Update
Posted: November 30, 2005 Filed under: Broadway Market Comments Off on UpdatePhoto by salimfadhley
This is an update on the occupation of 34 Broadway Market which Hackney Independent fully supports.
– UPDATE – UPDATE – UPDATE –
THANK YOU….
First of all thank you to all local residents who have been so supportive of this action!
Special thanks to the many who have donated time food, heaters and other useful things.
SUPPORT
It seems that the majority of local people support what we’ve done. Many have commented on how angry they are that after 30 years Tony was forced out of Broadway Market and that Tony represents part of Broadway Market that is being pushed out as the area is gentrified.
DEMOLITION STOPPED – WHAT NEXT?
Our first goal has been achieved! A group of local people have taken legal possession and secured the premises and on Monday 28th of November we prevented the scheduled demolition of Tony’s Café.
We have cleaned up the mess left after Tony’s eviction and made the place warm and welcoming for anyone who wants to drop in. Many people have already come for a cup of tea and to find out more about what’s been going on.
Also we have heard that Hackney Council have reviewed the original planning application for the site and come to the conclusion that it should not have been issued in the manner that it was. Our legal advisors are saying that the approval of the application was not a formal decision and we are now at the stage where the planning application can go to judicial review.
SECURITY
Our occupation of the premises is entirely legal. However we have to keep it secure. Friendly locals are invited to drop in but we have to be careful not to let representatives of the developer come through the door and attempt to repossess the cafe and start demolition. Please beware that although the building is occupied 24 hours a day, the front door is always locked. This is a necessity because of the legal position we are in.
Urgent Appeal: Occupation Of 34 Broadway Market, E8
Posted: November 28, 2005 Filed under: Broadway Market Comments Off on Urgent Appeal: Occupation Of 34 Broadway Market, E8As of Sunday evening the premises of Franscesca’s Café on Broadway Market have been occupied in protest against ongoing corruption allegations and aggressive gentrification in Hackney.
The café was due to be demolished at 8.00am, Monday November 28 to make way for luxury flats.
This is part of Hackney council’s sell-off of commercial properties. The estate agents appointed by the council have sold £225 million worth of properties for just £70 million, with the majority of these going to wealthy off-shore cartels who have made an absolute killing at the expense of the people of Hackney.
Tony Platia, a well-liked and popular figure in the community, has run Franscesca’s Café for the past 31 years.
Tony had first refusal on the property and repeatedly tried to buy it from Hackney council but was passed over in favour of a wealthy developer, Dr. Roger Wratten.
On three previous occasions local people rallied in support and prevented his eviction by bailiffs but in July this year, 10 bailiffs and 50 police turned up to throw him out.
Dr. Wratten is typical of the greedy developers that Hackney council chose to do business with. As the owner of a multi-million pound property portfolio his only interest in the area is financial gain – at the expense of the local community.
We call on both local residents and sympathisers to show their support by turning up at Broadway Market as soon as possible. Please copy this appeal and pass it on.
Hackney Independent Film Day: Standing Room Only!
Posted: November 23, 2005 Filed under: Events Comments Off on Hackney Independent Film Day: Standing Room Only!The 2005 Film Day proved to be a major attraction on Sunday November 20, with a full house testifying to it’s appeal.
The first short film shown was Their World This Time, a modern documentary on the post-WWII squatting movement. It particularly focused on the spirit of co-operation as people found themselves having to take both public and private property for themselves and their families.
Not a Penny on the Rents from 1968 was a short 20 minute film covering the successful GLC tenants rebellion against 100% rent increases. In black and white, time can never age its central message: unity is strength.
The Nick Broomfield early features were particularly powerful. The first, Who Cares?, looked at slum clearance in Liverpool L8, while the second from 1974 concentrated on a rent strike in Kirby where the majority of tenants had been rehoused. Provoking both plenty of laughter and anger in equal measure, the working class opinions on the media and the class society are as relevant now as they ever were.
Noemi Rodriguez introduced and answered questions on her short feature All That Glitters, a film about the 2012 Olympic bid. This is an on-going work that will certainly bloom as the social consequences of the Mayor’s folly becomes more apparent. Afterwards, a robust discussion provided some insightful views from the audience.
Spectacle Productions has been in existence since the mid-80s. Making independent short films on a variety of grassroots subjects, Mark Saunders has recently been working on a film concerning regeneration on a couple of south London estates. Presenting some clips from this project, he was on hand to answer questions afterwards.
Lastly, the London Particular was a challenging and very well made short film that looked at the gentrification of the Shoreditch area. Both film makers, David Panos and Ben Seymour, offered an introduction at the beginning.
We look forward to seeing you at the next Hackney Independent Film Day – if you have any requests then please get in touch.
Hackney Independent Film Day
Posted: November 4, 2005 Filed under: Events Comments Off on Hackney Independent Film DayHackney Independent invites you… down the pub to the Sussex! On Sunday, November 20, we’ll be holding our 2005 Film Day – and what an extravagance we have lined up! We’ve unearthed some real working class gems from the past and present.
Their World This Time – 1998
A film about the post-World War Two housing crisis, the squatting movement and the requisitioning of empty property.
Not a Penny on the Rents – 1968
How GLC (Greater London Council) tenants first organised Tenants’ Associations and conducted the first rent strikes against council rent rises.
Who Cares? 1971
Examines the problems of slum demolition and removal of people to new housing blocks, letting the residents speak for themselves. It comments on the need for playschools and community centres, but makes the plea that future planning should take into consideration the feelings and opinions of the working class concerned
Behind the Rent Strike – 1974
This Grierson Award-winning film deals with the rent strike undertaken by 3,000 Kirby New Town tenants, shortly before Christmas 1973, as a protest against the Housing Finance Bill.
The two short films above were made by Nick Broomfield who has gone onto international fame with such productions as Biggie & Tupac, Kurt & Courtney and Aileen – Life and Death of a Serial Killer. These are not commercially available and this may be your only chance to see them.
All that Glitters – 2004
Produced before the announcement of the successful bid, the documentary explores what might happen if the Olympics comes to London. It looks at the broken promises of the 1980s Docklands development and the almost identical pro-Olympic claims and promises
The producer of this film, Naomi Rodriguez, will be delivering a short introduction
Plus more films to be announced on the day.
2.00PM until late
Sussex Pub, 107a Culford Rd, London, N1 4HT
£2entry Sunday November 20
Nearest station: Dalston Kingsland
We Need Housing For the People Not For the Rich
Posted: November 3, 2005 Filed under: Labour Party, Media, Privatisation / Sell Offs Comments Off on We Need Housing For the People Not For the RichLetter and Editorial from the Hackney Gazette
In the Gazette article “Homes Shortage Crisis Claim” (20th October 05) MP Meg Hiller is just making the same points she made in the House of Commons on 15th June. Meg wants to see more “affordable, family-sized homes.” What she doesn’t call for is more council housing.
As a newcomer to Hackney affairs, Meg won’t remember this, but we saw estates like Stonebridge and Laburnum being built in Shoreditch by Hackney Council not that long ago. Then the Council told us that the Tory government had stopped council house building. We have had Tony Blair in power for eight and a half years and still we see no new council housing.
Labour are now as opposed to council housing as the Tories ever were.
When people come to see us at Hackney Independent advice surgeries they ask us to help them get a council flat big enough for their family. They never ask for “affordable homes” or “shared ownership.” These schemes are only available to people who are in secure well-paid jobs.
Hackney Independent carried out a door-to-door survey of 100 people in Shoreditch. We asked if people would like to see more council housing and more private housing built in Shoreditch.
Eight out of ten wanted to see more council housing. No-one said only private housing. Most of those who thought we needed both agreed that council housing was more important. While Meg puts out press releases calling for “affordable housing” her own party is busy approving plans for more and more luxury flats in Shoreditch, while trying to sell off as many council estates as it can. You have to judge a party by what is does, not what it says. Labour in Hackney means less council housing and more luxury flats. Hackney Independent campaigns as part of the community to save the council housing we have and to build more council housing for overcrowded tenants and our young people.
Peter Sutton
Hackney Independent
Hackney Gazette editorial
‘Sardines in a Can’
The lives of thousands of the borough’s kids are blighted because they live in overcrowded housing. An estimated 9,000 Hackney families suffer severely cramped conditions in households unsuitable for their size, a shock report by homeless charity, Shelter, has revealed. Many sleep in makeshift beds on dining-room, lounge or hallway floors because of lack of space, or have to share a bedroom with their parents – and in some extreme cases teenagers of the opposite sex are forced to share a bedroom. Lack of privacy places stress on family relationships and affects children’s education because they have nowhere to study or do their homework. It is a consequence of a chronic shortage of family-sized social housing.
In the past 20 years, the country’s public housing stock has contracted by more than a third, in part down to the sell-off of homes under the right-to-buy scheme. In an effort to free-up larger properties, tenants in homes too big for their housing needs are being given incentives to move to smaller council accommodation, but it is just tinkering. Sooner or later, society may have to grasp the nettle and accept the somewhat unpalatable reality that nobody has a God-given right to have as many children as they want when resources are scarce and taxpayers are expected to foot the bill. Until then the government needs to make the cash available to build more family-sized council and housing association homes in the borough and end the misery of overcrowding for good.
A Change Has Got To Come…
Posted: November 2, 2005 Filed under: Elections, Haggerston Comments Off on A Change Has Got To Come…Hackney Independent has been working with tenants and residents in Hoxton and Haggerston to try and create an independent group that puts the interests of working people (the majority of Hackney’s population) first.
For over 5 years we have supported campaigns to protect vital community services in Shoreditch, worked with tenants to tackle housing issues such as repairs and regularly put out a free newspaper that tells a very different story from the glossy spin of Hackney Today. Our main focus is on community politics but when we stood candidates in Haggerston in the last council elections we came within 90 votes of beating the Labour party.
We don’t pretend to have all the answers and certainly don¹t have a ‘party line’. We are currently talking with people on estates in Haggerston to see if they might be interested in helping to elect independent candidates who would report directly to residents. In the past we have pledged to commit any councillor’s salary towards creating a drop in centre so that people can report issues and problems directly to any elected representative.
We’d also like to talk with others in the borough who might want to share ideas or group together to work towards building an independent alternative to the main establishment parties. For those who are genuinely interested you can contact us through this website: or leave a message on 0207 684 1743.
Haggerston Pool – ‘consultation’ – what consultation?
Posted: October 30, 2005 Filed under: Community Facilities, Hackney Council Comments Off on Haggerston Pool – ‘consultation’ – what consultation?Following Hackney Council’s announcement that they are undertaking a feasibility study into the reopening of Haggerston Baths, a Haggerston Baths Building Steering Group has been established. To begin with the Council refused to invite Pool Campaign reps to their meetings. Fortunately, they have since been persuaded to back down and reps are now included on the steering group. Naturally, they have also employed a consultant to look into the future of the building.
It is understood that 3 options will be put to the Council’s cabinet in January. While the Council has publicly committed itself to reopening the building, there is yet no guarantee that it will be reopened as a swimming pool, something that local residents have consistently demanded.
Consultation thus far has not involved those that Hackney Independent feels are a priority in any decision-making. The question therefore remains, when will Hackney Council (if ever) undertake a proper public consultation exercise, one that includes the people that really matter: local tenants and residents?
New Labour talks a good game when it comes to the usual buzzwords: ‘accountability’, ‘transparency’, ‘choice’, resident ‘participation’, local democracy, but the reality is decisions are made beforehand behind closed (cabinet) doors. Local tenants and residents are routinely ignored by these processes, and when they are consulted, the questions are often designed to make it very difficult for people to express their real views and guarantee a positive outcome – in other words asking the wrong questions to get the right answers. However it doesn’t have to be like this.
Hackney Independent calls for the results of the consultation so far to be made public; and for the Council to ask local tenants and residents their opinion of the future of Haggerston Pool before their cabinet makes its decision. Is their failure to conduct any public consultation due to the fact that they know what we want? Are they afraid of the fact that local tenants and residents demand the reopening of the building as a swimming pool, a community facility at affordable prices, without privatisation or luxury flats? Long term we’d like to see public ballots on issues like this, but a proper consultation would be a positive first step towards genuine local democracy.
When Hollywood comes to Broadway market!
Posted: October 9, 2005 Filed under: Broadway Market, Gentrification / Regeneration Comments Off on When Hollywood comes to Broadway market!Hackney Independent has recently mourned the closure of Francesca’s Café on Broadway Market – the latest victim of the gentrification of the area which has seen shop rents increase at the expense of decent, affordable outlets for local working class residents.
Lately we have also witnessed the closure of the upmarket ‘Little Georgia’ restaurant on the Broadway, another victim of rent increases, but one that indicates that even the original gentrifiers are not immune from the self-same process. (See our letters page for coverage of debate on this in the Hackney Gazette.)
Irony of ironies is that this last week, film crews – which have in the past used the Market for its gritty realism – have been seen ‘dressing down’ the site of the ‘Little Georgia’, which is now another new upmarket restaurant, to look like a traditional local working-class café!?
Hackney Independent, we are sure, don’t need to point out the absurdity this situation.
Indeed, as they say, you couldn’t make it up if you tried…
Hackney Gazette – Sinking with the Mortgage
Posted: October 9, 2005 Filed under: Gentrification / Regeneration, Media Comments Off on Hackney Gazette – Sinking with the MortgageHome owners in South Hackney and Shoreditch are spending up to a third their wages on mortgage repayments.
The area has been named as the worst place in the country for property owners expecting to part with more of their hard-earned cash to pay their mortgage.
Andy Gray, head of mortgages for the Woolwich, said that the top 50 least affordable areas are more likely to be up-and-coming neighbourhoods rather than ones with high property prices.
He explained that in certain areas, including South Hackney and Shoreditch, many borrowers were spending a higher proportion of earnings on repayments.
“Places like Hackney tend to attract young professionals who will borrow as much as they can to get a property in the next up-and-coming area,” said Mr Gray.
“They are hoping hat property prices will increase quickly as the area gentrifies and are also confident that as young professionals their earnings will rise quickly to drive down their mortgage payments as a percentage of income.”
The price of an average three-bedroom house in South Hackney and Shoreditch is now more than £300,000, according to estate agents, Bunch and Duke, in Mare Street, Hackney.
Prices have risen rapidly over the past three years and buyers are expected to pay out more of their income on a mortgage here than anywhere else.
Property owners paid 26.5 of their income on mortgage repayments in 2002. That figure has now increased to 32.8 percent.
South Hackney and Shoreditch is followed closely by Brent East, Vauxhaull, Poplar and Caning Town and Brent South as areas in which buyers spend most of their incomes on mortgage repayments.
Gazette Editorial
Having a mortgage can be a financial millstone around your neck, so a study showing what percentage of their salary home owners spend on repayments may make folk think twice about getting on the property ladder in Hackney. The average amount of net wages Londoners use to repay their home loans is 23 per cent, but in popular areas like Hackney South and Shoreditch the proportion of earnings which go towards repayments, according to the Woolwich, is as much as 33 per cent or a third! That’s because many buyers attracted to the area are young professionals who borrow as much as they can, gambling that property prices will increase quickly and their earnings will rise at the same rate to drive down their percentage of income spent on repayments.
As a result up-and-coming areas like South Hackney are among the least affordable in the capital because many buyers are not among the top earners.
If home owners in the south of the borough are paying up to a third of their earnings in mortgage repayments, that means they have less in their pockets to spend on the high street, and that can only be bad news for the local economy.
Challenging Institutional Gentrification
Posted: September 13, 2005 Filed under: Broadway Market, Gentrification / Regeneration Comments Off on Challenging Institutional GentrificationIt covers a meeting held on Tuesday by the Broadway Traders & Residents‘ Association and led by Queensbridge Tory Councillor Andrew Boff. The meeting was largely attended by a middle class audience with a few exceptions.
FOCUS ON CORRUPTION
The meeting was prompted by the closing of the upmarket ‘Little Georgia’ restaurant. We note that that there were no meetings called when much more socially useful shops closed or Tony‘s Cafe (Francesca‘s) closed recently. Councillor Boff says that he is concerned that the market is going backwards because of the ‘greed’ of developers, and focussed on how council corruption that has led to the selling off of council-owned shops to off-shore developers.
A local lawyer has been researching the background to several of the sell-offs in Broadway Market and claims to have found several cases where the council has been involved in doing deals with developers behind the back of shopkeepers who could have bought their leases. He has been taking the council to task but has not managed to get any straight answers from them in response to his allegations.
A representative from the Dalston area updated people about the recent sell-off of Dalston Lane properties. It seems that these were carried out in the same way as the 2001 Broadway Market sell-off – local shop keepers were sidelined by property developers who were given preferential treatment by the Council’s estate agents, Nelson Bakewell. The meeting was told that Nelson Bakewell sold an entire parade of shops on Dalston Lane as a job lot for almost half their total combined asking price to an overseas developer that already owns 10 properties in Broadway Market.
Councillor Boff is willing to stand up and say that there has been corruption in the Council and it is clear he wants to make political capital out of this and position himself as a champion of Broadway Market.
PROTECTIONISM
The view from some traders and residents is that they want to see laws put in place that mean that properties are only sold with conditions that they stay in local hands (no overseas developers) and are used for ‘community’ use. By community, the Traders Association seem to mean the ‘community’ of young professionals that could afford to frequent places like Little Georgia – people friendly to many of the shop keepers’ agenda of creating a middle class ‘urban village’ with little to offer the majority of local people.
The majority view in the meeting seemed to be that the sale of council-owned shops is fine, as long as the shops are sold to people like them, not big developers.
There was no mention of related issues that have shaped the area like gentrification or the privatisation of council housing and services. The traders do not seem to accept that many local people feel that the Farmers Market is not for them. Their agenda is very narrow – they want to fend off big chains like Starbucks and freeze the gentrification process at a particular point. Ultimately the shopkeepers want to be protected from the excesses of the free-market whilst enjoying its immediate benefits.
We have seen this gentrification process at first hand in “Hoxton”/South Shoreditch, Spitalfields and Islington‘s Upper Street. First comes the arty/hip shops and bars, then the place becomes popular, then the rents come up, big business pushes out the artists and “cutting edge” trendy bars and shops. At this point those who did nothing for the working class majority except price us out of their new shops and close our pubs expect us to help them or at least feel sorry for them when they get pushed out in turn.
LABOUR?
New Labour’s William Hodgson, councillor for Queensbridge and head of Planning did turn up to the meeting. The Hackney Independent have not seen him since we saw him mouthing obscenities and gesturing at us at the 2002 election count where Labour narrowly beat our candidate.
Whereas Andrew Boff at least seems to be interested in local issues (though from a middle class perspective) Hodgson has an arrogant attitude to his role as a councillor and seem annoyed to even have to attend the meeting.
When one local started laying into him, he was protected by the Chair who told everyone ‘he’s on our side’. Not on our side, mate!
Hodgson also refused to take any responsibility for things done before he was in office. His basic role at the meeting was to keep repeating his New Labour mantra: “historically the council has done a bad job of managing properties so therefore I think it is best to sell them. The council should deliver services not manage properties. So it is our duty to get the ‘best price’ for ‘your’ properties as a duty to the borough. It is hard for us to guarantee that anything stays in the hands of community businesses”.
His argument was attacked as obviously many of the sales in Broadway Market and Dalston Lane have hardly been at ‘best price’! The reality is that commercial properties have usually sold at cheapest price to the developers after tenants have been sidelined from their right to buy.
Despite these attacks Hodgson’s solution to everything still seemed to be offloading more properties onto the free market. This sums up Labour‘s view perfectly – but not just with shops – it is the same with council housing, schools, leisure … They don’t want to own anything, they want to sell it and stand back and let market forces provide. This makes them no different from the Conservatives or Lib Dems and of no use to us whatsoever.
Although Councillor Boff seems to be more engaged with local issues and does a better job than Queensbridge‘s Labour councillors, his position on Broadway Market has two major flaws. Firstly his party shared power with Labour during part of the time of the mass sell-off of shops and of course did nothing to stop it. Secondly he believes in the free-market. He does not disagree with the council selling off the shops, so his only tactic is to say there was corruption in the process. The problem with the free market is that it will inevitably drive out smaller businesses if there is money to be made. So all the help Andrew Boff has put into helping establish the Saturday market has inevitably led to the increase of popularity in the area which in turn leads to pricing out local businesses.
The Gazette editorial summed up the meeting very well:
“It is ironic that the ward’s only Tory councillor slams the damaging effect of putting so many properties in the hands of a few real estate speculators and warns the future of the area is at the whim of property developers. Until there is evidence to the contrary, we can assume there is nothing shady or unlawful about what has happened and it is simply the consequence of a free-market economy – an ideology championed by Thatcherism and usually embraced by all Conservatives, shopkeepers and traders.
There is no accidental process going on in Broadway Market. Selling their commercial properties was not just to balance the council’s books when they ran short of money. The council don’t want to hold on the shops, or have any other plan to provide shops and service of use to most of us. The process is ‘institutional’ gentrification‚ at work, not just corruption on the side of a few fat cats.
We don’t want Starbucks to come in, but we also don’t need shops for new rich young settlers discovering this ‘fabulous shopping street’ in the ‘gritty’ east end. We want Broadway Market back serving local people as shops and market stalls selling goods at affordable prices.
Recent Comments