"The Chalcots estate super-saver makeover" Says the Times Newspaper!

"Flats in these four tower blocks get a whole new look for just £30,000 by United House"

I have just stumbled on this incredible story in Times Online, so as to be even handed I present the piece whole (everything in quotes is by the Times Author Kasia Maciejowska).

This piece reads almost like a glossy advertisement by United House as a PR exercise.


"Picture the upheaval involved in refurbishing one kitchen. Then multiply this by 439 and add in bathrooms, central heating, floors and windows that must also be modernised, everything being carried out to a strict budget. In this cost-conscious process, the price of a kitchen can be no more than about £3,000, a fraction of the typical six-figure outlay in a deluxe project such as the Rigby & Rigby house in Eccleston Street, Belgravia."

The Chalcots has 717 properties and even if you subtract the 110 leaseholder properties this gives 607 properties so where does Kasia Maciejowska get 439 from and what happened to the fifth tower block?

"You will then have some idea of the vast and challenging task undertaken every day by United House , the construction group that specialises in the regeneration of tower blocks and other council and social housing."

"You should also bear in mind that one prime objective of the work is the improvement of the energy efficiency of the homes - these have often not been modernised since the 1960s. Note too that only a few elderly or particularly vulnerable tenants will be moved into temporary accommodation for the period of the makeover, which can last for months. The rest remain in their homes and have a say in the proceedings: they are entitled to choose which colour schemes and finishes they prefer, for example. You may then be even more amazed at the good-natured enthusiasm of United House's staff. My impression from a day spent on site at the overhaul of the Chalcots estate in Swiss Cottage, North London, is that these workers always put the tenant first."

This is another incredible PR statement; there has been more complaints from residents in this project than any other comparable PFI project in recent years. The complaints run into the many hundreds, Estate blocks Tenant Representatives are busy chasing all the issues. Yes there have been some successful outcomes for some residents, but a substantial number have outstanding problems, which United House have yet to resolve.

"The £66 million Chalcots project involves recladding four 1960s tower blocks, each 22 storeys high, using weatherproof insulating aluminium and installing new bathrooms, kitchens, heating systems, windows and flooring and completely redecorating 439 out of the 660 flats. The work began in May 2006 and United House is on schedule to complete the project, part of the Government's Decent Homes programme for the improvement of social and housing assocation homes, by January 2010."

Here again we have complete story fabrication, the Chalcots comprises four tower blocks of same design and another of entirely different design. The buildings were completed during the period 1967 - 1968. The true cost of this PFI makeover "contract" is £150 million not £66 million as the Times article makes out. Also the project is not completing to "decent homes" standards but an entirely different protocol. In most cases much of the internals of the properties remain unchanged and undecorated from there 1968 appearance! Furthermore, on three buildings the "new" cladding system is de-laminating after only weeks of being erected by the PFIC. One building has so far been completely re-cladded and another two buildings are awaiting the same re-cladding exercise that will take two months each causing misery for residents.

"Given that the majority of United House's projects are ultimately publicly funded, financial efficiency is paramount. “There's no room for the bad weather excuses that are common in construction,” says Colin Dixon, United House's managing director. The company aims to complete the work on four flats every week (each flat takes 12 days to revamp)."

Complete rubbish, some flats have taken nearly two months to complete, some flats still have not been completed after one year of work.

"So how does United House meet its deadline and cost targets? To provide vast numbers of new kitchens and bathrooms with minimal errors and in a short space of time, it has a warehouse where the items required by each home - some bought in, others manufactured by the company itself - are packed together into individual units for each home. This enables the workmen to assemble the parts swiftly, minimising disruption to the tenants."

Many residents have had to have work re-scheduled multiple times because of unavailability of parts, making there internal disruption extend out to 6 or 8 weeks of work.

"It is a refurbishment production line that has been honed to near-perfection over the 44 years since United House began providing heating for council homes as Harp Heating."

The business of making money. It may be said has been honed out to perfection!

"Tower blocks are relatively easy to refurbish because the flats follow a regular pattern and the buildings are recent. However, in the 1960s, there was little concern for insulation. As a result of the refurbishment, the gas bill of one resident went down by £46 in the most recent quarter."

It is on record at official meetings, which I have attended virtually every one that these flats are a nightmare to work on as there was no thought given during there construction to a infrastructure re-fit. For the first one year of this PFI project hundreds of flats were converted into a virtual submarine by having visible 6 copper pipes for the central heating systems exposed all round the properties. After much protest this has been tidied up to a degree.

On the matter of improved insulation that it is reported by Times Author Kasia Maciejowska one resident's GAS bill is down £46 in the most recent quarter. This is complete hogwash since all residents in the "four" blocks pay for gas as a bulk gas supply from the Council and therefore pay a fixed "unmetered" charge. Only Blashford the "fifth" block that Kasia Maciejowska omitted previously have metered GAS. Yet again a tottaly misleading piece of information being reported!

In point of fact heating costs will be increased substantially by Camden over the next couple of years!

"Doing up period homes in Islington, which house many of the borough's council tenants, is considerably less predictable. United House has revamped 2,350 Victorian homes in Islington so far; each property has to be individually surveyed and its exterior preserved in an appropriate style."

Once again this is far from the truth, PFI Islington known as PFI 1 was beset with even worse problems than the Chalcots. The project reached such a low point that the entire PFI team of managers had to be replaced.

"Some local authorities employ United House directly and others fund the refurbishments through Private Finance Initiatives (PFIs). With PFIs, a bank or private lender funds the project and the Treasury repays the bank as the work is completed. Local authorities bid for PFI funding from the Treasury and companies, such as United House, then bid to the local authorities for contracts."

This at least is an entirely correct statement.

"Winning the contracts for these schemes is a slow process - it took three years to negotiate the Chalcots and the Islington contracts, but these were two of the initial six pilot schemes set up in 2003."

"While many developers struggle through the downturn, United House continues to grow. And as demand for social housing soars, it looks well placed to continue."

I have no reason to doubt that this is true, but at a high cost (stress) to the residents often getting sub-standard works with considerable disruption brought about by poor planning and management.

"Fact Box

Tenants can pick from five colour schemes; men like advice, women know what shades they want

The kitchens are designed around tenants' own appliances

The makeover process is democratic. At Chalcots, tenants voted for the large sitting room windows to be retained to keep the great views"

"Details: www.unitedhouse.net"

The author clearly says it all here.

I have felt it vital to set the record straight having read this piece written by the "Times", clearly its journalistic standard has dropped to a new low point. I will be more than happy to publish a reply from the Times editor, should it be sent to me here.


Written and edited by Nigel Rumble 27th April 2009

Article extracts originaly published in The Times. By Kasia Maciejowska February 6, 2009

DNA pioneer concerned about national database

The pioneer of genetic fingerprinting, Professor Sir Alec Jeffries, has said that the Government is risking public support for the national DNA database by holding innocent people’s records.

Professor Jeffries told the Guardian,

“I have significant concerns there [about the size of the database]. That database is currently populated by an unknown number of entirely innocent people. It is not possible to get an accurate number but it appears to be hundreds of thousands.

“My view is very clear that if you have been convicted of a crime then you owe it to society to be retained on that database for catching in the future should you reoffend. But the retention of entirely innocent people is a whole different issue. There is a sort of presumption here that if they haven’t committed any crime now, then they will in the future.”

Chris Huhne, Liberal Democrat Shadow Home Secretary said,

“It demonstrates how out of touch the Government is with public opinion when the inventor of genetic fingerprinting has to tell them how unfair the DNA database is.

“It is unacceptable for the state to store the DNA of innocent people. The European Court agrees, Professor Jeffreys agrees and the public agrees. The Government must bring forward concrete proposals to remove the DNA of those that have done nothing wrong.

“Professor Jeffreys is also right to point out that the DNA database is not the flawless crime-fighting tool ministers would have us believe.”

Please help the campaign to protect innocent people’s DNA by signing this petition at: http://ourcampaign.org.uk/dna

Produced by Home Office Watch Friday, April 17th, 2009

MPs quiz Home Office on abuses

The campaign to protect photographers' rights has reached the House of Commons. Olivier Laurent talks to Conservative MP John Randall, who raised the issue in Parliament

The Home Office says that newly introduced counter-terrorism laws are not designed to prevent photographs being taken in public places, despite widespread concerns - and much evidence - that legislation is being misused to do just that.

The statement was made to Parliament during a wide-ranging debate on public photography rights after Conservative MP John Randall of Uxbridge submitted a question to the Home Secretary on Wednesday 01 April.

Randall took the initiative after becoming aware of the many recent incidents in which police have stopped photographers shooting in the public arena. He cited the example of a 70-year-old photographer who was handed a notice after taking a picture of a house in his neighbourhood in Windsor. The photo included a police car parked on a double yellow line with two police community support officers (PSCOs) inside.

Randall also added that police officers have been, in some cases, abusing the stop-and-search powers they received with Section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000. 'I am acutely aware of the potential for terrorism,' he said. 'We have to look out for such things, but common sense seems to have escaped police officers - or, very often, PCSOs - in some of the cases mentioned.'

Speaking to BJP, Randall said that he thinks the situation is 'absolutely crazy. It seems to be coming from some overzealous police officers'.

Answering Randall's comments, the parliamentary under-secretary of state for the home department, Shahid Malik, said that 'our counter-terrorism laws are not designed or intended to stop people taking photographs. That is simply not their aim. People have the right to take photographs in public places for legitimate reasons and we will uphold that right'.

He added: 'I accept that there are concerns about how some of our laws are being, or might be, applied. Concerns have been expressed about the stop-and-search powers used under section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000. As honorary members will know, section 44 enables the police to stop and search anyone within an authorised area for the purposes of searching for articles of a kind that could be used in connection with terrorism. The powers do not require a reasonable suspicion that such articles exist.'

Malik explained that these powers are useful, but they are 'also wide-ranging, and concerns have been expressed that the power is being used to stop people taking photographs - whether of buildings or of people - within authorised areas. There are also concerns that cameras are being confiscated as part of such searches. Those are genuine concerns that people have raised,' he said. 'I would like to make it clear that section 44 does not prohibit the taking of photographs.'

The parliamentary under-secretary of state for the home department added that it would be issuing guidance to 'ensure that the laws are implemented correctly and that people's liberties are not being infringed upon unnecessarily'.

The government also addressed the issue of the new offence in section 58A of the Terrorism Act 2000, which was inserted by section 76 of the Counter-Terrorism Act 2008. The new set of rules, which BJP exposed earlier this year, targets anyone who 'elicits or attempts to elicit information about (members of armed forces), which is of a kind likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism'. A person found guilty of this offence could be liable to imprisonment for up to 10 years, and to a fine.

However, Malik told MPs that while 'it has been suggested that the new offence could criminalise people taking or publishing photographs of police officers,' the law is in fact designed 'to capture terrorist activity directed at members of the protected groups, which, sadly, we know occurs. An offence might be committed, therefore, if someone provides a person with information about the names, addresses or details of car registration numbers of persons in the protected groups.

'The important thing is that the photographs would have to be of a kind likely to provide practical assistance to terrorists, and the person taking or providing the photograph would have to have no reasonable excuse, such as responsible journalism, for taking it.'

He added: 'I want to be clear about this: the offence does not capture an innocent tourist taking a photograph of a police officer, or a journalist photographing police officers as part of his or her job. It does not criminalise the normal taking of photographs of the police.'

However, speaking to BJP, Randall says that even if the government 'says that it's not what it meant with these laws, the fact is that's what is happening on the streets. I'm afraid that this could be used to intimidate people. In some cases, photographers have been forced to delete pictures.'

Randall also says he fears that legitimate press photographers could be bullied to delete picture of violent police actions during protests. '(Section 44) could be used as an excuse to try to hide such acts.'

BJP will continue to monitor the situation as part of its on-going campaign to protect photographers' rights.

Source Marina Scukina/BJP 8th April 2009

We were wrong, says the Met

The Metropolitan Police is apologising to press photographers covering last week's G20 protests after BJP questioned why they had been prevented from covering a key incident during clashes outside the Bank of England.

According to photographers contacted by BJP, police ordered them to move away from the action, citing Section 14 of the Public Order Act 1986, as they prepared a charge on demonstrators using police dogs.

The incident occurred while police were looking to move and arrest demonstrators last Thursday (02 April), and is thought to be the first time Section 14 has been used to corral journalists.

Section 14 gives police the power to impose conditions on assemblies 'to prevent serious public disorder, serious criminal damage or serious disruption to the life of the community'. Under the act, the police can impose the location and duration of a public assembly, as well as the number of people taking part in it.

It is not, however, designed to prevent photographers reporting on events.

'There was a whole group of journalists by Bank tube station at one point,' photographer (and chairman of the British Press Photographers' Association) Jeff Moore tells BJP. 'Officers were using police dogs on one side to snatch and arrest people on the other side. The police walked up to us and asked us to move away or we would be arrested under Section 14 of the Public Order Act. When we protested the decision, we were given the number of a press officer who only sympathised with us and said it was a police matter,' says Moore. 'Once the operation was over, they put us in a lovely spot, but it was too late and too far away.'

As we reported on our website (BJP-Online.com/news) last week, the move was officially protested the following day by the National Union of Journalists and the British Press Photographers' Association, who also condemned authorities for preventing journalists from leaving the Bank area after police formed a cordon around the demonstration for several hours.

After BJP put these complaints to the Met, a spokeswoman admitted Section 14 was wrongly applied. 'It was used to get people to leave an area,' she told BJP. 'It should not have been used specifically against photographers, and they should have been able to stay (in the immediate area) after showing their press cards. The Metropolitan Police apologises if that was not the case.'

The apology comes after both the NUJ and BPPA praised police communication with journalists on the day, but cited a number of incidents about which they remain concerned.

'We're unhappy that photographers were pinned in with the demonstrators during the Bank protests,' says NUJ freelance organiser John Toner. 'It appeared that if photographers wanted to leave the area, they first had to agree to be photographed. We find this unacceptable,' he says.

The Met spokeswoman told BJP that up to 6000 demonstrators, 200 were intent on causing trouble, so police officers were charged with obtaining the best evidence of the worst offences, leading them to take photos of anyone leaving the area, even press photographers'.

The NUJ hopes to discuss these matters with police during an official debrief in a few weeks time. 'Overall, the police were helpful,' says Toner, 'but there were these very serious and unacceptable problems and we intend to take these up.'

There were also unconfirmed reports of officers using the Terrorism Act 2000 to force protestors at the 'Climate Camp' demonstration in Bishopsgate to delete their images of police officers.

Source: BJP 8th April 2009

G20 and Protests in the City on a sunny April Fool's Day

The G20 parties have started; the mass media circus is here in the City, well-rehearsed smiling faces are on show by G20 leaders. Lets hope that the G20 Talks are fruitful, that protests are peaceful and that everyone walks away with a sense of participating in what is seen by many as the last real chance to halt the recession taking hold in all economies. In the 1930's countries were seen to take unilateral positions adopting "protectionist policies", this historically worsened the recession into the “Big Depression”.

This must not be allowed to happen again, all G20 member countries must agree to actively participate in a multi-lateral policy of financial control measures. Already, we have “fighting” talk from France and now Germany wishing to put a more unilateral line into Europe. This would create a destabilisation effect to the G20 accords.

There must be a cohesive and affective adaptation of monetary policies by all G20 members’ countries.

In terms of the other melt downs taking place not just in the banking system but on our own Planet, such as the polar ice melts taking place at increasing speed. Climate change is happening fast, we have at best less than 10 years to check global warming and CO2 emissions, this represents not only a potential disaster in store for all generations to come on a scale unknown before. The current World “Financial Credit" problems will pale into insignificance by any comparison.

Written by: Nigel Rumble 1st April 2009