Monday, 03 November 2008

Benchioners' anti-social behaviour

London bench 1 They carry sticks, discuss the price of bleach, and reminisce about the blitz. Some are arthritic and drink lucozade. So when they congregate on the park benches you know to expect trouble. Sometimes they stay out til three in the afternoon. They can be noisy and very intimidating.

The Telegraph reports today on a gang of pensioners aged between 69 and 96 whose behaviour, gathering on four benches on an estate in south-east London, is a cause of local concern:

'Neighbours complained of noise and nuisance and the local housing association proposed to disperse the gang by removing the benches.'

Someone's being monumentally daft, but there's a serious point. It's only possible because of some too-familiar themes - a culture of blame and assertive intolerance, and the relentless marginalisation of older people. One wants to ask how come any authority can get itself into such a mess; but of course in this low-interaction, risk-averse contracted-responsibility culture, people can complain about anything and require an agency to take action.

3 Nov 2008 13:45:37 | Neighbourhood relations, Space and place

The comments to this entry are closed.

NEXT POST
Feeding frenzy coming up? If now is the time of the neighbourhood online network, it could be all about feeds. William Perrin asks the 'wifm' (what's in it for me?) question about local volunteer-generated material being gobbled up by other sites without return. I quite liked his closing metaphor: 'Have a tradesman’s entrance to the walled garden for content to come in and out but send individual members of the public through the turnstiles.'
PREVIOUS POST
What have neighbourhoods got to do with designing-out crime? Policy-makers still struggle to consider the local context of changes they would like to see. Here's the Home Office announcing new investment in designing-out crime, bringing industry, the public sector, designers and crime prevention experts and victims together. The programme is expected to come up with design-led ideas and develop 'solutions to a wide range of crime-related problems,' including: Schools – design solutions to reduce problems such as bullying, fighting and petty theft. ‘Hot’ products – innovations to make personal electronics more ‘crime-proof’. Housing - embedding design-led crime reducing approaches in the planning and construction of houses. Alcohol-related crime – to reduce the harm caused by alcohol-related criminal behaviour. Business crime – using design to minimise crimes such as shoplifting. At least there's nothing there about graffiti; but what about neighbourhoods? Does the impact of local environment not impinge on the consciousness of those who set up this initiative? My guess, and it's just a guess, is that initial discussions among officials may have included 'Neighbourhoods' as a heading but it was thought just too difficult, too political, or too inconclusive. A pity, because a new initiative which revisited the tensions between new urbanism and 'designing-out-crime,' while taking account of the new surveillance culture, recent experience of home zones, the Manual for Streets and so on, would have been welcome.

Kevin Harris

Search

My Other Accounts

Recent Comments