When you Threaten one you Threaten ALL!

by netter Tue Oct 28, 2008 17:25

Semi-privatised empires: people for places ex-director speaks out: http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/joepublic/2007/dec/05...pires

by St Pauls Resident Tue Oct 28, 2008 18:57

I have spoken to a friend of mine who works for Places for people. She tells me that there is no such thing as "Places for People’s charitable arm, Places for People Individual Support.

Prehaps you know something that she doesn't. If so can youn sahre your information about this Charity within a charity.

ta

by The Bristol Blogger - The Bristol Blogger Tue Oct 28, 2008 20:52

http://www.placesforpeople.co.uk/individualsupport/

by person Tue Oct 28, 2008 21:07

Seriously.
A VERY basic search online will find as much information as your friend, and yourself may need.
It's quite the indication of how Places for People operate as a company that your friend is unaware of one of it's major departments.
Our maybe your friend just doesn't care about their job?

by Local Resident Tue Oct 28, 2008 23:30

Turns out that everyone's been protesting against an eviction to make way for a social housing scheme (see link to minutes) and post on "eviction in progress" thread. Someone from the Bristol Housing Action Movement knew about this but forgot to tell anyone. Lets hope none of the protestors had to cancel anything important. I wonder whether the squatters will hand over the keys now?

by @rchie Wed Oct 29, 2008 12:44

Having followed the link that "local resident" provides above to the st pauls unlimited meeting minutes (something they obviously didn't do Unless of course they were there with there P4P hat on) we find that the council expressed concern over the afordability of the houseing scheme proposed and the only person who said that the scheme was in line with the Housing plan was from P4P!.

P4P are trying to make fools of all of us.

by Local resident Wed Oct 29, 2008 23:09

...and note the consultation event referred to on the 3rd nov last year. If the project went through consultation with local residents and it didn't fit the housing plan then it wouldn't have got funded. And its a guess but I don't think it would have got funded if it was just being done to make a profit. And no I don't wear a p4p hat I just try to pay attention to whats going on in the area.

by @rchie Thu Oct 30, 2008 11:30

Apologies for assuming you were p4p “local resident”, this comes from some awareness of the under hand nature of Britain's most centralised housing corp., so again apologies. I have looked further into this house and tracked down this

www.stpaulsunlimited.org.uk/taskgroups/documents/Planning04.12.07.doc

which is the minutes from after the “ consultation” and it contains this paragraph.....

“Discussion followed which expressed disappointment that bids have been made without prior reference to the Planning Sub-Group - as had been promised by Tim Southall. The whole purpose of this prior consultation was not only to comply with the Ground Rules of the emerging SCI, but principally to avoid the public conflict which had to be aired over Brigstocke Road and Backfields. Whilst the current list may appear generally benign, it looks likely that there might be opposition to the proposals for 87 Ashley Road. MR to ask Penny to take up our concerns with Nick Hooper to ensure that the commitment previously made for consultation with SPU before bids are submitted is taken on board. “

I can find no reference to a planning application on the councils website, though this maybe because im not using it correctly. If you or anyone else can establish what they plan for this place it would be useful.

If you are a St Paul's resident then I suggest that the CJ HOLE for sale signs adorning the buildings opposite 87 ashley rd might give some idea of P4P's intentions.

by Local resi Thu Oct 30, 2008 23:08

Thanks for doing some more digging @rchie. If this scheme hasn't got planning permission then there there are rules on what can get planning permission in st pauls so someone should get the council to intervene. The squatters should speak to st pauls unlimited. Local people should have a say in this. Its not for the squatters to decide for themselves. I checked the flats over the road and there's a big sign saying its funded by the housing corporation with money from the government so if P4P are selling them off someone should tell them or the fraud squad

by baitmaster Fri Oct 31, 2008 11:02

who cares who owns it? Its owned by someone else, not the leeches that live there

Homeless, huh? For how long? What have they done about it? How much do they take from society, and how much do they give back? Whats the matter? unable to sweep a road? Too proud? Or just too bloody bone idle

"ILLEGAL EVICTION" shouted out in big letters... and the building was entered legally in the first place, was it? You didn't know that someone else owned it?! Stop hiding behind technicalities, and have some honour and dignity, what you are doing is tantamount to theft in my eyes

"They make big profits" So? You want to live without money? Then why sit on St James Barton roundabout every bloody day, taking it in turns to look stricken and get free handouts from well meaning members of the public, whilst your pikey mates hang around nearby drinking cider. Ive seen your set up, how you take it in turns to get your next bit of drug money. Never more than five minutes at a time so its not too difficult for you...

You want better lives for yourselves? GET OFF YOUR ASSES AND WORK like the rest of us! You might end up taking more pride in your surroundings, instead of just taking and breaking all the bloody time, and wasting everyone else's tax money on unnecessary police and court action

Call this trolling if you want, but Im entitled to my say cos I paid for it through my taxes - probably a damn sight more than you did. And don't tell me Im prejudiced either, I've been watching this happen

by n8 Fri Oct 31, 2008 12:51

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=MoZ15oDqcHw

And just to add my non visual 2p worth to the interesting comments above -

- Resisting a social housing provider building affordable accommodation in St Pauls - sounds pretty criminal!

Now lets leave aside for the moment the fact that the housing in question may or may not actually be 'affordable' and also the question of the status of p4p as a charity given its purported quasi-profit making activities. Lets assume for the sake of argument that it is a friendly, good-willed, social housing provider with nothing but the best intentions.

In this case would it be right for the squatter to remain in the property?

- I would argue that yes it right for the squatters to remain. Taking control of your own housing situation rather than existing in a paternalistic relationship with the social housing provider is surely a preferable situation. Most people who squatt do it out of necessity and/or to break with the dependence on the state and capital so as to liberate time for living, community organising and creativity. Whilst social housing is preferable to full privatisation it is less empowering than taking control of your own life to house yourself. Clearly squatting it is not currently manageable for everyone as involves a lot of hard work, can be quite a transient existence and involves social stigmaitisation and prejudice as the comment above clearly demonstrates (unless it has been removed). However if we are genuinely interested in emancipatory social change rather than bigger crumbs from the masters table (which I understand many are not) then we should support Ashley Road, BHAM, Bristol Space Invaders & squatting and DIY forms of urban survival to make them more accessible, less stigmatised and more widespread.

by nickleberry Fri Oct 31, 2008 13:08

@baitmaster writes: Call this trolling if you want, but Im entitled to my say cos I paid for it through my taxes - probably a damn sight more than you did.

No you didn't. This site has got nothing to do with your taxes; it's run by volunteers, and is funded by donations and fundraising. You're entitled to your say by virtue of being a human being with an opinion on this issue; it'd be nice if you expressed your opinion with a little respect for those with whom you disagree.

by She Fri Oct 31, 2008 13:48

Or Masterbaiter?

I dont imagine anyone here is gonna want to communicate with such a closed-minded, non-thinking person as yourself.

Being a 'taxpayer' does not qualify you to judge people you know nothing about, ever.

Your assumptions and opinions and conditioning and imaginings have destroyed your ability to reason intelligently.

I respectfully suggest you de-condition yourself ASAP if you ever want to be a part of the solution.

You might get a better response to your bile by writing to the Daily Mail or Daily Telegraph, I have no doubt you would feel more at home with them.

by baitmaster Fri Oct 31, 2008 14:35

N8, I accept your points to some extent, but from what I see the reality is often somewhat different:

"Most people who squatt do it out of necessity and/or to break with the dependence on the state and capital so as to liberate time for living, community organising and creativity"

- necessity, in the short term, I could maybe accept, but (1) short-term emergency housing is available and already paid for by the taxpayer, and (2) how short-term is short-term? The people I've seen in this situation seem to do nothing to change it. Surely the homeless should be prioritising getting their lives back on track, and not freeing up time for "creativity"? The saying "beggars can't be choosers" could not be more apt, given the circumstances

If these people are in genuine hardship, there are systems in place to look after them, including free money, shelter, counselling, legal advice and everything else they might need. To simply take what belongs to someone else, and try and justify it on the basis that the "someone else" are greedy or whatever, still amounts to the same thing - its taking whats not theirs, has not been earned, and in 99% of cases will be mistreated to the point of destruction in the process, with no intention of doing anything about solving the persons own problems, just expecting someone else to do it or pay for it. If they are here through choice, they have to accept when someone wants their property back and get out

For the record, I would hope my previous comments aren't removed, as I say elsewhere in this forum - which is an open forum for local people discussing local issues, not just organising one-sided political action - there are two sides to every story, we just disagree on how to deal with the problems. In my eyes, if you keep giving handouts, people become reliant and don't fix their own troubles - maybe you could view it as "you've got to be cruel to be kind". Its the same reason I NEVER give money to beggars - you've got to cut that lifeline to their heroin, forcing them to do something about it. OK, maybe Im being prejudiced again to some extent, labelling "all" as smack addicts, but its true or not far off the mark in many such cases

by baitmaster Fri Oct 31, 2008 14:52

Nickleberry

Your comments are noted, and I apologise that I did rant a bit, and take an overharsh tone. My comments should be interpreted in the third person, and not directed at any one individual in this thread which is how they appear (its awkward trying to write in the third person all the time..)

I hope that my second post clarifies better why I get annoyed at people that seem to take, take, take, without giving anything back to those of us that do pay a lot into the system. You may feel its prejudiced against those that have little, others of us feel that its prejudiced against those that work hard and are made to pay for it - after all, everyone has opportunities, if they choose to take them

I also accept your point that taxes have no bearing on this site, but they do have a bearing on the subject. I was homeless and penniless myself when I arrived in Bris 8 years ago, but by hard graft I am now happy and successful, and yes, paying a lot of taxes

by ex-squatter Fri Oct 31, 2008 17:46

Personally i'm not a fan of hippies and can't stand what the Americans call "FauxBos"- richkids pretending to be poor and revolutionary, however squatting is a lifesaver for many who are genuinely homeless who would be in deep doo doo otherwise. Hostels are well known as a nightmare full of drunks, drug abusers and violent loons, and it can take years to get housed by your friendly local caring "social housing provider" (many of whom are extremely corrupt, and little more than slum landlords btw- one well known Bristol mini-empire was literally seeded with drug money and have defrauded the social for thousands upon thousands of pounds of Transitiona Housing Benefit. for so-called support which amounts to nothing more than a weekly visit from some pen-pusher). END RANT.

So anyway in this case I say: Good for the hippies - doing something socially responsible and relevant to real life for once!

by hellana phillips - concerned citizen Sat Nov 01, 2008 02:24 hellsgraphics at hotmail dot com ebbw vale gwent

i am pleading to who ever this may concern please let the squaters stay at ashley road they are all homeless people ,good people i viseted there a few weeks ago with a mate it was the first time i had ever been to a squat and it was a big eye opener for me im not from bristol myself i live in ebbw vale in wales where i live there is alot of help for homeless people unlike bristol people help each other the people who live in ashley road have no help from any one please give them a chance and let them stay show some kind ness make a differance start a chain of kindness today change the world forever hellana phillips

by £$£$£$£$£$£ Sat Nov 01, 2008 08:55

No can do Hellana, capitalism does not do 'kindness', we do exploitation for profit and nothing but.

Its one of the fundamentals of capitalism deary, we cannot possibly do lefty shit like sensitivity and kindness and compassion and general nice-ness, theres no money in it.

Just imagine for a minute what might happen if we were to ever be sensitive or kind or compassionate or nice, for a start we'd never be able to drive our 4 x 4 wearing our £800 suits to the races to gamble and make loadsa wonga!

Get real - get a job working for an asshole like me and get paid minimum wage! - I'll give you one!

by nickleberry Sat Nov 01, 2008 09:32

@baitmaster wrote: Your comments are noted, and I apologise that I did rant a bit, and take an overharsh tone.

Fair enough. God knows I've ranted plenty before now...

I hope that my second post clarifies better why I get annoyed at people that seem to take, take, take, without giving anything back to those of us that do pay a lot into the system. You may feel its prejudiced against those that have little, others of us feel that its prejudiced against those that work hard and are made to pay for it - after all, everyone has opportunities, if they choose to take them.

Your annoyance is understandable, but I would suggest that your ire would be better directed elsewhere. Firstly, as people have said, there are very good arguments as to why squatting can be an entirely positive contribution to a local community. I have not visited this particular squat but I've been to plenty of others that have provided housing for those that needed it, and/or have provided valuable community space for those in the neighbourhood.

Moving beyond the immediate question of squatting though, let's consider these "people that seem to take, take, take, without giving anything back to those of us that do pay a lot into the system". This group of people occupies a special status in the minds of many in this country; the tabloid press are forever condemning this group of people, and complaining that hard working middle England are being robbed blind by them. I maintain that this is a red herring.

I don't deny that there are individuals within society who are looking for a free ride. But realistically, people perpetrating low level benefit fraud, or those squatting a house, or whoever it is, are not the drain on society that the press might have you think. Their "free-ride" is nothing to the free-ride of our lords and masters at the top end of town. While the press bangs on about heroin addicts claiming disability allowance, bankers are being paid six figure bonuses, while the banks themselves receives billions of pounds of public money to make up for the incompetence of these same bankers. While the press harangues teenage mothers having kids "so they can claim benefits", our government is spending some insane amount of money (figures vary, but anything up to £100 billion) upgrading Trident. Needless to say, the list goes on.

You have every right to be resentful of the money you pay the government in tax, you should feel hard-done-by because your daily grind is undervalued, but don't blame a bunch of squatters for this. Investigate the real reasons as to why half the country works their arse off, and gets paid fuck-all for it. The problem is not hippies, or squatters, or heroin addicts, the problem is the politicians, their off-siders in the media, and the rest of the top end of town.

by another ex squatter Sat Nov 01, 2008 19:14

I used to squat in london and it was always in council places because we leant the hard way what happened if you tried private properties. I got arrested in one private (empty) house cos the neighbour was so quick to report it. some friends got attacked by the owners thugs in another place. we always fought possession proceedings cos sometimes you got an adjurnment on a technicality and that helped give you time to find somewhere else. If I was in this squat I would hang on for as long as I could. the thing is we thought we doing the right thing but we were always picking soft targets. I don't think anyone should kid themselves that this is a battle against capitalism. this is just taking advantage of a slow witted housing association with useless security and solicitors. if you want to make a real difference then try squatting one of the hundreds empty buy to leave flats or a repossessed property cos thats where the real problem is. i don't recommend it tho. if this housing association was run by proper capitalists these squatters would have been out on the street in a few hours never mind squatters rights. if you want to show us alternative to the capitalists and bureaucrats then think about how many people from ethnic minorities, disabled or families are living in this place and think about how the community can have a say in whats happening. fair play for taking the initiative and looking after this place but solving real housing problems needs more than crowbars and slogans

by ex-squatter Sat Nov 01, 2008 20:22

I have a horrible feeling that it was only ever a pose for you, another ex-squatter. Crowbars and slogans certainly helped me survive a long time that I otherwise wouldn't have, thank you very much. local councils and HAs are well known cesspools of corruption, stealing public money and spending it on jamborees for themselves while the housing stock goes to rack and ruin. screw the poverty-parasites and corrupt councillors, they're the ones that block housing by leaving places empty so long. Meanwhile the homeless have learned to cut out the middle man, and take for themselves what the bullshitters and beurocrats so often work to deny them. Carry on squatting!

by linda Mon Nov 03, 2008 19:04

Hi
Yeah I'm sure people will carry on squatting and for a load of different reasons. Because they are desperate and need a place to stay, or because they are passionate about wanting to live outside the crazy logic of spending life working to pay rent, or many other reasons in between.
The question with this one is...What about this house on Ashley Road? It has been defended once, but if I'm not mistaken they may well attempt another eviction tomorrow.
It's clear from this article
http://www.thisisbristol.co.uk/news/Squatters-delay-Bri....html
that the response to the attempted, illegal eviction and the press interest that has been generated in to P4Ps activities, has made them begin a charm offensive.
As the comments suggest, there are still loads of easy stereotypes about squatters that will be made. All of us that are worried about the impact that developers are having on our communities, the bail outs of banks with public money and the rising cost of living to us all, while the rich at the top cream all the profits, should put aside any doubts about whether these people living in a building abandoned for three years are 'right' to live there. And instead think about how they are making a stand for the whole community. It's a tricky issue but I would rather see work delayed a few more weeks, and a proper debate about what these housing associations are up to. We should all unite in the demand that we don't want any more of our public assets sold off. They are not the ones delaying affordable housing in Bristol. That's what the whole crazy property market has been doing in Bristol and the whole country for years!

by another ex squatter Mon Nov 03, 2008 22:27

for the record ex-squatter i was squatting cos it was cheaper than anything else. thats probably the same reason as most squatters. you seem to think i'm anti-squatting so read my post again. if people need to they should squat. i hope everyone at ashley road has cracked anew place in case the eviction happens. what i'm saying is that its only an answer for some people. loads of people need council and housing association houses cos squating isn't an option. are the people in 87 ashley rd or any squats in bristol a cross section of the homeless or even the population? i bet they are mostly young, fit, clever (no posers) so if there are so many empties then they should find somewhere else so that this place can be used for someone who cant squat

by Tory Monarchist Thu Nov 06, 2008 06:59

Squatting is one of the ancient liberties that has been excercised in this country for many centuries, and, as such should be supported.

What more can I say?