<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Nick Raynsford replies to NOGOE open letter</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.greenwich.co.uk/news/02406-nick-raynsford-replies-to-nogoe-open-letter/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.greenwich.co.uk/news/02406-nick-raynsford-replies-to-nogoe-open-letter/</link>
	<description>Greenwich news and information</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 03:00:20 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nick Raynsford - Nobody Likes a Bad Loser &#124; Greenwich.co.uk</title>
		<link>http://www.greenwich.co.uk/news/02406-nick-raynsford-replies-to-nogoe-open-letter/comment-page-1/#comment-11755</link>
		<dc:creator>Nick Raynsford - Nobody Likes a Bad Loser &#124; Greenwich.co.uk</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Dec 2009 14:12:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.greenwich.co.uk/?p=2406#comment-11755</guid>
		<description>[...] an article for this website last week, Mr Raynsford accused Nogoe, the anti-Olympics group, of &#8220;scaremongering&#8221; and a [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] an article for this website last week, Mr Raynsford accused Nogoe, the anti-Olympics group, of &#8220;scaremongering&#8221; and a [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dermot Agnew</title>
		<link>http://www.greenwich.co.uk/news/02406-nick-raynsford-replies-to-nogoe-open-letter/comment-page-1/#comment-11613</link>
		<dc:creator>Dermot Agnew</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 12 Dec 2009 18:44:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.greenwich.co.uk/?p=2406#comment-11613</guid>
		<description>But, unlike you Indigo, I have declared my interest.  

I am a Greenwich resident in favour of the Olympics in Greenwich Park and work at the Royal Opera where Olympics-supporting Tony Hall also works.  I also grew up in the horse world and happen to think Greenwich Park is an ideal venue for three-phase eventing.

It is now your turn to declare your interest, so that (to quote yourself) &quot;the rest of us can make an informed judgement&quot; on YOUR position.  Information please.

Do you live in Greenwich ?

What are you scared of that you cannot reveal yourself to those outside your friends ? 

What are you hiding ?

Why resort to addressing me by my surname (intended to be offensive, I imagine) ?  

I will not return offense (even if I knew your name) because a valid argument will stand on its own merits and does not need to rely on offense to bolster it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>But, unlike you Indigo, I have declared my interest.  </p>
<p>I am a Greenwich resident in favour of the Olympics in Greenwich Park and work at the Royal Opera where Olympics-supporting Tony Hall also works.  I also grew up in the horse world and happen to think Greenwich Park is an ideal venue for three-phase eventing.</p>
<p>It is now your turn to declare your interest, so that (to quote yourself) &#8220;the rest of us can make an informed judgement&#8221; on YOUR position.  Information please.</p>
<p>Do you live in Greenwich ?</p>
<p>What are you scared of that you cannot reveal yourself to those outside your friends ? </p>
<p>What are you hiding ?</p>
<p>Why resort to addressing me by my surname (intended to be offensive, I imagine) ?  </p>
<p>I will not return offense (even if I knew your name) because a valid argument will stand on its own merits and does not need to rely on offense to bolster it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dermot Agnew</title>
		<link>http://www.greenwich.co.uk/news/02406-nick-raynsford-replies-to-nogoe-open-letter/comment-page-1/#comment-11611</link>
		<dc:creator>Dermot Agnew</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 12 Dec 2009 17:55:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.greenwich.co.uk/?p=2406#comment-11611</guid>
		<description>Half truths here again, I think., Neil.

My understanding is that St Alfege turned down the request to use their Church Hall in case the Church and Parish was seen to be partisan in the argument over the Olympics, one way or the other.  Entirely responsible for the Parish Church to stay above this fray.

If quoting an unnamed &quot;spokesman&quot;, check the facts beforehand and name &quot;him&quot;, otherwise it`s just half truths which distort the debate.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Half truths here again, I think., Neil.</p>
<p>My understanding is that St Alfege turned down the request to use their Church Hall in case the Church and Parish was seen to be partisan in the argument over the Olympics, one way or the other.  Entirely responsible for the Parish Church to stay above this fray.</p>
<p>If quoting an unnamed &#8220;spokesman&#8221;, check the facts beforehand and name &#8220;him&#8221;, otherwise it`s just half truths which distort the debate.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Indigo</title>
		<link>http://www.greenwich.co.uk/news/02406-nick-raynsford-replies-to-nogoe-open-letter/comment-page-1/#comment-11602</link>
		<dc:creator>Indigo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 12 Dec 2009 13:56:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.greenwich.co.uk/?p=2406#comment-11602</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t see how St Alfege can claim that half of the congregation is in favour of the Olympics in Greenwich Park.  The congregation has not been polled on this subject.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t see how St Alfege can claim that half of the congregation is in favour of the Olympics in Greenwich Park.  The congregation has not been polled on this subject.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Neil Rhind</title>
		<link>http://www.greenwich.co.uk/news/02406-nick-raynsford-replies-to-nogoe-open-letter/comment-page-1/#comment-11596</link>
		<dc:creator>Neil Rhind</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 12 Dec 2009 12:06:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.greenwich.co.uk/?p=2406#comment-11596</guid>
		<description>Dear Nick

I am sorry that you have taken such a fierce line against those who are less than enamoured by the intention of LOCOG to stage the Equestrian events of the 2012 Olympics in Greenwich Park.

Like you I am a patriot for Greenwich, having been born here 72 years ago.  But I have become involved with the NOGOE campaign because I firmly believe that holding the Equestrian Olympics in Greenwich Park was a stupid little thought-through decision made in ignorance by people who did not know Greenwich at all well. It is too small, fragile ecologically, historically and environmentally, and seriously locked in by major inadequate traffic arteries on all sides.  

When these elements were made clear to LOCOG a year ago it had the chance to move the event to Windsor, or wherever, without loss of face and at considerable savings. It didn’t do so mainly because it said that the “athletes” had to be near the Olympic Village and because the view from the top of Greenwich Hill would look nice on international television.

The people involved in NOGOE and supporting its campaign come from all areas and interests, across the party-political divide, indeed some card-carrying member of the Greenwich Labour Party are NOGOE supporters.  These people have views which, in a democratic society, should be respected and not laughed to scorn.  The NOGOE approach has been one of careful research and analysis – and at no time has it claimed that avenues of trees were to be felled to create a cross country course. This lie is constantly repeated by anti-NOGOE people and it really should stop.

You claim there is great support for the event in Greenwich. I have not detected it: having spent some hours helping gather signatures for the NOGOE petition (13,000 in all) during the day for a few weekends in the summer. This revealed an astonishing level of opposition from all people and of all ages.  

Now that LOCOG has published its planning documents all my worst fears have been realised.  By a skilful and no doubt expensive public relations campaign LOCOG has previously soft-pedalled its approach to the undoubted problems which are now hideously revealed in its scheme.

Two points from me – other people  will nail many more  – cost and location.

When the bid went in for Greenwich Park it was for £12 million pounds. LOCOG refused to give a revised  budget figure at the Concert Hall meeting last month because it was “commercially confidential”. Now it has revealed a cost estimated at £42 million!  This during a time of major world depression and increased tax burdens on the bulk of the UK population

Early this year I was assured categorically by a LOCOG official that it had no intention of taking even a square millimetre of Blackheath.  Now it intends to enclose the Circus Field on the Heath. – about 24 acres give or take a bit.  Thus proving that Greenwich Park was too small in the first place.  Not only that but LOCOG’s intention for Blackheath is illegal and statute barred, and Greenwich Council cannot give consent because it also statute barred from doing so. 

Finally, I was distressed to learn recently that an attempt to book the Greenwich Theatre for a NOGOE public meeting was refused. The Theatre’s management claimed that Greenwich Council, which helps  to fund the theatre was in favour of the Olympics and therefore closed the door on opposition groups.  A similar response came from St Alfege church for a request to use the church hall, because “half the congregation were in favour of Olympics in Greenwich Park” claimed a spokesman.
I trust I can look to you as my MP to raise the matter with the Council leader and put a stop to this totalitarian nonsense.

Neil Rhind</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dear Nick</p>
<p>I am sorry that you have taken such a fierce line against those who are less than enamoured by the intention of LOCOG to stage the Equestrian events of the 2012 Olympics in Greenwich Park.</p>
<p>Like you I am a patriot for Greenwich, having been born here 72 years ago.  But I have become involved with the NOGOE campaign because I firmly believe that holding the Equestrian Olympics in Greenwich Park was a stupid little thought-through decision made in ignorance by people who did not know Greenwich at all well. It is too small, fragile ecologically, historically and environmentally, and seriously locked in by major inadequate traffic arteries on all sides.  </p>
<p>When these elements were made clear to LOCOG a year ago it had the chance to move the event to Windsor, or wherever, without loss of face and at considerable savings. It didn’t do so mainly because it said that the “athletes” had to be near the Olympic Village and because the view from the top of Greenwich Hill would look nice on international television.</p>
<p>The people involved in NOGOE and supporting its campaign come from all areas and interests, across the party-political divide, indeed some card-carrying member of the Greenwich Labour Party are NOGOE supporters.  These people have views which, in a democratic society, should be respected and not laughed to scorn.  The NOGOE approach has been one of careful research and analysis – and at no time has it claimed that avenues of trees were to be felled to create a cross country course. This lie is constantly repeated by anti-NOGOE people and it really should stop.</p>
<p>You claim there is great support for the event in Greenwich. I have not detected it: having spent some hours helping gather signatures for the NOGOE petition (13,000 in all) during the day for a few weekends in the summer. This revealed an astonishing level of opposition from all people and of all ages.  </p>
<p>Now that LOCOG has published its planning documents all my worst fears have been realised.  By a skilful and no doubt expensive public relations campaign LOCOG has previously soft-pedalled its approach to the undoubted problems which are now hideously revealed in its scheme.</p>
<p>Two points from me – other people  will nail many more  – cost and location.</p>
<p>When the bid went in for Greenwich Park it was for £12 million pounds. LOCOG refused to give a revised  budget figure at the Concert Hall meeting last month because it was “commercially confidential”. Now it has revealed a cost estimated at £42 million!  This during a time of major world depression and increased tax burdens on the bulk of the UK population</p>
<p>Early this year I was assured categorically by a LOCOG official that it had no intention of taking even a square millimetre of Blackheath.  Now it intends to enclose the Circus Field on the Heath. – about 24 acres give or take a bit.  Thus proving that Greenwich Park was too small in the first place.  Not only that but LOCOG’s intention for Blackheath is illegal and statute barred, and Greenwich Council cannot give consent because it also statute barred from doing so. </p>
<p>Finally, I was distressed to learn recently that an attempt to book the Greenwich Theatre for a NOGOE public meeting was refused. The Theatre’s management claimed that Greenwich Council, which helps  to fund the theatre was in favour of the Olympics and therefore closed the door on opposition groups.  A similar response came from St Alfege church for a request to use the church hall, because “half the congregation were in favour of Olympics in Greenwich Park” claimed a spokesman.<br />
I trust I can look to you as my MP to raise the matter with the Council leader and put a stop to this totalitarian nonsense.</p>
<p>Neil Rhind</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Indigo</title>
		<link>http://www.greenwich.co.uk/news/02406-nick-raynsford-replies-to-nogoe-open-letter/comment-page-1/#comment-11593</link>
		<dc:creator>Indigo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 12 Dec 2009 11:50:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.greenwich.co.uk/?p=2406#comment-11593</guid>
		<description>It goes without saying that people who have &quot;an interest&quot; should declare that interest, so that the rest of us can make an informed judgement about whether or not your view, Agnew (in this instance), is &quot;influenced&quot;.  At committee meetings - eg in the university, charitable, local authority sectors - &quot;declaration of interest&quot; is usually the second or third item on any meeting agenda, after apologies for absence.

I have been using the handle &quot;Indigo&quot; on the web for years (and long before the 02 adopted it, incidentally).  The people who know me know who Indigo is.

Tony Hall has &quot;form&quot;, by the way, in complacently ignoring the majority will of the people.  Back in November 1992, when he was Director and Editor of BBC News and Current Affairs, he told an audience of Radio 4 listeners that: no matter how few people wanted a &#039;continuous news&#039; service, the BBC would not reconsider their intention to introduce it by April 1994 on the 198kHz (Long Wave) frequency.  This was before the Internet, and at a time when hardly anyone had access to radio and tv on satellite or cable, and FM reception was extremely patchy.

Well, Tony Hall lost that one.  Deservedly.  Let&#039;s hope LOCOG&#039;s plans for Greenwich Park go the same way.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It goes without saying that people who have &#8220;an interest&#8221; should declare that interest, so that the rest of us can make an informed judgement about whether or not your view, Agnew (in this instance), is &#8220;influenced&#8221;.  At committee meetings &#8211; eg in the university, charitable, local authority sectors &#8211; &#8220;declaration of interest&#8221; is usually the second or third item on any meeting agenda, after apologies for absence.</p>
<p>I have been using the handle &#8220;Indigo&#8221; on the web for years (and long before the 02 adopted it, incidentally).  The people who know me know who Indigo is.</p>
<p>Tony Hall has &#8220;form&#8221;, by the way, in complacently ignoring the majority will of the people.  Back in November 1992, when he was Director and Editor of BBC News and Current Affairs, he told an audience of Radio 4 listeners that: no matter how few people wanted a &#8216;continuous news&#8217; service, the BBC would not reconsider their intention to introduce it by April 1994 on the 198kHz (Long Wave) frequency.  This was before the Internet, and at a time when hardly anyone had access to radio and tv on satellite or cable, and FM reception was extremely patchy.</p>
<p>Well, Tony Hall lost that one.  Deservedly.  Let&#8217;s hope LOCOG&#8217;s plans for Greenwich Park go the same way.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dermot Agnew</title>
		<link>http://www.greenwich.co.uk/news/02406-nick-raynsford-replies-to-nogoe-open-letter/comment-page-1/#comment-11573</link>
		<dc:creator>Dermot Agnew</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 12 Dec 2009 01:07:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.greenwich.co.uk/?p=2406#comment-11573</guid>
		<description>I am not impressed by those who have so little belief in their views that they have to hide behind nicknames.   

Yes, Tony Hall heads the Royal Opera where I work.  But I have my own opinions which I admit to, unlike MSFCE  and Indigo.

My dictionary tells me Indigo is a form of violet.

Reveal yourself.  Or are you a shrinking violet ?



Says it all.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am not impressed by those who have so little belief in their views that they have to hide behind nicknames.   </p>
<p>Yes, Tony Hall heads the Royal Opera where I work.  But I have my own opinions which I admit to, unlike MSFCE  and Indigo.</p>
<p>My dictionary tells me Indigo is a form of violet.</p>
<p>Reveal yourself.  Or are you a shrinking violet ?</p>
<p>Says it all.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MSFCE</title>
		<link>http://www.greenwich.co.uk/news/02406-nick-raynsford-replies-to-nogoe-open-letter/comment-page-1/#comment-11553</link>
		<dc:creator>MSFCE</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Dec 2009 15:42:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.greenwich.co.uk/?p=2406#comment-11553</guid>
		<description>Come off it, Agnew, nobody is talking about adorable sleepy blah di blah.  Surely you know that Greenwich is already one of the top tourist attractions in London and heaving with people, especially at weekends.  Those visitors will be put off coming to Greenwich while large areas of the Park become a construction site for much of  2012 and some of 2011, and local businesses will lose out on all the money they normally spend, while for a few days the Olympics spectators will be doomed to consume the refreshments offered by the sponsors - Macdonalds, Coca Cola and Cadburys.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Come off it, Agnew, nobody is talking about adorable sleepy blah di blah.  Surely you know that Greenwich is already one of the top tourist attractions in London and heaving with people, especially at weekends.  Those visitors will be put off coming to Greenwich while large areas of the Park become a construction site for much of  2012 and some of 2011, and local businesses will lose out on all the money they normally spend, while for a few days the Olympics spectators will be doomed to consume the refreshments offered by the sponsors &#8211; Macdonalds, Coca Cola and Cadburys.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Indigo</title>
		<link>http://www.greenwich.co.uk/news/02406-nick-raynsford-replies-to-nogoe-open-letter/comment-page-1/#comment-11541</link>
		<dc:creator>Indigo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Dec 2009 10:03:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.greenwich.co.uk/?p=2406#comment-11541</guid>
		<description>I think that Dermot Agnew should fess up that he is &quot;channelling&quot; his employer - Tony Hall - who sits on the board of LOCOG.

&quot;former head of BBC News, who joined the ROH in 2001 and has become widely respected throughout the sector for his work there, is the first figure from the arts world to gain a seat on the board of the London Organising Committee of the Olympic Games (LOCOG) and will also chair his own new Cultural Olympiad board as part of a new structure to oversee the programme.  

He is expected to appoint national figures from the arts to that board, including Sir Nicholas Serota of the Tate and Vikki Heywood of the Royal Shakespeare Company.

He said that there was “enough time, not plenty of time” to organise a fitting celebration of the UK’s cultural vitality for the summer of 2012. &quot;

Times 16 July 2009
http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/article6715274.ece

Google &quot;dermot agnew&quot; and &quot;royal opera&quot; (although I didn&#039;t have to because I already knew this).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think that Dermot Agnew should fess up that he is &#8220;channelling&#8221; his employer &#8211; Tony Hall &#8211; who sits on the board of LOCOG.</p>
<p>&#8220;former head of BBC News, who joined the ROH in 2001 and has become widely respected throughout the sector for his work there, is the first figure from the arts world to gain a seat on the board of the London Organising Committee of the Olympic Games (LOCOG) and will also chair his own new Cultural Olympiad board as part of a new structure to oversee the programme.  </p>
<p>He is expected to appoint national figures from the arts to that board, including Sir Nicholas Serota of the Tate and Vikki Heywood of the Royal Shakespeare Company.</p>
<p>He said that there was “enough time, not plenty of time” to organise a fitting celebration of the UK’s cultural vitality for the summer of 2012. &#8221;</p>
<p>Times 16 July 2009<br />
<a href="http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/article6715274.ece" rel="nofollow">http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/article6715274.ece</a></p>
<p>Google &#8220;dermot agnew&#8221; and &#8220;royal opera&#8221; (although I didn&#8217;t have to because I already knew this).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jan Stewer</title>
		<link>http://www.greenwich.co.uk/news/02406-nick-raynsford-replies-to-nogoe-open-letter/comment-page-1/#comment-11537</link>
		<dc:creator>Jan Stewer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Dec 2009 09:27:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.greenwich.co.uk/?p=2406#comment-11537</guid>
		<description>Nick, you campaigned to secure the bid for Greenwich and have been consistent in hectoring any opposition to two really bad schemes - the shooting at Woolwich and The desecrating of Greenwich Park. I have not heard a soul say that you actually listened to them if they disagreed with you - there was your disgraceful outburst at the Friends of Greenwich Park meeting where you were verbally abusive of concerned constituents who voiced their objections. 
We were recipients of both Gareth Bacon&#039;s and LOCOG&#039;s surveys and the former was much more open- ended than the latter which I am fearful that even those opposed could have been marked as supporters because of the phrasing.......and where on earth did they find 70,000 or so people to make 85% more supporters than the 13,000+ NOGOE protest signatures?? The plans are out now and we can all see what a terrible mess they intend to make of  Greenwich Park for the next 5 years and beyond. Thanks Nick - am ashamed we ever voted for you.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nick, you campaigned to secure the bid for Greenwich and have been consistent in hectoring any opposition to two really bad schemes &#8211; the shooting at Woolwich and The desecrating of Greenwich Park. I have not heard a soul say that you actually listened to them if they disagreed with you &#8211; there was your disgraceful outburst at the Friends of Greenwich Park meeting where you were verbally abusive of concerned constituents who voiced their objections.<br />
We were recipients of both Gareth Bacon&#8217;s and LOCOG&#8217;s surveys and the former was much more open- ended than the latter which I am fearful that even those opposed could have been marked as supporters because of the phrasing&#8230;&#8230;.and where on earth did they find 70,000 or so people to make 85% more supporters than the 13,000+ NOGOE protest signatures?? The plans are out now and we can all see what a terrible mess they intend to make of  Greenwich Park for the next 5 years and beyond. Thanks Nick &#8211; am ashamed we ever voted for you.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

