Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Haringey Development Vehicle
For those interested finding out more about the controversial Haringey Development Vehicle there is a public meeting tonight at 7pm in the Wood Green Social Club, opposite the Haringey Civic Centre, Stuart Crescent, Wood Green N22 5NJ.
Leaflet attached.
Tags for Forum Posts: haringey development vehicle, hdv
- Attachments:
-
-
HDV meeting.jpeg, 237 KB
-
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by 2nb5m6nbeyrdi on
-
A simple google search would have saved you some time.
I guess you're another of the:
"We must do something, this is something, therefore we must do this" school of thought.
-
-
-
This is social cleansing by the back door. Knock down the existing social housing, ship out all the low-life scum, rebuild with nice posh housing that will not be affordable. Yes, it'll make a profit. It's asset stripping and we should not be encouraging our own Council to do this to us.
-
Permalink Reply by Finsbury Park Ranger on
-
If something makes a regular good profit for decades after, which it didn't before, it's an asset gain, not an asset loss. Especially if it replaces the social housing that was lost and adds more interesting things for local people to do.
The bottom line is if you want to be liberal on immigration and protect the countryside, you have to be liberal on building more housing in the cities.
-
-
I wonder if your home was threatened and future relying on "promises" and "commitments" by Cllrs who wont be around when it goes to pot, that you would be such an advocate for it. The bottom line is, based on you completely ignoring most of the evidence presented, you are happy for the, vulnerable, poor and the “ethnics” will get kicked out, and many shipped off to other boroughs or insecure homes because you might get to see a Wholefoods store in Wood Green or Tottenham one day and see middle class English people populate the east of the borough. You just don’t have the courage to admit it.
-
-
The status quo is more than adequate??? Hardly. Have you seen the homeless figures recently? I am personally pro-development - I am self-confessed SWIMBY (something wonderful in my back yard). I want to see large scale, beautifully designed, innovative projects. I want to see more housing and for it to happen fast but I don't think putting 2 billion of tax payers money into the hands of property developers with almost no oversight is the way to go.
-
-
Permalink Reply by John D on
-
You weaken your argument by bringing " class " into it
Define " middle class "
-
Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton on
-
Social class cam be a slippery category, John D. But surely not one we should altogether jettison. Crudely and mechanically used, it may not always be helpful. But how about the more nuanced approaches taken by academic writers about inequality?
I'm thinking for example, of Michael Marmot, Danny Dorling and Loretta Lees. I don't know if you've come across Michael Marmot's concept of the Health Gradient, for instance.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h-2bf205upQ -
-
-
I disagree that it weakens my argument. When existing tenants in council homes, who are in the majority "working class"; and those in temporary housing are "working class"; demolishing their homes to build "affordable" private £450k luxury flats for the majority of people who wont be able to afford it makes it a class issue.
When the council has a report which concludes that the likely outcome of the HDV is that it will effect "black people" and the least effected people will be "white people" because they're better off, it makes it a race issue as well as class. The logical conclusion of the HDV is that the poorer and working classes will get kicked out of their homes, and richer (middle class) people will move in to create "mixed communities".
-
-
-
Anonymoose, I agree with you.
However my thinking is that we have here an incredibly wide coalition/ convergence of views opposing and questioning Cllr Claire Kober's scheme.
So, for example The Greens are leading on a possible Judicial Review of Haringey's decision. Both LibDem and Labour councillors are discussing "calling-in" the cabinet decision. Even the Tottenham Tories are speaking out against it.Of course, not everyone has the same doubts and similar objections. In fact there are so many serious objections to the scheme, we are all spoiled for choice. For example there are people who don't object to the principle of the private sector involvement and demolition of council estates, but who think it should be done on a small scale and not with just one developer.
And not everyone in this broad loose coalition will necessarily give prominence to a class and race perspective.As I'm guessing you know well, one of the falsehoods presented by the proponents of this scheme is that it will produce a "mixed community". One of these warm fuzzy terms which refers implicitly to aspects of class and race but with deliberate and misleading imprecision.
(Professor Loretta Lees is very helpful on this issue.) -
-
-
My apologies John and to others who may be offended by me bringing class or race into it. The opposition to the HDV does indeed include people from all areas of Haringey, class and race, as Alan has stated. I have met many of them and they are a compassionate and a well informed bunch. I will refrain from making my arguments a class related one.
Just so it's for the record, my criticism for this scheme is purely towards the Cabinet of the council and especially to the few proponents of this scheme (Cllr Strickland, CEO Nick Walkley and Cllr Kober).
-
-
Basically this is an arguement between old labour and new labour. Old labour never managed to do anything meaningful in Wood Green for a life time. Now they are arguing and everyone else that new labour, who are now in charge, are too inept to do anything either.
Shocking, sad but possibly true.
I wouldn't be surprised if nothing happened.
-
-
Basically FPR, the problem is that things have already happened and are still happening.
In parts of the borough where people's homes are threatened with demolition; and where 'Planning Blight' is likely to interfere with sales, purchases, investments and people's plans for their homes and lives. For an example, if you haven't seen it please take a look at this Evening Standard story.
The KoberTories and their developer pals and others would love a narrative (= fairy story) that portrays this as just an internal argument within Haringey Labour. But it's not.
FPR, you might want to look further than Haringey and read about what's happening elsewhere in London. And in other cities - among them: San Francisco, New York and Vancouver. I recommend the intro to Anna Minton's "Big Capital; Who is London For?".
Personally, my own street doesn't seem to be directly affected. Or is it? There are Council-owned homes a few minutes walk away. In the diseased Kober fiefdom of Haringey such information is withheld. Hundreds of yellow coloured pages are marked EXEMPT and kept secret from the tenants, leaseholders and freeholders whose homes and businesses may be for sale, or face compulsory purchase, or - likely - demolition.
Some senior officers lie by omission. It's on the maps, they may say, or in the Area Plan. But the key pieces of information which anyone should and wants to know are withheld. Because people usually want and need to know something simple and direct: about Number XX, and Y Road. Why? Because they live there. Or maybe because they are thinking of buying or renting there. Or it's the home of their friends/relatives. Will our Dear Leader or her minions tell them?
They won't.
I'm told by people who have been allowed a glimpse of the secret yellow pages that some of this information is held on dense tables. Some almost unreadable in tiny print. But still perhaps without sufficient detail and context to give people reliable solid chapter-and-verse-facts about their own homes.
It's par for the course that a recent presentation to the Council's External Auditor explained that agents will be asked to negotiate for purchasing properties without telling residents or businesses they are acting for the Council or the Homes Destruction 'Vehicle' (HDV). Why? Because they may be able to cheat the resident or business out the true market value of their property which they'd ask if they knew the full picture.
I hear that Cllr Claire Kober has told the Ham & High that people are now distrustful of politicians and of the HDV, because of the Grenfell Tower tragedy. I can assure Ms Kober that the total and complete lack of trust I and other people feel for her is entirely of her own making. It's due to her execrable record as "leader"; and the risk her HDV plans pose for both residents directly affected and the rest of us should the Vehicle drive off the cliff, leaving the borough with a massive new debt.
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
