Young mothers evicted from London hostel may be rehoused 200 miles away

[Yelkcub]

I've been discussing this with a mate who's much brighter than me and much more politically motivated. I can't see anything that would ever bring a revolt if this doesn't. As a wider topic, for all the noise regarding the party to be had when Thatcher died, pretty much nothing happened. How many people took to the streets? He can't explain it either.

I'm not interested in revolution. I can operate in the current system and give my missus and child a good life. I wish everyone could but I'm not about to risk anything above my family. But the net suggests people would. Is it just hot air on the internet?

 

[salem]

Fucking disgusting and incredibly short sighted if taken at face value. Infact I suspect that the costs surrounding moving these people etc would come in higher then the proposed 'saving' of £41k. It's going to be at best a shifting of cash from one department to another.

I wonder if this is some kind of political posturing though? As many have pointed out the saving is nothing. But it gets some nice headlines for the council. I hope that the 'may' have to move is an indication that there is some back up plan in place.

One of the problem with these cuts is that the people implementing them are generally self-serving tossers who will keep themselves and their friends and get rid of important services such as this.

 

[brogdale]

Will these single mothers be expected to pay the removal costs necessitated by this social cleansing, or will the authorities be providing special trains....

 

[farmerbarleymow]

As well as that I think (and I may have said this before) that some labour councils implement cuts in as painful a way possible in order to make a point - "Look at what these bastards in central government are making us do" sort of thing.

That's not to say the government aren't bastards of course.

I see where you are coming from, but I'm not sure that is entirely true. Just an example of the top of my head, Manchester City Council closed public loos - undoubtedly to make a point - but not an enormously painful cut, albeit affecting people due to the lack of facilities. Better to close public loos than to close more important services. In my mind it wouldn't make sense for them to do this, unless they had some weird hidden agenda, as they, and not central government, would be the ones taking the flak.

But I readily admit I'm no expert in what LAs do, so you may well be right on this.

 

[salem]

As well as that I think (and I may have said this before) that some labour councils implement cuts in as painful a way possible in order to make a point - "Look at what these bastards in central government are making us do" sort of thing.

That's not to say the government aren't bastards of course.

That was exactly my first thought too. If so I really hope it's making as big a story as possible rather then actually screwing people over for political gains.

 

[coley]

It's not the HB that's removed, it's the additional funding that hostels offering these sorts of extra much-needed services attract, that has been cut, hence none of the "bog-standard" homeless hostels have been too badly affected (yet).
It's absolutely despicable that LAs have been forced to retrench back into basic generic services at the expense of specialised provision that's been proven to make a difference, but that's life under these neoliberal fuckwits. If a service is expensive and can't be exploited, then any utility it has becomes a moot point.

Aye, but what I cannot get me head around,this place is, in another galaxy and another time,would have been lauded as a Tory success, single mothers in a secure environment being brought back into the mainstream yada yada etc,as opposed to the usual DM scenario of feckless single mothers with their own flats, the obligatory 50' TV and partying costing the taxpayers a fortune, etc?

 

[smokedout]

He is keeping his word though, he isn't watching thousands being removed, it's only a couple of hundred. He is, therefore, innocent of being a Tory scum-bag. At the moment.

thats not true, theres been a steady exodus of people out of london due to the first housing benefit cuts and thats likely to be a flood now the full benefit cap has come into effect, Boris has done nothing to stop it other than write a letter to Iain Duncan Smith two years ago

 

[coley]

It's not the HB that's removed, it's the additional funding that hostels offering these sorts of extra much-needed services attract, that has been cut, hence none of the "bog-standard" homeless hostels have been too badly affected (yet).
It's absolutely despicable that LAs have been forced to retrench back into basic generic services at the expense of specialised provision that's been proven to make a difference, but that's life under these neoliberal fuckwits. If a service is expensive and can't be exploited, then any utility it has becomes a moot point.

But it's not expensive and I could do the calculations proving that the future costs of this enforced move will come to far more than 41k on the back of an envelope!

 

[coley]

I've been discussing this with a mate who's much brighter than me and much more politically motivated. I can't see anything that would ever bring a revolt if this doesn't. As a wider topic, for all the noise regarding the party to be had when Thatcher died, pretty much nothing happened. How many people took to the streets? He can't explain it either.

I'm not interested in revolution. I can operate in the current system and give my missus and child a good life. I wish everyone could but I'm not about to risk anything above my family. But the net suggests people would. Is it just hot air on the internet?

Unfortunately, yes.

 

[coley]

Fucking disgusting and incredibly short sighted if taken at face value. Infact I suspect that the costs surrounding moving these people etc would come in higher then the proposed 'saving' of £41k. It's going to be at best a shifting of cash from one department to another.

I wonder if this is some kind of political posturing though? As many have pointed out the saving is nothing. But it gets some nice headlines for the council. I hope that the 'may' have to move is an indication that there is some back up plan in place.

One of the problem with these cuts is that the people implementing them are generally self-serving tossers who will keep themselves and their friends and get rid of important services such as this.

You don't realise 'how on the money' you are

 

[ViolentPanda]

Aye, but what I cannot get me head around,this place is, in another galaxy and another time,would have been lauded as a Tory success, single mothers in a secure environment being brought back into the mainstream yada yada etc,as opposed to the usual DM scenario of feckless single mothers with their own flats, the obligatory 50' TV and partying costing the taxpayers a fortune, etc?

You're looking at this from a Tory/not Tory perspective. What you need to keep in mind is that the loss of these hostels isn't a result of direct legislation or cuts directed by central government fiat, it's purely a result of local authorities accepting spending cuts, and then chopping the head off of anything that isn't generic service provision and/or isn't legally (or ethically) ring-fenced.

 

[ViolentPanda]

But it's not expensive and I could do the calculations proving that the future costs of this enforced move will come to far more than 41k on the back of an envelope!

Again, I suspect you're missing the point. Don't look at this from a party-political perspective, because that'll get you nowhere. Try viewing it through a managerialist perspective: How many boxes does X service tick? Would shifting funding from X to Y tick more boxes? How can the most boxes be ticked for the least money?
Bear in mind that local authorities are assessed not on their performance for those who live within the local authority's remit area, but on "metrics" calculated on ticked boxes. Human beings getting shat on because of this, that doesn't occur to these people, and if it did, it still wouldn't matter much to them.

 

[ViolentPanda]

thats not true, theres been a steady exodus of people out of london due to the first housing benefit cuts and thats likely to be a flood now the full benefit cap has come into effect, Boris has done nothing to stop it other than write a letter to Iain Duncan Smith two years ago

^^^^This. The social cleansing has been happening steadily, it's just "under the radar" because it's relatively small amounts of people flowing out of each borough over the course of each year. The loss of a couple of hundred people from a borough isn't particularly noticeable, and for the mainstream media, barely notable.

 

[brogdale]

^^^^This. The social cleansing has been happening steadily, it's just "under the radar" because it's relatively small amounts of people flowing out of each borough over the course of each year. The loss of a couple of hundred people from a borough isn't particularly noticeable, and for the mainstream media, barely notable.

Yep, but here's a little statistical evidence from the Observer:-

Stephen Boatwright
Headteacher, St Cuthbert with St Matthias primary school, Earl's Court
... We began to see the changes as the new benefit regulations were introduced. These have meant that families cannot afford to rent privately locally. This, coupled with the shortage of social housing, is having a profound effect on the school.

At first the effect was subtle but this year there is evidence of dramatic change. In 2011, about 63% of children in the reception class were eligible for free school meals; this year only 23% are eligible, a reduction of around two thirds.

Linked with this has been the rise in children whose first language is English. In 2011, only 18% of the reception class had English as a first language whereas this year 33% of the children have.
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/oct/20/future-london-capital-risks-soul

 

[Greebo]

Yep, but here's a little statistical evidence from the Observer:-

Thanks for that.

 

[treelover]

But a city like Berlin feels more alive and cosmopolitan than London right now because it has nurtured, not overlooked, its creatives. And by comparison our capital feels increasingly bland, increasingly homogenised, as though it is losing its soul

not what I've been reading on here and elsewhere.

 

[ViolentPanda]

not what I've been reading on here and elsewhere.

Berlin is undergoing the same process as most European capital cities - i.e. gentrification.
It's slower there though, not least because of the system of issuing long leases, which means it's harder for developers to take control of existing housing. The largest threat is from institutions (mostly financial institutions- private equity funds and the like) buying up freeholds and then jacking the cost of new/renewed leases and rents, secure in the knowledge that someone will pay it.

 

[Ms Ordinary]

On 21 September 2014, the estate was occupied by Focus E15 Mothers, a group of mothers who campaign for housing rights

 

[Belushi]

Best of luck to them!

 

[Ms Ordinary]

Sorry major link fail, but here's some more info:

[url]https://www.facebook.com/pages/Focus-E15-Mothers/602860129757343[/URL]

[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carpenters_Estate[/URL]

[url]http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/mother-tongue/10956419/Meet-the-young-single-mothers-facing-eviction.html[/URL]

 

[Ms Ordinary]

[url]https://twitter.com/FocusE15[/URL]

FocusE15@FocusE15 · 1h
We have occupied to show that there is nothing wrong with some of these flats and the rest could be fixed in a week or two. @NewhamLondon

 

[Ms Ordinary]

I don't know what's going on down there - just following it on Twitter - but can't argue with this:

Kevin Blowe@copwatcher · 49m
#OccupiedE15 Hey @NewhamLondon: was saving £41K, making @FocusE15 mothers homeless and turned them into campaigners worth the bad publicity?

 

[Puddy_Tat]

I don't know what's going on down there - just following it on Twitter - but can't argue with this:

i'm on the move so hard to search / post links but

lewisham people before profit occupied and refurbished some homes that lewisham council were planning to sell off a year or so back.

may be worth research / making contact?

 

[Coolfonz]

the quality of life for the majority in London is poor. go and live in another country for a few years and then come back. then it really stares you in the face and goes `oi you stupid bastard fack awf ya mug` and so on. (I can say that I'm a Londoner )

 

[Flavour]

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/23/real-politics-empty-london-housing-estate

Quite unexpected but welcome none-the-less.

This paragraph caught my eye:

"This story is really about how the apolitical get radicalised. Because first the 29 mothers did as told: registering as homeless, spending days phoning all the landlords on the three-page sheet given to them as the sole help by the council. When that didn’t work, they chanced upon a revolutionary communist market stall and enlisted their help in formatting the petition. They set up their own stall, which can still be seen every Saturday in Stratford centre. They drew in help and information from other campaigners, passers-by, the internet."

Who's this revolutionary communist group then? And has anyone seen this stall in Stratford? With local support this could run and run.

 

[Flavour]

Never mind, a cursory glance of the Focus E15 has given me the answer: it is indeed the "Revolutionary Communist Group" itself.

 

[SpookyFrank]

Meanwhile, in Germany:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/23/germany-imposes-rent-caps-inner-city-properties

 

[weepiper]

The council have cut off their water supply today

 

[Pickman's model]

 

[SikhWarrioR]

This isnt the same Newham Council that recently spuncked £110 million on a new HQ building the same Newham council that is in charge of some of the most deprived parts of London by any chance, Looks like we will have to keep an eye on freight train movements in and out of Newham particularly full trains of covered vans