Britain's estates are 'social concentration camps'
Three decades of failed policies have destroyed the life chances of millions living in public housing, says a devastating new report. Emily Dugan investigates
Millions of people have been condemned to live under "social apartheid" by 30 years of poor housing policies, a damning report on council estates will say this week.
The 107-page report, to be published on Friday, condemns successive governments for pushing poorer people into what it condemns as "social concentration camps" set away from private housing, jobs and shops. Children born on such estates are more likely to end up unemployed, suffer mental health problems and die younger than their counterparts in private housing, says the study by the Fabian Society. Most damningly for the Government, it concludes that pledges by the then Prime Minister Tony Blair to end "no-go areas" and close of the gap between rich and poor have ended in failure.
The report, entitled In the Mix, finds that by concentrating council housing in estates set apart from the wider community, successive governments have produced a situation where living in social housing is not just a sign of poverty but a cause in itself. It is blunt in assessing Britain's housing policy as "nothing short of disastrous".
According to the Fabians, children bought up in social housing now have far fewer life chances than half a century ago, because they are concentrated on increasingly ghettoised estates. Those born after 1970 in council homes are twice as likely to suffer from mental health problems than those born in 1946 in public housing, 11 times more likely to be unemployed and not in training or education, and nine times more likely to live in a household where nobody has a job.
The gulf between those left stranded on these estates and rich or even middle-income families is wider now than it was 30 years ago. In England and Wales, the average electoral ward is 16 per cent public housing, but in the poorest wards that figure rises to 70 per cent or more.
By splitting up those living in public and private housing, successive governments have fostered suspicion towards those who live on council estates. Research for the study found that a third of those polled felt people living on council estates had "nothing in common with them", and 60 per cent of those believed that mixed housing would be a bad idea. It concludes that segregated estates have had a devastating effect on social mobility. "There is nothing inevitable about this correlation between housing and disadvantage. It has been caused by political and institutional processes – and such processes can be arrested and altered."
The London Borough of Islington is widely considered the essence and epicentre of New Labour. It also illustrates the national gulf between rich and poor. The Andover estate, one of the biggest in the country, has now become a byword for deprivation, with high rates of unemployment and ongoing problems with drugs and crime. Tina Baillie, 41, first moved to the estate in north Islington when she was 11, and lives there with her three children, Rick, 18, Abbi, four, and Vinny, two. Her boyfriend is in prison and she says she has been out of work for "quite a while" now. Her hopes for her children are simple and informed entirely by the cycle of unemployment on the estate. "What do I hope they do? Work."
Although fiercely defensive of its residents, she blames the estate in large part for her life as it is now. "I wanted to do everything when I was younger: air hostess, modelling, the lot. But what am I doing? Fuck all! I'd move off tomorrow if I could: get a house and be somewhere different. But my kids love it and it's what I've got."
The struggle to get work can often simply be a product of coming from a certain estate: tenants living there become stigmatised, often having trouble finding work simply because of the postcode they live in.
Deborah Murphy is already terrified that her children will get stuck in the cycle of boredom, crime and unemployment that mars so many within. The 49-year-old, unemployed for several years, shares a small flat with her daughter Keshia, 18, and her four-year-old son Casey. "It's hard to make something of yourself here," she says. "I don't want my son to be here when he's 18 or 19 because there's nothing here. It's hard to get a job: if they find out what estate you're from when you apply it's really hard."
Andrea Assanah, 29, has brought up her nine-year-old son Bradley on the Andover estate, but she spent her childhood on a mixed street of houses. "I would have loved that for my son," she said, "but I had to take what I could when this place came along. There is definitely a better sense of community on a street and you feel less cut off."
The Liberal Democrat leader, Nick Clegg, said: "One of the saddest failings of the Labour Government has been its failure to really shift the life chances of Britain's poorest children. The Government has not only allowed social housing to wither on the vine, it has allowed the gap between the richest and the poorest in our country to turn into a chasm. It is a betrayal of everything the Labour Party was supposed to stand for."
The shadow housing minister, Grant Shapps, agrees: "This report lifts the lid on the devastating impact of a failed housing policy that has led to an increasingly ghettoised social divide. This is bad for those directly disadvantaged and for society because it simply wastes lives."
But a spokesman for the Communities and Local Government Department said: "No government has done more to tackle deprivation... This Government brought in major changes to planning policy last April which means councils must ensure a proper mix of housing to meet local needs."
View all comments that have been posted about this article.
Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.
- Print Article
- Email Article
-
Click here for copyright permissions
Copyright 2009 Independent News and Media Limited



Comments
Employment agencies can use post code information to any potential employees to engage in a form of corporate ethnic cleansing. I suspect that people could be driven from any estate property speculators and developers have desires on. Then they blame some people for being on the dole for years, not having the option to move out to another higher priced area. Its all about rigging the property market causing massive house price inflation in some areas whilst councils are forced to virtually give their council house assets to bogus charity housing associations for the stock market parasites to borrow against. Against assurances to tenants voting for " privatisation " rents have increased at rates well above that of inflation, now there are reports of funds not being available for " regeneration " even though the target property is already effectively ethnically cleansed, if not economically cleansed.
Step forward Cromwell, to clear a dense population of snouts out of Westminster and Whitehall - and hold the disinfected ground for long enough for democracy to put down roots.
Look ,pride of place , keeping ones own back yard clean, your children scrubbbed up and knowing that by up lifting an area by virtue of zero tolerance to crime and grime gives back a bit of power to the community therefore creating less helpless feeble occupants. People CAN do this collectively, and then the youngsters learn by example. It doesn't have to be a nannyfed dumbed down society, does it?
If one removes the cliches from your comment, one is left with naught but empty space.
The post war housing experiment is not a concentration camp. brief visit to Bosnia S Lanka or Oswiecem would reveal how glib misinformative and insulting this label is to all.
The estates esp the sink estates act like the work house before as a punishment for th poor and equally importantly as a warning to the lower middle classes .One slip one wreckless adventure crime or unwanted pregnancy and welcome to housing benefit hill.
If people have nopower or responsibility for their environment hardly surprising they dont care.
Adapt adopt and improve,the levellers saw land as a key to autonomy a garden at least ,tenants to pay some of the rents.
Mixed communities where the PM,architect,have social workers and police to reside in these communities might ensure mutual interest.
Evict the trouble makers to comparable estates at the other end of country or Flaklands perhaps as a deterrenet to the drug gangs.
Looks like those irony by-passes for members of the Shadow Cabinet have really paid off.
We also need to end the 'tenancy for life' culture. Bad tenants should be evicted and underused houses should be sought and elderly residents moved to purpose-built sheltered housing. Tenancy should be reviewed every two years.
Now because social housing is based on need people have to make themselves needy to get a house.
When EU residents can come here in 2012 and apply for housing without having to work here for a year there will be an outcry as new tenancies go to large families of EU nationals. The waiting list will be the only way for low-paid British people to qualify for social housing.
Councils should be able to spend right-to-buy receipts on building new accomodation for the elderly and single people and to buy houses in private housing areas to make mixed estates.
People in social housing in areas with few jobs should be able to move to areas with jobs in other parts of the country. Why should a Polish builder get a council house in London when an unemployed builder in Hartlepool could find work if he could get housing?
Hostels should be built for asylum seekers so that the 'pull' effect of getting a house isn't an aim of immigrants.
Council housing shouldn't be a stigma, but housing policy has made it that way. An urgent rethink is needed and the allocation procedure should be the starting point. Waiting lists have soared and getting a social housing tenancy should be a stepping stone, not a millstone.
I grew up on a "notorious" estate in Oxford in the 60 and 70's Blackbird leys.
all I can recall is that the overwhelming majority of men worked shifts and many woman too. The estate was tidy and there were old fashioned working class respectability values in place....such as keeping your home and garden in order and keeping up appearances. There were also many "gatekeepers"" in that age too. Men and woman who did voluntary youth work. Visible men who didnt stand for nonsense. People who stood at entrances, on the buses. All of this has gone, alas with the pride and the general optimism of the period.
What are the answers? Many. But there is not even the beginning of a wider social debate about the deletarious effects of some of the following; over consumption, the spiritual emptiness of UK secular society, negative and over sexualised TV input, bad nutrition, poor mental health and low aspiration on Britain s marginalised millions
Go to Holland if you want some answers to public housing and social cohesion. They are MILES ahead on this matter and many more besides.
Then class hatred - by which I mean the dislike of the middle and upper classes for the working class - intensified. "Chav" jokes became mainstream and extreme.
If there was a discussion about other social groups who failed to achieve, some thought might be given to the prejudice that deters and prevents them. Why is this not explored here but merely mentioned briefly as the prejudice against people from certain postcodes?
I definitely think the idea of social housing mixed with private is an utter disgrace. Why on earth should someone who has worked damned hard to save for a home and buy one at great expense and pay the bills be two or three doors away from some single youngster with her noisy brood of ear ringed 6 year old brats and pack of barking dogs.
I feel that social mixes like this do not produce a steadying effect ,just resentment towards housing societies. Brand new housing estates have to have about 35% + social mix but no one who buys actually knows who their near neighbours will be.
Elderly people should never be shunted around from pillar to post and excluded as such. They ought to occupy prime positions in the community and not be confined to blocks of flats. Warden assisted bungalow complexes with courtyard gardens are so vital just to keep the old darlings interested and moving around.
So perhaps some policies have suceeded only too well - the policy of never telling voters that nanny won't always provide.
Coupled with this, we need a large personal allowance to take all low earners out of tax and a minimum wage that allows anyone working full time to pay a private sector rent in the local housing market.
Simple. Multiple social problems solved.
But no, that would be "intervening in the market" and we can't have that can we? Not when there are big profits to be made by transport companies and supermarkets.
"But a spokesman for the Communities and Local Government Department said: "No government has done more to tackle deprivation... This Government brought in major changes to planning policy last April which means councils must ensure a proper mix of housing to meet local needs.""
Last April! You've been in power for 12 years!
Why do all governments, regardless of where they are on the parliamentary spectrum (centre-right, right or extreme right) constantly evade the question and refuse to admit their policies were wrong? The above statement by this faceless spokesman is a blatant lie yet we continue to let these fools and thieves run our lives. We're about to vote a "changed" Tory government in, yet they are backed by the same think tanks, corporations and faces that backed them when they were kicked out after years of sleaze, lies and corruption. In 10 or 12 years time we'll vote a "changed" Labour Party back in backed by the same crooks. Are we really that stupid? Are our memories really that bad? Don't we deserve something better than a parliamentary democracy that is no democracy at all?
Exterminate the 'useless eaters' lovely.
I wonder why it took that long to find something out that everyone who lived in them knew.
Oh yes, no-one bothered to ask or believe the answers.
plus ca change.......
John
Current policies are merely a continuation of those initiated in the eighties.
Expect no change after June 2010.
PS. How's Lady Porter?
1. Although Canada has a small social housing sector, circa 6% of stock, it has a large private rented sector, approximately 30% of stock. Provision is made for those who need housing (mainly in the private sector), where rents are paid in full, albeit tightly regulated.
2. Most Indie readers don't live in social housing, certainly not on large 'sink' estates. You're targeting the wrong people. Try the Sun or Mirror. Don't expect too many replies.
I have lived on a council estate for 12 years and most of my neighbours, health and care workers, postmen, cleaners, pensioners, etc, etc. deserve respect not disregard OR horrified dismay, however sympathetic. We need to work towards becoming one country again where the word VALUE isn't about what you own.