Tag Archives: Greenbank

DAFT POLICY ON ROUGH SLEEPER ENCAMPMENTS

Camp

The recent EVICTIONS of homeless people living in vans and caravans from Greenbank, Easton and an ENCAMPED PROTEST in July on the council’s doorstep on College Green has focused attention on BCC’s homelessness prevention and provision services. As well as its new draft policy proposal on van dwellers and rough sleeper encampments.

As The BRISTOLIAN recently highlighted, a private for profit company, Social Impact Bristol Ltd is to commodify and make a profit from homeless people through a SOCIAL IMPACT BOND.

So it may not entirely be a coincidence that the recently launched DRAFT POLICY ON ROUGH SLEEPER ENCAMPMENTS is proposing to wholly outsource homelessness provision to St Mungo’s. An organisation that is intimately involved with Social Impact Bristol Ltd. and will be paying interest to the ‘high net worth individuals’ that have invested in it.

Bristol is seeing increasing numbers of people BECOMING HOMELESS, with some taking control of their own living conditions by squatting, living in vans, caravans and tents and refusing to pay exorbitant rents to landlords.

Sadly far too many are falling through our social safety net and ending up on the streets. Against this backdrop, a policy proposal that would seem to originate from the DEPUTY MAYOR’S OFFICE seeks to coral all rough sleepers into a ‘pathway’ through St Mungos. Encampments, even if deemed “low impact” with no anti social behaviour complaints, are only going to be tolerated for a maximum of 3 months and then dwellers will be forced into a “pathway”.

Whilst Marvin has been jetting off to Asia to seek international finance at a Green Growth seminar, there are people who are living environmentally LOW IMPACT LIFESTYLES that are going to be directly affected by the Draft Policy proposal on Rough Sleeper Encampments. A policy headed by Tom Gilchrist, BCC Gypsy and Traveller Liaison Officer, who has publicly stated he “wants to see everyone in bricks and mortar”.

How does this draft policy proposal fit in with Marvin and Deputy Mayor Asher Craig’s public statements about inclusivity, sustainable living and other corporate drivel?

Many homeless people refuse to engage with St Mungo’s, citing reasons of chronic drug dealing, serious substance misuse issues, violence and theft within St Mungo’s hostels. St Mungo’s own outreach workers state that they don’t have the capacity to deal with the number of homeless people, and admit that St Mungo’s hostels are DANGEROUS AND UNSAFE for those that do use them.

We ask why would a draft policy proposal that comes under the remit of the Deputy Mayor be calling for all homeless people to be CORRALLED into St Mungo’s when St Mungo’s doesn’t have the capacity or the safe conditions to properly assist some of the most vulnerable people in our city?

It wouldn’t have anything to do with providing a financial investment return to those high net worth individuals that have invested in Social Investment Bristol Ltd would it?

CAPITULATING COUNCILLOR WATCH

The Man of Steel: not to be pissed off?

The planning committee meeting last month where the proposed Chocolate Factory development in Greenbank with SOD ALL affordable housing was considered (again) provided excellent opportunities for ridiculous GRANDSTANDING from useless councillors prior to their complete capitulation.

Wallflower Labour councillor Steve “MAN OF STEEL” Pearce was among them. In January this tedious old fart announced on his blog, “I love sitting on Licensing committee” (sic).

The same blog also demanded that book deliveries to Bristol libraries “should be made via the Freight Consolidation Centre so that we can reduce the number of vehicle movements around the city”. So no surprise when he voted in February’s budget meeting to, er, CLOSE the freight consolidation centre!

So cometh the crucial planning meeting, cometh the man and the big fella didn’t fail to disappoint. Announcing to the audience that greedy developers ignoring affordable housing obligations “are starting to PISS ME OFF, and that you don’t want to piss me off”.

Really? Why not? Who on earth would be bothered about pissing off this FATUOUS LITTLE PRICK?

Naturally his committee went on to vote IN FAVOUR of the development!

Charlie (Bolton) and the Chocolate Factory: THAT GREEN PARTY AFFORDABLE HOUSING POLICY IN FULL

that-green-affordable-housing-policy-in-full“So for a planning application to come forward – and it is not the first – with zero affordable housing is quite unacceptable. It goes against everything we believe in. It is quite simply an attack on the poorest in the city.”

Bristol Post 30 November 2016, Bristol Green Party Leader, CHARLIE BOLTON slamming news that the Chocolate Factory development at Greenbank by the Generator Group will have ZERO affordable housing

“Bristol South’s Dawn Primarolo, ward member CHARLIE BOLTON, Green party Parliamentary candidate Tony Dyer and the chair of BS3 Planning Group have all stated support.”

Bristol Post, 27 August 2014 reporting on the proposed 16-storey St Catherine’s Place development by Urbis in Bedminster with ZERO affordable housing.

STOP PRESS: The Green Party are putting forward a motion at tomorrow’s full council meeting demanding that developers deliver more affordable housing in the city! Apparently “we need strong leadership from our city leaders to call for change” (except from the Greens in the case of Urbis?)

THE TOWERING CONTRADICTION: the Labour Party and affordable housing

Redcliffe's cash cow carbuncle: not for the poor!

Redcliffe’s cash cow carbuncle: not for the poor!

A CONVENIENT LEAK from the Rev Rees’s planning department of the viability assessment for the small Chocolate Factory development of 135 flats at Greenbank just days before a planning committee meeting yesterday was enough to get the plans temporarily KNOCKED BACK by grandstanding councillors.

The leaked confidential document, the direct responsibility of council planning bosses, revealed that the developers, The Generator Group, might be able to afford more than the FIVE per cent or SIX units of affordable housing that they finally offered at the site.

This was AGGRESSIVELY seized upon by Labour councillors at the planning committee meeting, who followed the Rev’s lead in the morning’s media and loudly demanded – in front of the gathered press – that the developers meet the Rev Rees’s target of 40 per cent affordable housing, which would be around 50 flats.

This fighting talk over affordable housing at Greenbank contrasted with a relative silence by Labour politicians over affordable housing at one of the Rev Rees’s pet projects, a horrendous 82 metre high concrete cash cow TOWER BLOCK for Redcliffe discussed at the same meeting.

Despite the lack of affordable homes – only 12 per cent or around 32 units against a requirement of 40 per cent or 110 units – the application for this development was WAVED THROUGH. One Labour councillor on the planning committee even said, “while there aren’t enough affordable homes, at least the developers tried”.

So that’s OK then. Although surely FURTHER PRESSURE applied on the developer, Redcliff MCC LLP – a limited liability partnership front for a complex web of companies centring around Christopher Mitchell Solicitors Ltd in Westbury-on-Trym – might have yielded considerably more units of affordable housing than are available at Greenbank? Especially as a tower block on a prime city centre location should be highly ‘viable’?

Of course any claim that the Chocolate Factory planning episode was a CAREFULLY STAGED public relations exercise is ridiculous. Presenting the Rev Rees and his Labour councillors as champions of the people fighting for affordable housing while a favoured and extremely lucrative city centre development fails to get anywhere near those same affordable housing targets without any criticism from Labour’s affordable housing champions is NO CONTRADICTION whatsoever.

Although we do have to wonder why, according to our sources in the planning department, not even a cursory effort is being made to discover how a CONFIDENTIAL planning document got so helpfully leaked ahead of a meeting.

Perhaps such an investigation might prove embarrassing to the Rev Rees and his Labour Party?