The tone of some of the postings in this thread has become a bit vitriolic, so I am not inclined to respond in the same manner.

There seems to be a degree of misunderstanding about the listing process. The body responsible for listing buildings is English Heritage, which is a national government organisation under the Department for Culture, Media and Sport. Among other things it is in charge of deciding which older buildings should be protected (although not preserved in aspic, they take a positive line about conversion and reuse because these things increase a building's chance of survival). They undertake routine surveys of different areas and list buildings. They will also sometimes "spotlist" buildings which are about to be demolished.

Any person or group of people can apply to have a building spotlisted at any time. In their application they send some photos and as much historical information as they can. An inspector then visits and conducts further historical research into the building. The inspector then decides on whether to list based on 4 criteria: architectural interest, historic interest, association with an important person and group value. A building can be listed on the basis of a single criterion. For example a totally dull house could be listed if it was an important person's birthplace. Their decision is then counter-signed by two other inspectors (who have to agree) and signed off by the DCMS.

Louise House was listed under ALL FOUR criteria (please see the earlier attached documents).

The process of listing is independent of any future plans for the site and once the initial application is in, is not able to be influenced (either way) by the building owner or the applicant. In essence, English Heritage takes a "pure view" of the building's national importance. Neither the SFFH nor Lewisham were able to influence the outcome at all.

The Save the Face of Forest Hill campaign group is independent of any political party. It is independent of the Forest Hill and Sydenham Societies. Some of the group are members of either society, both or none. Although the Sydenham Society aligned itself with our policy, this was a separate decision taken by different people, and that alignment could be only temporary if the policies of the two groups diverged. The Sydneham Society decided to fall behind our general approach at a well attended AGM earlier this year, where the show of (about 100) hands was nearly unanimous.

As for being unrepresentative, SFFH has stood in the streets for weeks in the rain asking people to sign its petition and over 1,000 people have done so. I am not aware of how many members the Forest Hill Society (for whom I assume Roz speaks) has, nor am I aware of any consultation it has taken of its members it has undertaken in its pro-demolition stance.

We live in the Perry Vale area of SE23. My partner is a member of the Forest Hill Society. In February 2008 I found the FHS to be very pro-demolition and the Sydenham Society to be more sympathetic to conservation. So I joined the Sydenham Society, but I don't speak for them or know anything about their workings.

Roz's accusations about privileged access to and influence of the Council are quite funny. The SFFH group had great difficulty in being allowed to approach Council Officers with alternative plans for rebuilding the pools behind the existing frontage block. Those alternative plans were then summarily dismissed. Privileged access, I should be so lucky!

In terms of why we "should have less than the Victorians" there is no problem. The current facade block has two pools, changing areas and all the other things a swimming pool needs already behind it. Particularly if the land which forms a small park to the north is also used, there is no reason why excellent modern pools cannot be built in the space available. Has any consideration been given to a two storey pools, with community facilities upstairs? The old facade is quite tall and could screen such a development.

With regard to the other accusations: I live in Forest Hill and so do the majority of our supporters. I am a teacher and, for what business it is of Roz's, a lifelong Labour voter.

Tim Walder
Save the Face of Forest Hill