Birmingham City Council have auctioned and sold community buildings all over the city, while the number of newly built community and social buildings has dropped to a shameful zero.
Birmingham Property Services have over 150 properties for sale all over the city, from potential mass developments and industrial sites to unused residential and community spaces. However while the council are busy through their in-house property consultants in selling the city’s land, the number of newly built community properties being built has dropped to an embarrassing zero.
Homelessness applications made to Birmingham City Council in 2003 were double the national average, at around 12,700 submitted. Of these, 6,400 (50.7%) were classed as priority cases – those with dependant children or at risk groups.
Yet across the country there are more empty houses and buildings then there are homeless families, around 20% of these buildings are within the public sector and many have been left empty for over six months at a time. There are currently over 300,000 empty houses across England alone.
The system in which Birmingham City Council deal with these properties is puzzling; it is Birmingham Property Services’ job to manage vacant Council property and find alternative uses for it. If no Council use can be found or decided upon, then the most likely alternative is that the property is sold, commonly to private or corporate organizations which use the building for profit.
It appears a contradiction of policy, that with so many vacant and disused buildings all over the city declared as ‘surplus’, no Council (and therefore community) use can be found. Despite homelessness applications peaking at twice the national average, no community use can be found for these buildings. It seems baffling that even though local authorities have a long-held responsibility to support people experiencing homelessness, BPS can still not come up with ideas of how these neglected buildings could be of help to those forced to live rough outside them.
Although the Council promotes a much talked about social inclusion programme, rarely are community buildings being used for such purposes. How can those in authority claim to be all for social and community inclusion when no new community buildings have been built in the past year? When those which already exist are not being renovated or revived for use by the community but sold to those with ambitions of private profit?
It seems a sad accord that abandoned and neglected buildings will litter our streets and suburbs indefinitely, and that the homeless and deprived will always be living under their shadow; perfectly adequate buildings which could house families or individuals who are poverty-stricken or homeless. The buildings instead are often left to rot while the Council deem them surplus, and while those in authority take their time to discuss the possibility of it being a community resource, the buildings themselves are often subject to vandalism, defacement and in some cases arson.
It is possible that a feeling of detachment from Birmingham City Council among neighbourhoods and locales exists due to a lack of communication. For example many community properties which are deemed surplus are done so without adequate public notice. So-called public reports are harder to find than one may think, with many neighbourhoods having no idea that any decision was made on a resource which by right is theirs.
With a lack of public involvement and consultation initiated by the Council, in addition to a seemingly apathetic public, it may make sense that the Birmingham City Council can escape scrutiny and go ahead with not only their mass auction of community resources, but also not building any more either.
The need for social inclusion and community enterprise is recognized in the many official statistics regarding Birmingham city. The nine inner city wards with the highest unemployment levels (three times the national average) are also ranked within the top thirty most deprived wards in England, out of a list of 8,600 wards.
Birmingham is one of the most diverse and multi-cultural cities in Britain, with a population of just under one million souls. In a social exclusion survey carried out by BirminghamEconomy.org.uk, the two main barriers to work were that there were too few jobs, and a lack of qualifications or skills.
Could not many of the neglected community buildings be used for training programs, providing skills and tuition in a variety of topics and subjects? It is perfectly plausible to set up the likes of adult education lessons, workshops, as well as community and neighbourhood meetings in these forgotten structures.
Would it not help revive some of the most deprived wards in the country to invest not in the private sector in the hope that it will bring more jobs, but invest in the community itself? There is an ample supply of buildings used and abandoned which could hold host to a variety of meetings, public consultations and organizations, from Connexions to Citizens Advice Bureau, training to education, from social integration to social enterprise.
It is a much talked about topic, yet Birmingham Council seem so out of touch with the varied needs of the city’s neighbourhoods and in any case slow to implement such incentives.
In 2003 the Deputy Prime Minister launched the ‘Communities Plan’. This plan set out a long-term programme of action for urban and rural areas, detailing urgent action needed to be taken over the next three years, as well as plans to accelerate change and address the most acute needs of housing and homelessness. Elements of the plan consisted of addressing the so called housing shortage and addressing low demand and abandonment.
However houses and properties already standing are not being used, even though they litter our neighbourhoods. One only needs to ride any city bus route and they will pass a number of derelict and vandalized buildings, each having its own potential and possibilities.
Not only are the disused and forgotten buildings of Birmingham not serving the community as they should, but construction of community spaces and social centres has ceased. Renovation and revival projects of such community resources seem hard to find, if not non-existent.
It appears that despite the rhetoric spoken in numerous reports and statements, despite the appearance of shared aims with the communities of Birmingham, the Council give the impression that they are heading in the totally opposite direction, quietly selling off community spaces under our very noses. Leaving those in need of repair or restoration to rot, possibly intending it for a future sale.
If the deprived wards of Birmingham – some of the worst in the country – are to improve, then those in power should advantageously invest in its people, its society and its communities, using the spaces already available for social projects, involving both inspiration and integration. As it currently stands, Birmingham City Council seem either uninterested or impotent.
Homelessness applications made to Birmingham City Council in 2003 were double the national average, at around 12,700 submitted. Of these, 6,400 (50.7%) were classed as priority cases – those with dependant children or at risk groups.
Yet across the country there are more empty houses and buildings then there are homeless families, around 20% of these buildings are within the public sector and many have been left empty for over six months at a time. There are currently over 300,000 empty houses across England alone.
The system in which Birmingham City Council deal with these properties is puzzling; it is Birmingham Property Services’ job to manage vacant Council property and find alternative uses for it. If no Council use can be found or decided upon, then the most likely alternative is that the property is sold, commonly to private or corporate organizations which use the building for profit.
It appears a contradiction of policy, that with so many vacant and disused buildings all over the city declared as ‘surplus’, no Council (and therefore community) use can be found. Despite homelessness applications peaking at twice the national average, no community use can be found for these buildings. It seems baffling that even though local authorities have a long-held responsibility to support people experiencing homelessness, BPS can still not come up with ideas of how these neglected buildings could be of help to those forced to live rough outside them.
Although the Council promotes a much talked about social inclusion programme, rarely are community buildings being used for such purposes. How can those in authority claim to be all for social and community inclusion when no new community buildings have been built in the past year? When those which already exist are not being renovated or revived for use by the community but sold to those with ambitions of private profit?
It seems a sad accord that abandoned and neglected buildings will litter our streets and suburbs indefinitely, and that the homeless and deprived will always be living under their shadow; perfectly adequate buildings which could house families or individuals who are poverty-stricken or homeless. The buildings instead are often left to rot while the Council deem them surplus, and while those in authority take their time to discuss the possibility of it being a community resource, the buildings themselves are often subject to vandalism, defacement and in some cases arson.
It is possible that a feeling of detachment from Birmingham City Council among neighbourhoods and locales exists due to a lack of communication. For example many community properties which are deemed surplus are done so without adequate public notice. So-called public reports are harder to find than one may think, with many neighbourhoods having no idea that any decision was made on a resource which by right is theirs.
With a lack of public involvement and consultation initiated by the Council, in addition to a seemingly apathetic public, it may make sense that the Birmingham City Council can escape scrutiny and go ahead with not only their mass auction of community resources, but also not building any more either.
The need for social inclusion and community enterprise is recognized in the many official statistics regarding Birmingham city. The nine inner city wards with the highest unemployment levels (three times the national average) are also ranked within the top thirty most deprived wards in England, out of a list of 8,600 wards.
Birmingham is one of the most diverse and multi-cultural cities in Britain, with a population of just under one million souls. In a social exclusion survey carried out by BirminghamEconomy.org.uk, the two main barriers to work were that there were too few jobs, and a lack of qualifications or skills.
Could not many of the neglected community buildings be used for training programs, providing skills and tuition in a variety of topics and subjects? It is perfectly plausible to set up the likes of adult education lessons, workshops, as well as community and neighbourhood meetings in these forgotten structures.
Would it not help revive some of the most deprived wards in the country to invest not in the private sector in the hope that it will bring more jobs, but invest in the community itself? There is an ample supply of buildings used and abandoned which could hold host to a variety of meetings, public consultations and organizations, from Connexions to Citizens Advice Bureau, training to education, from social integration to social enterprise.
It is a much talked about topic, yet Birmingham Council seem so out of touch with the varied needs of the city’s neighbourhoods and in any case slow to implement such incentives.
In 2003 the Deputy Prime Minister launched the ‘Communities Plan’. This plan set out a long-term programme of action for urban and rural areas, detailing urgent action needed to be taken over the next three years, as well as plans to accelerate change and address the most acute needs of housing and homelessness. Elements of the plan consisted of addressing the so called housing shortage and addressing low demand and abandonment.
However houses and properties already standing are not being used, even though they litter our neighbourhoods. One only needs to ride any city bus route and they will pass a number of derelict and vandalized buildings, each having its own potential and possibilities.
Not only are the disused and forgotten buildings of Birmingham not serving the community as they should, but construction of community spaces and social centres has ceased. Renovation and revival projects of such community resources seem hard to find, if not non-existent.
It appears that despite the rhetoric spoken in numerous reports and statements, despite the appearance of shared aims with the communities of Birmingham, the Council give the impression that they are heading in the totally opposite direction, quietly selling off community spaces under our very noses. Leaving those in need of repair or restoration to rot, possibly intending it for a future sale.
If the deprived wards of Birmingham – some of the worst in the country – are to improve, then those in power should advantageously invest in its people, its society and its communities, using the spaces already available for social projects, involving both inspiration and integration. As it currently stands, Birmingham City Council seem either uninterested or impotent.
e-mail:
Comments
Hide the following 2 comments
Khoodeelaar! No to Crossrail assault on the East End sets example
28.08.2006 13:31
2. Our defence of the East End thus far has included extensive studies conducted by the campaigning economist Muhammad Haque of all aspects of the Big Business agenda.
3. Unless that pernicious Big Business agenda against the inner cities communities is identified by and for the communities across the board and targeted by the communities ourselves for reversal by democratically answerable local councils , then the idea of local communities in the inner cities would suffer irreversible set backs.
4. For the defence to be effective, community groups must first of all be aware of the latent corruption that is evident now in the local councils and their counterpart entities and apparently representative bodies elsewhere in the inner cities.
5. There has got to be also recognition of the fact that no aspect of what used to constitute the agenda of the local council services is now under the democratic control of local people. Most of the councilors are now not only not doing the job of standing up for the local communities. Most local councils in England - and in Scotland and in Wales - have now been abolished by Tony Blair as democratic entities. They are token ‘democratic’ entities which are nothing more than disguised extensions of the Big Business agenda being channeled via the pretext of the democratically elected regime fronted by Tony Blair.
6. There is also widespread corruption of local [once known as] voluntary sectors. The result is that in most inner cities, the once vocal voluntary sector has died and a mysterious silence is noticed.
7. The only independent and effective voluntary action for the defence of the communities against advancing Blaring Big Business agenda of destruction and takeover is done and can be done by those who do not seek cash or approval from the locally existent corrupting council.
8. Khoodeelaar! Has found consistently that the local Tower Hamlets Council is an agency of the Crossrail promoting Big business interests
Khoodeelaaronline
e-mail:
lawmedia@hotmail.co.uk
Homepage:
http://www.khoodeelaar.com
Khoodeelaar! No to Crossrail issuing challenge to TUC over Crosrail disaster
28.08.2006 19:08
View the web page which will carry the KHOODEELAAR! Open Letter to TUC against Crossrail threat to the East End of London, on Tuesday 29 August 2006
Khoodeelaaronline
Homepage:
http://uk.geocities.com/aadhikarlaw/today.html