London’s new Night Time Industries Association wants to keep Hackney dancing

Out out. Image: Darrell Berry/darrell-berry.com/Flickr.

Despite recent revelations about the UK’s nightclubs, London is still one of the best places in the world to party: just ask any of the thousands of international clubbers who fill its venues every weekend.

From big clubs like Ministry of Sound or fabric, which host a couple of thousand people every weekend, to the likes of Dalston Superstore and nearby Dance Tunnel, which pack a couple of  hundred into their more intimate venues, London remains a worldwide centre for having a good time.

But its freedom to dance is under threat. An early draft of Hackney council’s new Licensing Policy review document, which details how any future applications will be handled, showed that late licenses for any new veues that want to open in the borough would be “not considered appropriate”:

 

Tellingly, that wording didn’t last very long. A later version of the document clarified that venues will have to close no later than midnight – or 1am, if they’re a restaurant. While Hackney is becoming a dining destination, its fame comes from dance venues that have barely got going at 1am.

Yesterday evening, though, things suddenly changed. The council released a statement, announcing a new proposal to maintain the current licensing arrangements for 2016, pending a re-consultation on an updated policy later in the year. The reason given for this sudden change was an unspecified “minor error” in the original document. It’s not entirely clear whether the earlier drafts of the policy really had contained significant mistakes, or whether Hackney Council is just making a u-turn and looking for a way to get out of Dodge.


Either way, the fact this discussion is necessary shows that Hackney council doesn’t understand the source of its own borough’s success – and how the night time culture actually works.

Steve Ball is the founder of the Columbo Group, which runs Shoreditch’s XOYO, plus The Nest in Dalston and an upcoming Brixton venue, Phonox. Without new licences, he told Dalstonist back in July, the local scene would stagnate:

“Hackney is built on its creativity and being seen as one of the most dynamic, diverse and creative boroughs in London,” he said. “A vital part of that is the constant regeneration of its nightlife. This policy is going to stop that regeneration... It will remove from young entrepreneurs the opportunity to do things differently.”  

It’s in response to things like this row that the NTIA – or the Night Time Industry Association – has arrived on the scene. Its mission is to combat the excessive regulatory impulses of councils that see nightlife as a problem, and not as one of London’s great cultural and social assets. According to the NTIA’s own “Forward Into The Night” report, the UK’s night time economy turns over £66bn a year, and contributes nearly 6 per cent of national GDP.

"It doesn’t matter how long you’ve been somewhere... You as a venue operator can still end up being seen as the problem"

The NTIA was launched back in May, with members from ranging from clubs like fabric and Bloc, to restaurants like Bodeans and seminal live venues like the 100 Club. But the recent revelation of Hackney Council’s attitude to nightlife – dismissed as mere “jargon” by councillor Emma Plouviez, the chair of Hackney’s  Licensing Committee – is just the latest skirmish in Hackney’s struggle with the industry that has fuelled the regeneration and gentrification of the borough.

First, it made Shoreditch a Special Policy Area in 2005, limiting local nightlife by stating that late licenses would only be given “in exceptional circumstances”. Dalston also become an SPA in 2014, despite an overwhelming number of those surveyed saying they didn’t want that to happen. 

A man who knows all about this struggle is the NTIA’s chairman, Alan D Miller. He’s co-founder of Brick Lane’s Vibe Bar and the Old Truman Brewery complex, and spent nearly 20 years as a venue operator. But he closed up shop in 2014, having had his fill of London’s over-regulation. 

“What I learned is that it doesn’t matter how long you’ve been somewhere, how much experience you have or how much you’ve improved the area,” he explains. “You as a venue operator can still end up being seen as the problem…. What happens is that people are caught up in an old mentality and it’s an easy fix to blame the night time economy.”

The key to what the NTIA wants for its members is parity with other businesses. As Miller puts it, “If someone behaves badly in a bank or on a motorway, they don't all get penalised and neither should we. We need to be treated like any other industry.”

He adds that many of the “crime spikes” seen around venues are almost entirely about mobile phone theft. “Imagine if you told the British public that the biggest challenge today in [London] policing was mobile phone theft…”

"You can tell the story of Hackney through its nightclubs"

Dan Beaumont, one of the co-owners of Dalston Superstore and Dance Tunnel and one of the directors of the NTIA, puts its arguments into a local context. “We need to help the decision-makers to understand that, actually, nightclubs are really part of Hackney's cultural capital.” That’s been true ever since the borough was formed in 1965, the same year, coincidentally, when seminal London reggae club The Four Aces opened.

“You can tell the story of Hackney through its nightclubs,” Beaumont adds. “The Four Aces, The Blue Note, the Bricklayers Arms, 333 – these are places that are part of our shared history. If we regulate them out of existence then we are all the poorer for it.”

One of the first people to publicise the #NotConsideredAppropriate hashtag, Beaumont explains it as “a real illustration of the gulf in perspective that we need to try and overcome”.

“I think there are certain crimes that are associated with late night venues, and we can't pretend that that's not the case,” he says. “But if we accept that people should have the freedom to enjoy [themselves] and that activity brings cultural, social and economic benefits, then we should look at the negatives within that context – and not try and shut down a vibrant and important part of city life." 

Shain Shapiro, of Sound Diplomacy and the Music Cities Convention, is an expert on the part music can play in urban planning (and writes on those subjects for this publication). How does he think we should bridge this gulf in understanding?

“I think for things to change for music and the night time economy, you need to have music become a part of the bigger debate,” he explains. “What I’m aiming for is for music to be considered like anything else is – like transport, for example, music should be part and parcel of that, a spoke in a bigger wheel.” 

The Music Venue Trust, the charity behind the mayor’s Music Venues Taskforce, has called for a full Agent of Change law in the UK. That would mean that the person or business responsible for a change is responsible for managing the impact of that change – in other words, the responsibility for noise dampening in new flats would lie with developers, not with long-existing venues.

There is possibly legal precedent for this, judging from the deal Ministry Of Sound struck with Englewood developers back in January 2014.  At the time, the Evening Standard reported then that Englewood had agreed “to incorporate high levels of noise reduction features including acoustic glazing, sealed windows and internal ‘winter gardens’” to address concerns about noise complaints. Residents will effectively also “‘sign away’ their rights to complain about noise through a specific reference in their deeds”. Were such a policy to become universal, it’d do much to protect London’s nightlife.

This is about more than just going clubbing in Dalston – it’s about Londoners having the freedom to enjoy themselves and their city, away from restrictions that seem to prioritise the needs of a few vocal residents over those of the many.

There is still time to tell Hackney what you think here, before the consultation deadline of Friday 14 August. You can also support the NTIA and We Love Hackney, a group of local businesses and Hackney residents who want to make sure their borough remains a social and cultural hotspot we can all enjoy for years to come.

 
 
 
 

The IPPC report on the melting ice caps makes for terrifying reading

A Greeland iceberg, 2007. Image: Getty.

Earlier this year, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) – the UN body responsible for communicating the science of climate breakdown – released its long-awaited Special Report on the Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate.

Based on almost 7,000 peer-reviewed research articles, the report is a cutting-edge crash course in how human-caused climate breakdown is changing our ice and oceans and what it means for humanity and the living planet. In a nutshell, the news isn’t good.

Cryosphere in decline

Most of us rarely come into contact with the cryosphere, but it is a critical part of our climate system. The term refers to the frozen parts of our planet – the great ice sheets of Greenland and Antarctica, the icebergs that break off and drift in the oceans, the glaciers on our high mountain ranges, our winter snow, the ice on lakes and the polar oceans, and the frozen ground in much of the Arctic landscape called permafrost.

The cryosphere is shrinking. Snow cover is reducing, glaciers and ice sheets are melting and permafrost is thawing. We’ve known this for most of my 25-year career, but the report highlights that melting is accelerating, with potentially disastrous consequences for humanity and marine and high mountain ecosystems.

At the moment, we’re on track to lose more than half of all the permafrost by the end of the century. Thousands of roads and buildings sit on this frozen soil – and their foundations are slowly transitioning to mud. Permafrost also stores almost twice the amount of carbon as is present in the atmosphere. While increased plant growth may be able to offset some of the release of carbon from newly thawed soils, much will be released to the atmosphere, significantly accelerating the pace of global heating.

Sea ice is declining rapidly, and an ice-free Arctic ocean will become a regular summer occurrence as things stand. Indigenous peoples who live in the Arctic are already having to change how they hunt and travel, and some coastal communities are already planning for relocation. Populations of seals, walruses, polar bears, whales and other mammals and sea birds who depend on the ice may crash if sea ice is regularly absent. And as water in its bright-white solid form is much more effective at reflecting heat from the sun, its rapid loss is also accelerating global heating.

Glaciers are also melting. If emissions continue on their current trajectory, smaller glaciers will shrink by more than 80 per cent by the end of the century. This retreat will place increasing strain on the hundreds of millions of people globally who rely on glaciers for water, agriculture, and power. Dangerous landslides, avalanches, rockfalls and floods will become increasingly normal in mountain areas.


Rising oceans, rising problems

All this melting ice means that sea levels are rising. While seas rose globally by around 15cm during the 20th century, they’re now rising more than twice as fast –- and this rate is accelerating.

Thanks to research from myself and others, we now better understand how Antarctica and Greenland’s ice sheets interact with the oceans. As a result, the latest report has upgraded its long-term estimates for how much sea level is expected to rise. Uncertainties still remain, but we’re headed for a rise of between 60 and 110cm by 2100.

Of course, sea level isn’t static. Intense rainfall and cyclones – themselves exacerbated by climate breakdown – can cause water to surge metres above the normal level. The IPCC’s report is very clear: these extreme storm surges we used to expect once per century will now be expected every year by mid-century. In addition to rapidly curbing emissions, we must invest millions to protect at-risk coastal and low-lying areas from flooding and loss of life.

Ocean ecosystems

Up to now, the ocean has taken up more than 90 per cent of the excess heat in the global climate system. Warming to date has already reduced the mixing between water layers and, as a consequence, has reduced the supply of oxygen and nutrients for marine life. By 2100 the ocean will take up five to seven times more heat than it has done in the past 50 years if we don’t change our emissions trajectory. Marine heatwaves are also projected to be more intense, last longer and occur 50 times more often. To top it off, the ocean is becoming more acidic as it continues to absorb a proportion of the carbon dioxide we emit.

Collectively, these pressures place marine life across the globe under unprecedented threat. Some species may move to new waters, but others less able to adapt will decline or even die out. This could cause major problems for communities that depend on local seafood. As it stands, coral reefs – beautiful ecosystems that support thousands of species – will be nearly totally wiped out by the end of the century.

Between the lines

While the document makes some striking statements, it is actually relatively conservative with its conclusions – perhaps because it had to be approved by the 195 nations that ratify the IPCC’s reports. Right now, I would expect that sea level rise and ice melt will occur faster than the report predicts. Ten years ago, I might have said the opposite. But the latest science is painting an increasingly grave picture for the future of our oceans and cryosphere – particularly if we carry on with “business as usual”.

The difference between 1.5°C and 2°C of heating is especially important for the icy poles, which warm much faster than the global average. At 1.5°C of warming, the probability of an ice-free September in the Arctic ocean is one in 100. But at 2°C, we’d expect to see this happening about one-third of the time. Rising sea levels, ocean warming and acidification, melting glaciers, and permafrost also will also happen faster – and with it, the risks to humanity and the living planet increase. It’s up to us and the leaders we choose to stem the rising tide of climate and ecological breakdown.

Mark Brandon, Professor of Polar Oceanography, The Open University.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.