Battle over silent majority as resident groups slam ‘pro-booze’ campaign
Silent majority: Revellers enjoy a drink at the Ridley Road Market Bar
Residents groups backing Hackney Council’s proposed licensing policy have lashed out a campaign they claim is being pushed by a “pro-booze lobby”.
Associations in Shoreditch and Dalston say that the We Love Hackney campaign, launched by a group of hospitality heavyweights, does not represent the views of the “silent majority.”
But the bar-owners opposing the licensing proposals – which would see no new licenses being granted to bars and nightclubs past 12am – insist that scores of Hackney residents are behind them.
Many Twitter users have tweeted support for the We Love Hackney campaign using the hashtag #notconsideredappropriate in reference to the wording used to describe nightclubs in the council’s draft policy.
Rachel Munro-Peebles from the Shoreditch Community Association (SCA), a group that “protects and promotes the common interests of those living and working in Shoreditch”, called the campaign “misleading scaremongering”.
She said: “In our view the new policy seeks a minor, sensible policy shift on new late-night license approvals from ‘Okay, unless it’s not’ to ‘not Okay, unless it is’.
Another member of the SCA, singer/song-writer from band The The Matt Johnson, who comes from a well known family of East End publicans, said something had to be done to stop “Shoreditch turning into Magaluf” and the council’s proposals are merely about “redressing the balance”.
“It’s no surprise to learn that those squealing the loudest over these very modest proposals are those with their snouts most deeply embedded into the trough of the night time economy,” he said.
The The singer Matt Johnson with local artist Zeke Manyika
“In fact, the We Love Hackney campaign would be better titled the We Love Making Money Out of Hackney campaign as it is about protecting the profits of this well-connected minority against the interests of the silent majority – the long suffering residents of Shoreditch and Dalston.”
Johnny Vercourtre, owner of Time for Tea and once-dubbed King of Shoreditch said he was being forced out of the area because of the incessant noise. “It’s got to the point that its really depressing,” he said.
“[The bar owners] just want to carry on expanding their empire. Why should the people who have made all this money for so long hold all the power?”
Meanwhile a “myth-busting” post on the blog of Dalston residents’ group the Rio Cross Residents Association argues that fears that late licenses will be stopped are unfounded and that the night-time economy’s contribution to the borough is overstated.
Responding to the criticism, the We Love Hackney campaign insisted that the borough’s “silent majority” is against the proposals.
A spokesperson said: “We are a grassroots campaign bringing together the silent majority of Hackney residents who don’t want to go back to 1980s opening hours. We want Hackney Council to properly manage the night time economy, rather than shut it down.
“The diverse, younger, creative people who love Hackney’s nightlife and creative industries are, traditionally, much less likely to engage with the council or make their voice heard. Our campaign is changing this, and is growing every day.”
The consultation on Hackney Council’s licensing policy ends on 14 August.
Have to agree that the campaign by the nightclub/bar owners is misleading and a campaign that is purely self-serving and profit driven. They talk about the next generation of nightlife when what they mean is that they won’t be able to expand their own empires by buying more bars and turning vast profits before selling to others at a massively inflated price.
There is also another issue that is being ignored and that is the creeping ‘triangulation’ of bar/club creep where one venue gains a licence by being presented in isolation. Yet in doing so sets a precedent the licensing committee find hard to resist when someone up the road asks for a licence; then another. The lurching drunks soon impact on a large area and more licenses are granted in-filling the area.
This is already starting to creep on the Mare Street area with plans for bar expansion next to Netil house at Ketlan House; another bar owner is betting on expansion by taking a hit on a loss leading venture further down whilst looking for further properties to run bars.
In all of this the residents and locals – in a residential area are sidelined and ignored – the large impact disregarded and their views not solicited. This is in part due to the dumb ass nature of license applications where venues barely need to display their desire to sell booze, open late and neighbours are not contacted by the council as that would be seen as ‘soliciting for objections’.
The result can be a nightmare for local residents already struggling with pissed up idiots moving between the already numerous existing bars. It results in more crime, more anti-social behaviour and an overall diminution of an area….all for the profits of a few. Any measures taken to limit and take a more measured step back view of the applications that are like a rash over the Borough should be welcomed.
Wow! Hard to feel sorry for people who obviously own property in Shoreditch which probably means they also “Love Making Money Out of Hackney”.
And the myth-busting post by the Dalston association is so condescending to waiters and waitresses, counter staff, bouncers, cleaners – awful middle class snobs!
Not quite sure what that has got to do with the argument? If you happen to own property anywhere in London these days you could say the same thing.
And it’s not the residents who have unleashed thousands of drunken customers onto the streets, shouting and urinating up against people’s front doors.
I used to love going out in Shoreditch about 10 years ago but it has become an absolutely dreadful place in recent years. Stag and hen party central. Magaluf indeed!
@Will – slightly baffled as to your point….
Strangely, many people live in the borough as residents who have made it their home. That means both owning and renting and not all of those who live in the borough want the living-it-large bar culture to impact negatively on their lives.
Also, many who live in the Borough have done so for years, often when others wouldn’t have dared come into the area (far too edgy back then) and often years before the moaning bar owners thought about opening a business here.
As for trying to label dissenting voices with a ludicrous and dismissive phrase of ‘awful middle-class snobs’ is to be dismissive of the mix of residents, all of whom have a right to be heard and consulted over licensing and impact on their lives, homes and neighbourhoods.
The statement from the bar owners is ridiculously misleading. Going “back to 1980s opening hours”? Shutting down the night time economy?
Where in the Council’s proposals does it say anything about that? There is no suggestion that any existing venues should close or have their opening times amended.
It is simply a recognition that both Shoreditch and Dalston are now saturated to breaking point with late-night bars and clubs, and any further expansion should be kept in check. This is perfectly sensible. The Council’s job is to look after the interests of everyone who lives, works and spends time in the borough and to preserve and improve the character and diversity of the area for the long term. Surrendering large swathes of the borough to marauding booze tourists is not the way to go about it.
“[Rachel Munro-Peebles from the Shoreditch Community Association] said: “In our view the new policy seeks a minor, sensible policy shift on new late-night license approvals from ‘Okay, unless it’s not’ to ‘not Okay, unless it is’.”
That’s not a minor, sensible policy shift – it’s a major turnaround of position, which flies in the face of one of the basic principles of English Law! Classic prohibitionist rhetoric, in other words.
As for the claim to represent the silent majority, isn’t that what every unelected and unaccoubtable pressure group claims, in order to leverage unearned power for themselves?
“Wow! Hard to feel sorry for people who obviously own property in Shoreditch which probably means they also ‘Love Making Money Out of Hackney’.”
Precisely, Will: now that the nighttime economy has sent local property prices through the roof, those who bought near the bottom as an investment want to discard it. Note how such an attitude goes hand in hand with a wave of property development across the borough…
@TheGreatSmellofBrute
so all residents are millionaire homeowners? How very silly. Lots of people renting who don’t own and benefit from the property prices. And not all those renting want the piss-up party revellers. Silent majority is a silly media term but those wanting their voice to be heard about the creeping, slow erosion of quality of life through the self-interest of bar owners should not be dismissed so casually.
And as for the shift in policy not quite as draconian as you would make it out. It is a proposed policy shift subject to consultation as others have pointed out there will continue to remain a large number of late licence venues – so not exactly prohibitionist.
“[S]o all residents are millionaire homeowners? How very silly.”
Rob, you know damn’ well that’s not what I wrote, which is there in black and white for anyone to read for themselves. Is attempting to put words in other people’s mouths a standard tactic for you in online discussions? How very dishonest, at a most basic level.
“And as for the shift in policy not quite as draconian as you would make it out.”
I was talking about the view expressed by the representative of a pressure group, which ought to have been clear to you, had you actually bothered to READ my comment properly.
Here’s a radical idea for you: try engaging with what people have actually WRITTEN in future, rather than making false attributions in the mistaken belief that they bolster your own expressed views!
P.S. Rachel Munro-Peebles needs to study the basic principles of English law before she shoots her mouth off in public again.
‘We Love Hackney’ is transparently an ‘astro-turf’ pressure campaign set up by a group of entrepreneurial bar owners (including public school brats such as Henry Dimblelby MBE) in order to bully the local Council to back down from their duty of care to the long suffering residents of Shoreditch and Dalston.
Many people have lived in Shoreditch and Dalston for decades – long before these opportunistic bar owners and their booze-tourist customers showed up – and back in those days these areas really were ‘edgy’ and ‘creative’. Now, of course, it has all been made safe for the greedy bar owners and the public school brats who like to slum it in East London.
But why should long term residents and local families lives be made a misery just because this minority of scheming graspers wish to enjoy privileged treatment at everyone else’s expense?
Anyone who has been in Shoreditch / Dalston on a Friday / Saturday night knows full well these areas are completely over saturated with licensed premises. Only a complete moron or those with a vested financial interest (and perhaps their drunken customers) could possibly think introducing some common sense controls to these over-saturated areas is possibly a bad thing.
@will @thegreatsmellofbrut
Don’t you love it when people feel the need to get personal! I didn’t realise I was that famous!
Learn a little more about what we try and help with! Its not about shooting our mouths off, I find that quite offensive!
@Great Smell of Brute…I did read what you wrote and stand by my comments…the suggestion that it was all about property owning nimby moaners was laid out by Will and reiterated in your response to him.
‘Prohibitionist rhetoric’ was your phrase…a suggestion I reject since clearly, as others have stated, the position of LBH has been deliberately misled and the proposals are far from being the draconian position that the ‘We Love Hackney’ campaign have presented.
So, yep, I READ your comments and stand by my response having with what you WROTE.