst date possible.


----------



## TeeJay (May 4, 2004)

William of Walworth said:
			
		

> Did the clash of dates not even occur to them?


I can assure you that they did understand that the date clashed. I was not involved in the decision, but Shane has told me on the phone that some really essential members of the crew simply could not do any weekend after June 5th because they are working to set up Glastonbury. I don't have a clue as to why it couldn't be done *before* June 5th. All I can do is suggest that you get in touch with Shane directly by telephone. If you don't have his number then contact me by PM. All I can do is apologise for this clash and say that now everyone is spoilt for choice. I am sure that everyone at the cannabis festival wishes Strawberry fair all the best and in no way wants to hurt it, but I suppose they were simpy faced with the choice of a clash or cancelling the Cannabis Festival outright, in which case the decision is understandable. Hopefully Shane will be able to get online in a bit and respond, although he is probably going to be on the phone constantly until late tonight to make sure all the crew, volunteers and contractors know that the dates been changed - otherwise people will be turning up by mistake on Saturday!


----------



## William of Walworth (May 4, 2004)

Saturday 22nd May, Saturday 27th May, Saturday 12th June, Saturday 19th June (a bit too close to Glasto perhaps?), Saturday 3rd July ...

Look at all those options! But they have to pick the no. one top ranking worst date possible ....


----------



## TeeJay (May 4, 2004)

William of Walworth said:
			
		

> Saturday 22nd May, Saturday 27th May, Saturday 12th June, Saturday 19th June (a bit too close to Glasto perhaps?), Saturday 3rd July ...
> 
> Look at all those options! But they have to pick the no. one top ranking worst date possible ....


I don't know about the other dates but 12th and 19th June are impossible as key members of the organising team and crew are involved in setting up for Glastonbury.

I'm sorry to anyone who is now faced with the dilemma of which one to go to, but please spare a thought for the crews and organisers who are having to reorganise their work schdules as well, and don't really have a choice about things they are already contracted to do.


----------



## William of Walworth (May 4, 2004)

Hi TeeJay

Yes, I can see that it's not easy for the organisers. And I do understand now why 12th and 19th June would not work ... 12th seemed to me at first a bit early to impinge on Glastonbury, but on reflection it's a huge city of 100,000 plus people, so will need a fair few weeks to set up.

But I still think this JayDay/Strawberry Fair clash is a mini-disaster.

It's probably too late, but here is the message I have just emailed Shane :



> Hello Shane
> 
> I understand from Urban 75 that the March and Festival has had to be postponed.
> 
> ...


----------



## shaneC (May 4, 2004)

Many apologies to people for whom the 5th June is a tricky date.  For various reasons - crew being unavailable for the 27th or the 12th we decided to go for the 5th June.  Surprisingly few catering stalls are booked for us and Strawberry Fair and by the 12th we start to lose crew to Pilton, so we decided to go for the 5th June.


----------



## Rollem (May 5, 2004)

bloody british weather, wrecking everyones diaries! 

looks like i am gonna have to miss j-day for the first time in gawd knows how long  strawberry fair for me on the 5th i think

still, hope all goes well and its a smashing day -sunshine vibe and smiles all round


----------



## LDR (May 5, 2004)

Rollem said:
			
		

> looks like i am gonna have to miss j-day for the first time in gawd knows how long  strawberry fair for me on the 5th i think




Same here.


----------



## aurora green (May 5, 2004)

Call me a terrible blasphema, but I've never really got Strawberry fair.. For me it's always a nightmare journey, either on the train, then really long walk through town, or the few times I've got a lift in a van, the impossible parking situation, always resulting in again, a bloody long walk.
You get there exhausted, and after a couple of hours its time to make the long journey home again.


----------



## Brixton Hatter (May 5, 2004)

To be fair, I know this change has had the unfortunate effect of spoiling the plans of William and others, but I think the potential audiences for the two festivals are quite different:

Strawberry Fair - festival goers all over southern England/midlands
Cannabis Festival - mostly (younger) Londoners


----------



## lang rabbie (May 5, 2004)

> 2. Objects and Values
> 
> 2.1 The object of the Fair shall be to hold a Fair, called Strawberry Fair, annually on Midsummer Common, Cambridge, on the first (1st) Saturday in June, *for the benefit of the local community, particularly the children. The Fair shall have free entry and entertainments, including music and theatre.*
> 
> ...


http://www.strawberry-fair.org.uk/
These laudable objectives being paid for by the beer/cider etc consumed by the festival goers from all over southern England/midlands


----------



## William of Walworth (May 5, 2004)

aurora green said:
			
		

> Call me a terrible blasphema, but I've never really got Strawberry fair.. For me it's always a nightmare journey, either on the train, then really long walk through town, or the few times I've got a lift in a van, the impossible parking situation, always resulting in again, a bloody long walk.
> You get there exhausted, and after a couple of hours its time to make the long journey home again.



You blasphema!!!!!  

I suppose it helps (for me) that I have a brother in Cambridge. For visitors for the day from London or from further, parking/transport can at times be something of a pain I'd agree ...

That said, LOADS of peeps from London make it up there for well over a couple of hours including (the last two or three years) large numbers of Urban-types.

And it's one of our very few surviving manifestations of free festival culture, which is why (whether you like SF or not) it's such a shame that they have to clash this year.


----------



## William of Walworth (May 5, 2004)

Brixton Hatter said:
			
		

> To be fair, I know this change has had the unfortunate effect of spoiling the plans of William and others, but I think the potential audiences for the two festivals are quite different:
> 
> Strawberry Fair - festival goers all over southern England/midlands
> Cannabis Festival - mostly (younger) Londoners



I think you're overdeterministic there Brixton Hatter.

I've been to 13 Strawberry Fairs (I think) and 4 JayDays. The demographic of both has overlapped hugely -- strict geography may mean there is _to an extent_ something of a different crowd _geographically_. But the overlap in people who are attracted to both is still huge -- lovers of free festie culture, alternative culture, counter culture. I have certainly seen planty of the exact same people at both, and I knpow of quite a few who will be disappointed that they have to choose. And as I said to Aurora, lots of Londoners *do* make the trip up to Cambridge, you should see the platforms at Kings Cross on the Saturday -- hippy and crustie central!  

But we'l be missing JayDay this year


----------



## Rollem (May 5, 2004)

William of Walworth said:
			
		

> I suppose it helps (for me) that I have a brother in Cambridge. For visitors for the day from London or from further, parking/transport can at times be something of a pain I'd agree ...


they lay on a free minibus service fom cambridge station to the common if thats any help to anyone...

agree with wililam, loads of people do both j-day *and * SF, with heaps travelling from london. shame that those people have to choose, but hey ho, thats the price of trusting the weather ! (would probably be _slightly _ more gutted if i wasnt on a sabaitcal from the mighty herb at the mo, admittedly  )


----------



## William of Walworth (May 5, 2004)

So are you giving both a miss then Rollem? 

Or being all respectable on us at Strawberry Fair??


----------



## Brixton Hatter (May 6, 2004)

William of Walworth said:
			
		

> I think you're overdeterministic there Brixton Hatter....The demographic of both has overlapped hugely ..


Fair enough. To be honest, I would have liked to go to SF too, but seeing as the CF is on my doorstep (literally) it's Brockwell Park for me. Shane and co obviously had no other choice, it's just really unfortunate.

One thing though - seeing as this is the second time the Jday has been rained off in the last few years, why cant it be held at a time when the weather is almost guaranteed to be better, ie july or august?


----------



## Streathamite (May 6, 2004)

this being bloody England, I doubt we could find ANY point in the year where sunshine is guaranteed


----------



## kea (May 6, 2004)

anyone fancy a diy-jayday meet-up this weekend instead? some beers and smoke and socialising?


----------



## Streathamite (May 6, 2004)

come on you lot-SOMEONE else must be up for it? useless unadventurous bunch...


----------



## Brixton Hatter (May 6, 2004)

kea said:
			
		

> anyone fancy a diy-jayday meet-up this weekend instead? some beers and smoke and socialising?


I'd love to kea but I think Mrs Hatter is going to take advantage of my sudden free day and <..starts living in hope..> whisk me off to somewhere exciting...


----------



## the B (May 7, 2004)

June 5th? Bit close to exams for many young Londoners I suspect.


----------



## William of Walworth (May 7, 2004)

Red Jezza said:
			
		

> this being bloody England, I doubt we could find ANY point in the year where sunshine is guaranteed



True, but it has happened occasionally in the past that you are in the early part of a week and the prospect right through the weekend is *known* (reliably) to be excellent .. (prays for this to happen in the first and last week of June this year!  )

Not tomorrow (Sat. May 8th) though. The forecast is ridiculously, farcically shit


----------



## Rollem (May 7, 2004)

William of Walworth said:
			
		

> So are you giving both a miss then Rollem?
> 
> Or being all respectable on us at Strawberry Fair??


the latter


----------



## Brixton Hatter (May 7, 2004)

the B said:
			
		

> June 5th? Bit close to exams for many young Londoners I suspect.


since when did piddly exams stop youngsters going for a proper good caning?? round here the kids smoke massive spliffs on their way *to* school!


----------



## lang rabbie (May 7, 2004)

Brixton Hatter said:
			
		

> since when did piddly exams stop youngsters going for a proper good caning?? round here the kids smoke massive spliffs on their way *to* school!


It's one of the advantages of living on a road leading to a pupil referral unit... just walk to work slightly downwind of the students.


----------



## TeeJay (May 7, 2004)

Brixton Hatter said:
			
		

> since when did piddly exams stop youngsters going for a proper good caning?


Someone's going to give you a jolly good caning! 

(BTW I would in no way advocate people getting stoned at school or young/underage people smoking etc - any more than I would advocate people getting drunk at school or young/underage people drinking. There are separate issues involved with getting rid of a criminal offence for adults and the health and age issues involved with cannabis, alcohol, tobacco and other drugs. This little speech is for any Daily Mail journalists et al who are reading this thread and looking for ways of shitting all over the festival and its organisers.)


----------



## johnny v (May 8, 2004)

from the guardian's diary this week

"Greetings from a very wet Brixton," emails Shane Collins, the Green party's official cannabis spokesman, breathlessly. "We have had to POSTPONE the 6th Annual Cannabis March and Festival until Saturday 5 June. This is due to a very waterlogged park (ducks by the hip hop stage). Please note that 'POSTPONED till Saturday 5 June' is the phrase (not cancelled)." Got it, Shane. Half an hour later, he's back. "Further greetings. We have just heard that Strawberry Fair in Cambridge is on the same day, so please hold on the new date until a further email." All together now: "Shane, what are you on?" 

got to larf eh


----------



## William of Walworth (May 8, 2004)

Matthew Norman up to his usual games there ...


----------



## MullahNasrudin (May 9, 2004)

*Except...*

...'twas Stephen Moss not Mr. Norman...

...incidentally, this is my first U75 post so hello to one and all!


----------



## the B (May 9, 2004)

Welcome to the boards


----------



## TeeJay (May 9, 2004)

johnny v said:
			
		

> from the guardian's diary this week
> 
> "Greetings from a very wet Brixton," emails Shane Collins, the Green party's official cannabis spokesman, breathlessly. "We have had to POSTPONE the 6th Annual Cannabis March and Festival until Saturday 5 June. This is due to a very waterlogged park (ducks by the hip hop stage). Please note that 'POSTPONED till Saturday 5 June' is the phrase (not cancelled)." Got it, Shane. Half an hour later, he's back. "Further greetings. We have just heard that Strawberry Fair in Cambridge is on the same day, so please hold on the new date until a further email." All together now: "Shane, what are you on?"
> 
> got to larf eh


As long as the Guardian confirm the correct date and maybe give it some publicity nearer the time they can say whatever they want in my book. It doesn't help when people like Time Out advertise the wrong date, or the SLP totally contradict the press release they have just been given regarding money and fees - however much energy put into publicity can be totally bollocks-up by a single journalist on a major mag or paper. They are either useless or malicious, but either way, without an advertising budget they have a lot of power to fuck things up for us (although hopefully most people are more clued up than to rely on the mainstream press for decent information about an event they are interested in).


----------



## shaneC (May 12, 2004)

*Guardian Diary 'joke'*

What the Guardian Diary did not refer to was the third press release which arrived 90 mins later confirming that Sat 5th June was indeed the confirmed date. 
Might have spoiled their running weed joke.
I've spoken to the letters editor who says they will publish a correction.

Word of mouth seems to be pretty powerful with the festi.  We only met around a  dozen people at Kennington Pk on May 8th who did not get the message.

If anyone would like flyers they are available on the website in pdf to download and print or mail me if you'd like some sent or delivered.

regards

Shane
www.thecannabisfestival.co.uk


----------



## Jackdaw (May 12, 2004)

As an aside.. I was cycling through Brockwell Park this morning and noticed Zippo's circus trucks had appeared on the bottom field (with the tree circle and lying down logs.) You're talking BIG trucks..  which I found a little odd.

They'd ripped up the ground quite a bit.


----------



## Brixton Hatter (May 12, 2004)

There is an axle weight limit in the park - I think it's 3 tons but it might be 5. When they held those stupid events over the queen's jubilee a few years ago, the organisers broke the axle weight limits and ended up bursting load of pipes underneath the ground. Idiots    Hope the same thing aint happening again.


----------



## Streathamite (May 12, 2004)

ShaneC, check yer emails mate


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Jun 4, 2004)

It's tomorrow!

Is there a meet up?

I expect you'll all tell me to look on the community forum now....


----------



## Streathamite (Jun 7, 2004)

that march went really, really well. chuffed by how many marched


----------



## liberty (Jun 7, 2004)

Wicked day  Photos to follow


----------



## IntoStella (Jun 7, 2004)

Red Jezza said:
			
		

> that march went really, really well. chuffed by how many marched


 I didn't . I watched it go by from my window.  Boy was it noisy.


----------



## Streathamite (Jun 7, 2004)

it was a really spiffing day, you shoulda turned up, IS.
well done to Shane-amazing we got there after all this years shenanigans!


----------



## IntoStella (Jun 7, 2004)

Red Jezza said:
			
		

> it was a really spiffing day, you shoulda turned up, IS.


 I DID, jezza. I just didn't go on the march.


----------



## liberty (Jun 7, 2004)

Red Jezza said:
			
		

> it was a really spiffing day, you shoulda turned up, IS.
> well done to Shane-amazing we got there after all this years shenanigans!



I like the way you approached the first dealer you saw panting like a puppy


----------



## liberty (Jun 7, 2004)

Some photos to follow soon


----------



## editor (Jun 7, 2004)

My pics are here: www.urban75.org/photos/protest/jayday.html


----------



## Dubversion (Jun 7, 2004)

liberty said:
			
		

> I like the way you approached the first dealer you saw panting like a puppy



i'd forgotten about that. quality moment


----------



## Streathamite (Jun 8, 2004)

liberty said:
			
		

> I like the way you approached the first dealer you saw panting like a puppy


well.....why waste time?


----------



## William of Walworth (Jun 8, 2004)

*Cheers Mr Editor!*

Nice pictures!  

Looking forward to your Glasto ones as well


----------



## lang rabbie (Dec 23, 2004)

*Make of this what you will...*

From the minutes of December's full Lambeth Council meeting



> Question 2. By: Councillor Peter O'Connell (05.11.04)
> To: Executive Member for Environment – Councillor Clare Whelan
> 
> *Cannabis Festival 2005*
> ...


----------



## Gramsci (Dec 23, 2004)

Interesting.I cant tell however whether the question is meant to see if the Administration is "soft" on drugs.As in a reent bye election up North the Labour party were attacking the LibDems for being soft on "Law and Order".

  From what i gather the Labour Group tacitly support the Cannabis Festival.

  Curious to now what actually goes on in Lambeth Group on issues like this.As in some ways the ones i meet are fairly liberal in the attitudes.

   Also the Lambeth LibDems have despite LD nationally supported ASBOs(though I beleive the LD nationally are changing their line on ASBOs).The Lambeth LDs seem to have been careful to make sure they are seen as hard on "Law and Order" as New Labour would be.


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Dec 23, 2004)

Gramsci said:
			
		

> Curious to now what actually goes on in Lambeth Group on issues like this. As in some ways the ones i meet are fairly liberal in the attitudes.


Are they in public, though, or only when talking to you?


----------



## lang rabbie (Dec 23, 2004)

I think Cllr O'Connell was just stirring - this administration is an odd alliance with differences between small 'c' conservative and small 'l' liberal attitudes to drugs (and other social attitudes) cutting across the Lib Dem/Tory party divide.

[For Gramsci's delectation, follow up on another thread, I think - Kennedy's speech on ASBO plus]


----------



## William of Walworth (Dec 23, 2004)

Trying hard to work out whether the above really will make the Festival less likely to happen, but it doesn't look too good does it? Hoping a few people can offer informed speculation about whether we'll get a  Festival in 2005 or not ....


----------



## Bob (Dec 24, 2004)

William of Walworth said:
			
		

> Trying hard to work out whether the above really will make the Festival less likely to happen, but it doesn't look too good does it? Hoping a few people can offer informed speculation about whether we'll get a  Festival in 2005 or not ....



I would imagine less likely - if Labour are going to accuse the council of being 'soft on drugs' then there's not much political cover for them... incidentally the quote from the Lib Dems on legalising 'some hard drugs' is entirely made up - Cllr O'Connell appears to be quoting the News of the World.   The News of the World appear to have made up the quote (my best guess is that they have paraphrased something less harmful).


----------



## Gramsci (Dec 24, 2004)

Justin said:
			
		

> Are they in public, though, or only when talking to you?



  The impression i get when they talk to me


----------



## Gramsci (Dec 24, 2004)

lang rabbie said:
			
		

> I think Cllr O'Connell was just stirring - this administration is an odd alliance with differences between small 'c' conservative and small 'l' liberal attitudes to drugs (and other social attitudes) cutting across the Lib Dem/Tory party divide.
> 
> [For Gramsci's delectation, follow up on another thread, I think - Kennedy's speech on ASBO plus]



  The Lib/Dems seem to be allowing themselves to be pushed to the right by New Labour.Also the "Orange Book" looks like some in the LD want to move them from "nanny state liberalism" to "tough Liberalism".Most of the marginal seats that the LD are targetting are held by Tories.So it makes sense tactically when as in Lambeth the Labour party are attacking their seeming "soft" approach on crime and drugs.

  See here on Orange Book:

http://www.socialistparty.org.uk/2004/364/index.html?id=pp4.htm


----------



## TeeJay (Dec 26, 2004)

William of Walworth said:
			
		

> Trying hard to work out whether the above really will make the Festival less likely to happen, but it doesn't look too good does it? Hoping a few people can offer informed speculation about whether we'll get a  Festival in 2005 or not ....


To be honest I think this is just party political shit-stirring and won't really have an impact on next year's festival. After all there was a significant police presence at last year's festival as well as the hired security and the march stewards. They all had different roles. I haven't seen the official police report on the event, but this will cut far more ice than this kind of point-scoring political knock-about in the chamber. After all, is the cllr claiming that the police or emergency services had any serious reservations about how the events was run? Did the parks, licensing and health and safety officers have any complaints? How do the vast majority of local residents and other parks user groups feel the event went from their perspective? I would hope - and as far as I know - these are all positive. I think the point the cllr was trying to make was that the Lib Dems and the Conservatives tend to have different points of view about drugs etc. I'd hope that all parties would be honest enough to admit that the festival was well run by any criteria or standard, that there was no trouble (and remember that thousands of people passed through the park that day), there was no damage to the park, the license conditions were all furfilled and all money was paid up front and in full. Lambeth council made a net financial gain from the event, whcih was funded by the voluntary efforts of all those campaigning for sane drug laws. Hopefully this year they will support the event and treat it like a proper, free, not-for-profit event that benefits the community and local economy and actually achieves something positive for the people.

However I am not holding my breath, since it seems that cllrs have more fun playing their games than trying to actually cooperate and agree on anything.


----------



## William of Walworth (Dec 26, 2004)

I really hope TeeJay's right .... 

And that we don't have a wet April


----------



## TeeJay (Dec 26, 2004)

The biggest problem will be getting quoted an outrageous sum of money for using Brockwell Park. It seems you can make a total mess of the place - as long as you have lots of money to throw at the council (or you *are* the council).


----------



## Streathamite (Dec 28, 2004)

TeeJay said:
			
		

> To be honest I think this is just party political shit-stirring and won't really have an impact on next year's festival. After all there was a significant police presence at last year's festival as well as the hired security and the march stewards. They all had different roles. I haven't seen the official police report on the event, but this will cut far more ice than this kind of point-scoring political knock-about in the chamber. After all, is the cllr claiming that the police or emergency services had any serious reservations about how the events was run? Did the parks, licensing and health and safety officers have any complaints? How do the vast majority of local residents and other parks user groups feel the event went from their perspective? I would hope - and as far as I know - these are all positive. I think the point the cllr was trying to make was that the Lib Dems and the Conservatives tend to have different points of view about drugs etc. I'd hope that all parties would be honest enough to admit that the festival was well run by any criteria or standard, that there was no trouble (and remember that thousands of people passed through the park that day), there was no damage to the park, the license conditions were all furfilled and all money was paid up front and in full. Lambeth council made a net financial gain from the event, whcih was funded by the voluntary efforts of all those campaigning for sane drug laws. Hopefully this year they will support the event and treat it like a proper, free, not-for-profit event that benefits the community and local economy and actually achieves something positive for the people.
> 
> However I am not holding my breath, since it seems that cllrs have more fun playing their games than trying to actually cooperate and agree on anything.


this is probably right; strikes me as just more pre-election jockeying by the various parties (espesh when, if you're the lib dems, you tend to take a panoramic, scene-shifting approach anyway!)


----------

