This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/nov/07/housing-policy-newham-ucl-campus

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Housing policy, Newham style: let residents make way for an UCL campus Housing policy, Newham style: let residents make way for a UCL campus
(about 2 hours later)
A local authority that has major problems with its housing waiting list decided last week to demolish a structurally sound council estate and send its residents elsewhere. The mooted replacement, to which they then gave their enthusiastic backing, was a new campus for an elite university, University College London. It's so obviously immoral that you could easily assume this was a malevolent, Shirley Porter-style episode from the height of Thatcherism. It is, instead, the policy of a local authority that has 60 Labour councillors out of 60 and a high-profile Labour mayor – a one-party state.A local authority that has major problems with its housing waiting list decided last week to demolish a structurally sound council estate and send its residents elsewhere. The mooted replacement, to which they then gave their enthusiastic backing, was a new campus for an elite university, University College London. It's so obviously immoral that you could easily assume this was a malevolent, Shirley Porter-style episode from the height of Thatcherism. It is, instead, the policy of a local authority that has 60 Labour councillors out of 60 and a high-profile Labour mayor – a one-party state.
The London borough of Newham – the borough in question – recently made the news when it transpired they had asked a housing association in Stoke-on-Trent to rehouse hundreds of those on its massive waiting list. The association refused, but it was unclear what the leaked request really meant – was this political theatre on the part of the Labour council, drawing attention to what Tory policy was forcing it to do? That was what Sir Robin Wales, the mayor of Newham, claimed.The London borough of Newham – the borough in question – recently made the news when it transpired they had asked a housing association in Stoke-on-Trent to rehouse hundreds of those on its massive waiting list. The association refused, but it was unclear what the leaked request really meant – was this political theatre on the part of the Labour council, drawing attention to what Tory policy was forcing it to do? That was what Sir Robin Wales, the mayor of Newham, claimed.
Or was it a desperate response by a cash-strapped local authority that hoped nobody would notice? Anyone who knows the borough well might be inclined to think it was something else – the continuation of a policy of gradually forcing out poorer residents in favour of affluent incomers. Newham would hardly be alone in that, as councils from Southwark to Manchester spent the 2000s eagerly rebranding themselves as business-friendly metropoles – but few looked quite so enthusiastic.Or was it a desperate response by a cash-strapped local authority that hoped nobody would notice? Anyone who knows the borough well might be inclined to think it was something else – the continuation of a policy of gradually forcing out poorer residents in favour of affluent incomers. Newham would hardly be alone in that, as councils from Southwark to Manchester spent the 2000s eagerly rebranding themselves as business-friendly metropoles – but few looked quite so enthusiastic.
Newham is the sixth poorest borough in England, but since the 1980s it has also played host to part of London's docklands – namely the new developments on the former Royal Docks, such as the ExCeL centre, City airport, Barrier Point and innumerable "quayside" luxury flats, enjoying water in front and the flightpath above. As if to make its allegiance to the new Newham clear, in 2007 the council moved its headquarters to the Royal Docks, to an immense, business park-like PFI hangar, at a safe distance from any but the most executive residential areas. It's closer to City airport's runway than the high streets of West Ham, Stratford or Forest Gate.Newham is the sixth poorest borough in England, but since the 1980s it has also played host to part of London's docklands – namely the new developments on the former Royal Docks, such as the ExCeL centre, City airport, Barrier Point and innumerable "quayside" luxury flats, enjoying water in front and the flightpath above. As if to make its allegiance to the new Newham clear, in 2007 the council moved its headquarters to the Royal Docks, to an immense, business park-like PFI hangar, at a safe distance from any but the most executive residential areas. It's closer to City airport's runway than the high streets of West Ham, Stratford or Forest Gate.
Newham is also a borough that has seen the building of huge quantities of new housing in recent years. It's in two distinct parts. Along Stratford High Street, a sub-Shanghai speculative skyline has taken shape on both sides of a dual carriageway, with hundreds of new units of tiny flats, most of them quickly snapped up by buy-to-let investors, many of whom were based, aptly enough, in China.Newham is also a borough that has seen the building of huge quantities of new housing in recent years. It's in two distinct parts. Along Stratford High Street, a sub-Shanghai speculative skyline has taken shape on both sides of a dual carriageway, with hundreds of new units of tiny flats, most of them quickly snapped up by buy-to-let investors, many of whom were based, aptly enough, in China.
The other is the Olympic Village – most of the Olympic venues were in Newham. This is a somewhat better-planned enclave, currently closed to the public while it is transformed into flats courtesy of its new owners, Qatari Diar. Newham might want to shift its tenants to the Potteries, but it has enough new, often publicly funded, housing to clear its waiting list. The Olympics' building project was 80% state-funded, which is worth remembering when we're told that we "can't afford" new council housing anymore – can't afford, even, to maintain what there is of it left.The other is the Olympic Village – most of the Olympic venues were in Newham. This is a somewhat better-planned enclave, currently closed to the public while it is transformed into flats courtesy of its new owners, Qatari Diar. Newham might want to shift its tenants to the Potteries, but it has enough new, often publicly funded, housing to clear its waiting list. The Olympics' building project was 80% state-funded, which is worth remembering when we're told that we "can't afford" new council housing anymore – can't afford, even, to maintain what there is of it left.
Which brings us to the exchange of council estate for Russell Group campus. The Carpenters Estate, a development of terraces and flats built in the 1960s, is right in the midst of the new high-rise clusters of Stratford High Street, many of which dwarf the old towers. Like other estates in newly lucrative areas, it is midway through being "decanted", with no guarantee of social, let alone council, housing on the residential parts of the new campus – which will be for UCL. This is one of the richest and most powerful universities in the country, with some of the strictest access criteria – so it is hardly likely to be "inclusive" for the local poor, if there will be any left in the immediate area afterwards.Which brings us to the exchange of council estate for Russell Group campus. The Carpenters Estate, a development of terraces and flats built in the 1960s, is right in the midst of the new high-rise clusters of Stratford High Street, many of which dwarf the old towers. Like other estates in newly lucrative areas, it is midway through being "decanted", with no guarantee of social, let alone council, housing on the residential parts of the new campus – which will be for UCL. This is one of the richest and most powerful universities in the country, with some of the strictest access criteria – so it is hardly likely to be "inclusive" for the local poor, if there will be any left in the immediate area afterwards.
Here in Stratford, all the usual reasons for destroying council housing fall apart. How to argue it's for the residents' own good when local campaigners fiercely oppose it? How to claim high-rise living is unviable and undesirable when dozens of new high-rises are being built all around it? How to claim clearance is for the residents' own good when the blocks are structurally sound? How to claim the area needs to be more "diverse" when it's one of the most multiracial places in the world? How to claim there's no money, when the publicly funded Olympic Village is only up the road? How to claim refurbishment of the estate would be too expensive when the recent refurbishment of Newham's dockside HQ cost £111m? How to avoid the conclusion that Newham wants one kind of people out, and another kind of people in?Here in Stratford, all the usual reasons for destroying council housing fall apart. How to argue it's for the residents' own good when local campaigners fiercely oppose it? How to claim high-rise living is unviable and undesirable when dozens of new high-rises are being built all around it? How to claim clearance is for the residents' own good when the blocks are structurally sound? How to claim the area needs to be more "diverse" when it's one of the most multiracial places in the world? How to claim there's no money, when the publicly funded Olympic Village is only up the road? How to claim refurbishment of the estate would be too expensive when the recent refurbishment of Newham's dockside HQ cost £111m? How to avoid the conclusion that Newham wants one kind of people out, and another kind of people in?
That raises another question: why? For UCL, it's a no-brainer – a place with far cheaper rent than Bloomsbury, good links to the sundry "hubs" of Docklands and even an international rail connection. But what's in it for Newham? Unlike Shirley Porter's reign in 80s Westminster, the council can hardly be driven by electoral arithmetic, given that the old tenants are more likely to vote Labour than UCL students or Canary Wharf clerks. It's just the done thing, the common sense of contemporary local government. We might wonder what it would take to shock Labour councils out of this kind of casual, glazed-eyed Thatcherism. The biggest crisis of capitalism since the 30s, perhaps?That raises another question: why? For UCL, it's a no-brainer – a place with far cheaper rent than Bloomsbury, good links to the sundry "hubs" of Docklands and even an international rail connection. But what's in it for Newham? Unlike Shirley Porter's reign in 80s Westminster, the council can hardly be driven by electoral arithmetic, given that the old tenants are more likely to vote Labour than UCL students or Canary Wharf clerks. It's just the done thing, the common sense of contemporary local government. We might wonder what it would take to shock Labour councils out of this kind of casual, glazed-eyed Thatcherism. The biggest crisis of capitalism since the 30s, perhaps?