Canada Water Campaign

Canada Water Campaign Home
Previous meeting Bulletin 5 Next meeting

Meeting No. 2, 1900 Thursday 10^th August 2000
Surrey Docks Watersports Centre

Minutes of Meeting No, 2 , 1900 Thursday 10^th August 2000 (Draft 4 15 August 2000)
Surrey Docks Watersports Centre.

Present: 64 attendees (names are on file).

Summary and Action Steps for the Future

1. Introduction

David Brunskill introduced himself and the aims of the Canada Water Campaign ("CWC")

1.1 Appointment of Chair:

It was agreed by the consent of all present that David Brunskill be appointed to Chair the meeting.

1.2 Appointment of minute taker:

Bruce de Saram very kindly agreed to do this on a temporary basis.

2. Approval of Minutes.

The minutes of meeting no 1 of 19/07/00 were approved.

Proposed: Hugh Closs. Seconded: Graham Sewell.

Matters Arising

3. Consultation process with London Borough of Southwark ("LBS"):

CWC sent a letter on 25^th July informing LBS of its establishment and requesting inclusion in the consultation process.

In response to a letter from Stephen Platts on 21^st July, a request was made on the same day by Email for funding, similar to that extended to residents involved with the Elephant and Castle development.

The LBS Cabinet meeting on 24^th July was attended by David Brunskill. Copies of a paper submitted to cabinet that day entitled "Canada Water-Consultation on draft development framework ("DDF") -item for information" were tabled.

The following points concerning the DDF were made from the chair.

1. LBS should be advised that this document does not fully represent the views expressed by residents at the meeting on 6^th July at the Holiday Inn.
   
2. The following points should be challenged:

Item 3.1: it is not maintenance to simply fill in Canada Water.

Item 4.1: the meeting on 6^th July rejected the High Density town centre development vision.

Item 5.1.2: the meeting on 6^th July rejected "relocation of Canada Water"

Item 5.3: the meeting on 6^th July rejected the scale of development .

Item 6.4: omitted constructive comment from residents regarding the need for traffic planning, regeneration and linkage into Canada Water of Albion Street and Lower Road plus the need for more options than those presented to the meeting

Item 6.6. Residents did not express concern, they mistrusted and firmly rejected the Council's approach.

Accordingly a draft letter was tabled with a view to sending it to all LBS councillors.

(C) Points made from the floor were:

(C.1) Leah Levane (a LBS community development and social inclusion Officer) present said that the Council is impressed with the speed with which the CWC has got its website and other information up and running. Leah stressed that the LBS is very keen to meet with representatives from the CWC to discuss ideas for effective consultation. Leah also stressed that the DDF was only a first draft.

(C.2) Gary Glover said that since the paperwork submitted to Councillors is not always read beyond the first page we need to draw up a document which is easy to read.

(C.3) Graham Sewell suggested that the summary on page 2 should be used in the body of the letter and the detail points attached (as an appendix).

(C.4) Others present were concerned about the issue of "Value Maximisation" since the Council usually adopt this policy at the expense of everything else. It was felt that we must avoid another Decathlon scenario.

(D) The meeting resolved that a letter should be written to the council to make these points and that this letter would be made available for scrutiny and appropriate amendment on the website prior to despatch.

3.2 Contact with other groups:

Ian Owers outlined the history of Time and Talents and its role in the community.

Ian stressed:

• The need to develop local opinion so that the Community as a whole is behind the CWC. Ian mentioned that the area surrounding Canada Water tube is fragmented and not linked in to the community. E.g the Canada Water Tube continues to be inaccessible from Albion Street.
• That the lack of social facilities in this part of the borough is not addressed in the DDF.

Emma Wilson, representing the Willowbrook Centre and Planning Aid addressed the meeting. Emma has worked in Southwark for six years and provides planning advice to organisations such as ourselves. In particular Emma assists in liaising with the Council. Her colleague Alison Blower also attended the meeting.

The meeting requested and Ian Owers agreed that Time and Talents would help to convene a meeting of concerned organisations using the Bermondsey/Rotherhithe Development partnership.

3.3 The Web site:

Is running.

4. Plans for Information and Awareness 20^th August:

The meeting discussed and agreed the following.

4.1;4.3 Leafletting and Posters

Hugh Closs agreed to co-ordinate the leafletting campaign on the Rotherhithe Millenium Day on 20^th August.

4.2 Poster design and production

Design to be developed by Hugh Closs. Gary Glover will arrange for 7000 leaflets to be produced.

4.4 Base for operations on the day

Time and Talents kindly agreed that their office can be used as a base.

5 Future Plans

The meeting was opened to debate. The following points relating to agenda items were made.

5.1 Office and meeting plans

The CWC can establish office facilities at Time and Talents subject to working in with existing arrangements.

A "Steering Committee " will be established - names of volunteers were taken at the end of the meeting.

The first meeting of the Steering Committee will be at 1900 17^th August at Time & Talents.

5.2 Funding and Administration

The steering committee will examine the strategy and modus operandi of the Elephant and Castle Community Forum so as to achieve similar funding arrangements. All aspects of regeneration will be covered.

A constitution will be drawn up and adopted. Officers and committee will be elected so as to provide credibility and as a framework for future funding and operation.

If appropriate Time & Talents will consider assisting by permitting the Canada Water Campaign to hold funds on behalf of CWC until such time as CWC is properly empowered to administer its own banking arrangements. administration procedures.

Hugh Closs will ensure coverage of Campaign plans in the Southwark News

6. Other Business

6.1 Simon Hughes MP was welcomed to the meeting.

Simon Hughes who had been listening to our discussion suggested the following points.

1. CWC need to be aware that the Council are going through a redesignation site process. What this means is that if an application is fast tracked the Council can change its original designated use much more quickly than we realise.
2. The site for an additional secondary school must be decided in the next six weeks.
3. In order to be recognised as a credible organisation CWC must ensure that it represents all groups within the community. CWCs will need to consult Ethnic Minorities, OAPs, Schools, the Police and Youth Organisations so that their views are also taken into account.
4. The consultation process needs to debate and determine what people want. I.e. issues like "Open Space" V the need to reduce the motor car. Councillor Lancashire had mentioned this is a six month plan hence the sooner people think about it the better. Simon said that we should find a Saturday to involve the whole Community in this exercise after our day of action on the 20^th August. Bacon’s College was suggested as the Venue.
5. A Constitution should be adopted.
6. Questions on any relevant points of concern should be raised as soon as practicable with LBS.

6.2 Some points following on from this discussion were that:

1. Bruce de Saram mentioned the need to involve Residents Groups and said that he represented BQRA.
2. Leah Levene suggested liaison with Primary schools and Planning for Real" exercises and passed on an invitation to meet with Council Officers prior to consultation processes being finalised.
3. Ian Owers agreed to assist as appropriate with the residents groups involvement.
4. Pauline Adenwalla said we must challenge the appointment of Independent Consultants suggested in Stephen Platts letter of 27^th July as a priority. It is imperative that the Canada Water Campaign is involved in setting the terms of reference for the consultation process. Likewise we must now start to be positive in suggesting what we would wish to see developed.
5. Brian Hodge said that the Mayor of London’s Strategic Development strategy would need to be implemented. Until that is done the UDP cannot be revised. It is necessary to track all aspects relating to the UDP to prevent inappropriate changes of use.
6. Brian Hodges also read extracts from the LSE report on the area which was commissioned by the London Borough of Southwark and gave a misleading view of the area.
7. Cllr.Derek Partridge mentioned that further to Stephen Platts letter of 28^th July the Council plans the three Consultation Groups were to be, The Residents, The Business Community, The Community Groups. It was felt that this approach was divisive and not acceptable
8. Current initiatives regarding requests for information from the council were outlined.
9. Aden Adenwalla requested terms of reference for the DDF. Councillor Partridge agreed to write to request them.

6.3 Simon Hughes replied that:

1. It is accepted that there is and will be a difference of opinion between these three groups.
2. The Council as a land owner has a stutory duty to maximise its revenue
3. We live in a local authority called "Southwark" which does not ring fence money to a particular group.
4. We must think of it in terms of the other developments and the views of the other communities in Southwark ie we must open up a dialogue with all parts of the Borough
5. We can be very focused about SE16 but the reality ultimately is that both Councillors and Officers have to take a Borough wide view.
6. The need not to go to any meetings with the Councillors or Officers as an unrepresentative group was stressed.
7. Background research work must be done carefully to ensure that the Campaign can influence the Council in a constructive manner and so avoid the risk of being rejected out of hand.

Mention was made of the need to have a Public enquiry. The Planning process was explained and the question was raised as to whether our preference would be that the Secretary of State who may not understand our issues should decide on these matters or LBS Councillors.

Meeting closed approximately 2110 hrs.

Note
The following persons indicated willingness to join the steering committee:
Pauline Adenwalla, David Brunskill, Hugh Closs, Joanna Dawson, Bruce de Saram, Evert de Vries, Len Hatch, Brian Hodge, Janet Hodge, Kirsty James, Beatrice Leung, Ian Owers, Graham Sewell, Ann Sewell, John Stevens, Cathy Whitehead, Kath Whittam.

AGENDA

Planning for the information and awareness activity to take place during the Rotherhithe Millenium Festival, 20^th August.

1. Introduction

1.1. Appoint Chair
1.2. Appoint Minute Taker

2. Approve minutes of meeting No. 1, 19^th July.

3. Matters Arising

3.1. Re 4.1 Consultation process with London Borough of Southwark
3.2. Re 4.2 Contact with other groups – Time & Talents, Planning Aid
3.3. Re 4.3 Website

4. Plans for 20^th August information and awareness activity

4.1. Leafletting & Posters– where, when, how many leaflets & posters needed, how many people available.
4.2. Poster & leaflet design & production
4.3. Collecting names and contact details
4.4. Base for preparation & distribution during the day – catering arrangements?

5. Plan Follow up to 20^th August

5.1. Establish office and regular meeting place
5.2. Mechanisms & funding for office operation

6. Next meeting, Any other business.

Canada Water Campaign Home
Previous meeting Bulletin 5 Next meeting