Time for a generational shift in housing policy to build, build, build social housing
An economic downturn, possibly a great depression is predicted for the UK. Boris Johnson’s disastrous speech says that he realises that the country needs to increase building. However, his answer is to recycle announcements and to let the market decide. If the loosening of planning rules leads to more residential development the quality, the sustainability and safety of these buildings is frankly questionable. Inside Housing found that critics of the policy say it allows developers to build homes well below space standards, remote from infrastructure or with insufficient natural light, as well as dodge affordable housing obligations.
There is another way. Housing campaigners, Shelter – where former Lewisham, Deptford MP Dame Joan Ruddock worked in the late 1960s – has proposed that there should be a historic renewal of social housing, with a 20-year programme to deliver 3.1 million more social homes.
I went to work for Shelter in 1968 – we said we existed to work ourselves out of a job – so sad still needed so much https://t.co/i9m5hMbQCZ
Shelter say: “Today we are feeling the effects of 40 years of failure in housing policy. This crisis has seen a catastrophic decline in social housing, leaving millions in insecure and unaffordable rented homes – with home ownership an impossible dream, and increasing numbers of people tipped into homelessness.”
“If we continue as we are, only half of today’s young people are likely to ever own their own home – and a generation of younger people and many who are retired will spend their lives struggling with insecure, expensive renting. Over the next twenty years, hundreds of thousands more people will be forced into homelessness by insecure tenancies and sky-high housing costs. But if we act now, we can change this.”
Shelter have launched a petition calling for the Government to build social housing. In the housing sector definitions over tenure have become blurred and politicised. Affordable housing has been defined as up to 80% market rent. In London, commentators rightly point out that this is not ‘affordable’ to many.
Shelter have said recently: “Social rents are much cheaper than other so-called affordable tenures, such as London Affordable Rent. Looking at 2-bed properties once again, Shelter found that an average London Affordable Rent would cost £690 a month – nearly £200 more every month than an equivalent median social rent letting.”
“Only social rent delivery can meet the affordability needs of the private renters, workers, and homeless families at the sharpest end of London’s housing emergency. Yet despite a growing need, social homes in London have almost entirely disappeared over the past 10 years. Just 534 additional social homes were delivered in London last year – a decrease of 95% compared to 2011-12, in which more than 11,000 properties for social rent were delivered.”
Cllr Alan Hall has supported Shelter’s call for an economic boost to recovery by building social homes that local Lewisham people can afford. The preamble to the petition says:
The pandemic has shown the need for more, better quality, affordable homes – yet shocking new analysis predicts the pandemic will see 84,000 fewer homes delivered this year, with a 30% drop in social housing being built.
As a country, we can do better. A more resilient future is possible by putting social housing at the heart of our recovery. We need good quality, secure homes to get back on our feet.
The time for change is now. Join us and call on the government builds social homes to boost housebuilding, support construction jobs, and begin to deliver the stable, genuinely affordable homes this pandemic has shown us people are urgently waiting for.
Along with housing campaigners @Shelter I think that the money used for the nation's recovery should be used to build decent, stable, and council homes. Will you join me and @ShelterLDN in demanding that the government commits to #BuildSocialHousing? https://t.co/D2WpKoIEJm
Cllr Alan Hall has supported Shelter’s call for an economic boost to recovery by building social homes that local Lewisham people can afford, he says: “Build, build, build social homes for an economic recovery in Lewisham, London and beyond.“
Cllr Alan Hall has joined transport campaigners, trade unions and commuters saying that the government should bring franchises back under public ownership, and start to build a railway for people not profit. Lewisham is a railway hub and the boroughs development depends on public transport.
Nearly 18,000 emails have been sent to Chancellor Rishi Sunak and Transport Secretary Grant Shapps, demanding that the railway be brought into public ownership. This comes at the launch of the ‘Take Back Our Trains’ campaign in response to the news that train company bailouts have cost at least £3.5 billion so far. The campaign is coordinated by rail passenger groups including the Association of British Commuters, Bring Back British Rail and We Own It.
The bailout – costing £900 million a month – was intended to be a temporary solution, but train companies are now demanding a 12-18 month extension to the bailout. Campaigners claim this would lock passengers and taxpayers into an expensive and dysfunctional system for the long-term, as experts say that nearly all rail franchises would financially collapse on even 80% of the passenger numbers they had before.
They also claim that public ownership is the only feasible alternative, and the government has already prepared sufficient backup operators to take over every franchise in the country, adding that the ‘Operator of Last Resort’ is well-resourced, and would provide the flexibility and cost-efficiency needed to adjust services in response to passenger numbers and the changing needs of public health.
“The dysfunctional system of privatised rail has been failing passengers for years, yet all promises of reform have come to nothing.
“The need to start building an integrated, efficient and accountable railway was urgent even before the corona pandemic. Public ownership is now the only way to succeed with the public health and economic challenges we’re facing.”
Campaigners anticipate that the government will make a decision on whether to renationalise or extend the bailout at the end of June. They stress that public ownership of the railway has the overwhelming support of the public – with one opinion poll putting support at 76%.
Ellie Harrison, founder of passenger-led campaign Bring Back British Rail said: “Privatised rail has never worked. ‘Natural monopolies’ like our railways need to be centrally co-ordinated.
“Now the coronavirus crisis has laid bare this simple truth. Public transport is an essential public service to get our key workers to their jobs, and it cannot be run for profit while ‘social distancing’ measures remain in place.”
Ellen Lees, campaigns officer at We Own It said: “Rail privatisation was imploding long before coronavirus hit, with private rail companies collapsing left, right and centre. The government can’t keep funnelling billions into a broken system which only benefits shareholders – so why not take the opportunity to build something better out of the ashes of privatised rail?
“Passengers, workers and the public all want public ownership – to keep us safe, to save money, and to build a public transport network fit for a greener, post-COVID future.”
The full text of the letter to the Chancellor of the Exchequer and Transport Secretary is here:
The government is about to make a crucial decision on whether to renationalise the railways. The alternative is a long-term bailout of train companies, which would lock us into the failed franchising system for at least another year. We urge you to bring these franchises back under public ownership instead, as the first and most important step towards an integrated, efficient and accountable railway network.
76% of the public want our railway to be run in public ownership – private train companies have been holding passengers hostage for too long, and it’s time to take back control for the public. With coronavirus still very much a threat, it’s even more important that we can trust our railway to keep us and workers safe.
When the corona lockdown began in March, all UK rail franchises were converted to ‘Emergency Measures Agreements’ (EMAs). This means the taxpayer is now funding the entire cost of the railway, while ensuring the train companies continue to make a profit. The arrangement is costing us an estimated £900 million per month, and train companies are demanding that it continues for at least another year – locking us into a wasteful, fragmented and unaccountable system.
Public ownership is the only other option, and it’s one that the government has actually prepared for. The Department for Transport has now assembled enough ‘Operators of Last Resort’ (OLRs) to take over every rail franchise in the country; the method that was used to renationalise Northern earlier this year. Before the lockdown, the OLR had been ready to take over other franchises at the point of collapse; such as South Western Railway, West Midlands Trains, and Transpennine Express. It would be a travesty if these failing companies were now to benefit from an indefinite bailout.
If the Emergency Measures Agreements are extended for all train companies, it could cost the taxpayer more than £10 billion a year; while further entrenching the dysfunctional structure of the railway and delaying any solution. But if the government chooses public ownership, that money could be spent far more efficiently, beginning the task of building an integrated and sustainable transport system right away. Passengers have been waiting for a solution to railway fragmentation ever since the 2018 timetable collapse, and in the face of a public health emergency it is now doubly important that they have a railway they can trust, with clear lines of accountability at every level.
The franchising system had collapsed long before the corona pandemic and any further bailout to train companies will delay the chance to fix our railways, when their role as an essential public service has never been so important. The social, economic and climate challenges ahead require a properly integrated, cost-efficient and accountable system run in the clear and overriding public interest. The government must take this opportunity to bring franchises back under public ownership, and start to build a railway for people not profit.
Christopher Muttukumaru CB, DL is a regular walker in Beckenham Place Park. He contributes to The Foundation for Research on Law and Business (Fide) based in Madrid on current legal and economic topics. Their website describes their primary purpose is to be a meeting place for companies, public administration and independent professionals in civil society. These photographs were exhibited as part of an international discussion on Covid-19 and lockdown.
The first collage was an experiment. It shows aspects of the lake as it filled from the autumn of 2018 onward. In a sense, it is a set of “before” and “after” pictures of the same scene. Thus the top left image shows a digger on a winter’s morning as the lake began to fill. The sequence takes the reader from the winter of 2018 to a few verdant summer scenes in 2019 ; and finally to the autumnal colours that are reflected in its waters.
Beckenham Place Mansion is seen from roughly the same place, near Summerhouse Hill Wood, first in heavy snow after the “Beast from the East” left Bellingham like a winter wonderland and secondly in the autumn of 2019.
During the Covid 19 lockdown, the park was a haven of tranquillity. The bluebells in Summerhouse Hill Wood were especially rich in colour. It was poignant to spot this juxtaposition of the NHS key worker rainbow motif and the gentle invitation to look out for the bluebells. Regular walkers know how attractive the woods are . Now, as a result of Lewisham Council’s foresight, the park has attracted new visitors.
The top row shows the bluebells in Summerhouse Hill Wood during the Covid 19 lockdown.
The lower row shows three buildings. At bottom left, there is Foxgrove Lodge, a Grade II listed building. The wisteria in 2020 has been sumptuous. Along with Southend Lodge (centre) , also a listed building, these were two of the gatehouses to Beckenham Place Mansion. The mansion (lower right) was built for John Cator in the period between 1760 and 1773. The house, a listed building, was built on a rise called Stumps Hill. Cator was a MP between 1772 and 1793. He was responsible for planting much of the estate, including some exotic species.
Thanks and Credit: Christopher Muttukumaru CB, DL, is a resident of Bromley. He has been walking in Beckenham Place Park each morning since 2012. As an amateur photographer, he has photographed the park over many years. He was a senior civil servant in the Government Legal Service. He is a barrister, a Bencher of Gray’s Inn and, in retirement, a part time consultant at a City law firm. He has shared these additional, technically innovative and artistic compositions of Beckenham Place Park exclusively here:
A young coot with ornamental plumes – these are thought to give an advantage to chick with parental, preferential feedingThe Mansion – Beckenham Place Park
In a statement following public concern on the construction site, the Port of London Authority has issued a position statement on the controversial, high rise, riverside development in Deptford on the former Henry VIII Royal Dockyard known as Convoys Wharf. The Port of London Authority was created to bring order to the chaos and congestion that prevailed on the Thames as rival wharfs, docks and river users battled for business in the late 1800s.
In the statement the PLA state that they would like to see ‘expeditious progress with reactivation of the wharf’. They are in touch with a number of potential operators.
The PLA support the use of the river to ship construction materials and they expect to be consulted on this.
On Tuesday 9th June and the early hours of Wednesday 10th June 2020, Lewisham Council’s Strategic Planning Committee met to discuss the first phase of the development since Boris Johnson determined the planning application himself at City Hall whilst he was Mayor of London. He held a reprentation hearing on 31st March 2014 to listen to concerns. Cllr Alan Hall was present and he had led the Lewisham Council non executive councillors who had agreed that the use of the river for construction materials and waste from the commencement of the project should be used to manage and mitigate construction impacts.
Surprisingly, Boris Johnson agreed with the Council’s representation that the Build the Lenox Project – a vision to build a replica wooden ship in the historic dockyard – was important. However, he granted the application and passed it back to Lewisham Council to sort out the details of implementing his decision.
“The approach to Sayes Court fails to provide a meaningful green link between the site of the Gardens with the remains of Sayes Court House. The opportunity to link these two historically significant spaces should be fully explored. The Lenox preferred building location is either within the Double Dry Dock or Olympia Warehouse. These options need to be explored further, as does the future use of the Olympia Warehouse and an agreement reached on the deliverability of the double dry dock or Olympia Warehouse as options for constructing the Lenox.”
Lewisham Council’s formal response in 2014 led by Cllr Alan Hall
Promises made to reflect the historic and strategic importance of Deptford
Port of London Authority Statement:
“Convoys Wharf is currently safeguarded by ministerial direction and planning policy protects it for waterborne cargo handling use (policy 7.26 of current Plan – Sl15 of emerging London Plan). As part of the Mayors Safeguarded Wharves Review (2018), the safeguarded wharf boundary for Convoys wharf is recommended to be reduced in size to reflect the extant planning permission for the site (Ref: DC/13/83358). The PLA supported this proposed change, whilst emphasising the requirement for the site owners and partners, including the PLA to expeditiously progress with reactivation of the wharf.
The GLA hearing report (March 2014) on the overall redevelopment strongly features the requirement to reactivate the wharf (which would be located at the western part of the application site) stating the overall redevelopment was acceptable.
And that the location of the Wharf provides a viable, flexible and commercially attractive environment for a range of potential river freight operators. The PLA is aware of interest from several operators about reactivating this as an operational wharf. The PLA wish to work with all stakeholders to achieve this.
We point out the S106 agreement for the overall development requires that “every 6 months commencing no later than 18 months prior to anticipated completion of Phase 1, the owner shall request details of suggested potential wharf operators….using it for waterborne freight handling uses from the PLA, GLA and the Council”. The PLA is keen to ensure this forms a key part of the overall project plan for the Convoys development.
Turning now to the specific recent applications for plots 08 and 15 (both southeast corner of site) and plot 22 which comprises the proposed riverbus terminal. We understand the planning committee discussed all three plots and plots 08 and 22 were approved. Plot 15 has been deferred.
Plot 15
The PLA made representations on this in May 2019.
We emphasised the need for the design to take into account potential impacts (eg noise) of the adjacent wharf (once reactivated) on future occupants of the building. We highlighted the need for the development to progress in line with the Agents of Change principle, set out in para 182 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and policies D12 and Sl15 (water transport) of the emerging London Plan.
The PLA also requested further information regarding use of the river as part of the construction stage. The previously submitted site wide Code of Construction Practice (CoCP) referred to the potential for bulk deliveries and material removal using the Thames. It further stated the client and their consultants would explore river use with all contractors to achieve this. The CoCP stated the volumes of river movements would be determined on a phase by phase basis to confirm river use was economic and viable. The developer committed to investigating for each phase or sub-phase a strategy to maximise river use where reasonably appropriate. It was not clear from the submitted documents for plot 15 whether this process was carried out.
The submitted Remediation Strategy for the application stated the contractor will produce a works specific Construction Phase Environmental Management Plan (CEMP). The PLA emphasised this must include full consideration of using the Thames as part of the construction phase of the development and that this form a condition as part of any planning permission.
The PLA’s position on these matters is unchanged.
Plot 22
The PLA initially raised an objection (Aug 2018) due to the lack of a Navigational Risk Assessment (NRA) in the submitted documents. However following discussions between the PLA and the applicant – including on the need for freight operators to be involved because of the close proximity of the safeguarded wharf to the river bus terminal – the scope of the NRA was agreed. An appropriately worded condition was also agreed. Further issues were also discussed and agreed to be dealt with via condition including on riverside lifesaving equipment.
Plot 08
The PLA raised no in principle objection to the proposals for plot 08 (July 2018). However – as with plot 15 – we emphasised again the importance of using the river during the construction stage of the development.
Deptfords narrow and congested streets by the River Thames
Lewisham Council has clarified some frequently asked questions here:
1. What arrangements will there be for using the wharf for the the delivery and removal of construction materials and to limit traffic through Deptford’s narrow streets in this area?
This was addressed in the outline approval. Condition 44 requires the submission of a code of construction practice for each plot or phase and needs to include details of arrangements for the use of the river for construction.
2. Will there be a proper cycle path along the riverbank and pedestrian footpath? The Thames Path is well loved and a new development is a great opportunity for a proper cycle path as well.
Yes – this was secured in principle in the outline approval
3. Has the Port of London been involved in the decision making process? What do they say?
Yes – their comments are reported in the committee reports in the P22 officer report at paragraph 6.29
No objection subject to the following issues being managed by condition
The Navigational Risk Assessment (NRA) for the proposed river bus terminal and consultation with freight operators. It would be helpful to confirm that depending on the outcome of the NRA, the final position of the terminal may need to be amended.
Provision of Shoreside Safety Measures
Requirement of further assessments mentioned in the jetty structural assessment (part 2.6 of the assessment)
4. Have all the formal conditions of the planning permission granted at City Hall in 2014 been discharged or satisfied?
No – not all are required to be discharged by this point. The committee reports outline what conditions have been discharged in table 8 in the P22 officer report, table 11 in the P08 officer report and table 10 in the P15 officer report.
5. What was the final formal agreed decision of the Strategic Planning Committee? I would not wish to misquote or misunderstand this.
Plot P22 was approved subject to additional informatives. Plot P08 was approved subject to additional conditions/informatives. An informative note allows the local planning authority to draw an applicant’s attention to other relevant matters – for example the requirement to seek additional consents under other regimes.
.@CllrKelleher pleads for changes to the #ConvoysWharf plans reminding us that this is 'the Royal Dockyard' and hoping for real community spaces
— Unite Community GLAB (@UniteCommGLAB) June 22, 2020
Lewisham Council’s Strategic Planning Committee reconvened on Monday, 22nd June at 8pm and approved the remaining application subject to a condition on ‘pepperpotting‘ the affordable housing.
Cllr Paul Bell said that London Affordable Rent was social housing and this has prompted questions in the past.
Here is the exchange of letters between the then, Mayor of Lewisham Sir Steve Bullock and the then, Mayor of London Boris Johnson. This outlined the Lewisham Strategic Planning Committee’s concerns in 2014.
General Letter Template for Headed Paper
General Letter Template for Headed Paper
General Letter Template for Headed Paper
General Letter Template for Headed Paper
It is interesting to note that Boris Johnson heeded the advice of his officials and refused to meet the Mayor of Lewisham directly on a planning matter he was to determine and referred the representations to his trusted Deputy Mayor, Sir Edward Lister former Leader of Wandsworth Council.
Cllr Alan Hall has signed the London Renters Union open letter because “Renters need support during the Covid-19 Crisis too”. The letter says:
“For too long, our housing system has prioritised private profits of landlords over the needs of the rest of us, leading to unaffordable rents, increased insecurity, and the decimation of public housing. A housing system rigged in the interests of landlords and investors is now deepening the problems caused by the Coronavirus pandemic. We agree with Leilani Farha, UN special rapporteur on the right to adequate housing, who said: “Housing has become the frontline defense against the coronavirus. Home has rarely been more of a life or death situation”.
Tenant unions fought for and won a temporary freeze on evictions but these measures are inadequate on their own. Polling shows 6 in 10 renters have suffered losses to their income and many are left out of government support schemes or do not receive enough to cover rent and other essentials such as food. The Conservative 2019 manifesto pledged “a better deal for renters” but current government policy leaves renters to fend for themselves.
Rent is still due and the government’s guidelines make it clear that landlords can issue eviction notices to renters who enter into rent debt. Huge numbers of renters are already behind on rent payments and at risk of eviction as soon as the temporary freeze on evictions is lifted. One survey showed the amount of rent collected by landlords down by almost half. Government inaction is causing a chaotic rent debt and evictions crisis.
Tenant unions have collected a wealth of evidence showing that estate agents and landlords are harassing renters to continue to pay rent in full. Many renters are fearful of eviction and of getting into unmanageable debt.
Millions of people feel enormous pressure to prioritise rent over buying food. According to recent research by the Food Foundation, 1.5 million Britons have gone a whole day without food during the Coronavirus pandemic.
Many renters feel they have no choice but to break social distancing guidelines and go out to work so they can continue to pay their rent, putting themselves and others at risk of infection.
Massive rent debt will make it impossible for many to rebuild their lives in the aftermath of the pandemic.
Housing, food and medicine are essential for the collective wellbeing of our society – landlords being able to continue to receive rent payments in full is not. While we are told that we must all make sacrifices and that we are all in this together, millions of people are suffering just to prevent the profits of landlords from being interrupted. Renters across all tenures need to be protected during the Coronavirus pandemic.
— London Renters Union (@LDNRentersUnion) June 20, 2020
Suspend rent immediately: no rent should be due for the duration of the crisis.
Cancel all rent debt: arrears accumulated during the crisis should be written-off
Protect renters from eviction: In England and Wales, Section 21 should be abolished immediately. Across the UK, protections against eviction should be expanded so no one loses their home while they are trying to cope with Coronavirus and its aftermath.
Thousands of renters have joined tenant and community unions over the past 6 weeks. Together, we will continue to organise to protect our homes and our communities and we are ready to take further collective action if the government fails to adequately address the growing Coronavirus rent crisis.
Tom Renhard, ACORN Sonja Coquelin, Living Rent Amina Gichinga, London Renters Union John McDonnell MP Zarah Sultana MP Richard Burgon MP Clive Lewis MP Ian Byrne MP Kate Osborne MP Aspana Begum MP Sian Berry, co-leader, Green Party Sarah Woolley Ian Hodson, Bakers, Food and Allied Workers Union Jo Grady, University and Colleges Union Petros Elia, United Voices of the World Laura Pidcock, People’s Assembly Against Austerity Cllr Alan Hall – Bellingham, Lewisham Council Satbir Singh, CEO, Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants Ellen Clifford, Disable People Against the Cuts Will Stronge, Autonomy Zita Holbourne, Black Activists Rising Against Cuts Migrants Organise Peter Stefanovic, lawyer”
More than a hundred charities, campaign groups, lawyers and local councillors have urged local councils not to evict homeless people with NRPF from emergency accommodation provided through the Covid-19 homelessness response. People experiencing homelessness are significantly more likely to suffer some form of mental or physical health problem.
The open letter, signed by charities including Refugee Action, Praxis, JCWI and the Big Issue Foundation, also asks councils to promise not to share homeless people’s information with the Home Office without their consent.
The signatories to the letter want local authorities to publicly lobby Home Secretary Priti Patel for an end to the ‘no recourse to public funds (NRPF)’ system. NRPF is a condition that prevents some migrants from accessing welfare benefits and social housing.
As a result of NRPF rules, overstretched local authorities have had to meet the financial burden of supporting homeless migrants during the Covid-19 pandemic. People with no recourse to public funds make up more than half of the rough sleeping population in some areas of the UK. There are fears that, as lockdown measures are eased, many migrants with NRPF will be evicted from emergency accommodation and forced to return to the streets.
Some councils, including Hackney and Cambridge City Council, have already called for an end to NRPF and criticised the government for not giving local authorities enough funding or legal powers to support all homeless people during the Covid-19 pandemic. Last week the Local Government Association (LGA) called for a suspension of no recourse to public fund
Benjamin Morgan, coordinator of the EEA homeless rights project at the Public Interest Law Centre (PILC), said: “If the government is not willing to protect migrant lives during and after this public health crisis, then local councils must be prepared to take a stand against the ‘hostile environment’ by offering sanctuary. Nobody should be forced to sleep rough for want of the right papers.”
Haringey Migrant Support Centre said: “We are braced for a further increase in rough sleeping as the effects of Covid – job losses, debt, evictions – further entrench inequalities in our communities. Migrants are particularly exposed to the racialised violence that is endemic among government institutions such as the Home Office. Local authorities have the power to mitigate the most harmful effects that impact migrants and should adopt anti-racist solutions: demand the abolition of NRPF policy and practice; commit to no data sharing; provide sanctuary.”
EMMAUS UK said: “Emmaus UK strongly believes that no-one should be without a safe place to stay, least of all during the Covid-19 crisis. It is vital that the government commits to providing ongoing funding to ensure that anyone threatened with homelessness has access to appropriate housing, regardless of their immigration status.”
Cllr Alan Hall said: “People should not be left destitute in a civilised society. Local Councils have had to use all their legal powers to find homes, feed children and provide subsistence during Covid-19. They hold the budget of last resort.” “Boris Johnson looked shocked and surprised when he was told this – he should end the cruelty of NRPF now. I am asking people to sign the open letter here: “
In Lewisham, there has been a NRPF scheme since 2014. This has been the subject of scrutiny and legal challenge. More recently, an independent assessment reported that local community groups found among the clients that they had worked with, there were historic reports of a “hostile” approach being adopted by the NRPF team and an over-emphasis on credibility. There was a sense amongst these groups that the service had sought to discredit clients rather than assess need.
We are writing to urge your local authority to commit to providing ongoing shelter and support to all those experiencing or at risk of homelessness during and after the Covid-19 pandemic, and to do so regardless of immigration status.
We are also asking you to join us in publicly calling on the government to end the ‘no recourse to public funds’ (NRPF) regime, which exposes many people living in the UK to destitution, including rough sleeping.
We recognise that councils are operating under extremely challenging conditions due to the pandemic. We are also aware that a decade of austerity, combined with a loss of revenue as a result of ‘lockdown’ measures, has placed local-authority budgets under severe strain.
It is clear that central government has not provided sufficient funding to local authorities to support homeless people during this crisis. This has been compounded by the failure of MHCLG to provide guidance on what legal powers councils should use to support those who would not normally be eligible for assistance. The NRPF condition, which restricts some migrants’ access to welfare benefits, has placed the burden of supporting such people on overstretched local authorities.
As a result, and despite the efforts of some councils, many homeless people, particularly those with NRPF, remain without shelter during this pandemic. Others have experienced unacceptable ‘gatekeeping’ or have received inadequate support once accommodated. Some people with insecure immigration status have been told by councils that their information may be shared with the Home Office for immigration-enforcement purposes.
As lockdown measures are eased, we are extremely concerned that some homeless people, particularly those with NRPF, may be evicted from council-provided accommodation and be forced to return to destitution. This would be a moral, humanitarian and public health catastrophe, especially given that many shelters will be unable to reopen due to ongoing social distancing requirements.
As you will be aware, the homelessness minister recently confirmed that the legal position on support for people with NRPF ‘has not changed’, suggesting that councils should make use of ‘voluntary repatriation’. We are deeply concerned by these announcements.
Nobody should be forced to sleep rough, regardless of their immigration status. Nobody should be forced to leave the country they call ‘home’.
In light of the above, we are asking your local authority to take the following steps:
Commit to continuing to support everybody who is, or is at risk of, sleeping rough, and to do so regardless of immigration status. This commitment must include assurances that nobody will be evicted from temporary accommodation provided through the pandemic response unless and until suitable long-term housing has been found for them.
Urgently and publicly advocate to central government for the removal of all NRPF restrictions, including those that apply to undocumented migrants and EEA citizens without a qualifying right to reside, to ensure that everyone can access shelter and meet their basic needs during and after the Covid-19 pandemic.
Provide assurances that homeless people’s data will never be shared with the Home Office without their informed consent and that nobody will be offered ‘voluntary return’ or ‘reconnection’ to their country of origin as a ‘single service offer’.
We are grateful to those local authorities who have already signalled their wish to ensure that nobody is forced to return to the street. However, in these extraordinary circumstances, further efforts are required to uphold everybody’s right to shelter, regardless of immigration status.
We look forward to hearing from you and to continuing to work with you around this issue. Please send your response to advocacy@haringeymsc.org
Yours sincerely,
Refugee Action JCWI Praxis Doctors of the World The Big Issue Foundation Migrants Rights’ Network City of Sanctuary UK WeBelong Emmaus UK Migrant Voice UKLGIGHelp Refugees/Choose Love Project 17 Just Fair Maternity Action Right to Remain Labour Homelessness Campaign Labour Campaign for Free Movement AVID (Association of Visitors to Immigration Detainees) Public Interest Law Centre Museum of Homelessness Streets Kitchen Lewisham Refugee and Migrant Network Simon Community South London Refugee Association PLOD Foundation Cllr Maryam Eslamdoust, Mayor of Camden Cllr Jumbo Chan, (Kensal Green Ward) Cllr Alan Hall, (Bellingham Ward) Cllr Soraya Adejare, (Dalston) Cllr Gail Macenna, (Haverstock) Jack Jeffery Unite Housing Branch Secretary and others
Note to editors: The open letter has been coordinated by homelessness and migrants’ rights groups including Museum of Homelessness, Haringey Migrant Support Centre (HMSC), Public Interest Law Centre (PILC), Paper Cup Project and Labour Homelessness Campaign.
Members of Parliament have joined the clamour for ‘no-one to be left out’ by signing a letter to Robert Jenrick, MP the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government see:
Pleased to have MPs across political parties join me in a letter to the Government warning of a coming ‘cliff-edge’ as the programme to house people experiencing homelessness in hotels during COVID-19 ends across England at the beginning of July. pic.twitter.com/DFo31HVlD5
On Saturday, 13th June 2020 at midday, Lewisham Trades Union Council President, Ms Cheryl McLeod attended a demonstration on Hilly Fields, Ladywell. The event was organised by the Lewisham Anti-Racist Action Group, LARAG.
Addressing the 250 strong crowd, Ms Cheryl McLeod said:
“We are in the United Nations Decade for People of Africa Decent. This runs from 2015 and ends in 2024. This highlights that people of African descent still have limited access to good education, health services and housing”
“We know that there have been 1,743 deaths in police custody since 1990. These affect black and ethnic minority groups more. We – Asian, Africans and Ethnic Minorities – make up only 14% of the population in the UK but our deaths account for over 30% of this total in London.”
“Also, remember the case of Cherry Groce and DJ Smiley Culture took his own life by stabbing himself in the chest during a police raid at his home.”
Turning to matters closer to home in Lewisham, Ms Cheryl McLeod went on to say:
“We have heard that Lewisham Council will participate in the Mayor of London’s initiative, a Commission to look at statues and other landmarks. This is very good but I want investment back into our communities.”
“I hope that Lewisham’s Mayor Egan hears us, when we say that Lewisham Council is failing our africa caribbean boys in educational attainment.”
“Lewisham Council have closed the only elderly day centre, the Calabash was our only dedicated Africa Caribbean day centre.”
“The housing waiting list comprises of many in the communities. We have Catford regeneration on the table. How many social homes are going to be built? This is a question I keep asking – you should ask this too!”
In her concluding comments, Ms Cheryl McLeod paid tribute to the trade unions and others who had worked tirelessly in the wake of the Grenfell Fire tragedy. “No doubt the Lewisham Town Hall will be lit green, we need fewer gestures and more action.” she said.
Hundreds join anti-racism protest in Lewisham park, reports Kaeshelle Cooke.
Church bells across London ring out on the third anniversary of the Grenfell fire
On 14 June 2020, the third anniversary since 72 people died as a result the Grenfell Tower Fire church bells rang out across London. The fire devastated an entire community in North Kensington.
The impact of building deregulation is under intense scrutiny today. The Fire Brigade Union has said:
“This agenda was driven by the demands and interests of corporations and developers; it prioritised the pursuit of profit over people. At Grenfell it resulted in a high-rise residential building being clad with highly combustible material. The repeated fire safety concerns of residents were ignored. Earlier warnings from the FBU about the dangers of flammable cladding systems were also ignored.”
Grenfell anniversary: FBU “will not accept another year of inaction” https://t.co/WZyvQIa3o9
The FBU say that little has changed. Buildings clad with ACM remain. And there is a large and unknown risk to those in homes built or clad with other combustible materials. There are a host of other high risk fire safety failings in residential buildings across the country.
There are still over 500,000 people at risk in unsafe housing across the UK;
Over 23,000 homes are still wrapped in highly flammable ACM cladding;
Over 400 buildings still have a ‘waking watch’ due to serious fire safety issues and despite our serious concerns over the ‘waking watch’ system.
The Construction Index News reports that more than two-thirds of at-risk buildings with flammable ACM cladding have yet to be fixed mainly located in London and Greater Manchester: Salford and the London boroughs of Greenwich, Newham and Tower Hamlets have more than 20 high-rise residential buildings with ACM cladding systems yet to be remediated.
Matt Wrack, General Secretary, FBU said: “We will continue our commitment to achieve real change in legislation and to hold those truly responsible for the fire to account. There must be justice.”
Criticism about the pace of change, culture and quality of relationships at the local Kensington and Chelsea Council has been leveled by a task force, brought in by the government. It is reported that they have said that it was pleased that the council has made progress but said some residents and community groups said they their reception was “ill-considered or brusque”.
“We remain concerned about the pace of change, the culture across the council and the quality of the relationship with the bereaved and survivors and the wider affected community. Consequently, we remain unable to give you unequivocal assurance that RBKC is effectively delivering a recovery for the bereaved and survivors and the wider community in north Kensington.”
And they said: “We have noticed that the ‘law of diminishing returns’ has now come into play. After two-and-a-half years the support and challenge we provide to Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea is sometimes welcome and sometimes not.”
Cllr Emma Dent-Coad, the former Labour MP for Kensington has written in Tribune: “The Task Force’s reprimands on lack of trust inspired the council to set up an industry of what they believe is ‘community engagement.’ Given that this crucial task has been sucked into the council’s media and comms team, we see their game.”
“Any criticism of how the council ‘engages’ is met with yet another round of staff recruitment. What they do not understand is that success lies not in heavily staged get-togethers, photo ops and enforced camaraderie but in true community empowerment. To right the endless wrongs they are responsible for, they must trust the community and hand over power. It may be messy, but it would be better than this current show.”
Yvette Williams from campaigning group Justice 4 Grenfell said: “More needs to be done and a change in thinking is still needed. This will never happen with just a suite of new written policies and governance arrangements, real change and a faster pace will only happen when the leadership has the personal and political will to do so.”
In a parliamentary debate in June 2019, Emma Dent-Coad, MP said that the Shelter report on social housing has been a welcome piece of research whose recommendations I hope, in time, will be adopted.
This report proposes a wide range of measures to secure the social housing needed, it stresses that social housing should be tenure blind and within mixed communities. There should be no ‘poor doors’. More recently, the housing campaigners have launched a London manifesto called ‘A Capital in Crisis’.
We remember the Grenfell Tower fire where 72 people died three years ago today. We support @fbunational when they say #GrenfellNeverAgain We support @emmadentcoad and all those who are trying to get Barry Quirk, RBKC CEO to end the “can’t do” culture and deliver now – it is time pic.twitter.com/3J4DZacayR
The BBC have produced a short video guide on the ‘R’ Number
In the news we here that the ‘R’ number is up or down in the covid-19 infection statistics. The ‘R’ stands for the estimate a measure of ongoing transmission. In simple terms the BBC have described the ‘R’ number as a way of rating a disease’s ability to spread.
If the number of people that an infected person passes the virus on to is greater than 1 then this can lead to a rapid, exponential rise. The numbers are a range as they a made up of several factors that will vary from place to place and situation. London has more dense, diverse and higher population.
DISEASE
REPRODUCTION NUMBER R0
Ebola, 2014
1.51 to 2.53
H1N1 Influenza, 2009
1.46 to 1.48
Seasonal Influenza
0.9 to 2.1
Measles
12 to 18
SARS-CoV-2 (causes COVID-19)
1.5 to 3.5
R0 values by disease type – table courtesy University of Michigan
Measles has one of the highest numbers with a reproduction number of 15 in populations without immunity. It can cause explosive outbreaks – especially in areas of high density population. Another good reason to ensure children are vaccinated against it.
The history of the ‘R’ number dates back to before the 1950s and the research carried out by Ronald Ross his ideas helped the theoretical work of George Macdonald and the empirical work of some of his close associates. The theory for transmission dynamics and control, a deliberately simplified set of concepts, in the “Ross-Macdonald” model plays a role in today’s science.
The latest Covid 19 ‘R’ figures are available by region.
These figures show the regional Covid-19 ‘R’ values.
The blue lines is show when interventions have been introduced (lockdown on 23 Mar and the relaxation of measures on 11 May), and the red line shows the date these results were produced on 3rd June 2020.
For London, the black line is the median value R=0.95
The lower calculated value for London’s R=0.72
The higher calculated value for London’s R=1.2
The density and diversity of London’s population is high.
Figures for the South West where R is rising and thought to be 1.0 are based on a lower population density overall.
The figures for the North West are worrying as this has a higher density population and a higher number of cases. R=1.01
Although the average national figure for R is less than 1, the regions have different values with London, South West and North West hovering around 1.
There is a margin of error and it looks like we are well within this. Only time will tell whether lockdown was lifted too early.
It is salutary to note that some councils are not expecting their schools to open on Monday 9th June. Tameside Council, part of Greater Manchester has issued a statement citing the rise in the ‘R’ as a reason to change their plans and advise schools not to open.
Our Director of Public Health @Jeanelleuk has today advised Tameside schools to delay their wider reopening until at least 22 June in response to the regional rise in the R rate & the associated increased risks to public health https://t.co/8wDZmmYy9o
— Tameside Council (@TamesideCouncil) June 5, 2020
The Letter from Tameside Council’s Director of Public Health, Dr Jeanelle de Gruchy states:
“Tameside Council understands that this is an extremely challenging time for all who live in our borough but recognises fully the many acts of kindness which local residents have undertaken to support each other. We would like to pay special tribute to the work of headteachers, staff, school governors and childcare providers for their fantastic work in supporting children and families during this and your brilliant contribution to the Borough’s response to Covid 19.
“Nationally, the government is requesting that schools and childcare settings start to increase the numbers of pupils attending over the coming weeks. Our local approach, as you know, has been to focus on making safe and sensible decisions and maintaining, wherever possible collective approaches which can inform local decisions. Headteachers and their staff, in partnership with the Local Authority, have done excellent preparatory work undertaking and completing risk assessments in their schools.
“Members of SAGE (Scientific Advisory Group on Emergencies) and the Association of Directors of Public Health advised caution and concern about the too rapid easing of lockdown and the increased risk of a second pandemic wave. Balancing this concern, the national R number being between 0.7 to 1.0 and estimated at 0.73 in the North West and the importance of having our children back at school, I supported the limited increase in the number of children attending planned in the Borough from Monday 8th June.
“However information released at 2pm today estimates the R value is now above the critical value of 1 for the North West, at 1.01.
“Because of this change in R, and despite the excellent work undertaken, I am therefore strongly advising all schools and childcare settings to delay wider opening until at least 22 June for us to be more assured that the rate of infection is reducing and R is firmly below 1.
“All settings should continue to remain open for vulnerable children and the children of key workers as they have been since the start of the national lockdown.
“I will continue to monitor what is a fast-evolving situation very closely and keep my advice to you under constant review. I will write to you all again next Friday with a further update and advice on wider opening.”
We have called on local authorities in Manchester, Oldham, Salford, St Helens, Stockport & Warrington to pause their plans to continue with the wider reopening of schools in light of reports that the R number has crept above 1 in the North West. https://t.co/fmkUskIWay
“Employers have statutory responsibilities to protect the health, safety and welfare of their employees at work and to minimise the risks to which employees are exposed. Given the reports that the R rate has now risen above 1 in the North West, meaning that the virus may be growing again, the NASUWT believes these local authorities must fulfil their duty of care to staff and pupils by rethinking plans for the wider reopening of schools in their region.”
“In the absence of new risk assessments being provided to the NASUWT and in the light of the increase in the R rate, the Union must insist that these local authorities demonstrate how they intend to keep pupils and staff safe and if they cannot, they must pause their plans for the wider reopening of schools.”
According to reports in The Guardian, Dr Sebastian Funk of the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine said the UK government appeared to be happy with R floating around 1, despite infections remaining relatively high. “That will come with the risk of higher number of deaths and morbidity compared to a scenario where you drive the disease to lower numbers before loosening the physical distancing measures,” he said.
The Shadow Secretary of State for Health, @JonAshworth asked an Urgent Question in the Chamber today, asking for an update on the Coronavirus "R" rate and lockdown measures.
The Human Rights charity Liberty has branded the new Immigration Bill part of the “hostile environment“.
Liberty’s Gracie Bradley said: “It’s impossible to have a hostile environment which doesn’t result in human rights abuses – and expanding it is nothing to be proud of. The Government could use this Bill as an opportunity for redemption, to learn the lessons of the pandemic, and to ensure there’s no repeat of Windrush. But it will only achieve that by ending the hostile environment and redesigning the immigration system so that humanity, dignity and respect sits at its core.”
The Government has set out proposals for a 6-month grace period for EU nationals which extends the programme for settled status until June 2021. During this period, EU nationals who have not been granted settled status will be subject to the current “hostile environment” provisions which exist for non-EU nationals.
The Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants say that the responsibility for immigration enforcement falls on businesses, public services and ordinary citizens and its structure encourages the targeting of ethnic minorities and those who look or sound ‘foreign’. Those without documentation are denied access to housing, healthcare, employment benefits and bank accounts. Given that most people in the UK without documents have a legal right to be here, it inevitably causes huge amounts of harm to people.
The hostile environment means that employers, landlords, NHS staff and other public servants have to check your immigration status before offering you a job, housing, healthcare or other support.
By including the NHS this leads to a public health risk as some people will be afraid to access healthcare. Clearly, this is critical during a pandemic.
As Parliament is debating these new immigration laws now, Cllr Alan Hall has joined campaigners and written to the Home Secretary, Priti Patel MP supporting the call for change:
“I am writing as your constituent to ask you to use the Immigration Bill to end the ‘hostile environment’ for migrants.
The hostile environment has embedded border controls in the heart of our communities and is destroying lives. Undocumented people in the UK can’t find a place to live, access employment, open a bank account, get a driving licence or receive benefits – forcing them into destitution and exploitation.
Data-sharing deals between essential services and the Home Office mean that people are afraid to send their children to school, or even get medical care when ill or report a crime because they may end up detained or deported.
The coronavirus crisis has further exposed the inhumanity of these policies. Having people in our country who are too afraid to seek medical help during a pandemic is a disgrace.
Meanwhile the Prime Minister himself has expressed shock at rules which stop many migrants from accessing basic public support.
After Brexit, three million more people will suddenly fall within the hostile environment and might too be locked up in immigration detention centres or removed from the country.
The Immigration Bill is an opportunity to prove we have learned the lessons of the Windrush Scandal. Please use it to end the hostile environment and redesign the immigration system with humanity, dignity and respect at its core.”
PM @BorisJohnson says 'people who… live and work here should have support of one kind or another'. We agree!
Hear from care worker Hanna, interviewed by Bilqis from @lewishamcitz, on what having #NRPF means for her.
