Islington Social Services Creeping Cuts Affecting Vulerable Adults and Their Carers

Islington Social Services Creeping Cuts Affecting Vulerable Adults and Their Carers

Islington Planning Department

14 Months ago as the new Chair of our Tenants and Residence Association (TRA)  I had no experience and had to learn as I went along with little or no support and much misinformation. The TRA undertook to deal with a very loud extractor fan beneath one of the buildngs which was tantamount to a motorbike engine left running for most of the day and every evening.  It was sited less than 3 meters from dwellings and the noise and smells were making people ill.  Many of the tenants in this block are classified as those in ‘Hard to reach groups’.   Those most affected tend to be those who are disempowered and disenfranchised with various social problems. The TRA contacted Islington Council to report This problem.

I spent a day telephoning different departments but to no avail as staff would not help me find the appropriate person to talk to.  This culminated in the writing an email of complaint which was immediately responded to and Planning’s response was that it was unfair.  This was the beginning of 14 months of delays whereby the tenants in the most affected block collected a petition which was handed in to Homes for Islington (HFI) and they acknowledged its receipt. 

The planning officers gave retrospective planning permission to this extractor fan.  However, the officers stated that they had, in fact, done a consultation whereby they had emailed, contacted every flat in the block, posted signs and placed an ad in the local newspaper.   These instruments of engagement which were supposed to allow participation in this planning process were not effective although Islington Planning Department did assure me and others that they had actually done this.  Furthermore, following this a member of the TRA did door to door consultation and not one tenant recalls either being consulted by mail, seeing a poster or advertisement in the local newspaper which was claimed.    Due to this consultation inadequate retrospective planning permission was granted.

However, it was learned later that the restaurant rented their space from London Borough of Islington (LBI) and I contacted this departed.  They were unaware of any consultation or the existence of this extractor fan or that they had planning permission.  This was in breach of their tenancy agreement and the restaurant was ordered to remove it.  However, a meeting was called where the TRA was uninvited at the 11^th hour which is contrary to their requirement to consult with all stakeholders.   HFI was unaware that this meeting was taking place and once informed by the TRA gate crashed the meeting.  It was agreed at this meeting that the restaurant would be allowed to have a suitable extractor fan which adhere to the DEFRA guidelines.  However, the restaurant did not act within the time frame which meant more delays.  They were in fact given notice to quite by LBI.  This fan has now been made less noisy and the tenants have enjoyed a peaceful Christmas but not because of the LBI planning department.

Upon reflection what may have been done differently? 

·         The TRA could have been trained to deal with this more effectively as our shortcomings were apparent due to our inexperience and lack of knowledge.

·         It was left to the TRA to discover the DEFRA guidelines and that the fan failed to meet many of its requirements resulting in not only nuisance (Noise and Odours) but importantly safety issues which are very disturbing.

·         The Planning Department could have used more appropriate instruments of engagement rather than ‘tick box exercises’ in line with their own policy document and to contact all the stakeholders and be prepare to form partnerships with HFI who employ a full-time community engagement officer and LBI Commercial Lettings.

·         It would have been advantageous for Planning to be aware of the social position of all tenants and been  prepared to engage creatively using partnerships and saving on the cost.

·         Changed their vernacular using less legalese to enable planning to engage with local communities in line with their own policy documents.

Thus, this fan which was spilling out grease and likely to be a fire hazard, the noise and odours affecting the safety, lives and wellbeing and of tenants would not have occurred if the DEFRA guidelines had been adhered to from the beginning.  Indeed their consultation was ineffective as many tenants were in the ‘hard to reach groups’ suggesting that a review of how planning engages with the public and encourages participation of all stakeholder groups must be reviewed in line with their own policies.

References:

Guidance on the Control of Odour and Noise from Commercial Kitchen Exhaust Systems (2005) DEFRA. Available at: http://www.defra.gov.uk/publications/files/pb10527-kitchen-exhaust-0105.pdf (Accessed 26/12/2011)

Planning -Statement of Community Involvement (2006) London Borough of Islington. On-line.  Available at: http://www.islington.gov.uk/DownloadableDocuments/Environment/Pdf/ldf_pack/STATEMENTofCOMMUNITYINVOLVEMENT_adopted_20JULY_06.pdf (Accessed 26/12/2011)

Recently a local group organised a ‘Finsbury Sports Day’ in Islington with the intent of piggybacking the message around health inequalities in an area where health inequalities are a big issue.  Letters were sent out to all the major businesses but we had no replies.  Invitations were sent out to all the principles political leaders and many did not respond.  However, although the local ward councillors and the mayor attended and some small businesses gave some prizes, the support from out major political leaders would have been a step in the right direction.  However, these Westminster elites continually site these inequalities as  political sound bites,  they have failed miserably to support a bottom up initiative where local people were attempting to address this issue.  If our political leaders who are burying their heads in Westminster are failing to support community leaders at the bottom, then what message does this send out to those living with social deprivation?

To take on the role of a community leader comes at a great cost to the individual as managing volunteers is unlike managing staff.  The very nature of being a volunteer means that they give their resources freely.  They are not 'dogooders' but have  a sense of social responsibility and are often put upon to fulfill a role without training or support which means that to organise a community event is often  highly stressful as their reputation is on the line.  The support of large businesses making huge profits would go some way in helping the event be successful. 

Indeed, national politicians who express sound bites about issues volunteers are trying to address is unhelpful if they do not make the effort to show up on the day.  Furthermore,  many talk of coming from these very backgrounds before they became elite. 

If health and social indequality is to be tackled effectively then local voluntary groups, the local councils and our national policians must demonstrate a unified and intergrated approach to local issues.