Lewisham Round Up

  1. Great turnout for meeting to set up new Ladywell community group

    Sue says it’s all going swimmingly.

  2. Two innovation powerhouses

    Matthew Taylor says nice things about Ruth Silver.

  3. No beer fest in Catford

    Let’s hope it’s only a temporary set back.


    Brockley Nick says call in the council!

  5. Brockley Fun Run 2008

    Howard says anyone can do it.

  6. Official Re-Opening of Forest Hill School

    There’s a nice video showing us what the new place looks like.

  7. Why I Want Rid Of Council Tax

    SNP point of view on Council Tax in Lewisham, not entirely what you’d expect.

  8. Lewisham is Seeing Spots

    The Londonist says we’ve had 19 cases of measles in January.

  9. Democracy in Sydenham

    Tim’s words are music to my ears, and should make Chris Best’s turn red!

  10. Appeal from Lewisham Teachers

    There’s going to be a strike

  11. Become a Recycling Champion – come on Ladywell!

    Sue the cheerleader

  12. The Long Blondes at the Amersham Arms

    The Inspector asks did we close the East London Line for this?

  13. Walking New Cross (1): Lausanne Road, Dennetts Road and the Somerville Estate

    Transpontine finds that every journey begins with a first step

  14. Fancy That II

    Ross says apples = pears

  15. Morris Activity – Hibernation Period Nearly Over

    Good news for all who like to see sticks struck and hankies fluttered

  16. Shopping and fetishes

    Tom from Going Local on the Tesco experience

  17. Support request for the Ward’s Safer Neighbourhood Team and Ward Panel

    Paul B argues for more funding

  18. The Excalibur Estate, London

    Nothing To See Here takes the view that the estate should be saved


About Andrew Brown

I live in Lewisham, South East London, and spent 9 years as a Labour councillor in the borough between 1997 and 2006.
This entry was posted in Lewisham and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to Lewisham Round Up

  1. ross says:

    apples = pears

    typical new labour hack response

    i.e. ‘you simply don’t understand how things work, best leave it to the experts like us (so we can continue to pump public money into private hands whilst turning a blind eye to areas that are in dire need of public investment)’

  2. Andrew Brown says:

    I did have an elegant and compelling response to this prepared, but my son ate my homework (closed the browser before I pressed “submit”), so I’ll just post the links and you can make of them what you will:

    Local Government Act 2000 puts a duty for wellbeing on local authorities

    JRF paper which says, “At the time of the study’s survey, 30 per cent of vulnerable households in ‘non-decent’ homes were living in privately rented accommodation.

    Rushey Green’s social deprivation

    Even more localised statistics

    Lewisham Council paper on Excalibur from last year.

  3. Reidski says:

    Re. No 12: I liked the Amersham Arms on its first reopening. But, after a couple of run-ins with the most miserable bar staff I’ve ever encountered in my considerable years of going to pubs, I decided that, unless a good band turn up there, I’ll never drink there again. The Hobgoblin, on the other hand, nicest bar staff in New Cross – well, apart from Bill and the folks at the Five Bells.

    Sorry, this is all a bit apropos of nothing ….

  4. Andrew Brown says:

    I know some people frown on that sort of thing, but I’m always partial to a bit of apropos nothing.

  5. ross says:


    without any kind of accompanying narrative to go along with your links it’s not quite clear what point your trying to put across by referencing them. I will, however, try to comment on each of them

    1. i’m well aware of the council’s obligations to improve the economic/social/environment well being in the area, which i would have thought backed up my point about the council’s failures to do just that in relation to estates like milford towers & excalibur (i.e. if sufficient investment in these estates had taken place over the decades there wouldn’t be a (non) decent homes issue in the first place

    2. out of the 4,000 privately owned homes covered by the rushey green renewal area program over 3,000 of them are owner occupied, leaving about 1,000 which are privately rented. now i’m sure some of these could be doing with some investment (although no doubt any improvement done and paid for with public money will result in an increased rental flow to the landlord), however i was always under the impression that there are conditions in place to ensure that private landords provide a sufficient level of inhabitance to their tenants (this has always been a clause in any tenancy i’ve had, and i may be wrong, but i was under the impression that this is an implicit requirement in any assured tenancy), the costs of complying with this, i would have thought however should lie with the person who receives the ongoing benefits of the rental income received through ownership of the property

    3 & 4. the 2nd lot of deprivation statistics that you linked to don’t actually relate to rushey green as a whole, just the Lewisham 020E area within the rushey green ward. your link says that within this subset there are 675 dwellings (opposed to the 6,000 in total for the whole ward – 4,000 privately owned as per above & 2,000 social housing). now the 020E area includes milford towers in which there are about 300 dwellings, so nearly representing half of the area overall. now as your link points out there is a high level of deprivation in the 020E area and my original argument was that money should be being directed to areas like this that needs it most, however given the nature of the rushey green renewal program and it’s specific targeting of privately owned accommodation, then it’s clear that none of this money will be seen by the majority of the residents in this area of high deprivation to which you linked to. (again i’m not sure what point you were trying to make by linking to this, although it does certainly back up my original point about where money should be prioritised to, however i was under the impression that you were attempting to show that my point was somewhat misguided, although your link does appear to do more to back up, rather than refute, my original point)

    5. not had time to read this one yet

  6. Andrew Brown says:

    1 – Glad we’re starting on the same page, but let’s not widen this out to cover all the council’s “failures” to invest in it’s housing stock.

    2 – Again glad to see you recognise the need for investment even if we don’t agree about where it all should come from.

    3 & 4 – Things don’t improve much if you move around the ward as far as I can see. No one seems in any doubt that Milford Tower and Excalibur need to have investment, but nor should the council neglect the needs of other areas like Rushey Green.

    5 – Feel free to come back when you have.

  7. rp says:

    Hi Andrew and Ross

    Sorry to distract you from your interesting discussions, but, Ross, may I say that whatever arguments you put forward, and far, far be it from me to stand in your way, or, indeed, disagree with what you say or your right to say it, but I’m wondering if this is the right platform for you to raise your points. Although Andrew may have been a councillor in the past, and whatever desires he holds within his breast for the time being (although most likely to deny them) I think it’s unlikely that he’ll hold a position of power in the future, unless its that of a school governor or some such other almost self-appointed post (no, disrespect intended Andrew). (mmmm, maybe I should reconsider that last statement, perhaps Andrew will prepare himself to return to the stump, it might just be that the Council requires men of his calibre)(don’t get above yourself though Andrew, remember the vanity . . .)

    So, I’ll come to the point now . . . Ross, why are you wasting your time jousting with bloggers? Your points are important and well intentioned, blogging will not ultimately make the slightest difference or help you get your point of view to a wider audience that *can* make a difference, so, make yourself ready for a councillorship!!

  8. ross says:

    don’t get me wrong rp, i’ve no illusions about posting on a blog changing anything, nor do i indulge it for that end

    like most people who have hobbies they do it for their own personal gratification, wasting time on blogs when you should be working is therefore one of my hobbies

    however even that aside, i’m a big fan of debate in any context (especially with those who hold positions different from your own), not as a means but as an end in itself – it sharpens your critical faculties, makes you think critically about our own positions, challenges your sometimes acceptance of dead dogma and forces you to confront things as living truths, so i think this kind of thing has a worth in itself which directly feeds into your ability to perhaps be more effective in attempts to pursue real tangible change or activities, so arsing around on blogs represents one means of exposure to this activity

    *goes back to constituency and prepares for government*

  9. Andrew Brown says:

    There are too few physical places where you can publicly debate politics and policy especially between people who don’t share party affiliation or an elected position.

    I’d compare the comment boxes here to debating politics or for that matter anything down the pub, or across the dinner table (except with a higher expectation of proof).

    You don’t do it to change anything per say, but hopefully it’s fun none the less.

  10. rp says:

    fun, yes andrew, more of that!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s