By continuing to use the site you agree to our Privacy & Cookies policy

Your browser seems to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser.


Your browser is no longer supported

For the best possible experience using our website we recommend you upgrade to a newer version or another browser.


Secret london housing plan blasted as 'social cleansing’

A London council is being accused of planning a programme of ‘social cleansing’ by demolishing council estates

The London Evening Standard, claims to have uncovered secret Hammersmith and Fulham council plans to demolish more than 3,500 flats and houses in the borough, a move that would break up areas that have traditionally voted Labour, to build new homes to attract residents with higher incomes.

The report says council estates ‘deliver a risible return on assets.’ It calls for council rents to be increased to market levels, a move that it estimates would raise £5 billion a year nationwide that could be spent on building new homes.

One document shows that if rents in Hammersmith increased to private levels, a two-bed council flat currently costing £85 a week would go up to £360 a week. It is claimed that, to placate tenants, extra housing benefit would be paid but the aim would be to end the divide between public and private housing.

One memo describes a council estate as ‘barracks for the poor’, while another says social housing is ‘not about giving somebody a £1million home for life’.

Andrew Slaughter, the Labour MP for Ealing, Acton and Shepherd’s Bush, said: ‘Using the language of social cleansing, and with no respect for age, vulnerability or human rights, the Tories propose to destroy communities. This is social engineering on a grand scale and it is being recommended to David Cameron as the way forward in housing.’

Council leader Stephen Greenhalgh, who also heads David Cameron’s Conservative Councils Innovation Unit, said: ‘It’s ludicrous to talk about “social cleansing”. That’s rubbish from neanderthals in the Labour Party. Every time someone comes up with an idea on housing, they are branded as having an ulterior, nasty motive. I make no apology for having a bold vision. We are not stepping back and as and when we have specific plans, we will talk to people about it.’

Hammersmith and Fulham’s newly published Local Development Framework includes options to demolish large council estates such as those in White City, West Kensington, Hammersmith and Fulham.

Readers' comments (2)

  • At last, someone is attempting to remove these hideous buildings from a city with such a wealth of historical architecture. Surely a more altruistic alternative to preserving these monstrosities would be to move the deserving people within them to someone more humane, and less suicide inducing.

    Unsuitable or offensive?

  • Anonymous, though possibly well meaning, this view is seriously misguided.
    These are not merely 'hideous buildings', but represent homes and communities.

    The idea of the forced break up and dispersal of long and well established communities is frankly barbaric - especially as the motivations are so nakedly financial.

    Unsuitable or offensive?

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment.

Related Jobs

Sign in to see the latest jobs relevant to you!

The searchable digital buildings archive with drawings from more than 1,500 projects

AJ newsletters