4 ms·

In London there is a wide array of low level nuisance and antisocial behaviour that the authorities are unwilling/unable to tackle. Drug dealing and use, drink

In London there is a wide array of low level nuisance and antisocial behaviour that the authorities are unwilling/unable to tackle. Drug dealing and use, drinking on the street, prostitues loitering, homeless people begging, women being catcalled and harassed, groups of youths congregating, littering, etc. are all commonplace in truly public spaces. Many of these 'pseudo-public spaces' (think Granary Square, More London, Canary Wharf) are enormously popular with families and businesspeople precisely because they have security personnel who do a good job of tackling these things.

nkoren 9y ago
Good grief, which London do you live in? I've lived here for nine years, mostly in Brixton and Bermondsey. > Drug dealing and use Barely visible compared to virtually every other city I've been to > prostitues loitering Haven't been a thing in London for a decade, from what people tell me. Certainly never seen it. Evidently that business has moved wholly online. > homeless people begging A fraction of what it is in any comparable American city -- but certainly on the rise in recent years due to Tory policies. > women being catcalled and harassed This is definitely an actual problem. > groups of youths congregating Good grief, how is this even a problem? They're citizens and that's their right. A city which helps young people to congregate is doing its job. More power to them, provided they behave well. > littering Yes, that's sometimes a problem. Not so much associated with youth, in my experience: yobs come in all ages. > Many of these 'pseudo-public spaces' (think Granary > Square, More London, Canary Wharf) are enormously popular > with families and businesspeople precisely because they > have security personnel who do a good job of tackling > these things. There's nothing that prevents public servants from doing the same -- except of course that they're underpaid and diminishing in number, thanks to austerity policies. The bargain which is making here is: 1. Reduce taxes / enforcement of taxes on large corporations 2. De-fund and generally decrease the quality of public service 3. Shift the burden of responsibility for providing said services onto said large corporations, who now provide a facsimile of the commons, minus inconvenient concepts like civil rights (right to assemble, speech, etc). 4. Use people's growing discontent with public services to argue for lower taxes. Go back to 1 and repeat. This is then propped up by a "Broken Britain" narrative like your own, which is, forgive the bluntness, tabloid-fueled bullshit. Despite the the government's diligent efforts to undermine public services, London remains one of the cleanest and cities on the planet, and is certainly doing better than at any point in its history.
- PJDK 9y ago
  The world isn't going to hell in a hand basket, but take a stroll past the McDonald's in Brixton of a weekend evening and you will find some drug dealers.
- gilleain 9y ago
  Evidently not the same parts of London that I see (for the past 40 or so years): > Drug dealing and use Literally every day. There's a man who sits on the next doorstep that I call 'Mr Subtle' as he is continuously 'reading' a newspaper. He has many friends who stop by for a quick chat. Then they smoke drugs that he has sold them. > homeless people begging Every day. Also stealing from Primark, sleeping in tents on the street, pretending to fall in front of traffic, pretending to read maps then asking for change, etc. Certainly different parts of London have different homeless populations, but Camden and central London are not great.
  - joosters 9y ago
    What have these issues got to do with public/private spaces? The ownership of the land won't solve drug use, nor will it end homelessness. All that happens is the problem gets pushed elsewhere.
    - gilleain 9y ago
      Agreed that we've drifted off-topic. Private spaces wont solve drug use or homelessness, but it could certainly affect it. It's harder to sleep on the streets if there is nowhere to go.
      - nkoren 9y ago
        > It's harder to sleep on the streets if there is nowhere to go. I'm puzzled by what kind of psyche underlies a statement like this. I'm sorry to frame it in these terms, but honestly it seems... evil to me. Do you not understand that for many people, sleeping on the street is last remaining alternative to death? Take away the ability to sleep on the street, and you are killing people. If that is your intention, there are faster and more humane ways to do it. Or do you believe that that were it not for the myriad comforts of the streets, the homeless would simply go back to paying off their mortgages or at least crashing on friends' sofas? Because if that's what you believe, you're simply wrong. Homelessness is a last resort. (And no, the government services which one ought to be able to avail oneself of are no longer always available. Particularly if you are a working-age male, it is often virtually impossible to prove to a social worker that you are not "voluntarily homeless", which then disqualifies you from receiving help.) I'd like to believe that nobody participating in this discussion is that malicious or that ignorant. If you can show me a third way, I'd genuinely appreciate it.
newhere420 9y ago
Granary Square and More London are in areas that don't tend to have that much of the issues you mentioned. Canary Wharf is busy in the week because it's full of skyscrapers. But I live just round the corner from it, and it's dead in the evenings or at weekends unless there's a special event going on, despite the relative safety. Other public areas in the surrounding neighbourhoods tend to be a lot busier. And actually, there's a large group of young drug dealers that regularly hang out in the west area of the Canary Wharf development. That said, the private security forces do indeed do a good job of keeping these areas safe, and free of threatening homeless people and such. Still debatable whether or not that's a thing we should be solving by privatising public spaces...

nkoren 9y ago

Good grief, which London do you live in? I've lived here for nine years, mostly in Brixton and Bermondsey. > Drug dealing and use Barely visible compared to virtually every other city I've been to > prostitues loitering Haven't been a thing in London for a decade, from what people tell me. Certainly never seen it. Evidently that business has moved wholly online. > homeless people begging A fraction of what it is in any comparable American city -- but certainly on the rise in recent years due to Tory policies. > women being catcalled and harassed This is definitely an actual problem. > groups of youths congregating Good grief, how is this even a problem? They're citizens and that's their right. A city which helps young people to congregate is doing its job. More power to them, provided they behave well. > littering Yes, that's sometimes a problem. Not so much associated with youth, in my experience: yobs come in all ages. > Many of these 'pseudo-public spaces' (think Granary > Square, More London, Canary Wharf) are enormously popular > with families and businesspeople precisely because they > have security personnel who do a good job of tackling > these things. There's nothing that prevents public servants from doing the same -- except of course that they're underpaid and diminishing in number, thanks to austerity policies. The bargain which is making here is: 1. Reduce taxes / enforcement of taxes on large corporations 2. De-fund and generally decrease the quality of public service 3. Shift the burden of responsibility for providing said services onto said large corporations, who now provide a facsimile of the commons, minus inconvenient concepts like civil rights (right to assemble, speech, etc). 4. Use people's growing discontent with public services to argue for lower taxes. Go back to 1 and repeat. This is then propped up by a "Broken Britain" narrative like your own, which is, forgive the bluntness, tabloid-fueled bullshit. Despite the the government's diligent efforts to undermine public services, London remains one of the cleanest and cities on the planet, and is certainly doing better than at any point in its history.

PJDK 9y ago
The world isn't going to hell in a hand basket, but take a stroll past the McDonald's in Brixton of a weekend evening and you will find some drug dealers.
gilleain 9y ago
Evidently not the same parts of London that I see (for the past 40 or so years): > Drug dealing and use Literally every day. There's a man who sits on the next doorstep that I call 'Mr Subtle' as he is continuously 'reading' a newspaper. He has many friends who stop by for a quick chat. Then they smoke drugs that he has sold them. > homeless people begging Every day. Also stealing from Primark, sleeping in tents on the street, pretending to fall in front of traffic, pretending to read maps then asking for change, etc. Certainly different parts of London have different homeless populations, but Camden and central London are not great.
- joosters 9y ago
  What have these issues got to do with public/private spaces? The ownership of the land won't solve drug use, nor will it end homelessness. All that happens is the problem gets pushed elsewhere.
  - gilleain 9y ago
    Agreed that we've drifted off-topic. Private spaces wont solve drug use or homelessness, but it could certainly affect it. It's harder to sleep on the streets if there is nowhere to go.
    - nkoren 9y ago
      > It's harder to sleep on the streets if there is nowhere to go. I'm puzzled by what kind of psyche underlies a statement like this. I'm sorry to frame it in these terms, but honestly it seems... evil to me. Do you not understand that for many people, sleeping on the street is last remaining alternative to death? Take away the ability to sleep on the street, and you are killing people. If that is your intention, there are faster and more humane ways to do it. Or do you believe that that were it not for the myriad comforts of the streets, the homeless would simply go back to paying off their mortgages or at least crashing on friends' sofas? Because if that's what you believe, you're simply wrong. Homelessness is a last resort. (And no, the government services which one ought to be able to avail oneself of are no longer always available. Particularly if you are a working-age male, it is often virtually impossible to prove to a social worker that you are not "voluntarily homeless", which then disqualifies you from receiving help.) I'd like to believe that nobody participating in this discussion is that malicious or that ignorant. If you can show me a third way, I'd genuinely appreciate it.

newhere420 9y ago

Granary Square and More London are in areas that don't tend to have that much of the issues you mentioned. Canary Wharf is busy in the week because it's full of skyscrapers. But I live just round the corner from it, and it's dead in the evenings or at weekends unless there's a special event going on, despite the relative safety. Other public areas in the surrounding neighbourhoods tend to be a lot busier. And actually, there's a large group of young drug dealers that regularly hang out in the west area of the Canary Wharf development. That said, the private security forces do indeed do a good job of keeping these areas safe, and free of threatening homeless people and such. Still debatable whether or not that's a thing we should be solving by privatising public spaces...