Showing posts with label social. Show all posts
Showing posts with label social. Show all posts

Wednesday, 29 March 2017

March 30th: Haringey Against the HDV: The Social. No Permission for Demolition

Haringey Against the Haringey Development Vehicle: 
The Social. No Permission for Demolition

Thu 30 March 2017 19:00 – 23:00 TChances Arts & Music Centre, 399 High Road, N17 6QN

Haringey (Tottenham/Wood Green/Hornsey) is facing the largest attack on Council Housing and public commercial land of anywhere in the UK. This onslaught is opposed by the Labour Party in Haringey,opposed by Unite and GMB, and both MPs have called for a halt. Multiple estates are due to be demolished as the council signs a deal with Australian multinational Lendlease, a known blacklister. We know what happened in Southwark where Lendlease took the stock of council homes from 1,194 to 79.

Under The Cranes. A film by Emma-Louise Williams.

"Using the script of poet Michael Rosen’s documentary play, the film is intercut with rarely seen archive footage, much of which shows the locality’s commitment to social housing. As we hear from the famous – Shakespeare in Shoreditch, Anna Sewell, Anna Barbauld – alongside a Jamaican builder, a Bangladeshi restaurant owner or the Jewish 43 Group taking on Oswald Mosley in Dalston, we see past and present streets, parks, cemeteries and markets."

Q and A with Director Emma-Louise Williams.

Michael Rosen: Comment, questions and poetry from the award winning author Michael Rosen (ps his new book on Emile Zola is excellent).

MC: Ava Vidal: Famed Comedian and star of Mock the Week, Newsnight,Michael McIntyre's Comedy Roadshow, Comedy Central's The World Stands Up, Edinburgh and Beyond and C4 reality show Kings of Comedy.

LIVE MUSIC With the superb Franco/Roma singer FLORENCE JOELLE and Band. A Truly excellent performer and a friend of Tottenham, who else could write an ode to the 29 Bus.

Campaign Update: Find out what is going on with the largest assault on Council owned properties in the UK and how we address it. Featuring Veteran Tottenham Activist Stafford Scott and other local activists and what you can do to help.

If you haven't booked you can still pay at the door.

Monday, 1 June 2015

Brent among the London leaders in social cleansing

This article by Housing Action Southwark & Lambeth on Novaramedia is reproduced under the Creative Commons Licensing Scheme. The article is unchanged from the original LINK except for the headline.

The 2011 Localism Act introduced new powers allowing councils to discharge their duty to homeless households into the private rented sector. Before this legal change, homeless households had been able to reject offers of private accommodation offered by the council and wait in temporary accommodation (often for extremely long periods) until an offer of social housing, nearly always in their home borough, was made. Now councils have powers to force people out of their communities permanently and into insecure private accommodation – which itself is one of the biggest causes of homelessness – and they are using them.

The households that councils have a legal duty towards are families with children and those with severe disabilities, meaning that it is often people with vulnerabilities who are being forcibly removed from their communities or threatened with homelessness. Whereas previous investigations (in The Independent and Vice) into social cleansing in London have looked at out-of-borough placements for homeless households, these out-of-borough placements have been for ‘temporary housing’, whereas the research in this article looks at the ‘settled’ accommodation that councils offer in order to completely discharge their duty to the homeless household.

Housing Action Southwark and Lambeth (HASL) has sent freedom of information (FOI) requests to every council in London asking a number of questions about how they are housing people in private accommodation and outside of their home borough. All the information below is for a 16-month period from October 2013 (when most councils had finalised their Localism Act policies) to January 2015 (when the requests were sent).

1. 2000 homeless households were forced by local authorities into private sector.

Since October 2013 a total of 2128 families have been forced into the private sector by the Localism Act, who previously should have been given social housing. The map below shows that many of the boroughs which use these powers are out of central London, in tube zones 3-6. The powers are new and HASL has heard that some Labour boroughs are holding off until others have ‘led the way’, hence few councils have forced more than 100 families into the private sector. However Brent and Newham have no such shame and have already forced nearly 400 and 1000 families into the private sector respectively (see point 5).
hasl 1
Image 1: Total Localism Act offers per borough from October 2013 to January 2015. Boroughs coloured white did not respond.

2. Over 1000 households were forced permanently out of their borough and nearly 500 out of London.

Of the households forced into the private sector 1000 were given places out of their home borough and 500 were out of London entirely. The most common destinations were edge-of-London boroughs such as Barking & Dagenham and Enfield, with Luton and Birmingham being used the most outside of London.

3. 670 households pushed into further homelessness by the Localism Act.

670 households, which is a third of the households given final offers in the private sector under the Localism Act, refused them. This is a huge proportion, especially considering the consequences.

These households will now be deemed ‘intentionally homeless’ for daring to stand up to the councils and will no longer get any help off the council’s housing department. They will then have to ask social services for help, where HASL has regularly seen families threatened with having their children taken off them for the crime of being homeless; in a recent high profile case the family were separated. Even if you keep your children, social services housing is normally poor quality, can be removed at a day’s notice and you can be put under punitive Job Centre-style programs for finding your own flat, normally out of London.

4. People are refusing social cleansing.

Our research has shown that the likely reason the 670 households refused their final offers under the Localism Act was because the offer was out-of-borough or out-of-London. The six boroughs which recorded people refusing offers (Barnet, Brent, Ealing, Haringey, Newham, Wandsworth) were either the worst for out-of-borough or out-of-London offers. This is shown clearly by comparing Sutton and Barnet, both of whom tried to send 64 households into the private rented sector since October 2013.

All 64 households in Sutton were offered tenancies in Sutton and they all accepted the offer. In contrast, Barnet gave 38 of the offers out of the borough, with 19 of those being out of London entirely. As a result of offering housing so far away only 35 households accepted (just over half).

5. Newham and Brent are the worst.

These two Labour-run councils accounted for two thirds of the total mandatory private sector offers across London. Newham and Brent have made 463 and 106 people homeless due to their private sector offers respectively. Together they account for 490 of the 563 out-of-London offers that have been made since October 2013 using the Localism Act. Where others have held back, these two councils are blazing a violent trail of social cleansing. Where Brent has made final offers to 48 households to move their whole lives to Luton, Newham has tried to forcefully move 142 families to Birmingham (of which over 100 refused, and are now presumably in further homelessness).

6. Many councils have not used the new powers but use more subtle force.

Even before the Localism Act, councils had many coercive tactics to get households to which they owed a homeless duty to accept private accommodation when they could have waited for social housing. This involved councils lying to people about their rights, and some councils are still using this method of forcing people into private housing over the explicit force of the Localism Act. The Localism Act also introduced powers to let local councils change their allocations policy for social housing. Some councils, such as Lambeth and Lewisham, are using this to give people no choice but to ‘choose’ private housing, regularly out of their borough.

When all the methods councils use of getting homeless households into the private rented sector are considered together, a total of over 7000 households have been placed in private accommodation by councils from October 2013 to January 2015. We found that in contrast to the forced placements discussed above, private sector placements – mainly through less explicitly forceful methods – are used most by central London boroughs. The second map shows the movements of households into private accommodation out of borough, and the worst are found in central London such as Camden, Lambeth and Westminster.
Image 2: The total movements into the private rented sector out of their home borough that has been administered by councils
Image 2: The total movements into the private rented sector out of their home borough that has been administered by councils.

7. Councils are administering social cleansing.

The effect of all these out-of-borough placements is to move people out of central London into the outskirts and beyond. The final map shows that most central London boroughs had more households moved out by the council than moved in by others (red) and the boroughs on the outskirts of London found more households moved in by other councils than were being moved out (blue). This shows that London councils are administering mass social cleansing as thousands of people are being moved out of central London by their local council or threatened with destitution.
Image 3 – The net movements into and out of each council area by councils finding private rented sector tenancies. Negative (red) means more households have been moved out of an area than into it, and positive (blue) means more have been moved into an area than out of it.
Image 3 – The net movements into and out of each council area by councils finding private rented sector tenancies. Negative (red) means more households have been moved out of an area than into it, and positive (blue) means more have been moved into an area than out of it.

8. This social cleansing is being challenged.

Both collective action and legal challenges are being made to stop the social cleansing of our communities. The highly publicized Westminster court case – although in relation to temporary accommodation rather than permanent/settled housing offers – could have ramifications for how local authorities find mandatory placements. The Focus E15 mums campaign started as a fight to get housing in their borough when they had been made offers in the private sector in Manchester, Hastings and Birmingham. Their campaign won them private housing in their home borough of Newham. Housing Action Southwark and Lambeth has made a leaflet with useful information for homeless households threatened with offers in the private sector. Local housing action groups can help people challenge an out-of-borough offer both through the appeals process and through collective action.

Monday, 30 June 2014

CHARITY DECLARES STATE OF EMERGENCY AS LONELINESS AMONG BRENT'S OLDER PEOPLE REACHES 50-YEAR HIGH


Guest blog by Contact the Elderly

Contact the Elderly LINK has declared a state-of-emergency as the number of socially isolated older people in Brent reaches breaking point.

Spurred by concern over the speed at which the government is tackling the problem of a million neglected older people in the UK who are off the radar, and the rate at which these numbers are growing, the charity is taking the issue into its own hands as it heads into its 50th year.

Supported by a network of volunteers across England, Scotland and Wales, Contact the Elderly offers a vital lifeline of friendship to those aged 75 and over, who live alone. The charity’s monthly Sunday afternoon tea parties in Brent enable older people to receive much-needed human contact.

Now the charity is calling for more volunteers to get involved to host a tea party in their home once a year or to drive older guests to and from the parties once a month.

A new study conducted by independent research agency Qa Research reveals that almost one in five (19%) of the older people Contact the Elderly supports joined the charity because they rarely saw another person.

With almost 50 years’ experience, Contact the Elderly knows that the solution to loneliness can be as simple as a regular face-to-face chat over a cup of tea. Some 78 per cent of the older people surveyed feel less lonely as a result of the monthly tea parties. A total of 96% said the tea parties give them something to look forward to.

Local group coordinator Elaine Smith from Wembley says, “We offer a vital lifeline of friendship to some of the loneliest people in Brent. By its nature, social isolation often means that the loneliest people are the hardest to reach. By spreading the word we can encourage more local people to give up just two hours a month as a driver, or a few hours a year as a host.”

With the survey identifying key loneliness triggers as marital bereavement (22%) and lack of mobility (51%); 80 per cent of guests said they felt happier after joining one of the charity’s groups.

Contact the Elderly Founder and Chairman, Trevor Lyttleton MBE, says “Loneliness amongst older people has reached a state of emergency and must not be ignored. For almost 50 years we have been focussing on providing a cost-effective solution, yet the demand for our service has never been so high.

“We know our formula of tea and conversation works, but we simply cannot reach out to the people that desperately need our help without increased volunteers and funding.”

If you want to volunteer for Contact the Elderly or join as a guest, please Contact the Elderly’s North London Development Officer , Isabelle Wise, She can be reached on 020 8445 1333.

#POWEROFCONTACT
To support the appeal, text POWR15 and the donation amount to 70070

Wednesday, 1 January 2014

Wembley Matters wishes you a successful New Year of struggle

Page views May 2007 to Jan 1st2014

I would like to thank all my readers for their support this year which has seen the Wembley Matters readership continue to grow.   In particular I am grateful to guest bloggers and those who have contributed information for my stories.

Later this month Wembley Matters should hit half a million 'all time' page views.

I wish everyone a successful New Year of struggle for environmental and social justice..

Tuesday, 12 November 2013

Attempt to clear up confusion on council rent increases not entirely successful

Pete Firmin
Speaking to Brent Executive last night, Pete Firmin, secretary of Brent TUC, a South Kilburn resident and Labour Party member, lambasted the Council's stance on council rent increases.  He said that the annual above inflation increases, which in his case would mean an increase of 40% over 5 years, should be unacceptable to a Labour Council.

The plans were included in the Housing Strategy officers' report which Firmin described as impenetrable. Several people had tried to make sense of it, including Brent Central potential Labour candidate Kingsley Abrams, and had been unable to say with absolute certainty what was proposed. His local Kilburn councillors had said they knew nothing about it and when he asked Cllr Margaret McLennan and Cllr Michael Pavey, both members of the Executive what it meant, they confirmed rent rises over five years to 80% of market rents.

He said that the Council would be adding to the financial problems of people already hit by benefit cuts, council tax benefit changes and higher food and energy prices. He asked why tenants were being forced to fund new build through the rent increases and contrasted that with the freezing of the Council Tax.

Firmin said that this was not something the Council had to do and he circulated information from Islington Council  on its approach.

Muhammed Butt defended the Council's approach saying that new housing was imperative. Cllr  Margaret McLennan, lead member for housing, said that the policy referred to social rent and not market rents (a search of the report reveals that the only mention of social rent is one about the possible national fixing of these).  She said that the Council had not yet decided on their definition of an affordable social rent.  She said that that the planned new build was good news ands that the plans had receved a high level of endorsement.The priority was to house people on the waiting list.

Andy Donald, head of Regeneration and Major Project, said the new build would go straight to an 'affordable' rent of between 60% and 80% of market rent. This was the government's definition and the Council would have to charge that to use a government grant. If new build was at an 'affordable rent' it would help fund the refurbishment of existing stock. The actual rent rises would be fixed in February 2013 and would be roughly 4% higher in 2014-15.

Cllr Pavey waded in to say that Pete Firmin should have discussed this earlier, the Islington document was interesting but why hadn't Pete circulated it beforehand (and anyway they had more land available than Brent) and then ended with what is fast becoming his mantra: this is not perfect but the best we can do in difficult times.

Many of us left not entirely clear on what was proposed and I suspect that was also true of the Executive members who voted to approve the strategy.