Thursday, March 23, 2006
Glasgow Tenants and Homeowners Networking Conference
SATURDAY 8th APRIL 2006
9.00am - 4.00pm
Charles Oakley Building, Glasgow Caledonian University,
Cowcaddens Road, Glasgow.
WHY WE NEED TO COME TOGETHER TO BUILD STRONGER LINKS: -
Rent increases, Secrecy, Demolitions, Repairs and Maintenance. Huge increase in costs for Right To Buy home owners.
24 Hour Concierge under
threat again.
Homelessness
Whose community?
Home Owners + Tenants
The future of 'social' housing
Ideas for organising independently of your landlord
The need for genuine dialogue between landlords and residents
-------------o0o--------------
* Creche [yes]
* Parking [yes]
* Buses {yes]
* Disability access [yes]
* Low Cost Buffet Lunch On Site [yes]
Getting there:
Charles Oakley Building, Glasgow Caledonian UniversityTrain. Within walking distance of both Queen Street and Central Stations. For details on train times, please visit the National Rail Enquiries website.
Bus The University has a bus stop by the main entrance and is only 200 yards from Buchanan Bus Station. For local buses see Information Centre in St. Enoch Square. Tel: 0141 226 4826
Subway The University is close to both Cowcaddens and Buchanan Street stations.
Car Parking The University is easily accessible from Junction 16 of the M8 motorway. Although parking is available on campus, there are also ample spaces available at the nearby Concert Hall car park and Buchanan Galleries.
Friday, December 16, 2005
From: Glasgow
From: Glasgow "Save Our Homes"
Glasgow Tenants Send warmest congratulations to EAST and all the Edinburgh Tenants who voted NO on an awesome victory over the Council Housing privateers.
Glasgow Tenants Send warmest congratulations to EAST and all the Edinburgh Tenants who voted NO on an awesome victory over the Council Housing privateers.
Tuesday, December 13, 2005
Home Truths - Why Many Are Still Fighting The Move
he Glasgow Housing Association website offers a tantalising glimpse of a bright new future. An old man, his tartan clad Scotty dog by his side, smiles underneath a happy quote about his brand new kitchen. The casual viewer would come away with the impression that social housing is surging forward unhindered into a brave new world.
They would be wrong. In 2002, Scotland's largest city transferred ownership of its 80,000 council houses to the private, but not-for-profit, social landlord the Glasgow Housing Association (GHA). The ambitious project was the biggest of its kind in Europe but the process, known as stock transfer, has been mired in controversy. As Edinburgh tenants await the result of their own transfer ballot, those against the move are again claiming tenants were lied to, blackmailed and fed false promises by a multi-million pound government spin machine. They say transfer has created "social apartheid" in Glasgow where the homes of the few are transformed while thousands are "left to rot" in their multi-storey flats.
On December 15, Edinburgh's council leaders and housing officials will discover whether the capital's tenants will follow their west coast counterparts. A fierce, often bitter and vindictive argument has preceded the vote. Both the Scottish Executive and Westminster believe that stock transfer is the only way social housing will meet the Scottish Housing Quality Standard - the benchmark that all homes must reach by 2015. The pro-transfer lobby have tapped into a war chest of around £8.5 million to sell the move in its best light while the anti-transfer campaigners, armed only with a fraction of the money, have done the best they can with leaflets and rallies. Despite senior politicians hailing the ballots as good examples of local democracy, the Executive has only funded one side of the fight.
"You've got this situation where David and Goliath are fighting against each other. The vote was won narrowly in Glasgow and now tenants have been left with a complete mess," says Jenni Marrow, executive member of the Scottish Tenants Organisation and a leading figure in the anti-transfer campaign.
The battle is not just a central belt spat; it is being fought out across Scotland. Aside from Glasgow, the Scottish Borders and Dumfries and Galloway councils have transferred their homes. The Western Isles council also voted for transfer in a recent ballot. However, Dundee and Aberdeen councils have resisted the proposals, on the basis that "there is no evidence of any obvious demand for full stock transfer or a change of landlord". Stock transfer is a policy cooked up in Westminster by Gordon Brown, and promoted across Scotland by the Executive. The thinking behind it is simple. Scottish councils — burdened with over £200 billion of debt from building and maintaining publicly-owned homes - transfer the houses to a private sector housing association. The treasury writes off the debt and the new not-for-profit housing body raises cash from banks, financial companies and rent to build and maintain new homes. Any profits made are ploughed back into new stock.
Sandra Forsythe, Tenant Chair of GHA, says it has taken time for Glasgow tenants to see the real benefits of transfer, but she claims they are now coming home to roost. "When people see the windows being done, heating getting put in, they start to see what it was all about. It was always going to be a case of 'we'll believe it when we see it' and now the place is buzzing and excited. I'm certainly happier in my home and warmer. I don't miss the waterfall that used to come in my window." Sheila Gilmore, Edinburgh City Council's executive member for housing, says transfer is the best of a limited number of options open to Edinburgh council's 23,000 tenants. Housing debts are so bad, she explains, that 41 pence in every pound of rent paid by tenants is spent servicing the debt, not on renovation or maintenance. The net result: only basic repairs have been carried out over the last 10 years and there is no money to tackle Edinburgh's chronic housing shortage. Gilmore believes the city needs 10,000 new homes and transfer is the only way to get them.
We didn't wake up one morning and decide to do this. We have been looking very hard at all the options. But when I have people come to me and say, 'why can't we have a house in Edinburgh?', 'can we have a bigger home to give our children more space?' or 'why can't my gran get a ground floor flat?' - in that case an ideological argument doesn't cut any ice," she says.
Gilmore says Edinburgh faces a stark choice between transfer and rapidly escalating rents. She is supported byjacqui Watt, chief executive of the Scottish Federation of Housing Associations (SFHA). "The city is 10,000 houses short and we have to do something radical to provide for the future," she says. Although many housing professionals support transfer as the only realistic way forward for Scotland's social housing, many privately question the political conditions that have created the necessity for the policy. Despite the not-for-profit nature of housing associations, anti-transfer campaigners say moving homes out of the public sector is simply privatisation, designed to give banks and businesses the leverage to make money from tenants.
Several Scottish housing professionals argue that chancellor Brown could have cancelled all the council's housing debt, but refused to do so for political reasons. New Labour, it is claimed, has no confidence in local government to do the job. This is a conclusion backed up by a call to the Treasury, where a spokesman says: "The UK government believes that to repay all local authority housing debt would send the wrong signals to authorities about their responsibility for servicing any future borrowings." Translated into plain speech: you've made your bed, now lie in it. We're only going to help you if you do what we think is best.
Sean Clerkin, campaign manager for the Scottish Tenants Organisation, says the 'best' option -according to New Labour in Westminster and Holyrood — has created a situation where "half the tenants are getting improvements and others have had no improvements of any kind". He says thousands are "left in limbo" because they live in homes under review for demolition. The number of homes, especially multi-storey tower block flats, scheduled to be pulled down in Glasgow has almost doubled from the number proposed before the transfer.
lain Maclnnes, a Glasgow Govanhill tenant, who campaigned against stock transfer, is even more forthright:"They are being left to rot. They don't want to spend money on buildings that will come down. Glasgow Housing Association is an inhumane landlord guilty of antisocial behaviour." GHA deny this allegation and say they have put £8m aside to carry out basic repairs on homes due for demolition. But the fact of the matter is that many tower blocks are under review. Effectively, their tenants are kept in the dark; getting by on whispers, never really knowing whether their home will be pulled down — a difficult thing to deal with for the often elderly and vulnerable tenants. However, no matter what the shortfalls of stock transfer, the governments at Westminster and Holyrood believe it is the only way that social housing will meet the Scottish Housing Quality Standard.
Stock transfer may not be universally popular but in the current political climate many believe it is the best option on the table. Gilmore points to Birmingham where a stock transfer ballot resulted in a no vote. Campaigners hoped this would force a change of direction from central government, but they were wrong, Birmingham's local authority has been left to struggle on with massive debts. Gilmore, especially, says "she can't talk ideology with somebody who is desperate for a home when there is a solution sitting there". But whether that solution will lead to a bright future of new kitchens and happy Scotty dogs, or more vulnerable people forced into the margins, confused and uncertain, is a real and worrying question.
Agnes Ferguson, 68, from Sighthill, has lived in her flat since 1988. It has now come under the ownership of Glasgow Housing Association and she is unsure when it is due for demolition "I voted against transfer. I didn't really want it, but what can you do? We were promised new kitchens and bathrooms and then we heard the block might be coming down and today I'm none the wiser.
"I'm like any other woman, I like to be able to change my mind, but just now I don't know where I stand. I'd like to do some more decorating but there's no point if they pull the place down. I just don't know. All I know is we are under review for demolition and we'll find out for definite later on.
"You hear so many rumours you don't know who is telling the truth and who's not. I really don't want to leave this wee house - it's comfortable and I've put a lot of work into it. The only thing I'm annoyed with is the size of the kitchen - it's far too small.
"There are a lot of people who have been here 40 years. No matter where else I decide to go, my nice carpets aren't going to fit. I've got no faith in the politicians. They make promises to you and they don't keep them. Personally I would rather stay where I am until the good lord takes me."
Sourse:Peter John Meiklem. Big Issue
They would be wrong. In 2002, Scotland's largest city transferred ownership of its 80,000 council houses to the private, but not-for-profit, social landlord the Glasgow Housing Association (GHA). The ambitious project was the biggest of its kind in Europe but the process, known as stock transfer, has been mired in controversy. As Edinburgh tenants await the result of their own transfer ballot, those against the move are again claiming tenants were lied to, blackmailed and fed false promises by a multi-million pound government spin machine. They say transfer has created "social apartheid" in Glasgow where the homes of the few are transformed while thousands are "left to rot" in their multi-storey flats.
On December 15, Edinburgh's council leaders and housing officials will discover whether the capital's tenants will follow their west coast counterparts. A fierce, often bitter and vindictive argument has preceded the vote. Both the Scottish Executive and Westminster believe that stock transfer is the only way social housing will meet the Scottish Housing Quality Standard - the benchmark that all homes must reach by 2015. The pro-transfer lobby have tapped into a war chest of around £8.5 million to sell the move in its best light while the anti-transfer campaigners, armed only with a fraction of the money, have done the best they can with leaflets and rallies. Despite senior politicians hailing the ballots as good examples of local democracy, the Executive has only funded one side of the fight.
"You've got this situation where David and Goliath are fighting against each other. The vote was won narrowly in Glasgow and now tenants have been left with a complete mess," says Jenni Marrow, executive member of the Scottish Tenants Organisation and a leading figure in the anti-transfer campaign.
The battle is not just a central belt spat; it is being fought out across Scotland. Aside from Glasgow, the Scottish Borders and Dumfries and Galloway councils have transferred their homes. The Western Isles council also voted for transfer in a recent ballot. However, Dundee and Aberdeen councils have resisted the proposals, on the basis that "there is no evidence of any obvious demand for full stock transfer or a change of landlord". Stock transfer is a policy cooked up in Westminster by Gordon Brown, and promoted across Scotland by the Executive. The thinking behind it is simple. Scottish councils — burdened with over £200 billion of debt from building and maintaining publicly-owned homes - transfer the houses to a private sector housing association. The treasury writes off the debt and the new not-for-profit housing body raises cash from banks, financial companies and rent to build and maintain new homes. Any profits made are ploughed back into new stock.
Sandra Forsythe, Tenant Chair of GHA, says it has taken time for Glasgow tenants to see the real benefits of transfer, but she claims they are now coming home to roost. "When people see the windows being done, heating getting put in, they start to see what it was all about. It was always going to be a case of 'we'll believe it when we see it' and now the place is buzzing and excited. I'm certainly happier in my home and warmer. I don't miss the waterfall that used to come in my window." Sheila Gilmore, Edinburgh City Council's executive member for housing, says transfer is the best of a limited number of options open to Edinburgh council's 23,000 tenants. Housing debts are so bad, she explains, that 41 pence in every pound of rent paid by tenants is spent servicing the debt, not on renovation or maintenance. The net result: only basic repairs have been carried out over the last 10 years and there is no money to tackle Edinburgh's chronic housing shortage. Gilmore believes the city needs 10,000 new homes and transfer is the only way to get them.
We didn't wake up one morning and decide to do this. We have been looking very hard at all the options. But when I have people come to me and say, 'why can't we have a house in Edinburgh?', 'can we have a bigger home to give our children more space?' or 'why can't my gran get a ground floor flat?' - in that case an ideological argument doesn't cut any ice," she says.
Gilmore says Edinburgh faces a stark choice between transfer and rapidly escalating rents. She is supported byjacqui Watt, chief executive of the Scottish Federation of Housing Associations (SFHA). "The city is 10,000 houses short and we have to do something radical to provide for the future," she says. Although many housing professionals support transfer as the only realistic way forward for Scotland's social housing, many privately question the political conditions that have created the necessity for the policy. Despite the not-for-profit nature of housing associations, anti-transfer campaigners say moving homes out of the public sector is simply privatisation, designed to give banks and businesses the leverage to make money from tenants.
Several Scottish housing professionals argue that chancellor Brown could have cancelled all the council's housing debt, but refused to do so for political reasons. New Labour, it is claimed, has no confidence in local government to do the job. This is a conclusion backed up by a call to the Treasury, where a spokesman says: "The UK government believes that to repay all local authority housing debt would send the wrong signals to authorities about their responsibility for servicing any future borrowings." Translated into plain speech: you've made your bed, now lie in it. We're only going to help you if you do what we think is best.
Sean Clerkin, campaign manager for the Scottish Tenants Organisation, says the 'best' option -according to New Labour in Westminster and Holyrood — has created a situation where "half the tenants are getting improvements and others have had no improvements of any kind". He says thousands are "left in limbo" because they live in homes under review for demolition. The number of homes, especially multi-storey tower block flats, scheduled to be pulled down in Glasgow has almost doubled from the number proposed before the transfer.
lain Maclnnes, a Glasgow Govanhill tenant, who campaigned against stock transfer, is even more forthright:"They are being left to rot. They don't want to spend money on buildings that will come down. Glasgow Housing Association is an inhumane landlord guilty of antisocial behaviour." GHA deny this allegation and say they have put £8m aside to carry out basic repairs on homes due for demolition. But the fact of the matter is that many tower blocks are under review. Effectively, their tenants are kept in the dark; getting by on whispers, never really knowing whether their home will be pulled down — a difficult thing to deal with for the often elderly and vulnerable tenants. However, no matter what the shortfalls of stock transfer, the governments at Westminster and Holyrood believe it is the only way that social housing will meet the Scottish Housing Quality Standard.
Stock transfer may not be universally popular but in the current political climate many believe it is the best option on the table. Gilmore points to Birmingham where a stock transfer ballot resulted in a no vote. Campaigners hoped this would force a change of direction from central government, but they were wrong, Birmingham's local authority has been left to struggle on with massive debts. Gilmore, especially, says "she can't talk ideology with somebody who is desperate for a home when there is a solution sitting there". But whether that solution will lead to a bright future of new kitchens and happy Scotty dogs, or more vulnerable people forced into the margins, confused and uncertain, is a real and worrying question.
Agnes Ferguson, 68, from Sighthill, has lived in her flat since 1988. It has now come under the ownership of Glasgow Housing Association and she is unsure when it is due for demolition "I voted against transfer. I didn't really want it, but what can you do? We were promised new kitchens and bathrooms and then we heard the block might be coming down and today I'm none the wiser.
"I'm like any other woman, I like to be able to change my mind, but just now I don't know where I stand. I'd like to do some more decorating but there's no point if they pull the place down. I just don't know. All I know is we are under review for demolition and we'll find out for definite later on.
"You hear so many rumours you don't know who is telling the truth and who's not. I really don't want to leave this wee house - it's comfortable and I've put a lot of work into it. The only thing I'm annoyed with is the size of the kitchen - it's far too small.
"There are a lot of people who have been here 40 years. No matter where else I decide to go, my nice carpets aren't going to fit. I've got no faith in the politicians. They make promises to you and they don't keep them. Personally I would rather stay where I am until the good lord takes me."
Sourse:Peter John Meiklem. Big Issue
Thursday, December 01, 2005
"SAVE OUR HOMES" CITY WIDE NOTICE OF MEETING Thursday December 1st 7.30pm
Seasons Greetings to You All This will be Last meeting for this year of 2005.
the Quakers Meeting Place 38 Elmbank Crescent, Glasgow G2 4PS 0141 248 8493
Agenda includes:
Feedback from EAST + the Law is an Ass (John)
Updates and Media Reports (Sean)
Combating Eviction (Iain)
GHA Ltd. / Scottish Executive’s Breach of EU Law
Monitoring Concierge Deal
No Care & Very Low Maintenance
Add your concerns / points for discussion
Contact agahst2003 (at) hotmail.com
the Quakers Meeting Place 38 Elmbank Crescent, Glasgow G2 4PS 0141 248 8493
Agenda includes:
Feedback from EAST + the Law is an Ass (John)
Updates and Media Reports (Sean)
Combating Eviction (Iain)
GHA Ltd. / Scottish Executive’s Breach of EU Law
Monitoring Concierge Deal
No Care & Very Low Maintenance
Add your concerns / points for discussion
Contact agahst2003 (at) hotmail.com
Monday, August 15, 2005
Demolition Threat in Glasgow
Glasgow Housing Association seek undemocratic demolition solution for Sighthill housing estate in Glasgow. Tenants continue to fight against housing privatisation agenda, as 1,200 homes come under threat.
Last thursday, 18/08/05,a small group of committed tenants from the 'Sighthill Save Our Homes' campaign group, alongside housing activists from Glasgow, lobbied the local office of GHA,(Glasgow Housing Association), at 30 Castle Street, Royston, to protest against what they perceive as 'harrasment and bullying' by the landlord, GHA. The Association want to eradicate half of the Sighthill area as it presently stands, with the planned demolition of five double blocks in Fountainwell. Tenants at the lobby felt this would result in the 'destruction of Sighthill as a community'.
The tenants wanted to have a meeting with Bob Maguire, the local housing manager, about the planned demolitions. At a previous meeting organised by the Save Our Homes group on july 28th in Sighthill, the group were told by Mr.Maguire that they were welcome to send a deputation to his office anytime. 'Sighthill Save Our Homes' had previously written to the office in early May, and had finally received a reply stating that GHA 'would be in contact' in late June. With the planned demolition of their homes freshly annonunced, the protesters felt it was time to take matters into their own hands. They were refused a meeting.
Graham Campbell, a tenant from the Fountainwell area, said that the Sighthill tenants had only become aware of the demolitions through press reports. No tenant had seen any plans of the area, and no-one in the area had known of the demolitions before reading about it in the newspapers. Mr. Campbell described GHA's attitude as 'incredible', saying that many tenants in the area felt that a decision over the future of their homes had already been taken despite considerable resistance from the local community.
GHA had previously stressed that no decision on the future of the blocks would be taken until the results of a social survey were known. The results are now known.
50% of Fountainwell tenants are 'satisfied with their homes', with 83% of Sighthill's 'other half' in Pinkston satisfied with their homes. Mr. Campbell, noted that the figures reflect the way the Fountainwell blocks have been run down deliberately in order to 'facilitate' demolition. He described the GHA's decision after the release of the results as, "just another example of GHA's contempt for tenants".
Alan Graham, a tenant from the Pinkston blocks, was equally appalled:
"We can't trust the announcements of GHA after the way they've ignored and rode roughshod over our voices. People here fear the Pinkston blocks will also be demolished after Fountainwell".
Despite GHA promising that all tenants who wish to stay will be re-housed in the area once demolition is complete, there are real fears that many will be re-housed elsewhere in less suitable locations. This has been the pattern in other mass demolitions throughout Glasgow's urban history.
The news of the demolition comes on the back of GHA's recently announced intention to cut the 24 hour fixed concierge service, which provides frontline service and maintenance to all Sighthill blocks. This is seen as part of the deliberate run-down of housing stock preceding demolition. Some tenants think this will lead to increased vandalism, a general escalation in crime and, potentially, increased fire risk. The concierge service has generally been deemed one of the few success stories in high-rise management over the last few decades. According to Ian Mcinnes from the Glasgow Save Our Homes campaign, it is widely believed in Sighhill that the downgrading of the service,
"is a deliberate strategy to drive tenants out through fear to facilitate demolitions".
For Macinnes, "this constitutes cruel and inhumane treatment".
The Glasgow Save Our Homes group, and their affiliated group in Sighthill, want the existing high-quality 24 hour fixed concierge service to be maintained, enhanced and promoted as a good example throughout the UK. They urge GHA to abandon its intent to demolish Fountainwell and to initiate another full review with proper tenant consultation, before any further annoncements on Sighthill's future are made. They also say that there should be immediate investment in the housing stock as it stands, citing disinvestment as a clear breach of the Tenant-Landlord agreement, and as a direct contradication in terms of the Housing Scotland Act of 2001.
The concern of the Sighthill tenants is mirrored throughout Glasgow with increasing tenants concern about GHA policy and practice right across Glasgow. There has been a marked increase in evictions since the stock transfer from the City Council to the GHA. Promised refurbishments have yet to materialise, a rent review is under consideration after only three years despite promises that rents would remain unchanged for five years, and the much-vaunted tenant participation has been delayed indefinitely - perhaps until 2033 according to a recent 'Glasgow Herald' report. The predictions of those campaigning aginst the 2002 housing stock transfer in Glasgow have materialised with a vengeance. As the same promises are rolled out in Edinburgh ahead of the imminent stock transfer ballot, the post-transfer situation in Glasgow will be watched with keen interest.
Bill Ramsay, in a recent letter to the Herald, (29/07/05), summarises expertly. "Many of us continue to argue that the funders of the GHA, the banks, are ultimately in control of an organisation that remains the largest social housing organisation in western Europe. Under these circumstances there is a greater chance of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration putting men on Mars over the next couple of decades, than there is of Glasgow Housing Association delivering community ownership for its tenants. Space launches have, for unfortunate reasons, once again become worth watching. So too will be how the proponents of stock transfer fare on Planet Edinburgh".
Last thursday, 18/08/05,a small group of committed tenants from the 'Sighthill Save Our Homes' campaign group, alongside housing activists from Glasgow, lobbied the local office of GHA,(Glasgow Housing Association), at 30 Castle Street, Royston, to protest against what they perceive as 'harrasment and bullying' by the landlord, GHA. The Association want to eradicate half of the Sighthill area as it presently stands, with the planned demolition of five double blocks in Fountainwell. Tenants at the lobby felt this would result in the 'destruction of Sighthill as a community'.
The tenants wanted to have a meeting with Bob Maguire, the local housing manager, about the planned demolitions. At a previous meeting organised by the Save Our Homes group on july 28th in Sighthill, the group were told by Mr.Maguire that they were welcome to send a deputation to his office anytime. 'Sighthill Save Our Homes' had previously written to the office in early May, and had finally received a reply stating that GHA 'would be in contact' in late June. With the planned demolition of their homes freshly annonunced, the protesters felt it was time to take matters into their own hands. They were refused a meeting.
Graham Campbell, a tenant from the Fountainwell area, said that the Sighthill tenants had only become aware of the demolitions through press reports. No tenant had seen any plans of the area, and no-one in the area had known of the demolitions before reading about it in the newspapers. Mr. Campbell described GHA's attitude as 'incredible', saying that many tenants in the area felt that a decision over the future of their homes had already been taken despite considerable resistance from the local community.
GHA had previously stressed that no decision on the future of the blocks would be taken until the results of a social survey were known. The results are now known.
50% of Fountainwell tenants are 'satisfied with their homes', with 83% of Sighthill's 'other half' in Pinkston satisfied with their homes. Mr. Campbell, noted that the figures reflect the way the Fountainwell blocks have been run down deliberately in order to 'facilitate' demolition. He described the GHA's decision after the release of the results as, "just another example of GHA's contempt for tenants".
Alan Graham, a tenant from the Pinkston blocks, was equally appalled:
"We can't trust the announcements of GHA after the way they've ignored and rode roughshod over our voices. People here fear the Pinkston blocks will also be demolished after Fountainwell".
Despite GHA promising that all tenants who wish to stay will be re-housed in the area once demolition is complete, there are real fears that many will be re-housed elsewhere in less suitable locations. This has been the pattern in other mass demolitions throughout Glasgow's urban history.
The news of the demolition comes on the back of GHA's recently announced intention to cut the 24 hour fixed concierge service, which provides frontline service and maintenance to all Sighthill blocks. This is seen as part of the deliberate run-down of housing stock preceding demolition. Some tenants think this will lead to increased vandalism, a general escalation in crime and, potentially, increased fire risk. The concierge service has generally been deemed one of the few success stories in high-rise management over the last few decades. According to Ian Mcinnes from the Glasgow Save Our Homes campaign, it is widely believed in Sighhill that the downgrading of the service,
"is a deliberate strategy to drive tenants out through fear to facilitate demolitions".
For Macinnes, "this constitutes cruel and inhumane treatment".
The Glasgow Save Our Homes group, and their affiliated group in Sighthill, want the existing high-quality 24 hour fixed concierge service to be maintained, enhanced and promoted as a good example throughout the UK. They urge GHA to abandon its intent to demolish Fountainwell and to initiate another full review with proper tenant consultation, before any further annoncements on Sighthill's future are made. They also say that there should be immediate investment in the housing stock as it stands, citing disinvestment as a clear breach of the Tenant-Landlord agreement, and as a direct contradication in terms of the Housing Scotland Act of 2001.
The concern of the Sighthill tenants is mirrored throughout Glasgow with increasing tenants concern about GHA policy and practice right across Glasgow. There has been a marked increase in evictions since the stock transfer from the City Council to the GHA. Promised refurbishments have yet to materialise, a rent review is under consideration after only three years despite promises that rents would remain unchanged for five years, and the much-vaunted tenant participation has been delayed indefinitely - perhaps until 2033 according to a recent 'Glasgow Herald' report. The predictions of those campaigning aginst the 2002 housing stock transfer in Glasgow have materialised with a vengeance. As the same promises are rolled out in Edinburgh ahead of the imminent stock transfer ballot, the post-transfer situation in Glasgow will be watched with keen interest.
Bill Ramsay, in a recent letter to the Herald, (29/07/05), summarises expertly. "Many of us continue to argue that the funders of the GHA, the banks, are ultimately in control of an organisation that remains the largest social housing organisation in western Europe. Under these circumstances there is a greater chance of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration putting men on Mars over the next couple of decades, than there is of Glasgow Housing Association delivering community ownership for its tenants. Space launches have, for unfortunate reasons, once again become worth watching. So too will be how the proponents of stock transfer fare on Planet Edinburgh".
Sunday, August 14, 2005
PRESS RELEASE and invitation to attend. Sighthill SAVE OUR HOMES demo
A Community Under Attack from GHA Bullies
On Thursday 18th August 2005, at 11.00am Tenants from Sighthill will be demonstrating, outside the Glasgow Housing Association Limited’s (Compas LHO) local housing office at 30 Charles Street, to protest against the harassment of tenants by this landlord, who wish to demolish their homes in half of Sighthill; 5 double blocks in the Fountainwell area. * - Source GHA Ltd survey). This would result in the destruction of Sighthill as a community.
At a recent public meeting on July 28th the Local Housing Manager, Bob McGuire stated that his staff were trained to deal with tenants properly and respectfully.
Also present at that public meeting was Paul Martin MSP who is a member of the GHA Ltd’s Board of Management . Paul states on this website referring to a meeting of 26th June; “The event, which took place at St Kevin's school, was organised by Save Our Homes campaigners to let the Sighthill community express opinions over the possible demolition of many homes in the area.
Over 2000 flats are currently under review for demolition as part of the GHA’s housing stock transfer, and many residents are concerned that a decision has already been taken over their future.
However, the GHA have stressed that no decision on the future of the flats will be taken until the results of a social survey are known.” *
This is Censorship
Well, the results are now know* more than 72% of Fountainwell tenants oppose demolition and 80% of Pinkston tenants are likewise opposed. However the revealed decision of GHA Ltd without who did NOT CONSULT was 1,100 flats in Fountainwell for demolition in and 1,000 Pinkston flats for modest refurbishment. The the people were and are against demolition but the GHA decided in favour and just as was the case with the Red Road, the tenants of Sighthill only found out via the mass media who were told initially to ‘sit on it’. Don’t tell the tenants till the official announcement was the message and then GHA Ltd. sends the information out to a few of the tenants by second class post thus guaranteeing that they get it after the media has announced the GHA Ltd decision to the world – so what was the point of the survey exercise? No part of Sighthill is safe. You cannot trust the GHA Ltd.
Target for Community Destruction
Sighthill Save Our Homes is opposed to the demolition of the Fountainwell area of Sighthill which is actively being targeted by the GHA Ltd for Community Destruction with tenants being bullied, by Housing Officers to accept re-housing outside the Sighthill area.
But You’ll Never walk alone
Tenants from across the city will be lobbying the Glasgow Housing Association Limited in support of Sighthill and to protest against the threat of demolishing up to 30,000 homes.
Lack of Investment by Anti-Social Landlord
Tenants are angry at their treatment at the hands of GHA Ltd. who talk about regeneration while acting in breach of the tenant landlord agreement with their policy of wilful neglect.
They are angry that the Scottish Executive are backing the activities of this exclusive, secretive, authoritarian landlord who are sitting on over £140million and are proposing to cut services and demolish huge numbers of homes without consultation. In fact GHA Ltd are secretive and refuse to consult with the tenants who would be affected by their decision making processes which are similar to the democratic style of Robert Mugabe or Ariel Sharon on housing policy.
DANGER GHA Ltd Action Risks Glasgow Crime Wave + Fire Raising
Tenants are angry at the GHA Ltd’s intention to CUT the 24 HOUR Fixed Site Concierge Service. This will unquestionably lead to an escalation in real crime and put tenants into a state of
fear and alarm. The risk of fire will also be increased putting lives in danger. They say that they are communicating with tenants but could not be bothered sending an official along to a well publicised meeting in Sighthill. It is widely believed that the downgrading of the ‘Rolls-Royce 24
Hour fixed Site Concierge Service to a glorified mobile patrol service with staff cuts of two thirds from 144 to 50 for Glasgow starting with Sighthill, is a deliberate strategy to drive tenants out through fear to facilitate demolitions. This constitutes cruel and inhumane treatment.
They are angry at the ZERO level of consultation and the misinformation from GHA Ltd. whose idea of consultation is to say that they have spoken to the Tenants’ Committee of the Local housing Organisation ( LHO), a body which is the local branch of the GHA Ltd and which does not communicate with the Community in a meaningful way. It only issues glossy PR newsletters which are about spin, not dialogue.
The wilful neglect of communities which have not received a penny of investment since 2002. This is a clear breach of the Tenant - Landlord Agreement and at odds with the Scotland Housing Act 2001. So called regeneration is nothing more than a euphemism for the destruction of communities. The proposed wilful destruction of Sighthill will, if GHA Ltd have their way, be replicated in Cartyne, Govan, Gorbals, Red Road and elsewhere with 30,000 homes under review for demolition.
Need - not Real Estate Speculation
GHA Ltd say they don’t want to spend money on homes which may be demolished in the future; in the mean time families have to live in damp houses with fungus on the walls!
What is needed are the Multi-storey Flats in Fountainwell and other parts of Glasgow to get a substantial part of the £140 million surplus as investment to improve the living .
Tenants and Concierges say that the existing high quality fixed Site Concierge Service should be enhanced and promoted as a good example throughout the UK.
Social Apartheid
Save Our Homes despite its unhappiness with the present landlord opposes Secondary Stock Transfer, realising that this will as surely as night follows day lead to ghettoisation and increase poverty resulting from further cherry picking by housing associations seeking the most desirable properties and leaving the residual housing behind.
----o----
GHA Ltd
CREATING BITTER HOMES
AND
ANGRY COMMUNITIES
Sighthill SAVE OUR HOMES is an affiliate of
GLASGOW SAVE OUR HOMES SAVE OUR COMMUNITIES
The media are invited to attend and you can get more information from Graham Campbell on 079 4093 7241 or Sean Clerkin on 881 3338 after 6.00pm or Iain on 07976 718 111
On Thursday 18th August 2005, at 11.00am Tenants from Sighthill will be demonstrating, outside the Glasgow Housing Association Limited’s (Compas LHO) local housing office at 30 Charles Street, to protest against the harassment of tenants by this landlord, who wish to demolish their homes in half of Sighthill; 5 double blocks in the Fountainwell area. * - Source GHA Ltd survey). This would result in the destruction of Sighthill as a community.
At a recent public meeting on July 28th the Local Housing Manager, Bob McGuire stated that his staff were trained to deal with tenants properly and respectfully.
Also present at that public meeting was Paul Martin MSP who is a member of the GHA Ltd’s Board of Management . Paul states on this website referring to a meeting of 26th June; “The event, which took place at St Kevin's school, was organised by Save Our Homes campaigners to let the Sighthill community express opinions over the possible demolition of many homes in the area.
Over 2000 flats are currently under review for demolition as part of the GHA’s housing stock transfer, and many residents are concerned that a decision has already been taken over their future.
However, the GHA have stressed that no decision on the future of the flats will be taken until the results of a social survey are known.” *
This is Censorship
Well, the results are now know* more than 72% of Fountainwell tenants oppose demolition and 80% of Pinkston tenants are likewise opposed. However the revealed decision of GHA Ltd without who did NOT CONSULT was 1,100 flats in Fountainwell for demolition in and 1,000 Pinkston flats for modest refurbishment. The the people were and are against demolition but the GHA decided in favour and just as was the case with the Red Road, the tenants of Sighthill only found out via the mass media who were told initially to ‘sit on it’. Don’t tell the tenants till the official announcement was the message and then GHA Ltd. sends the information out to a few of the tenants by second class post thus guaranteeing that they get it after the media has announced the GHA Ltd decision to the world – so what was the point of the survey exercise? No part of Sighthill is safe. You cannot trust the GHA Ltd.
Target for Community Destruction
Sighthill Save Our Homes is opposed to the demolition of the Fountainwell area of Sighthill which is actively being targeted by the GHA Ltd for Community Destruction with tenants being bullied, by Housing Officers to accept re-housing outside the Sighthill area.
But You’ll Never walk alone
Tenants from across the city will be lobbying the Glasgow Housing Association Limited in support of Sighthill and to protest against the threat of demolishing up to 30,000 homes.
Lack of Investment by Anti-Social Landlord
Tenants are angry at their treatment at the hands of GHA Ltd. who talk about regeneration while acting in breach of the tenant landlord agreement with their policy of wilful neglect.
They are angry that the Scottish Executive are backing the activities of this exclusive, secretive, authoritarian landlord who are sitting on over £140million and are proposing to cut services and demolish huge numbers of homes without consultation. In fact GHA Ltd are secretive and refuse to consult with the tenants who would be affected by their decision making processes which are similar to the democratic style of Robert Mugabe or Ariel Sharon on housing policy.
DANGER GHA Ltd Action Risks Glasgow Crime Wave + Fire Raising
Tenants are angry at the GHA Ltd’s intention to CUT the 24 HOUR Fixed Site Concierge Service. This will unquestionably lead to an escalation in real crime and put tenants into a state of
fear and alarm. The risk of fire will also be increased putting lives in danger. They say that they are communicating with tenants but could not be bothered sending an official along to a well publicised meeting in Sighthill. It is widely believed that the downgrading of the ‘Rolls-Royce 24
Hour fixed Site Concierge Service to a glorified mobile patrol service with staff cuts of two thirds from 144 to 50 for Glasgow starting with Sighthill, is a deliberate strategy to drive tenants out through fear to facilitate demolitions. This constitutes cruel and inhumane treatment.
They are angry at the ZERO level of consultation and the misinformation from GHA Ltd. whose idea of consultation is to say that they have spoken to the Tenants’ Committee of the Local housing Organisation ( LHO), a body which is the local branch of the GHA Ltd and which does not communicate with the Community in a meaningful way. It only issues glossy PR newsletters which are about spin, not dialogue.
The wilful neglect of communities which have not received a penny of investment since 2002. This is a clear breach of the Tenant - Landlord Agreement and at odds with the Scotland Housing Act 2001. So called regeneration is nothing more than a euphemism for the destruction of communities. The proposed wilful destruction of Sighthill will, if GHA Ltd have their way, be replicated in Cartyne, Govan, Gorbals, Red Road and elsewhere with 30,000 homes under review for demolition.
Need - not Real Estate Speculation
GHA Ltd say they don’t want to spend money on homes which may be demolished in the future; in the mean time families have to live in damp houses with fungus on the walls!
What is needed are the Multi-storey Flats in Fountainwell and other parts of Glasgow to get a substantial part of the £140 million surplus as investment to improve the living .
Tenants and Concierges say that the existing high quality fixed Site Concierge Service should be enhanced and promoted as a good example throughout the UK.
Social Apartheid
Save Our Homes despite its unhappiness with the present landlord opposes Secondary Stock Transfer, realising that this will as surely as night follows day lead to ghettoisation and increase poverty resulting from further cherry picking by housing associations seeking the most desirable properties and leaving the residual housing behind.
----o----
GHA Ltd
CREATING BITTER HOMES
AND
ANGRY COMMUNITIES
Sighthill SAVE OUR HOMES is an affiliate of
GLASGOW SAVE OUR HOMES SAVE OUR COMMUNITIES
The media are invited to attend and you can get more information from Graham Campbell on 079 4093 7241 or Sean Clerkin on 881 3338 after 6.00pm or Iain on 07976 718 111
Sunday, July 24, 2005
Notice of Public Meeting
Demolition in Sighthill - Public Meeting
public domain This work is in the public domain
Demolition in Sighthill - public meeting
GHA's Plans for Sighthill.
The GHA has announced its plan for demolition of the five multi-storey blocks in the Fountainwell part of Sighthill. Of course the fact that it announced this to the “Herald” and the “Evening Times” several days before bothering to mention it to us mere tenants is upsetting. It looks more like contempt rather than communication.
Sighthill Save Our Homes sighthillsoh (at) hotmail.com will hold a public meeting on Thursday 28th July at 6.30 p.m. In Sighthill Primary School, 8 Fountainwell Place, G21 1QH. All interested are invited to come along.
public domain This work is in the public domain
Demolition in Sighthill - public meeting
GHA's Plans for Sighthill.
The GHA has announced its plan for demolition of the five multi-storey blocks in the Fountainwell part of Sighthill. Of course the fact that it announced this to the “Herald” and the “Evening Times” several days before bothering to mention it to us mere tenants is upsetting. It looks more like contempt rather than communication.
Sighthill Save Our Homes sighthillsoh (at) hotmail.com will hold a public meeting on Thursday 28th July at 6.30 p.m. In Sighthill Primary School, 8 Fountainwell Place, G21 1QH. All interested are invited to come along.
