|
|
 |
| |
The son of TV traveller Michael Palin says our parks are
meant to be enjoyed by all |
Whose park is it anyway?
Museum curator William Palin says we
must all fight to keep commercialisation out of our public space.
What has happened to the sanctity of our public parks and
gardens? How is it that the capital’s open spaces, so envied
by visitors from foreign cities and so vital to everyLondoner’s
quality of life are suddenly up for grabs?
Last month, the community around Lincoln’s Inn Fields,
London’s largest and most historic garden square, successfully
defeated Camden Council in its attempt to sweep away laws protecting
the park from private exploitation, but elsewhere, the commercialisation
of the capital’s green lungs continues apace.
Regent’s Park, arguably the most beautiful of all central
London’s green spaces will be suffering a similar fate,
as the Royal Parks, under pressure from the Culture Department
to increase revenue, close off more and more acreage for corporate
events.
No public park should have to justify its existence in economic
terms nor should its upkeep depend on commercial use. Yet, unless
the political will is there to protect the principals of public
open space, the London park will become increasingly the resort
of companies and corporations who are able simply to purchase
them for their own exclusive use.
The case of Lincoln’s Inn Fields, Holborn, is an interesting
one, and at least provides some hope for the future. The square
is an iconic open space in one of the most built-up parts of
London.
It was enclosed and protected in the early 17th century “as
a meanes to frustrate the covetous and greedy endeavours of
such persons as daylie seek to fill upp that small remainder
of ayre in those partes with uneccessary and unprofitable buildings.”
In 1894, following the passing of an Act of Parliament, it was
leased to the London County Council as a public park and on
its opening in 1895 the Chairman of the LCC exclaimed that the
dream of John Ruskin “when children shall no longer play
in the gutter” had almost been realised.
The Fields later passed to the GLC and finally, in 1970, to
Camden Council. In the 1980s, the state of the park deteriorated
and the Fields famously became a homeless encampment for a number
of years. Following the threat of legal action the council finally
agreed to clear and properly enclose the Fields.
However, this only hailed a new occupying force. In 2001, the
council began erecting large marquees for corporate events.
These proliferated, resulting in the exclusion of the public
from large parts of the square.
In 2002, an events company erected an 18-metre-high steel-framed
structure in the centre of the square. It was ugly, took weeks
to erect and dismantle and housed events that rocked the square
past 1am. The atmosphere of the square had changed, regular
users felt intimidated and excluded and for those working and
living on and around the square the noise became a nightmare.
Yet, it transpired that all this time Camden had been breaking
the law. The Act of 1894 forbade the erection of any structures
in the Fields. When this was discovered, Camden were forced
to sacrifice a lucrative contract with an events organiser and
get out of the Fields. We hoped they would be gone for good.
Yet it seems the community had underestimated the “covetous
and greedy” officers at Camden. Early in 2004, notifications
were sent of the council’s intent to change the law to
allow them to continue to use the Fields for private events.
This was a serious step, but not serious enough it seems for
the officers involved to notify their own councillors. Not even
the chairman of the planning committee had been told. It was
at this point that the Lincoln’s Inn Fields community pulled
together, petitions again the clause were submitted and a long
legal battle ensued, culminating in a seven-day hearing in the
House of Lords.
The council argued that they needed the money generated by private
events for the maintenance and improvement of the square, yet
they provided no reliable figures to back this up.
They also admitted that they had not explored other ways of
raising revenue (through donations from the businesses around
the square for example). To many, the council’s argument
was profoundly disturbing – the implication being that
private events should lift the financial burden of looking after
a public space away from the council.
The Lords were not impressed by Camden’s case, not least
because it was shown that the council had not bothered to consult
with the local community, and the clause was thrown out. It
is not known how many tens of thousands of pounds of ratepayers
money was squandered by Camden on this case.
The battle cost the petitioners too. Sir John Soane’s Museum,
a public museum supported by a government grant, shelled out
over £12,000 to fight its own local authority.
It is hoped that the victory over Camden in the battle for Lincoln’s
Inn Fields will inspire other community groups to fight the
exploitation of their own coveted open spaces. The message is
clear, the public realm is not open to negotiation and the principals
that inspired the LCC to enshrine in law the public status of
Lincoln’s Inn Fields should never be compromised.
• |
|
|
|
