Whatever is happening to Pendle properties???

[michele cryer]

As Pendle Council is discussing plans to demolish parts of Nelson, the people whose housing is going to be affected are asking 'What's happening?' and 'How can we get a fair deal?'

Napier Street is one street which Pendle Council plans to 're-develop'... the plan sounds pretty on paper... the council wants to provide a 'village green' therefore all the houses on one side of Napier Street are going to be demolished, and the gardens of the opposite houses are going to have their gardens extended, and a 'green' is going to be planted to replace the lost houses. But what is going to happen to the residents? They are to be offered the full asking price of their house, by Pendle Council and a £20,000 relocation grant towards the cost of finding another property...it should be stressed that the relocation grant is a maximum of £20,000 and will be reduced accordingly if the asking price of the property you purchase is less than £20,000 more than the value of your own property. I believe a further £3,200 'inconvenience' grant will be payable not only to house owners, but also to those residents who are currently renting their Napier Street property... and who will be forced to move elsewhere.

This all sounds very nice to those residents who are planning on moving out anyway over the next 10/15 years when these relocations are earmarked to take place, but what of those who are settled in Napier Street, the elderly for instance? Also, what of the effects this policy is having on those who are trying to sell their properties now? A friend of mine is finding it extremely difficult to sell her house because potential buyers are approaching Pendle Council and being told that if they purchase the house and wish to move out before 2 years they will not be entitled to the £20,000 relocation award.

A group of local residents is meeting on Tuesday evening at Napier Street to discuss this issue and produce leaflets to post to all the residents affected, to try to set up a 'residents committee'. I would like to suggest that we use this as the basis for our first Burnley, or should it be Burnley and Pendle, Social Forum...

Please let me know your views on this matter.

[michele cryer]

Points brought up at the meeting re the housing problem:

1. There are many 'rumours' flying about.
2. Find out if the November council meeting is 'open' to the public.
3. Confirmed the £3,200 inconvenience payment is in addition to the £20,000 relocation grant payable.
4. The £20,000 award is only payable if you purchase property within the borough.
5. The whole scheme is undemocratic, more public consultation and compromise required.
6. Nothing is 'set in stone', ie. which streets are going to be affected...the timescale, could be 10/15 years or could be the next 12/24 months.
7. New purchasers moving into these properties must live in the house for 2 years before being eligible for the £20,000 award...therefore if the scheme took place within that time the new householders would receive nothing.

Apparently the council is to send letters to any potential purchasers so that they understand the terms of the agreement over the £20,000 relocation grant and when the final decision on the action is going to be made.

Telephone call will be made to Pendle council today, to find out when the meeting is to be held and whether or not it is a public one. If not public, then when will the next public meeting be held.

Me, Rose and Julie will meet again after the phone call has been made, to arrange a residents meeting and to design/print up flyers inviting residents to our meeting before attending the Council's public meeting.

Residents will be encouraged to attend the local Respect and other party public meetings on this issue to decide if they would like any of those groups to represent them.

[Mitch]

Superb and informative,

Count me in for strong support - can produce flyer and help with leafleting.

Thinking of doing a stand in Nelson town centre on 16th October if yourself, Julie and Rose fancy it, prior to play at Unity Hall. Can tie this in with promoting this campaign - plus a Burnley & Pendle Social forum which I reckon could convene sometime in November.

On Residents Association - would recommend linking in with Trinity who have had an active campaign over there - learn from them - ideas on leaflets and where to focus etc. Also, really worth getting example leaflets from Bristol - ringing them shortly for ideas. There's also a residents association in Walverden - will find out their details and email them to you. Would also suggest writing letters to Nelson Leader again, airing your concerns, calling for concerned residents to get together.

Let me know what you need.

Best Mitch

[michele cryer]

Thank you Mitch, as you know your help/support is always greatly appreciated..would be good to get other members of the Burnley/pendle Social Forum in on the act too!!! (hint hint).

That is a great suggestion regarding the stand in Nelson on 16th October...I will definitely aim to help you there and will ask Rose and Julie if they too can help.

I will consult the other residents groups as you suggested, to get ideas, and will let you know as soon as any practical help with flyers.etc, is required.

[thismachinebleeds]

yep, you can definately count on me for support, and to offer the campaign lightning fast wit and repartee, of which the likes of kkkeith and respect have never seen before. also, i could offer excruciatingly bad spelling and grammer!!!!! see you dudes tonight at the TEXTRESPECTTEXTmeeting. ahh the mellow sounds of, 'have you brought the party paper........?? and, 'if you join the respect coalition, you and your fellow residents will have a PROPER POLITICAL PARTY BEHIND YOU, NOT LIKE THE ONES THAT SOLD YOU DOWN THE RIVER IN ORDER TO GET GOVERNMENT MONEY.....VOTE FOR US, VOTE FOR US Ill stop now, i hear the gulags are espesially frosty at this time of year!

[michele cryer]

Hahaha...Thanks thismachinebleeds...I'm looking forward to meeting you and the others at tonight's meeting...

[michele cryer]

Well well well...an interesting turn of events at the local Respect public meeting on the housing issues in Pendle tonight.

1st speaker was local 'respect' member and general activist..David Penney. He filled us all in on the 'facts and figures' behind the local govt. housing plans. Highlighted one or two successful local campaigns to halt demolition of properties in Colne.

2nd speaker was Sylvia (sorry have forgotten her surname for the moment...no disrespect intended!). She was a chief campaigner against the demolition of properties in the Whiteside area of Nelson, she spoke passionately about their campaign and its' success.

Generally not very much was gained at tonight's meeting...locals who belonged to their own Resident's committees did speak of their efforts and of their wishes to 'get together' with other Residents committees. Pieces of paper were passed round on which people could place their contact details to 'obtain more information...and (if anyone even noticed the small print) to obtain info re Respect!!! A few minor alterations to the amount of cash incentives to be offered to householders was highlighted by visiting Lib-Dem Tony Greaves. There was a mention made of the possibility of holding another meeting in the future, although no definite plans were made to do so...people were just encouraged to leave their contact details and group together to support each others' causes.

Tony Greaves did mention that there is to be a meeting with a local councillor on Sunday, 10th October, at 2.30pm. Unity Hall, Vernon St. Nelson, to further discuss the issue.

Towards the end of the meeting a Respect member, disguised as a 'member of the general public' was asked to make 'one last comment'...she spoke of the failures of the Labour and Lib Dems to address the housing and other issues in the country, then urged everyone to 'join Respect'...at which point, quite bravely, Thismachinebleeds shouted out 'You can't use this meeting to recruit members to your party. You are using people's misery to increase your party membership!'...to which the Respect member replied that 'of course this is the right place at which to recruit...politics is people.' A couple of people left the building at this point during the general chaos that was ensuing!!

After a brief moment in which the crowd was settled again, the meeting re-commenced with a poetry reading from Sylvia..wish I could get a copy of it because it was very funny. Sylvia insisted that she was not politically motivated to attend tonight's meeting, she was purely there to highlight the problems with the housing in Pendle.

At the beginning of the meeting, the Respect member who was chairing the event mentioned briefly that it was intended at tonight's meeting to elect a delegate to attend the Respect AGM. I think in view of the uproar this idea was dropped..as no further mention was made of the Respect party...

Michele was, however, pulled to one side by a local SWerPer, who insisted that the comments/heckling by thismachinebleeds was completely out of order, uncalled for, unfair and unjustified. The Swerper was almost in tears as he explained all the good that the Respect party locally was trying to achieve, and how he didn't want it undermined by local anarchists, who hadn't done anything for anybody's causes for at least the last 25 years! Fred and thismachinebleeds were 'not amused' to hear this...also, it was stated quite clearly that unless thismachinebleeds intended never to repeat his outbursts he would no longer be 'invited' to further meetings....begging your pardon, but aren't public meetings supposed to be open to all, and aren't all comments from the public supposed to be aired?? FREELY

[Mitch]

You did right to challenge, thismachinebleeds - brave soul, and Michele well done for challenging the particular SWerp in question.

This scenario is not new - I have been there - it is hard, but their top-down using of local issues and local people must be confronted. If this SWerp in question was close to tears I feel no pity - for I have seen him and others crush confidence, ideas and action so many times and I will tolerate it no longer.

What a fool this SWerp in question is - look at his language - accusing local anarchists of doing nothing for anybody's causes in Burnley & Pendle. Is this not the crux of their party's increasingly totalitarian approach - that one has to do something for someone. Read between the lines - there is an assumption here that local people are not intelligent enough, or cannot fight themselves - they need the Socialist Workers Party/Respect to guide them to change/revolution.

ENOUGH, NO I say - the people of Burnley and Pendle know their own experience, and they are already making up their own minds, rising up and fighting in local residents groups, community groups and individually. I learn from them.

In support of my companions Michele & Thismachinebleeds - in that meeting they have done much to turn around the damage that the SWP have been doing locally in Burnley and Pendle over the last 25 years.

[michele cryer]

Thanks Mitch, your support for us is very welcome!!

[octoberlost]

I dont appear to understand, did RESPECT hijack the event or did they call it?

[thismachinebleeds]

respect did call the meeting, to which i have no complaint, but as the actual meeting went on it became sickeningly clear that all the good intentions about helping people keep their homes was a charade. as was said in the post by michele the 'keep me informed sheet' was a mailing list for the respect party. no community groups were helped at all, as the issue of a next meeting for a 'district wide' residents association was never called, no meeting was called at all, infact. hte thing that pissed me off, was the blatent fact that the respct coalition intended to use peoples concernes as a tool to further their interests as a party. i think the BNP uses the same tactic, eh? the residents who showed, werent interested in joining a party, they were interested in their homes and their interests as communities.
im disgusted at the way michele was treated as a result of my outburst. it was cowardly and unjustifiable as i walked past said swerper only moments before!!!!!
so on to the issue that has been burning in my head since, would we, as anarchists have treated the situation any differently than said trots? if we had called the meeting, what would we have suggested and, would we have tried to get people along to ourmeetings?
is a housing meeting 'fair game' as a recruting place? id say no, not if its at the expense of people who have no interest in wanting to hear about anarchists or our ideas.

[octoberlost]

Thanks for the clarity, I wasnt really criticising just concerned that we shouldnt be starting unecessary flame wars with the wadicals of the SWP...

[Steve]

thismachinebleeds. I think if anarchists had called the meeting it would (should) be different. Certainly if we in SF call a meeting like this we would be encouraging the residents/tenants to take action themselves and form their own group to keep contol of the decision making.

We would encourage certain ways of organising, recallable delegates etc, and using direct action, but in the end it would have to be up to the people directly involved to decide what form their protest takes.

There would be SF leaflets available for people to read but it would be entirely voluntary and any petitions or contact sheets would be soley for the use of tenants/residents groups.

[jim]

What would anarchists have done in a similar situation?

In the not too distant past the Burnley Anarchist Group plaid a great part in opposing the motorway, the M65 I think it turned out as. There was a great deal of hurt and fear amongst the areas affected, and it showed, just as it did last night.
We did a questionaire and went around certain streets door to door asking the residents. Chiefly "are you in favour of the road" Were you approached by the council and so on.
The response was overwelming from the residents complete support and from the Labour Council a hate campaign.

Eventually we called a meeting and advocated the formation of a residents association. We were attacked by the residents or some of them who seemed to believe we were responsible for the M65. It was so bitter that one of our members Paul, a new member resigned rather than face the hostility.
We pointed out, we were not interested in controlling anyone. If,however they were going to struggle in a meaningful way against the council they would need to be organised!. Ultimately they formed the West end Residents Association . Later we were asked by a Scot who lived in the Trafalgar Flats if we would help the residents their in an attempt to form a residents committee. Again we did, calling a meeting and expaining who we were and what our motives were. We were a help only , it was their struggle. In the end we also helped form two more residents and one ratepayers association. Some of them asked us to lend a hand , which we did for a short while but in each case we withdrew. We then suggested that the groups might like to affiliate together which they did and we arranged for an anarchist planner working with Shelter to give them aid and assistance. We even put him up and found rooms for him. At no time did we get involved but offered assistance when it was sought.
At election time a CP candidate who put up for councillor in Trinity Ward where the flats were, publicly attacked us for interfering in the affairs of the residents inspite of the fact that the residents had asked for our help and inspite of the fact that the CP had asked us would we give them tips on how we organised. The trots attacked us on the grounds that we organised the residents and then left them to stew in their own jiuce. The Liberal Leader on the Council said at this time that the oppostion to the Council consisted of Jim Petty, Susan Ewens and Harry Fuller a veteran CPer and constant letter writer to the local paper.

So then we helped organise, we supported when asked and we advocated confederation.
We explained who we were and our motives we did not proselytise as such. We never did, even when we were in the anti race and anti-fascist movement. Nor during the miners strike. We didn't as I say hide who we were or what we wanted. We were totally honest. We were attacked severely by the local BBC and the authorities for interference.

[Jim]

Further to the last post the Ratepayers Association which we helped form was a disaster. They were fascists from the lower middle classes and looked after their own interests.
The whole episode was in one way a terrific success and in another a complete failure. We were fighting against the state and they, the authority, new it and used it in their propaganda. They frightened people, but when residents met us and realised who and what we were they, in many cases stuck by us. The trot claim that we abandoned the residents in one case was not without a grain of truth. It wasn't our fight, we weren't leaders, just people carrying on the class struggle. But the people of Gannow Residents Association were not able to defend themselves adequately against the Council who sold them out. Where were we? Should we have interfered? Don't forget we were underfire from the town and from the BBC as well as the trots and Cp.
We advocated a series of residents associations and street committees federated locally , horizontally and nationallly. But not at meetings instead we did massive leafleting and called anarchist meetings all over the place. Naturally we didn't get the same attendance as at the residents meetings but we did well. One of the things we did was to call for twon meetings, we saw them as we see the Social Forum now

[michele cryer]

Thank you to everyone who has replied to my post regarding the Respect meeting about Pendle housing...octoberlost, I'm sorry that I didn't make it clear enough regarding who called the meeting...and I must reiterate that I too agree that calling the meeting about the housing situation was a good thing...I actively encouraged my neighbours (the ones going to be affected by the housing changes) to attend the meeting, but to treat it as a housing and not a political meeting...

Thanks to thismachinebleeds for filling in the gaps from my post!! and thanks to Jim for filling us in on the background to the work of the burnley anarchists.

[thismachinebleeds]

Steve said:

thismachinebleeds. I think if anarchists had called the meeting it would (should) be different. Certainly if we in SF call a meeting like this we would be encouraging the residents/tenants to take action themselves and form their own group to keep contol of the decision making.

We would encourage certain ways of organising, recallable delegates etc, and using direct action, but in the end it would have to be up to the people directly involved to decide what form their protest takes.

There would be SF leaflets available for people to read but it would be entirely voluntary and any petitions or contact sheets would be soley for the use of tenants/residents groups.

exactley right, i was in a bit of a moral mish mash when iwrote my post yesterday. STEVE!!!!could you either give me a ring this week regarding the SF meeting on tues or post the directions and where it is on these boards, as i can now make it over on me own. ta