Social Housing

[Genghis Cohen]

Over the years there have been a number of initiatives to use privately owned properties to accomodate those in need.The idea was to disperse some of those living on benefits and avoid creating more ghettos. It was also thought that living among a better class of people would increase the self esteem of this group and make them better citizens.

Why is it that things always happen in threes? Over the last month I've met three different families who all had a similar experience. In one case the house opposite had been used to house people short term. It had worked well for several years until a single parent family moved in. The woman had three children, each by a different father. Within weeks a previously neat little house had become to resemble a dechetterie. She was a small time drug dealer and her associates arrived as well. One of their specialities was driving around in old bangers. After a month or so these would finally give up the ghost and were then abandonded around the village. Eventually the Maire had had enough and used her influence to get this experiment in social engineering stopped. The other two cases are similar but are still ongoing.

It is all very well having these wonderful ideas but why is it that the people who dream them up never live with the consequences. Why should people who have paid good money to live in a quiet neighbourhood be subjected to continuous noise and general disorder when a family of unemployed hoodlums move into what was a serene family home? Hollande and his mates have a lot to answer for!

Genghis Cohen

[one over the 8]

Its a bit like THT pylons, wind farms and landfill sites, no one wants them in their own back yard so where do you put these things and families? I dont know why you question it, its not a french thing the exact same goes on in England at one time a load of lower class northerners were going to be moved to upper class Devon God forbid. Both in France and UK a developer cant get planning permission now unless an element of social housing is included. A sign of the times I am afraid!

[lesleyf]

Its a bit like THT pylons, wind farms and landfill sites, no one wants them in their own back yard so where do you put these things and families? I dont know why you question it, its not a french thing the exact same goes on in England at one time a load of lower class northerners were going to be moved to upper class Devon God forbid. Both in France and UK a developer cant get planning permission now unless an element of social housing is included. A sign of the times I am afraid!

As a northerner, I find your remark incredibly offensive. Are you seriously tring to have us believe that there are no badly behaved southerners? I would like to point out to you that in last year's riots - you know the ones where those nice well mannered southeners burned and looted- nothing at all happened in the north-east.

[one over the 8]

There were no riots in Devon either which by the way is the South West. I never mentioned southerners. Oh and you missed the "y" out of trying!

[hesfordj]

I assume it was tongue in cheek.

Mingling of social housing with private is not the problem. As the OP said, it had worked fine for several years. The problem was that the latest occupant was a troublemaker who would not be welcome in gated community, posh village or council estate because she doesn't give a shit about her neighbours and there is little that can be done within the law to prevent it. I had the bad luck to be living a flat beneath a similar low-life back in the bad old days of negative equity. It wasn't because of a social program, it was just that my neighbourhood went down the pan and I couldn't sell up because the Building Society wouldn't let me.

At another time I lived in a very nice apartment in New York which had a 20% rent allowance quota. I never experienced any problems with the rent-allowance residents but I did have noise problems from the trust-fund kid who lived above me in the penthouse.

What we need is not the ability to isolate ourselves on posh streets with no poor people but to have laws which force people to behave with respect for their neighbours.

[one over the 8]

Your penultimate paragraph and last paragraph contradict themselves Jonathan. In the penultimate you are saying it was the poorer ones who were good tenants and the rich kid who was trouble. In the last you are saying it is the poor who are trouble. I disagree its not what you have financially that makes you bad. Its how you are brought up. If as a kid you never see your parents because they are at the pub after work, you never sit down to eat together and there are shown no good life skills then it is likely you will be the same. A child has to have someone to look up to and taught the right behaviour then perhaps society will get back on the right track, all looking out for each other and being good neighbours, regardless of colour, religion sexual preference rich or poor. It has nothing to do with being poor or rich it is knowing what is acceptable to others.

[Sandra]

in England at one time a load of lower class northerners were going to be moved to upper class Devon God forbid.

which part is the God forbid, northerners or lower class ?

i am proud to be a northerner and find it quite amusing that people still think we are stupid, wear flat caps etc...

back to the subject.. There are also plenty of noisey and disruptive people who are private tenants and also owners of the properties.

My neighbough feeds the stray cats, which turns the street into 'Cat Alley' and makes me so p***ed off..

if there are any grammar or spelling mistakes , I don't care !

[hesfordj]

1/8. You misread my last paragraph. Perhaps there were too many negatives in it.

"What we need is not the ability to isolate ourselves on posh streets with no poor people but to have laws which force people to behave with respect for their neighbours."

I'm saying what you are saying.

[one over the 8]

Agreed Jonathan!