Report from Anti London Olympics/regeneration march and meeting plus comment

Sun­day the 23rd Sep­tem­ber was a sad day in the his­to­ry of gar­den­ing. It was the day the Manor Gar­dens Allot­ments were closed by the Olympic Deliv­ery Author­i­ty.

Manor allotments demoSun­day the 23rd Sep­tem­ber was a sad day in the his­to­ry of gar­den­ing. It was the day the Manor Gar­dens Allot­ments were closed by the Olympic Deliv­ery Author­i­ty.

It was also the day for­mer allot­ment hold­ers and many oth­er peo­ple decid­ed to march and demon­strate their con­cern over the way in which devel­op­ment and so called regen­er­a­tion is soak­ing up much need­ed green space. Mar­tin Slavin an Olympic researcher was on the march and com­ments “ … so called regen­er­a­tion projects like the Olympics are more about the careers of those involved in the Olympic indus­try, and the prof­its of devel­op­ers and con­struc­tion com­pa­nies than they are about improv­ing the lives of ordi­nary peo­ple”.

The Manor Gar­dens Allot­ments, were a lit­tle piece of the coun­try­side in Lon­don, and were giv­en to the gar­den­ers of East Lon­don by May­or Vil­liers, an old fash­ioned phil­an­thropist, he was ded­i­cat­ed to improv­ing the life of work­ing class Eas­t­en­ders by a trans­fer of resources from him (rich) to the peo­ple of East Lon­don (poor). As well as the allot­ments, the Olympic project has swal­lowed up a huge chunk of land in East Lon­don, most of it com­pul­so­ri­ly pur­chased. The acqui­si­tion of the Olympic Park land is vir­tu­al­ly a mir­ror image of what Major Vil­liers did all those years ago.

The com­pul­so­ry pur­chase of the Olympic Park­land has been fund­ed by pub­lic mon­ey, and as such it can be argued that it should stay in pub­lic own­er­ship, post Olympics, how­ev­er, exact­ly what will hap­pen to the land remains unde­cid­ed, but both Ken Liv­ing­stone and Ruth Kel­ly have pub­licly stat­ed that they plan to bank role the Olympic project by sell­ing off land with­in the park to devel­op­ers when the Games are over. Major Vil­liers would no doubt turn in his grave, as his beau­ti­ful allot­ments along with vir­tu­al­ly the whole STATE AREA site is bull­dozed for a project which will most like­ly result in a trans­fer of land from pub­lic to pri­vate own­er­ship. As the Olympic project runs fur­ther and fur­ther into finan­cial dif­fi­cul­ty the pres­sure will be on to claw back as much mon­ey as pos­si­ble. This will inevitably mean get­ting into bed with prop­er­ty devel­op­ers who, along with the con­struc­tion com­pa­nies, will be the main ben­e­fi­cia­ries of a project that has been flawed from the very begin­ning.

An added tragedy to this sto­ry is that much what will form Olympic Park was pre­vi­ous­ly avail­able for use, on a non-income depen­dent basis, a cycle cir­cuit, allot­ments, social hous­ing, foot­ball pitch­es, lit­tle nooks and cran­nies, were all sorts of mar­gin­al busi­ness and artists had found a foothold. There was also a rave scene at Hack­ney Wick, with tired and dazed ravers leav­ing par­ties on Sun­day morn­ings whilst the well dressed con­gre­ga­tions of the many African Church­es filed by. It was an area that had grown organ­i­cal­ly over more thaan a cen­tu­ry and though it has some rough edges the area had an authen­tic­i­ty rarely found in 21st cen­tu­ry Lon­don. This has been lost to what will more than like­ly be an Olympic lega­cy of expen­sive flats with­in gat­ed com­mu­ni­ties, a ster­ile, pri­vate­ly owned area sim­i­lar to the dock­lands.

It would be impos­si­ble to sell the Olympics to the nation for 3 weeks of sport, it is sim­ply too expen­sive, so those mak­ing their liv­ing out of this project have mar­ket­ed it on the sup­posed ben­e­fits of a lega­cy which remains unplanned. One of the prob­lems is that New labour has con­trol of the project, it has cen­tral gov­ern­ment back­ing and with New Labour also con­trol­ling all 4 of the bor­oughs in which the Olympic Park is sit­u­at­ed, and with the Olympic Deliv­ery Author­i­ty award­ing plan­ning per­mis­sion to itself the Olympic project can be pushed through vir­tu­al­ly unchecked.

Sunday’s march from Hack­ney Town Hall to the new secu­ri­ty gates of the Olympic con­struc­tion site was a sign of the public’s mis­giv­ings over this deeply flawed project. After the march there was a meet­ing where dis­cus­sions were held relat­ing to devel­op­ment and regen­er­a­tion. One inter­est­ing point cov­ered in this dis­cus­sion was the way these large projects evolve. First plans are made, then a so-called con­sul­ta­tion takes place and then the work begins. How­ev­er the meet­ing agreed that the con­sul­ta­tions were gen­er­al­ly a pub­lic rela­tions exer­cise and that they made lit­tle dif­fer­ence to the out­come of projects, which are usu­al­ly forced through despite any pub­lic mis­giv­ings. The Olympics appears to be a case in point.