Comments on: Andrew Gilligan: What’s The Point Of The Greenwich Society?

By: Heard of the Charlton Society? Find out more on Saturday… | The Charlton Champion

Tue, 11 Oct 2011 13:10:34 +0000

[...] The Blackheath Society‘s been left in a bit of a tizz after blowing a huge sum of money on a court case against a music festival on the heath, while the Greenwich Society shot itself in the foot by backing the almost-universally unpopular Greenwich market hotel. [...]

By: Storm glouds gather as Greenwich Market inquiry starts « 853

Storm glouds gather as Greenwich Market inquiry starts « 853 — Tue, 07 Sep 2010 14:17:17 +0000

[...] as a supporter of the redevelopment, while English Heritage, the University of Greenwich and the Greenwich Society had either backed or not opposed the scheme, Mr King said. Indeed, Greenwich Council’s own [...]

By: Michael Naylor

Michael Naylor — Wed, 27 May 2009 20:12:15 +0000

I am also a resident & I am opposed to turning Greenwich Market into the Hong Kong Airport Terminal.

Much as I like the airport terminal in Hong Kong as an airport terminal whilst I am travelling, I do not wish a poor copy to replace one of the last remaining historic & unique markets in London.

I have not been made aware of it by Greenwich Hospital at all, I only found out about it through an unrelated google search and I now wish to start shouting before they steal away this valuable asset for their own financial benefit.

I am strongly against this development!

By: Darren

Darren — Wed, 27 May 2009 07:08:42 +0000

In response to Tim Barnes:

Whilst I agree with your comments in relation to the Olympics in Greenwich Park I have no sympathy with your support of the development of the Market site.

Greenwich Hospital have systematically devastated the current site with rent increases that have seen shop after shop close. They have betrayed the trust placed in them by local people and have shown themselves unworthy custodians of the site.

The market is already a vibrant hub of the community and if rents were lowered on the surrounding properties and local residents consulted on those retailers being brought in then I feel everyone could be satisfied.

As ever it seems the Hospital’s only motivator is financial and I do not see how such aims can match those of the Greenwich Society.

But then again I’m not a member – just a resident!

Darren

By: Greenwich Society Responds To Andrew Gilligan | Greenwich.co.uk

Greenwich Society Responds To Andrew Gilligan | Greenwich.co.uk — Tue, 26 May 2009 08:09:11 +0000

[...] Chairman of the Greenwich Society, Tim Barnes, responds to the recent article by Andrew Gilligan titled “What’s The Point of the Greenwich Society?”. [...]

By: tom

tom — Fri, 22 May 2009 13:38:05 +0000

Endless demands for us to be angry about people that make you “sick, sick, sick” I find quite exhausting, and am not sure gets to the truth of the issue.

By: Andrew Gilligan

Andrew Gilligan — Fri, 22 May 2009 11:42:27 +0000

Tom,

We do indeed live in one of the best places in London. God forbid that anyone should get “angry” about a plan to spoil it!

Andrew

By: tom

tom — Fri, 22 May 2009 07:57:42 +0000

Blissett – you aren’t alone in what you say. I also feel that the tone of the article – accusatory, conspiratorial and angry – does not reflect the feelings of many people that live in the area. We live in one of the best places in London (the world!), a place that people travel thousands of miles to admire. There are good bits and bad, but due to its heritage change needs to be carefully thought through.

Local politics needs to be more constructive then a few angry men shouting, accusing ‘faceless bureaucrats’ of unspeakable acts. It is interesting to note that both LOCOG and Greenwich Hospital have tried to engage with their critics on this site, but their accusers have been slow to respond. If you ask people to complain then some always will. It is much harder to promote positive change.

By: Blissett

Blissett — Thu, 21 May 2009 22:57:48 +0000

Andrew,

I can’t pretend to know much about the GS, but judging by it’s Mission Statement and Constitution, there is no clear commitment to present the views of all Greenwich residents. They are a private group rather, representing the interests of their members, not a public one. Indeed one of their key objectives is to support “continuing face lifts for the Greenwich and East Greenwich town centres”.

As for the responses to the council, does anyone ever register a vote in favour of these things? I would be amazed if anybody had, regardless of how popular the proposal was. And a 1.2% response rate on an issue that’s clearly as significant and contentious as this does not suggest to me that “public feeling on this issue” is in any way clear.

I don’t know what the general public view is. I’m not even 100% certain what my own view is. But if there really is a significant number of people who strongly oppose this, now is the time for them to make themselves known, organise and clearly communicate their specific objections. Because right now, it just looks like a small number of people arguing that any kind of progress is bad and that there’s some kind of conspiracy going on to force an unpopular development on an unsuspecting public. If I really should be angry about this, I need better reasons than those.

By: Andrew Gilligan

Andrew Gilligan — Thu, 21 May 2009 19:22:43 +0000

Blissett,

I don’t claim to speak for anyone except myself. The point about the Greenwich Society is that it does claim to speak for the residents of Greenwich – without, in this case, having made any effort to find out what their views are. Judging by the sampling of public responses just so far to the council (42 against – 0 in favour) it looks like the GS view doesn’t represent public feeling on this issue.

Andrew