St. Agnes Place - Putting Up A Resistance

[Kid_Eternity]

I agree!
The worst possible out come for Lambeth is the loss of those beautiful houses. They should be listed, in fact I cant imagine why they aren't. I only live down the road, and everything old is caught in a conservation order, and old facades have to be kept even if the bulding is re-developed.

Is there a way to find out if they can be? It's a long shot I guess but getting them listed would be at least a good fuck you to the council (agreed Victorian houses typically are beautiful).

 

[netbob]

The Kremlin-like approach of Lambeth to releasing information on their plans for the site, for which there no planning application, doesn't do them any favours.

Can't you do an FOI request (there's an online form on the lambeth website). They can probably claim commercial confidentiality on alot of it (which seems to be used as a catch all for stopping anything interesting getting out). But you might get soemthing good out of them.

 

[jæd]

You're being dishonest, given how deliberately contentious and confrontational you were being early in the RIOT POLICE IN ST AGNES THREAD NOW thread, in General.

You were threatened with a ban, remember? Any idea why that was? Because of your reasonability, was it?

Ok, so that probably wasn't the time to be asking questions, etc... Sorry... But I see this as a different thread with more discussion on it. As I said, I'm interested in the issues surrounding it, and not just from one view point...

 

[jæd]

if you bothered reading the report on blink then you'd know.

Well, concerning the Rastafarians, its interesting they've trying to cut a deal with the council. But I would have thought that allowing the evictions to happen would just mean their time will be up sooner.

 

[Streathamite]

I'm interested in the issues surrounding it, and not just from one view point...

if your that interested, why not do some research on it yourself, independent of these threads

 

[Bob]

That's all very well Bob, but how much money has this whole debacle cost? Do you really believe it is money well spent? How many properties do you know that are currently empty in Lambeth that could be redesigned to take in Special Needs &c. if only the money was available?

If you take this line with every housing issue then shouldn't we building more skyscrapers to accomodate the thousands upon thousands on the list?

If the council didn't evict people who were illegally in housing then it would lose a lot more housing than it has already - which is why it needs to evict people. Effectively what you're saying is that the council should never forcibly evict anyone. So no I'd rather the money didn't have to be spent on this but can't actually see an alternative.

 

[Bob]

Can't you do an FOI request (there's an online form on the lambeth website). They can probably claim commercial confidentiality on alot of it (which seems to be used as a catch all for stopping anything interesting getting out). But you might get soemthing good out of them.

TBH an FOI request would probably get virtually everything you need in terms of what affordable means etc. Anyone feel like submitting one?

 

[tarannau]

Ok, so that probably wasn't the time to be asking questions, etc... Sorry... But I see this as a different thread with more discussion on it. As I said, I'm interested in the issues surrounding it, and not just from one view point...

Would you shut up about this 'one viewpoint' nonsense, repeating it as if it's some perceptive and much needed comment. There have been plenty of people arguing St Agnes' case on these threads, from all walks of life - it's clearly ridiculous and reductive to try and group everyone as sharing the same 'viewpoint' because they've some sympathy for a selection of threatened folks made homeless a month before Christmas

The fact that the milk of human kindness doesn't seem to run too strongly in your veins isn't our fault, nor that people rightly take some offence to you asking boneheaded questions (with simple answers) at inappropriate times. If you really can't understand the issues then perhaps it's better to take a step back and do a little research on the situation, rather than coming up with unhelpful, vacuous and ridiculously oversimplified gumph which basically equates to 'why can't they find over £800 behind their sofa, get a decent job and rent their own place...'

 

[citydreams]

Effectively what you're saying is that the council should never forcibly evict anyone..

Homes are for living in, not for making money out of.

 

[Bob]

Homes are for living in, not for making money out of.

The council allocates housing according to need - which squats do not. I may find the council frequently rubbish but it's their job to allocate housing not mine or anyone elses. If you disagree you can elect a council that allocates housing on a different criteria - but I would be surprised if your criteria was the ability to squat somewhere rather than something like the number of children you have or some other basis of need.

 

[William of Walworth]

Would you shut up about this 'one viewpoint' nonsense, repeating it as if it's some perceptive and much needed comment. There have been plenty of people arguing St Agnes' case on these threads, from all walks of life - it's clearly ridiculous and reductive to try and group everyone as sharing the same 'viewpoint' because they've some sympathy for a selection of threatened folks made homeless a month before Christmas

The fact that the milk of human kindness doesn't seem to run too strongly in your veins isn't our fault, nor that people rightly take some offence to you asking boneheaded questions (with simple answers) at inappropriate times. If you really can't understand the issues then perhaps it's better to take a step back and do a little research on the situation, rather than coming up with unhelpful, vacuous and ridiculously oversimplified gumph which basically equates to 'why can't they find over £800 behind their sofa, get a decent job and rent their own place...'

Spot on. It'll be monothought Urban clique from jaed next ...

<uses solitary thought to agree with tarannau >

To be fair to jaed, he DID (belatedy) apologise but he still should have realised how provocative and inflammatory his initial post in the other thread was, at the time.

The criticisms of St Agnes former residents worth taking notice of IMO (and there are certainly some, but there are times and places to talk about them!)come from themselves and their friends and supporters or from people who otherwise know what they're talking about.

I have my doubts that jaed does. He has clearly started out with a pre-existing prejudice against St Agnes residents.

 

[citydreams]

The council allocates housing according to need .

I find that very hard to believe having worked in Hackney's housing department. Yes, the emphasis is on placing those that are deemed as being overcrowded into bigger property. And, yes, there is a constant shuffle of the waiting list to place those that are most vunerable. But this is at the discretion of the housing officers. And worse, no matter how many ways they shuffle the list there still isn't enough housing for those that actually need it.

I respect your desire to observe the laws of the land, but how can you expect any justice to be done when the system is inherenly flawed?

 

[gabi]

To be fair to jaed, he DID (belatedy) apologise but he still should have realised how provocative and inflammatory his initial post in the other thread was, at the time.

I think by apologising, he's done just that. Now it seems he'd like to discuss the issues behind what's occurred - which appears to be beyond you and seemingly everyone else on u75 without dishing out hysterical vitriol.

 

[tarannau]

I think by apologising, he's done just that. Now it seems he'd like to discuss the issues behind what's occurred - which appears to be beyond you and seemingly everyone else on u75 without dishing out hysterical vitriol.

With the greatest of respect, that's bollocks. I wondered if I had been too harsh on jaed, but after looking at the variety of StAgnes threads where he repeatedly kept piping up with the same reductive point - 'why don't just get a new place like I would' I reckon the reaction to him has been entirely understandable.

Repeatedly accusing a huge number of contributors to the boards as having 'one viewpoint' as Jaed did is not conducive to honest or decent debate in my book. If anything it's Jaed who can't see outside his own viewpoint and experiences, showing an entire lack of empathy for those who may lead a lifestyle less fortunate than his.

And nope, I don't believe that constitutes 'hysterical vitriol' either.

 

[aurora green]

.... So no I'd rather the money didn't have to be spent on this but can't actually see an alternative.

Again I'm wondering exactly how much this eviction has cost Lambeth council tax payers, or in deed if we will ever be told.

It seems a bit coincidental to me that the money gained from the sale of the site, is pretty much the same as Fitchett is responsible for loosing.
Isn't this just a blatent attempt to cover the councils own losses?

 

[gabi]

And nope, I don't believe that constitutes 'hysterical vitriol' either.

A lot of the stuff I read on the other thread when the evictions were happening certainly came across as hysterical - at one point the guy was threatened with being banned because of having a differing opinion to the majority. That seem fair?

I was under the impression that debate was encouraged on these boards, but the kind of siege mentality adopted in the last week or so will not encourage that, and simply lead to more of 'us against them'. Which in the long run, is not helpful. Sounds like the Rastas at St Agnes realised that some time ago.

 

[citydreams]

- at one point the guy was threatened with being banned because of having a differing opinion to the majority.

No, he was threatened with being banned for disrupting a thread.

The same happened with the July bombings.

There's plenty of room on these boards for discussion.

 

[lang rabbie]

Again I'm wondering exactly how much this eviction has cost Lambeth council tax payers, or indeed if we will ever be told.

Legitimate question. Ask a scrutiny question of the Housing Department, and if that fails, make an FOI request

It seems a bit coincidental to me that the money gained from the sale of the site, is pretty much the same as Fitchett is responsible for loosing. Isn't this just a blatent attempt to cover the councils own losses?

Now that is entering tinfoil hat conspiracy territory.

The fraud apparently took place in March 2005 and only came to light in July. The case is unproven on just where in the Housing Department responsibility lies. Having read all 90 pages of the anonymised internal audit report, IMHOthere are rather a lot of senior housing officers with as much or more to fear from the Roots Inquiry as Cllr Fitchett.

AFAIK sale of the vacant St Agnes Place site to a housing association has been planned since the licenses/leases expired to 1990. Lambeth Housing have been making housing offers to those St Agnes Place residents (families with kids, other vulnerable people) who would be eligible for rehousing for the best part of a year.

Indeed, have there been any such families living there for the last couple of months? Why else would the Standard have needed to photograph a non-resident woman and child next to the riot police.

 

[aurora green]

It's no secret that the families of St Agnes had already been re-housed.
Doing so was the first step in the destruction of this community.

But what about the people whom the council has no responsibility to rehouse, some having been part of the community and borough, for a great many years, council tax payers themselves, ruthlessly thrown onto the street in winter?
Wouldn't it have been more honerable for the council to re-house everyone who had been evicted?

And fwiw, I wasn't standing 'next' to riot police, I was being pushed by them, out of the way, so there could be no witness to what went on.
I was on the pavement when the vans of riot cops screeched to a halt, and all jumped out like an army invasion. I was immediately physically pushed down the pavement, it got very upsetting when the wheels of my buggy got stuck in a broken slab, but still the riot police kept pushing me in the back. They tried to take the buggy off me and wheel it themselves. I hung onto it tight. I was told to leave the area. I replied I lived in the area. I was threatened with arrest 'child or no child' if I stepped on the pavenment again.
I have been a Lambeth resident for over 20years.

 

[piratetv]

please help to save the houses

http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=141750&page=31&pp=25

 

[piratetv]

Appeal for St Agnes Homeless

People left homeless by Tuesday's evictions have issued an appeal for matresses, bedding, kitchen tat, a radio etc as they have been left with absolutely nothing. Conditions are pretty grim for them as i am sure you can imagine, so if anybody has any of the above or anything else that would be useful please can you pm me and i will arrange collection.

Thank you all

 

[Streathamite]

I think by apologising, he's done just that. Now it seems he'd like to discuss the issues behind what's occurred - which appears to be beyond you and seemingly everyone else on u75 without dishing out hysterical vitriol.

there's ways of doing it. his was provocative, counter-productive and more than a little nasty

 

[netbob]

Look what you get when you type Parasite of Lambeth into Google.

 

[piratetv]

that is VERY VERY funny

 

[Donna Ferentes]

Tell me if I'm wrong, but as perfectly sensible human beings elsewhere on the planet seem to think that this is a case of council housing being taken off queue-jumping squatters and put back into proper use, are the following propositions correct?

1. As a result of the evictions, not a single penny extra of rent will be paid to the council.

2. As a result of the evictions, not a single room on St Agnes' Place will come back into council housing stock.

3. As a result of the evictions, not a single person on the council housing list will be housed at St Agnes' Place.

 

[articletwo]

Tell me if I'm wrong, but as perfectly sensible human beings elsewhere on the planet seem to think that this is a case of council housing being taken off queue-jumping squatters and put back into proper use, are the following propositions correct?

1. As a result of the evictions, not a single penny extra of rent will be paid to the council.

2. As a result of the evictions, not a single room on St Agnes' Place will come back into council housing stock.

3. As a result of the evictions, not a single person on the council housing list will be housed at St Agnes' Place.

There is a link on the St Agnes web site to a Blink news article (http://www.blink.org.uk/pdescriptio...uat30.xml&sSheet=/news/2005/11/30/ixhome.html) which says that Hyde Housing Association are going to create 200 new social housing properties. Given that I assume the St Agnes folk agree with the contents of the links they post up, I guess we can assume it is true (at least in their opinion).

So presumably Hyde will house those from Lambeth's list, and either they pay the council something, or they don't pay the council but they take on the costs of refurbishing/rebuilding. But the council has then saved the cost of housing the 200 people elsewhere.

 

[William of Walworth]

>>Gabi

I think by apologising, he's done just that. Now it seems he'd like to discuss the issues behind what's occurred - which appears to be beyond you and seemingly everyone else on u75 without dishing out hysterical vitriol.

With the greatest of respect, that's bollocks. I wondered if I had been too harsh on jaed, but after looking at the variety of StAgnes threads where he repeatedly kept piping up with the same reductive point - 'why don't just get a new place like I would' I reckon the reaction to him has been entirely understandable.

Repeatedly accusing a huge number of contributors to the boards as having 'one viewpoint' as Jaed did is not conducive to honest or decent debate in my book. If anything it's Jaed who can't see outside his own viewpoint and experiences, showing an entire lack of empathy for those who may lead a lifestyle less fortunate than his.

And nope, I don't believe that constitutes 'hysterical vitriol' either.

Tarannau has answered you pretty much along the same lines as I would have, Gabi.

Jaed is still around to post as he likes, but I'm more interested in what YOU think about this particular issue ...

 

[netbob]

that is VERY VERY funny

The best thing is he even trumps the Lambeth pest control department

 

[aurora green]

There is a link on the St Agnes web site to a Blink news article (http://www.blink.org.uk/pdescriptio...uat30.xml&sSheet=/news/2005/11/30/ixhome.html) which says that Hyde Housing Association are going to create 200 new social housing properties. Given that I assume the St Agnes folk agree with the contents of the links they post up, I guess we can assume it is true (at least in their opinion).

I think this is unclear.

Does anyone know for sure what are the plans?
People have been saying 75% 'will be 'affordable' housing. But I for one, am unsure what exactly 'affordable' means, does it mean that 25% will be unafforable? or that the 75% will be part buy-part rent schemes, and the remaining 25% will be real social housing?

 

[piratetv]

This afternoon ex residents of the street now homeless have attended Lambeth housing unit to register as being homeless and asking to be accomodated. Some are now being searched by the police and anybody attempting to take photographs is being told to cease and desist.