The history of the North London evictions is included both here and on our website. Here are the links again:

http://www.itv.com/news/london/story/2013-03-11/families-evicted-from-met-owned-property/
http://occupylondon.org.uk/archives/25529

Yes, issues are more complex than can appear in a short, 2-week news update. We try to make up for this in subsequent sections of the newsletter. For example, the changes made to the NHS competition regulations are cosmetic – several links in the “Campaigns & Petitions” section help the reader to learn more.

Divisions within the Tory party have been extensively reported now by mainstream media for some time so hardly qualify as “cherry-picking”.

On the issue of the bedroom tax, the latest changes:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/patrick-butler-cuts-blog/2013/mar/14/bedroom-tax-disabled-children-exemption-u-turn

provide an indicator of the concerns regarding effects it is expected to have on the most vulnerable members of our society. The consequences on disabled people, for example, are projected to be devastating. You can read more details about it in the legal challenge described here:

http://wearespartacus.org.uk/bedroom-tax-undermines-disabled-peoples-human-rights/

We are always open to change and dissent, self-criticism included. This is why the newsletter always includes educational material, preferably covering both emotions (see e.g. forgiveness forum) and the intellect.

If you feel that there are specific issues/changes that we are still not addressing, please feel free to make them known either here, through e-mail (outreach@occupylsx.org) or by blogging on our site.

There needs to be more clarity about the issues mentioned in this newsletter. For instance, there is no information about the mass evictions in North London and those people there who are lamenting receiving ‘only £500 per week in benefits’. I am quoting from an email I received from one of the groups there which is demanding protests of these landlords while also asking for people to protest the benefits cuts. There is no information as to who why these landlords are evicting people (ie. might they have justifiable reasons in some cases, might they wish to raise the rent since their costs have increased, etc). It is also hard to sympathise with those people who receive double in benefits than most of us earn in a week.

As for critiquing only the ‘wealthy’ who have ex-council flats, it is more common that ex-council tenants–the formerly poor–bought their flats and are now also among the ranks of landlords, greedy or not remains to be seen. Where is the social critique of this fact that in the UK the right to buy scheme brought public housing down to 12%?? Our lack of self-critique here is shocking and we need to begin to discuss openly the problems of the right to buy scheme and the preference of council housing for women with children, and the concomitant issues of young women having children merely to get benefits, and all the social ills that we know well do exist.

As much as I would like to deny it, I cannot but admit that there is an enormous amount of abuse of council housing and of benefits in this country. As a fervent social activist I am a bit disheartened to read such postings as this above and see zero self-reflection of our own. We really do need to be honest and understand that the bedroom tax, as ridiculous as a title this is, is really asking that people who live in too large a space give it up for someone else who needs a larger space. I personally know of individual people living in two bedroom, two floor council flats who refuse to give it up for a smaller flat so that a small family could move into theirs. I also know of a lot of council flat and benefits abuse.

I would like to see more critical honesty in the newsletters and this group’s approach to social activism. I have little patience with this form of party politics which attempt consistently to lambast the Tory party simply for attempting to make cuts where needed. I cannot really argue against some of what they are doing although I do agree with certain measures.

If we are to get anywhere as a forum which seeks to make changes in our society, we need to look at ourselves and current social policies which although part of our social fabric for many generations is now leading to a society of dependency and entitlement. As we demand changes from the wealthiest members of our society, so too must we make changes from our end.