George Clarkes Council House Scandal

[HelenaDove]

31 July on Channel 4

tvhighlights.bradfordzone.co.uk/television/tvprogrammes/george-clarkes-council-house-scandal-channel-4-31-july-900pm/

As council housing in the UK reaches its 100th anniversary, George Clarke embarks on his own personal campaign to kick start a new wave of council house building. A child of a council estate, Clarke looks at the reasons for the steep decline in affordable public housing, and meets those who have suffered due to the acute shortage of homes. In a bid to realise his own ambition to create social housing of quantity, and quality, he meets visionary architects of the past, and visits the best and worst examples of housing currently on offer. A trip to Vienna, where social housing can come with indoor and outdoor pools, proves inspirational for his housing vision for the future. George lobbies government to reform housing policy, before taking matters into his own hands in a bid to start a housing revolution. Prod Co: Amazing Productions

on next Wednesday

Not sure if everyone posting reads every other post already on the thread, but I want to back to why we have a situation that everybody when asked directly knows is mad, but everyone, including voters acts as though there is another reality.

ie even the Victorians and Edwardians worked out that is was cheaper in the longer run to provide decent housing for people on lower wages. As well as creating a healthier more settle workforce to exploit!

And it is worth remembering that after both World Wars one of the demands by returning troops and the women who did so much work on the home front, was to be rewarded with decent housing. And Governments at the time prioritised these. And more importantly people as a whole, including the media promoted it positively.

But the poison that entered our group think under Thatcher, ie there is no such thing as society, the politicisation of the police (miners strike etc.) meant more and more people rejected these notions, and later generations just dont understand it. And we allow the grasping materialistic american way of life to influence what we aspire to. The stupid notion of home ownership, which more sophisticated but conservative european countries now is not necessary for a good society, is now a British mania. Not forgetting the US housing crisis is what caused the meltdown here and led to austerity.

And because we didn't challenge not only Thatcher, but Blair who acted as Thatcher's son, to stop the sale of council housing. And worse then pressurised HAs through funding streams to prioritise profits over purpose. For many HAs it is more financially rewarding to sell off existing housing stock in city and town centres as they can get so much money for them that they can justify it terms of then being able to build more (sub standard) homes in remoter areas.

It isn't just about short term decisions, but that what should be political decisions about improving society, are now about what brings in the most money. That fact that some of the original social housing which were founded under charitable status in the 19th century are now happy to change those charitable aims to allow them to sell some of the best social housing in the country to private financeers is a prime example of how morally corrupt we have become.

One of the reasons we have a housing shortage is that what were homes are now bought and sold as though they are stocks and shares. Many new developments have flats etc., that have never been occupies because they are bought as speculation, often by companies and individuals who dont in live in the UK, and nobody cares.

I am not surprised that HAs are unable to provide suitable housing, carry out repairs effectively, act as decent human beings. They have been put in a situation (which you could argue they could have refused to do) of trying to provide a system that can only be effectively run by local councils in line with local need.

Many HAs are now using zero contract staff who are demotivated and alienated, and more often than not out of their depth.

I am an HA tenant with a flat in a valuable block. We have been sold on 3 times. We are now part of a very large HA which has 3 times if not more, than the number of properties as the previous one. And they have only one surveyor to check and recommend work on properties.

Grenfell wasn't about a Tory council, it was about a system that has been effectively gutted and just limps along in the same way as G47 etc., are doing work that should be carried out by professional services.

And yet even during the aftermath of Grenfell, not just the media but people on social media were talking about social housing tenants as being some sort of blot on society. Grenfell housed people from a wide range of professions and cultures. And as some later documentaties showed, many of the homes were little palaces where families had created well cared for and comfortable homes.

As other have said up thread, social housing started out by providing so many people with the opportunity to move out of desparately over crowded, unsanitary homes. And yes in some cases communities were broken up and connections lost. And some of the housing was sub standard (remember Ronan Point).

But it was a step in the right direction. And could have been improved. Not forgetting that HB comes out of a Council's budget, so in many cases if the HN was to pay for a council house that money returned to the Council. Now basically, HB is a system of taking public money and streaming it into the pockets of private companies and slum landlords. (A mainstay of Tory politics, diverting public money into private pockets.)

So HAs are managing cuts in the same way as the NHS and schools are having to do. It isn't about need, but about juggling competitive needs. While the salaries of CEs increase year after year.

ie there is no such thing as society, the politicisation of the police (miners strike etc.) meant more and more people rejected these notions, and later generations just dont understand it

YES And they think its a normal way to behave Especially SOME of the ones who work in sector.

My ex housing officer who i mentioned upthread pinned a tort notice to the communal wall backed up with a letter. Saying that unless my disabled DH removed his mobility scooter they would take it and sell it to cover the cost of removal/ destroy it depending on whether you believed the tort notice or the letter.

This caused immense stress in the run up to Xmas a couple of years ago because he pinned it up in late Nov.

DH got a mobility scooter shed put in in the end which he happily pays for.

After i kicked off on social media (and i DID try the correct avenues first) and got a visit right before Xmas (maybe they were scared it was going to go viral when their offices were closed the shed was discussed and put in a few months later.

I had hoped they had learned from this but no I found out they were still treating other disabled tenants in the same way.

The residulisation of social housing laid bare.

It is NOT reasonable to threaten a disabled tenant with what is basically the removal of their legs in this way and treat them like they are criminals purely because of thinking that those that live in social housing are the lowest of the low.

It is also pure tokenism to cite Grenfell as the reason when

a. the drug user downstairs is storing a can of petrol under the communal stairs

b. see Barne Barton fire.

www.cfoi.org.uk/2018/06/parliament-to-debate-bill-that-would-bring-public-service-contractors-housing-associations-and-other-bodies-under-foi/
Add message | Report | Message poster
HelenaDove Wed 13-Jun-18 20:51:48

The bill would also make housing associations subject to FOI. The problems caused by the current lack of any right of access to include:

54 out of 61 housing associations refused to supply their fire risk assessments to Inside Housing magazine in 2017. [3]
a tenant was refused information about the cause of a fire on their premises. [4]
a housing association refused to say whether potentially toxic lead pipes were used in the property’s water supply. [5]
another housing association refused to reveal the electricity bill which led a tenant to be charged £1,200 to cover the cost of 6 communal light bulbs. [6]

Other bodies that would be brought under the FOI Act by the bill include electoral registration officers, returning officers and Local Safeguarding Children Boards.

The bill would give the Information Commissioner new powers to obtain information from contractors when investigating complaints and make them subject to the offence applying to public authorities which deliberately destroy requested information to prevent its disclosure. It would also close a loophole which blocks such prosecutions unless they are brought within 6 months of the offence occurring

THIS DOCUMENT. Myatts Field North refurb.

www.geog.leeds.ac.uk/fileadmin/documents/research/pfisocialhousing/MFN_PFI_Refurb_Experiences_Report.pdf
Add message | Report | Message poster
HelenaDove Fri 14-Jul-17 22:10:33

Residents were told to remove their pets, but no compensation was offered to cover the
costs involved.
 No consideration was given to residents who worked night shifts.
 Workers used electricity paid for by of residents, without offering compensation.
 Doors were left open and residents were able to wander in unchallenged by workers
who did not know them.
 Quality alterations that residents had already made to their homes were ripped out to
make way for inferior alternatives.
 Supposedly completed electrical rewiring was found to be substandard and occasionally
dangerous.
 Supposedly completed pipe works and its housing were found to be substandard.
 In some homes, odd sized radiators and kitchen unit doors had been fitted.
 Flooding in one home had been caused by an unsupervised apprentice.
 Households were left overnight without running water or a toilet.
 At least one resident was left without electricity for a whole weekend.
 Some workers were found to be abusive, bullying and inconsiderate, especially towards
elderly or otherwise vulnerable residents
Add message | Report | Message poster
HelenaDove Thu 20-Sep-18 14:31:48

"Hodkinson carried out a qualitative survey of 14 homes refurbished by Rydon that had been the subject of a huge number of complaints. Showers were fitted next to electric fans. A toilet was installed so close to a wall that you could only sit on it sideways. Some households went for days without electricity and weeks without cooking facilities. Cupboards were fitted with wrongly size doors. Tenants who complained reported that they were treated dismissively. One remembered the site supervisor saying to him, “It ain’t Chelsea, mate.” Regenter’s out-of-hours emergency line linked to the wrong database, so callout engineers weren’t available. The striking thing was how long problems could drag out: one family’s flat was flooded in January 2014, and repairs weren’t even scheduled till September. Two years later, their flat still hadn’t been fully repaired and redecorated. Even at the most straightforward level, the work wasn’t done to a decent standard.

When approached for comment, Rydon said that since the complaints were made, three years ago, attempts have been made to remedy the problems. They said the comments were not reflective of most of the residents, and that there was a good level of satisfaction among the residents now.

For tenants with more complicated requirements, the situation was worse. The Cifuentes family, one of whom used a wheelchair, was left without ramps, hoists or any means of escape in a fire, and without a lock on the front door. Repairs were so slow and haphazard that, at one point, the family had to move out for over a month, and the disabled member could only have his needs met by going into a respite unit – whereupon they were threatened with losing their carer’s allowance, their disability allowance and their car.

www.theguardian.com/housing-network/2017/aug/18/social-housing-residents-tenants-badly-treated-grenfell-ledbury-modern-britain
Add message | Report | Message poster
HelenaDove Fri 18-Aug-17 18:56:54

"Following the news in 2017n has been like riding an out of control rollercoaster. As soon as one story dissipates, another rears its head
with little chance to analyse and contextualise anything that occurs.
Take the news about housing: after the shocking tragedy of Grenfell Tower, an eyewatering number of tower blocks were revealed to have similarly unsafe cladding as the government fire tested samples sent in by councils and housing associations.

May orders national inquiry after 100% failure rate in high-rise cladding tests
Read more
The statistics caused huge alarm: the Chalcotts Estate in Camden was evacuated when it was discovered the panels fixed to the new-build towers were the same as those fitted to Grenfell Tower, which are believed to have contributed to the speed and scale of the blaze. Scarcely had politicians and the public begun to discuss what this meant for the culture of housing and redevelopment across Britain, when another story broke.

The Ledbury estate in Peckham was found to be at significant risk of collapse in the case of a gas explosion. Believing the residents to be in immediate danger, Southwark council began evacuating.

In 1968, in Ronan Point tower in Newham, east London, four people
died and 17 were injured when a gas explosion caused load bearing walls to collapse as the bolts holding together large prefabricated panels
buckled. The image of the tower was stark. From the roof to the floor,
an entire corner had fallen in, like dominos. That the fatality count
was as low as four was a miracle in itself. The collapse caused huge
concern for tower block residents, and the system then used to join the
concrete panelling was outlawed and building regulations changed to
ensure tower block architecture was safer and more robust.

The Ledbury estate was constructed using the same method as Ronan Point but residents were told that the problem had been fixed.

Southwark commissioned a fire safety inspection after residents raised concerns following the Grenfell Tower inferno, and it was discovered that, somehow, the flawed construction method had never been rectified. So for decades, the tower was at risk of the same fate as Ronan Point. It’s unclear how this oversight occurred. But a similar tale emerges: residents had been complaining of safety risks for years before this life-threatening danger was revealed.

Housing costs, supply and a dearth of social housing are cited often as the main issues in the UK’s housing crisis. But how we treat residents and tenants is a stain on modern Britain. The Ledbury and Grenfell residents were repeatedly dismissed when they raised concerns.

People constantly contact me panicked when they are turned away illegally by council housing offices or have issues with damp, leaks, cockroaches and rodents in their homes, endangering their children’s health. In the past few weeks, several women have kept me updated with their treatment after the roof of their Notting Hill Housing Trust domestic violence refuge collapsed. The women had complained for weeks that the sprinkler system was leaking into the ceiling, with little response. When the ceiling collapsed, they were told they’d be moved from Kensington to Barking, where several of their violent ex-partners live.

Since, some of them have been in temporary accommodation. One was placed in a hostel staffed entirely by men and when she caught someone photographing her
through a window, found the manager of the hostel and the housing staff at Kensington and Chelsea council dismissive until a police officer contacted the council on her behalf and pressured the department to move her to more appropriate accommodation.

In the meantime, the stress had caused her post-traumatic stress disorder to
escalate to the point where she was admitted to a psychiatric unit. Prior to the roof collapse she’d felt close to recovery.

Housing associations and councils must accept they have a duty to uphold human dignity and treat residents as they would their friends and neighbours rather than like human detritus. Meeting housing association chief executives, I’m struck by the earnest way in which they speak of their work and how they argue we need to give homes to all who need it and remove the stigma social tenants face. Yet the tales their tenants tell do not match their words.

Some councils are rotten, and so too are some housing associations. Staff on the frontline must do more to genuinely listen and act on the complaints and needs of residents, and less on honing the corporate exterior gloss"

Good post @stumbledin

Great post Stumbledin.

Helena I'm not au fait on the terms you used and will check out those book titles, thanks. But surely lower cost housing has to be prioritised for the more vulnerable in society, and by default estates are more concentrated with vulnerable populations? Imagine if a 'housing for all' council estate was built in London, every man and his dog would want one. You'd have property developers in first, followed by doctors who work in GOSH so where would that leave the families who have been living in a unit for the last few years?

I was reading that in Austria salary is the bench mark for allocation of a 'public' house but once you are in there is never a reassessment so you might have wealthy residents beside poorer ones, which creates a mixed socio-economic area which in theory is good. IME there is resentment towards working people (especially those perceived to be in good jobs) being allocated SH from other tenants so I wonder would that work here? I have always read on MN about people who live in SH estates that are mixed and work well but I haven't seen it myself.

cardamoncoffee

But that's the whole point. If council housing building had continued at the rate it used to be the majority of households would be in social housing. They should be "mixed" communities.

And in the long run cheaper housing means it is easier to survive on lower wages, people dont over reach themselves pursuing a mortguage, communities remain settled. This housing policy, and the austerity cuts are part of a process of creating a work force that unions spent decades trying to destroy. ie with secure jobs with benefits and rights. The Tories are looking to creating a population that will end up, as in developing countries, waiting at the side of the road to pick up odds bits of work. That is what Brexit is about. Many of the rights we still have are because we were in the EU.

And as I said up thread it is about effectively taking tax payers money and instead of creating a virtuous circle where money out eg HB returns to local councils, it goes into the pockets of capitalists exploiters. When you think of the number of single mums who have literally been left holding the baby and instead of society saying thanks for continuing to care and not abandoning your child, they are moved from once private scum land lord to another. HA would block rent rundown properties from private landlords, do the buildings up to the minimum standard based on the highest level of HB they knew they could collect. But many of these where short term, so private landlords gets their properties done up, but are returned to them and dont remain part of the public housing stock. So families are moved from one place to another, cant put down roots, or have settled school.

The social cost of this creation of a false shortage of housing is about enabling private finance at the expense of people's lives.

Not only should there be a change in the law to allow councils to build new properties, but all the money that central government has stolen from councils (ie the proceeds of the sale of housing) should be repaid. every tax cut, or other bribe various governments have offered to society as a whole has been paid for by making people homeless.

As was said in the documentary if after each WW when if anything Government's were more in debt than ever (you are always financially worse off as the winner!) could committ to and carry out mass social housing building it could happen now.

But it isn't just Governments who are not doing it, but it is voters who have so invested in the notion of the "value" of the building they live in that they wont allow it. (ie if there was mass building of social housing the value of homes owned by individuals would plummet - yay!).

Have started a thread on Feminism Chat based on Women's Budget Group report on housing being unaffordable for women. www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3654459-Housing-is-unaffordable-for-women-in-every-English-region-Womens-Budget-Group

Like George I grew up in a New Town. My parents bought their house new off the Development Corporation because they had owned the house they moved from but plenty of people with good jobs lived in council houses, many of my teachers certainly did. Owner occupied and council houses were in close proximity and there were no 'bad' areas. Young people applied for a house when they got engaged (this was in the 70s) and there were flats for single people, I had one in my early 20s. It worked then but I would imagine it's completely different now.

To clarify, my parents didn't buy under the Right to Buy - some houses were built to be sold immediately.

Great, will he be spending his own money to build these grand inspirational visions of his or is he expecting the rest of us to foot the bill?

When you say 'we will foot the bill' surely that is how Council Housing works although I don't know how his particular project is going to work.

@cardamoncoffee i understand what you are saying but because of the decimation of supported housing people with complex issues are just allocated a flat on a housing estate and left with no support

Social housing only being seen as a last resort is now and historically a right wing notion (the book explores this too) Housing estates arent hostels but there is a very sinister undercurrent that wants them to be.

@stumbledin i agree with your articulate insightful posts but the behaviour of some housing associations (SOME not all) has been appalling and disgusting.

No matter what has happened politically there is no excuse for individuals who work in the sector not to show a basic level of human decency towards tenants The HO i mentioned......that tort notice re. DHs mobility scooter was his VERY FIRST communication with us

Our first HO was lovely Retired now and i hope shes bloody enjoying her retirement.

@BogglesGoggles Your attitude is part of the problem.

i have kept all communications via letter from 1994 to now and you can see how the attitudes towards tenants has changed when you compare them.

It is residualisation that has stoked the belief that social housing is just for people in a bad place. But because of this we do get people with complex needs housed next to older tenants. Because of this, housing officers now seem to be operating a blanket policy of policing ALL tenants and acting in a paternalistic way towards them.,.......which makes the older tenants feel confused upset and angry at being targeted like this when they have done nothing wrong.

@helenadove really? I am the problem. That’s so strange. I thought the problem was people who don’t pay their way and make my life difficult as a result. Maybe I should just not bother with a career, tell my husband to shut down his business and fire the employees and just go living in council housing instead. Then I won’t be part of the problem any more.

No i didnt say you were the problem i said your attitude is. Interesting that you didnt note that though.

And you do realize that 23% of pensioners live in social housing. And a high percentage of social housing tenants WORK.

The fact that you said you would jack it all in and go and live in council housing a shows your attitude which means my post stands and b. residulisation welfarisation of council/social housing has worked beautifully on you.

am not surprised that HAs are unable to provide suitable housing, carry out repairs effectively, act as decent human beings

But we dont make excuses for people who are racist because of the political climate of Brexit So the political climate re housing is no excuse for the way some individuals there are behaving towards tenants. They need to take some personal responsibility for their actions which some quarters seem to think only applies to tenants and poorer people.

BogglesGoggles what????

I work full time, DP works full time and we're lucky enough to own our own home. I say lucky because it's legacies from family that have made it possible.

We've both lived on council estates, and I have to say that your comment shows you really don't know what council estates are like.

Social housing is the crux of a civilised society, and my MP will be asking at the next PMQs why the government can suddenly find £2 billion for brexit when there has been a considerable housing crisis brought on by austerity for many years.

Some people work, some people can't, some people want to but there aren't jobs, some choose not to, some are disabled and unable to.

We're all part of society, and we contribute in different ways.

I'm no better than anybody because I'm a homeowner and I work, I'd be fucking horrified if anyone thought I was.

Why do you think you are?

HelenaDove across many different threads, with me having many different usernames, I've always been struck by how well you speak and how what you say is absolutely right and decent.

I wish more people thought as you do, especially in positions of power. The world would be a better, fairer place.

@InTheHeatofLisbon Thanks thats a very kind thing to say

HelenaDove you have a very articulate way of explaining exactly how it is, carefully backed up with evidence, and showing exactly why being selfish and inward looking is not conducive to a decent, honourable and proper society.

I'm all for progressive politics and outlooks, it's exactly where I sit. I just don't have the talent for writing it perfectly. But I agree with everything you say.