Today's Friday lunchtime distraction is from Tim Minchin, one of my favourite comedians, who mocks pop star pomposity whenever addressing 'issues' with his gloriously bombastic anthem against plastic bags. Sing along if you can follow the lyrics...
More from Tim with a brilliant nine-minute 'beat poem' at this earlier post.
More east London public space surrendered for the benefit of the Olympics - from the Evening Standard:
A park used by about 100,000 people a year is set to be tarmaced over and used as a storage depot for the London Olympics.
Residents will lose the use of Drapers Field in Leyton for 16 months after Waltham Forest council proposed leasing it to the Olympic Delivery Authority.
The council admitted there would be significant loss of amenities but said it was in talks with the ODA to gain substantial compensation.
Park users, including the Norlington School for Boys and 23 clubs and teams, face upheaval as the council searches for alternative sites.
The chairman of governors at Norlington, whose previous pupils include former England cricket captain Graham Gooch and TV star Jonathan Ross, said the plans were “absolutely horrendous”.
Stephen Pierpoint said: “It's an amazing contradiction that in trying to promote sports they are preventing our pupils from playing sports.”
Leyton councillor Bob Sullivan, who leads the Lib-Dem group on Waltham Forest council, said he doubted the compensation would be satisfactory.
He said: “It's a disgrace. We're supposed to be an Olympic borough. Norlington School for Boys uses the field four days a week and they are going to find it difficult to find somewhere else to go that is affordable.”
If the lease is agreed, Drapers Field would close to the public next year and not reopen until December 2012.
A perimeter fence will be erected and the grass tarmaced over for “back of house facilities” to supply the athletes' village. The deal is subject to planning permission which has not yet been applied for.
The ODA has already requisitioned part of Hackney Marshes which are being converted into a VIP coach park for the Games before being restored with enhanced facilities.
The Independent's Christine Patterson has responded angrily today to the criticisms made against her article 'The Limits of Multiculturalism', which a week ago took Stamford Hill's Hasidic Jewish community to task for its lack of manners.
The original piece has been ably dissected over at The Third Estate, which has questioned the way Patterson has leapt from her own feelings about the insularity and suspicion of one conservative minority community and generalised this into an attack on another, the Muslims inevitably, with the biggest leap being a causal link between religious obscurantism, the wearing of the niqāb and the vile practice of female circumcision. Patterson's own liberal cultural isolation is apparent from her belief that there is widespread support within Muslim communities for such amoral and criminal conduct. There isn't, but let's not let the facts get in the way of sweeping generalisations.
I've discussed before how those who are most irate about, say, a woman wearing a veil, angry enough to demand a rethinking of multiculturalism, have a great deal in common with those religious conservative men who seek to police the customs and behaviour of 'their' communities. By way of an example is this letter in support of Patterson's first piece, which reaffirms her basic argument and includes the following gem:
Try substituting genital mutilation and female circumcision for sexual violence, burka for mini-skirt and religious for secular and you get the following:
For some reason, it is acceptable to condemn genital mutilation yet not the wearing of the burka, despite the clear links between the two. Obviously, not all wearers of the burka support female circumcision; some do actually choose to wear it.
But the ideas that underpin female circumcision – female sexual pleasure is taboo; women are the sum total of their sexuality – and the burka are very similar. These practices are tolerated in the name of religious acceptance.
The niqāb may well be a a symbol of patriarchal oppression and, when it is strictly enforced , an instrument of oppression as well. But unless you can prove there is a direct link between a heinous criminal act and any item of clothing, you'll inevitably end up sounding like the granddaughter of Mary Whitehouse - just as conservative and narrow-minded as the people you point your finger at and accuse.
For some reason, it is acceptable to condemn sexual violence yet not the wearing of the mini-skirt, despite the clear links between the two. Obviously, not all wearers of the mini-skirt support sexual violence; some do actually choose to wear it.
But the ideas that underpin sexual violence – female sexual pleasure is taboo; women are the sum total of their sexuality – and the mini-skirt are very similar. These practices are tolerated in the name of secular acceptance.
Proving that even against seemingly insurmountable odds, local people can fight against big business interests and win, reports in the Newham Recorder and the Evening Standard have both rightly acknowledged the crucial role of campaigners in defeating property company St Modwen, who have finally abandoned its plans to redevelop Queens Market in Upton Park.
For seven years, the Friends of Queens Market campaign has fought against the developers and Newham council to ensure that fresh, affordable food remains available to local people. It's first victory, after 12,000 signatures were collected to stop the demolition of the market, was to persuade the supermarket giant Asda-Walmart to pull out of the proposed development in June 2006. The next victory involved successful lobbying of the Greater London Assembly after a multi-million pound planning application was submitted by St Modwen in May 2009, involving a 31 storey high-rise tower block on the market site with a token amount of social housing. The campaign mobilised 2,600 individual letters of objection to the plans and although Newham council drove through approval of the scheme at the planning stage, Friends of Queens Market then worked hard to persuade London Mayor Boris Johnson to throw out the 'inappropriate' development.
A year on, St Modwen and Newham council have finally parted company, claiming that they could not agree about a way forward. Campaigners are now demanding to know how much local council-tax payers money was wasted by Newham council as it repeatedly pushed ahead with the destruction of Queens Market in the teeth of local opposition.
This is particularly important because the scheme always had the fervent and unwavering backing of Newham Mayor Sir Robin Wales, who was adamant that redevelopment had to go ahead at all costs. And we know how much the Great Helmsman hates to lose...
The Friends of Queens Market campaign has a website here. My earlier posts on the campaign can be found here
"We need", said my friend Cilius, "a revolution. This is outrageous!" Not the normal reaction to the commentary aboard one of those open-top tourist buses that Londoners are familiar with, but an understandable response to the information that huge parts of the central of town are owned by one family, the Grosvenors. Perhaps the tour should be included in cadre-building by the Trot groups - some of the detail intended to impress American visitors will make any vaguely liberal Briton's blood boil.
For years, a group of us have been talking about buying tickts for a touist bus and seeing London from an entirely different perspective and today we finally found the time to do so. Check out the photos below - you can find more on Flickr.
Meet PC Simon Harwood (right), the Territorial Support Group police officer who is accused of hitting Ian Tomlinson and causing his death.
Yesterday this photo was circulated by his solicitors Reynolds Dawson to the editors of all the national newspapers for publication, in an attempt to ensure that photographers didn't camp outside his home in Carshalton in Surrey. The Sun ran the picture about an hour ago on its website.
In their letter, Reynolds Dawson allege that there has been "a great deal of threatening material published about him on the internet which has caused him and his family great concern". They are presumably alluding to the disbelief and outrage at the decision by the Director of Public Prosecutions to take no action over Ian Tomlinson's death, causing considerably more than 'great concern' to Ian's family. However, Harwood's lawyers go on to say that "he is aware that the media will not allow his family and neighbours any peace until it has a photograph of him, and he has taken the view that the only way to protect them from harassment by the photographers camped outside their addresses is to provide one". They add:
Now personally, I'm not interested in what Harwood has to say about anything unless it is in the dock and in front of a jury. Equally, anything that prevents his lawyers from trying to argue in future that a fair trial is impossible, because of intense interest from newspapers more interested in headlines than justice, has to be good. After all, there still remains a realistic possibility that the DPP's decision may be subject to legal challenge and that Harwood may yet have to account for his actions in court.
For the avoidance of doubt, it would be inappropriate for PC Harwood to comment publicly on the Director of Public Prosecution's decision or on other proceedings in the way that others have chosen to. Accordingly, there could be no legitimate purpose in approaching PC Harwood for further comment.
Photos by unslugged from today's protest in support of the Tomlinson family at the Crown Prosecution Service and on into the City.
Random Blowe is the personal and political blog of Kevin Blowe, a campaigner based in Newham in east London. 
Posts
All Comments
Random Blowe | Original articles licensed under a Creative Commons License.
