Thursday, March 26, 2009

The Protest

There has been considerable concern around Queen's Student Union about This.

They had little to worry about. No-one showed. As one commenter put it,

"They wouldn't have the brass neck"

He was right. Despite copious posters and leaflets and texts, nobody came. The True Believers of the Socialist Workers' Party stood around in the rain hugging their wet placards and looking ever more stupid. I would have felt sorry for them, but I thought their protest was a cynical prank at the expense of the handful of residents imprisoned in the Holyland.

-No Riot Police in student areas.

An interesting demand. How are we to deal with public disorder? You will by now have seen the clips on YouTube. Should we offer such people a nice cup of tea and a bun if only they'll keep the noise down and stop wrecking cars? There are churches in the area that hand out free burgers and coffee and biscuits to this lot on their way to and from the pub. A representative of Fitzroy Presbyterian Church told a residents' meeting that they should do just that and it'll make things better. I suppose he thought we should pray too. The prayers of many have not prevented the death of the area, nor will they resurrect the corpse of a community that has clearly died.

-No Slum Student Housing

An admirable demand. One might ask where the untold millions in HMO grants have gone. At the recent PACT meeting it was pointed out that the landlords have demolished the area and built a slum. Declan Boyle took great offense at this.

"My properties are to the highest standard. They're passed by Building Control. They're passed by the Housing Executive. There's nothing wrong with them."

Such righteous indignation ignores the obvious question. What exactly are the authorities doing? They have doled out £240 million in HMO grants across the province, financing the rape of untold communities. This money came out of the housing budget, a fact that would explain the presence of 20,000 homeless. The Housing executive is not allowed to build. Instead it finances the private sector through grants and £140 million every year in housing benefit. In a sane and just society this money would be recycled to finance environmentally sustainable public housing. I digress. To demolish a family home and build flats to house 16 students in rooms smaller than a prison cell is slum housing, no matter what the authorities say.

- No expulsions for St Patricks Day.

I, and apparently the Union, had expected a large turn-out in support of this. No show. Why? Perhaps because no-one will be expelled and we all know it. At the PACT meeting Gerry McCormack belittled the concerns of residents to the point of obscene absurdity. As it happens Queens do expel people; if they can't pay fees for example, or their studies have suffered because of health concerns or adverse circumstances. Students call this the "Sweeny Todd" syndrome, but it's not just the head of Occupational Health, Denis Todd, that flushes people down the toilet. The School of Psychology does it too, and this 40 years after they expelled Bernadette Devlin just before her finals.

This brings me to the big point. Queens was once a hotbed of radical student activism. Today it's a cultural sewer. Why will they not fight against fees? Why will they not demand full grants? Why do they not demand decent housing for all? The destruction of the Health Service; anyone care? Apparently not. Water privatisation; anyone listening? Silence.

What has happened to the student body? The answer can be found on YouTube. Thinkers are packing their bags and going. We are in intellectual meltdown. We are also in moral meltdown. Whether it is privileged nihilists high on ethnic chauvinism, or a lost generation who drown their despair in drugs, our youth have no sense of purpose. I could argue that this shows the moral bankruptcy of Christian schooling, and I would not be wrong. I think the larger issue is structural. Thatcher and her heirs have quite literally destroyed society and in its place is that thing understood by Connolly; the morality of the pig trough.

20 comments:

Anonymous said...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2nchc05Hv2c&feature=player_embedded

I put this link in before but you must have forgot to accept my comment!!

Spankertankon said...

It's not residents, but "residents". The people who actually live there are, well, non-people.

you put students in brackets are 'students' non people in your eyes

if you do put this up, which i doubt you will
are students non-people
its nice to be censored alan
i know you won't let this on your blog

belfast samizdat said...

I've already discussed HolylandsStudent's point in the discussion in Aftermath; the movie.

The clips show the "before the riot" and "during the riot" Johanna.

I think it is despicable and cowardly for students to torment and intimidate an elderly woman living alone.

Tell your friends to stop.

belfast samizdat said...

I put the word "students" in quotation marks not because they are non-people, but because they are not here to study.

The guy the next day who had no shame, no remorse, and a painfully limited vocabulary is what I'm talking about.

Why should these people be allowed to abuse education and taxpayers funds?

Anonymous said...

so r u 100% that guy was a student? or was he up for the party? cause if he wasnt a student then quit ur bitchin

belfast samizdat said...

If it looks, acts and babbles like a student, I assume it is one.

HolylandStudent said...

If you are no longer a resident of the holylands why were you in the holyland on st patrick's day during the riots?

Anonymous said...

"abuse education and taxpayers funds",

Abuse Education;

Student pay over £3,000 per year to attend University so therefore tax payers pay F all toward 3rd level education.


Taxpayers funds;

Most student have part-time jobs so therefore are taxpayers while most of the "residents" of the holylands are living in free government house because they are on "Job seeker Allowance" (but have no intention of getting a job)

belfast samizdat said...

"Student pay over £3,000 per year to attend University so therefore tax payers pay F all toward 3rd level education. "

They're called top-up fees for a reason. Every student brings with them a great big wad of taxpayers' money. This has been the case ever since universities were marketised during the 1980's.

"If you are no longer a resident of the holylands why were you in the holyland on st patrick's day during the riots?"

To observe and report.

Anonymous said...

Surely your being there may have caused more tension if it is obvious that you dislike students?

belfast samizdat said...

I was wearing my social camouflage (the striped Primark top). They didn't know me. It's amazing how easy it is to fool people.

Anonymous said...

So what is the solution to the Holylands?
Current legislation (HMO 2015) Hopes to limit housing to 30% HMO in student areas. Where are all the students going to go?
Halls of Residence don't work. More than enough statistical proof to support that.
I mean, what solution can be brought to the table which will act as a compromise to all interested bodies? (I exclude Landlords from 'interested bodies' because their interest is largely financial and not always in the interest of the tennants and of non students and building/ maintaining an integrated community.)

belfast samizdat said...

OK, this is gonna require a detailed article. Here's the synopsis:_

The Holyland is gone, finished, kaputt. There will never be a community there again .

Build new houses nearby for the residents and rehouse them. I'm talking about environmentally sustainable public housing to a high standard.

Put no more public money into the Holyland. Not another penny of taxpayers money should be given to landlords. This is a bigger question and deserves its own article.

Studies of "studentification" in England have found that when 10% of an area's population is student it is destabilised and spirals downward. 30% HMO's marks the destruction of any community invaded to such an extent by landlordism. The problem should be contained and isolated like cancer and not spread around the city like secondary tumors.

I will say more later.

Anonymous said...

But - areas like Stranmillis and Lisburn - more like 40% - 60% (roughly up to 80% in some areas of stran).
There isn't that complete sense of breakdown - you feel part of the community. And there aren't nearly as many problems. I am not by any means saying that there aren't problems. And I'm also not justifying making other areas nearly as dense.
I definitely agree that an HMO ring-fence has to be brough about, bit like a green belt but for houses.

The only solution I can think which would work would be if Queen's and UU owned the houses and run them like landlords as houses (not like halls - I think the 'amenity' (as the doc calls it) does have to be preserved). Students would be assured standards (in theory), and then disturbances to the neighbourhood could be written into contracts and made part of the disciplinary code.
Even if Landlords and estate agents could be brought into schemes like this - A system whereby keeping noise down after hours / warning neighbours of parties in the future etc / maintaining a decent set of standards - would all be written into housing contracts.
Students could then be cautioned and kicked out of the houses if found to be causing problems.

Either way the simple implimentation of making landlords checking up of properties maybe once a fortnight on pre-set days (don't want to break the law) to check that the house is kept in a decent order. (Like - i would get on well with my landlord but I haven't seen him once since we signed the agreement - I wonder if he even cares about his property as long as it is in a fit enough state to let-on next year - and at the end of the agreement.

Also - Students and non students alike in residential areas should be given an area of annonymous posting whereby they could report - e.g. "no.5 on x street was making lots of noise on this date" - and then the landlord is responsible, as well as Queen's and UU if it is their students, or the PSNI if it is non students, for making sure their tennants aren't causing problems.

Then issues arising would largely be narrowed down to wonderers. People not tied down to a specific house.

Sorry - bit of an epic post.

Anonymous said...

"I was wearing my social camouflage (the striped Primark top). They didn't know me. It's amazing how easy it is to fool people."

We all seen u and had a right laught at u! Oh u hate students so much...then chatting 2 students... what a renegade! So were u infultrating them like an undercover detective? wow, ur like james bond in a way!

Names Murray, Alan Murray, Licence to blog

belfast samizdat said...

I wish I had more relevant and intelligent epic posts.

I think we have to accept that if students are 99% of the population in the Holyland the balance can never be redressed. Certainly something has to be done to manage the place because it's impossible to study there. One could argue that it should be walled off (we love our walls in Belfast) and the students left to their own devices. This is probably the only realistic option because the universities don't care and neither do the landlords. They're all simply making too much money out of it and the landlords will keep the substantial damage deposits and have successfully sued former tenants for compensation to cover property damage. The universities don't seem to care whether their "students" study or not as long as keep the money rolling in. They'll dole out degrees to whoever pays them.

You say a lot of things that make sense in areas that are not already gone. Unfortunately it would not be enough.Anonymous complaints won't work if you're the only resident in the street. Equally, if residents are merely heavily outnumbered complaining will make them targets. The universities' complaints system, devised by the diabolical Anne Monaghan, does just that. A "substantiated" complaint gets a slap on the wrist. A second "substantiated" complaint gets another one. A third gets a trivial fine. I can only conclude that this system was designed to make residents targets so that they will either leave or shut up. It has been highly successful in the Holyland.

If Stranmillis, Lisburn Road and Ballynafeigh are to survive they must redress the balance. The Headingley area of Leeds is 60% student 40% resident. They have maintained a sense of community, but how they plan to roll back the tide to get the area stable (90% residential) is a herculean task that is bigger than the fights of individual communities.

Clearly landlordism must be treated as a social cancer to be cut out. This requires radical thinking and drastic action. In both these islands we need a change in philosophy toward Bevan's housing and health policies. We must rise to the challenge. We must become moral beings again.

Bevan made us better people. Free health care for all is a moral achievement that elevates all who experience it. It is anathema to Thatcher and Blair and Brown and their Irish (Northern and Southern) counterparts. The same can be said of decent housing for all. Read the Connolly quote, then look around you.

Keep posting.

Anonymous said...

Sorry – I must apologise for another epic post – but it started off so small…
(on re-reading a lot of “I thinks” - again - apologies)

Walled off Holylands – I can’t think of anything more depressing. When you start walling off communities they become isolated, un-integrated and also to some extent resentful of neighbour areas / people.
Students would care less about their local environment and their neighbours. Without any interaction they would see Belfast as even less of a home. It would become a ghost town at weekends and holidays. Not good considering a whole host of issues, namely crime, and the general atmosphere. It would be like Elms on the weekends… completely dead. The Holylands itself is quite central to the city centre; I think it would be hugely detrimental to Belfast to have such a large space walled off. I think it would also give students an excuse to think that they don’t have to consider other people’s feelings.

Those who have been living there longer would be resentful because they might feel angry that the students have got a better deal than themselves – which I’m sure a lot of people in the area feel already with the considerable amount of money poured into HMO grants (a lot of which I would argue doesn’t always transfer better living conditions for students).

I think most of all it would be hypocritical. Hypocritical to say on the one hand – you can’t kick students out, we are an interest group, we are people too, and then kick the non students out with the other. (I also think it would be hard to pass through city council as well!)

I think one of the hardest things about coming up with solutions is to make sure you aren’t just moving the problem around Belfast – or just further and further out. I think a dual strategy is necessary:
On the one hand promoting better practice both before landlords and students sign contracts, e.g. by making sure they come with good references from their last landlord; and then introducing stricter measures once they have moved in.
I think that the fines system should be scrapped altogether. I think that instead of paying a token £200 fine for making a disturbance that should be translated into 40 hours community service in the area. This could be anything from gardening in old people’s houses, helping out with the Holylands clean-ups which have been run this year, delivering meals on wheels etc etc. To be honest, money is easily come by and easily lost – consider a student may easily spend £40 on one night drinking – they only have to not go out for 5 nights to pay for that fine which has taken a month or two to process.
I admit that administering the community service would be difficult – but I think with the help of the council and PSNI and Queen’s/UU and the Students’ Unions it could be achieved.
Then for repeat offenses people get kicked out of their homes instead/as well as kicked off of their course.
If a student is expelled I think it’s highly unlikely that they are going to leave their house – unless forced. (They should also be banned from coming back into that house – possibly).

The second part of the strategy – which is slightly included in the community service – is the necessity to build up community relations between students and non students. And I am not going to pretend this will be easy – by any means. I think it will be easier to turn students round than non students purely because on average students have a 3 or 4 year turn-a-round. Once you start hitting them it will only take 3 or 4 years for the majority of students to get the message. This would be an ongoing campaign and would need to be re-in forced every year to both new and existing students.

I think one issue which really really has to be addressed is the living of non-students in areas such as the Holylands. The universities can only step in and act if it is a student. So why not introduce – Student HMOs. That way we target exactly where/how many student houses are in certain areas. It will remove those who have recently graduated but hang around with students – and I believe that there are a fair few. I think with the introduction of this it will relieve the market for more residents to move in. (If there are residents around, who do want to move in).
I think the building up of the community is essential to any long term plans.

I think another subtle thing the council could do is to promote business competition in the edge of the Holylands areas. This would hopefully increase the value of the houses making some current landlords want to sell up. It will also help to raise the rent of houses closer to the city (obviously this wouldn’t work so well with a Student HMO area). If the rent was raised considerably it would be ‘young professionals’ moving in – *theoretically* without the problems caused by students.

I have to admit I don’t know if they’d be so keen on the last – I might just be paranoid – but I swear their main aim is to drive the value of the houses down… I seriously wouldn’t be surprised if when houses hit an all time low – especially in these circumstances – the council starts buying up houses which would be forced onto the market by their plans.

belfast samizdat said...

It's a very good "epic post". You've raised many interesting points. I want to reply to them in detail, so I'll have some coffee then get back to you.

Dave said...

ah so you get back to people you like?

selective.

belfast samizdat said...

Hi, sorry for the delay in getting back.


The area is a ghost town at the weekends and holidays. This is common in studentified areas across the UK.

In terms of walling the place off, something has to be done to contain the studentification. A UK academic suggested spreading secondary tumours throughout cities. This will destabilise communities around the city centre. Remember, you only need 10% students to send an area spiralling. Once the process starts landlords can trash the whole place then move on.

People living here have been deliberately neglected so that the area can die. We reached that point some years ago. The best thing is to build them new houses. The non-students have already been kicked out. Only a handful remain. You can't and shouldn't force them to leave, but give them a better offer and they'll take it.

Community service sounds like a great idea. In fact compulsory community based service in return for free tuition sounds like a better idea. This will make clear to people that they are part of a society to which they have obligations.

I can tell you now that the universities will not expel students for off-campus activity. They would be sued, and the case would go to the European Court of Human Rights, and they would lose. Even an off-campus contract would be unenforceable.

Landlords will not sell up. The current fall in market values will enable them to buy up more property. What matters to them is income, and students generate enormous amounts of it.

The public vesting of properties in the area is inappropriate for several reasons. Cost; a new build is cheaper than purchasing these houses. Which is better; houses that heat themselves with the sun all year round or houses that are tiny, damp and environmentally unsustainable. Making the slums in Wolseley Street tenable would probably cost more than system build. You can never redress the balance in population here. How do you go from 1% residents to 90% (the stable level)? It's not possible and should not be tried. People should not be imprisoned in this area. It is unbearably cruel to do so.

Professionals used to live here, but, no more.