Brixton news, rumours and general chat

[nagapie]

Why are Lambeth so hellbent on demolishing these flats? Do they need the proceeds or is there some other reason. It seems to be tunnel vision over several years.

Money, money, money.

Strike rich, no more upkeep costs, get rid of the horrible poor people that live in them that they have to pay benefits to.

Naked greed and prejudice.

 

[teuchter]

Money, money, money.

Strike rich, no more upkeep costs, get rid of the horrible poor people that live in them that they have to pay benefits to.

Naked greed and prejudice.

I don't think it's helpful to simplify it to this kind of thing.

 

[Orang Utan]

I don't think it's helpful to simplify it to this kind of thing.

but that's what it is - greed and pandering to it

 

[nagapie]

I don't think it's helpful to simplify it to this kind of thing.

I think it's extemely helpful.

 

[teuchter]

but that's what it is - greed and pandering to it

Whose greed?

 

[nagapie]

Whose greed?

The LEA. They see their job as making money instead of actually looking after people. Also do you have any idea how corrupt Lambeth is? There are so many cronies who will make money out of that development, make no mistake.

 

[Orang Utan]

Whose greed?

Property developers and Lambeth

 

[teuchter]

The LEA. They see their job as making money instead of actually looking after people. Also do you have any idea how corrupt Lambeth is? There are so many cronies who will make money out of that development, make no mistake.

So we just say, any kind of development that Lambeth does is 100% driven by making some cash for council officers' mates. And housing targets, budget cuts and that sort of thing is irrelevant? End of story, no further discussion needed.

 

[teuchter]

Property developers and Lambeth

What is Lambeth "greedy" for?

 

[Orang Utan]

You don't think the property developers are greedy?

 

[Orang Utan]

What is Lambeth "greedy" for?

Kickbacks

 

[teuchter]

You don't think the property developers are greedy?

Property developers try to make money by developing property. No big surprises there.

 

[teuchter]

Kickbacks

So - would you object to them building any kind of housing anywhere, because the only motivation behind doing so would be individuals in the council making money illegitimately?

 

[nagapie]

So we just say, any kind of development that Lambeth does is 100% driven by making some cash for council officers' mates. And housing targets, budget cuts and that sort of thing is irrelevant? End of story, no further discussion needed.

I am talking in particular about Cressingham, in which Lambeth's greed and corruption is well documented. This includes how the development will reduce social housing rather than add to it as well as all sorts of wrongs against the community and environment, why do you think it's constantly being taken to court.
If you want to talk about other Lambeth projects, I will direct you to the Hondo Tower thread. Unfortunately Lambeth has form for this sort of corruption.
And while budget cuts are a thing, vanity projects like the town hall are able to push ahead while things like children's centers and libraries are forced to push back against the cuts.
Really, I don't know what you're trying to defend here.

 

[Orang Utan]

So - would you object to them building any kind of housing anywhere, because the only motivation behind doing so would be individuals in the council making money illegitimately?

Yes. I think they all need to be burnt in a skip

 

[editor]

Coming up:

 

[teuchter]

I am talking in particular about Cressingham, in which Lambeth's greed and corruption is well documented. This includes how the development will reduce social housing rather than add to it as well as all sorts of wrongs against the community and environment, why do you think it's constantly being taken to court.
If you want to talk about other Lambeth projects, I will direct you to the Hondo Tower thread. Unfortunately Lambeth has form for this sort of corruption.
And while budget cuts are a thing, vanity projects like the town hall are able to push ahead while things like children's centers and libraries are forced to push back against the cuts.
Really, I don't know what you're trying to defend here.

I'm not trying to defend anything; I do not think the Cressingham scheme should go ahead.

I'm saying a simplistic account of what drives this stuff is counterproductive.

For people looking at something like Cressingham, people who don't know the history and don't yet have an opinion, if they see on the one side the council saying it's because they have to meet their housing targets in the context of very limited budgets that mean they have to attempt to extract financial value out of their existing assets, and then on the other side people just shouting that it all comes down to councillor backhanders, then I think many people are going to regard that is simplistic conspiracy type stuff, and buy the Lambeth line.

It's much more effective to address the arguments coming from Lambeth directly, in my opinion. Explain what the viable alternatives are, point out where Lambeth have been ignoring them, and so on.

 

[Orang Utan]

Property developers try to make money by developing property. No big surprises there.

No one's claiming it is

 

[teuchter]

Yes. I think they all need to be burnt in a skip

No more social housing ever, anywhere, then.

 

[nagapie]

I'm not trying to defend anything; I do not think the Cressingham scheme should go ahead.

I'm saying a simplistic account of what drives this stuff is counterproductive.

For people looking at something like Cressingham, people who don't know the history and don't yet have an opinion, if they see on the one side the council saying it's because they have to meet their housing targets in the context of very limited budgets that mean they have to attempt to extract financial value out of their existing assets, and then on the other side people just shouting that it all comes down to councillor backhanders, then I think many people are going to regard that is simplistic conspiracy type stuff, and buy the Lambeth line.

It's much more effective to address the arguments coming from Lambeth directly, in my opinion. Explain what the viable alternatives are, point out where Lambeth have been ignoring them, and so on.

Sadly these are not conspiracy theories, the corruption is real and the sooner it is spoken about for what it is, the sooner it will be addressed instead of pretending that such things do not exist in a white Western country.
Also Cressingham provided Lambeth with an alternative that provided them with housing and budget opportunities, which they refused to accept, doesn't exactly make you feel like they are stuck between a rock and a hard place.
Really you are talking about things that have been tried and failed because at the root of all of this is simply naked greed and prejudice.

 

[Orang Utan]

No more social housing ever, anywhere, then.

We don't need property developers for that - they are the enemy of social housing

 

[editor]

We don't need property developers for that - they are the enemy of social housing

Lambeth Council are property developers now!

 

[Southlondon]

I am talking in particular about Cressingham, in which Lambeth's greed and corruption is well documented. This includes how the development will reduce social housing rather than add to it as well as all sorts of wrongs against the community and environment, why do you think it's constantly being taken to court.
If you want to talk about other Lambeth projects, I will direct you to the Hondo Tower thread. Unfortunately Lambeth has form for this sort of corruption.
And while budget cuts are a thing, vanity projects like the town hall are able to push ahead while things like children's centers and libraries are forced to push back against the cuts.
Really, I don't know what you're trying to defend here.

I’m not going to Defend all the actions of Lambeth council but where’s your evidence of corruption? There is none. They might be doing things you don’t like but that doesn’t mean they’re corrupt . The ejections are coming up and that’s when residents can show their displeasure by voting them out or, conversely voting them in. If you have evidence of corruption then hand it over to the police up investigate but I have not seen any myself

 

[Rushy]

The ejections are coming up ...

Wishful thinking!

 

[teuchter]

We don't need property developers for that - they are the enemy of social housing

You are saying we can't trust local authorities either though. So how are you going to get it built?

 

[Orang Utan]

You are saying we can't trust local authorities either though. So how are you going to get it built?

Massive systematic change

 

[nagapie]

I’m not going to Defend all the actions of Lambeth council but where’s your evidence of corruption? There is none. They might be doing things you don’t like but that doesn’t mean they’re corrupt . The ejections are coming up and that’s when residents can show their displeasure by voting them out or, conversely voting them in. If you have evidence of corruption then hand it over to the police up investigate but I have not seen any myself

Lambeth council have been accused a number of times of corruption in terms of handing contracts to their preferred providers rather than through fair tender. I personally have experience of this but I cannot post this on public message board - not as someone who was hoping for a contract but as someone who suffered due to the fall out of this.
Not carrying out proper consultation or making consultation inaccessible is corrupt in my books. Hiding evidence of alternatives, even ignoring this, having your housing officers support projects when they're supposed to be neutral, having hidden and vested interests in developments - this is all corrupt.
Unfortunately our election system doesn't offer a way out with no alternative but voting for others who also support the status quo.

 

[teuchter]

Massive systematic change

So... when people say, how about this Cressingham Gardens story - I've heard that Lambeth are forced to do this stuff in order to meet their housing targets, because central government does not provide any budget to build on new sites. Your answer is, no it's not about that, it's all about corrupt councillors. And they say, I see, what can we do about this? And you say, massive systematic change. They nod and walk off. The next time the Cressingham story comes up, they think, oh well, lost cause - there's nothing to be done about that except for some kind of revolution, and it doesn't look like that's going to happen soon.

 

[Orang Utan]

So... when people say, how about this Cressingham Gardens story - I've heard that Lambeth are forced to do this stuff in order to meet their housing targets, because central government does not provide any budget to build on new sites. Your answer is, no it's not about that, it's all about corrupt councillors. And they say, I see, what can we do about this? And you say, massive systematic change. They nod and walk off. The next time the Cressingham story comes up, they think, oh well, lost cause - there's nothing to be done about that except for some kind of revolution, and it doesn't look like that's going to happen soon.

I know. Shame innit

 

[nagapie]

So... when people say, how about this Cressingham Gardens story - I've heard that Lambeth are forced to do this stuff in order to meet their housing targets, because central government does not provide any budget to build on new sites. Your answer is, no it's not about that, it's all about corrupt councillors. And they say, I see, what can we do about this? And you say, massive systematic change. They nod and walk off. The next time the Cressingham story comes up, they think, oh well, lost cause - there's nothing to be done about that except for some kind of revolution, and it doesn't look like that's going to happen soon.

You are willfully ignoring the whole history of how this has played out and the alternatives Lambeth could have chosen and met their targets.