In November 2015 Manchester Metropolitan University (MMU), along with the Whitworth Gallery and Home, Manchester’s new £25 million arts centre, hosted events for the Homeless Film Festival. They billed it as ‘the first festival of its kind, dedicated to confronting and presenting homeless issues’.1 Just a short walk away from the Homeless Film Festival programme, MMU and Manchester City Council (MCC) were forcibly evicting The Ark – a self-built informal settlement set up by homeless people in Manchester and home to some of the poorest people in the region.
This chapter explores how the major public sector players in Manchester have violently disrupted homeless camps behind a mask of progressive politics, exploiting the social conditions of austerity and using their control of public space to violently marginalise some of the city’s most vulnerable populations for their own ends.
Between 2010 and 2015 Manchester saw a tenfold increase in street homelessness.2 According to Shelter, the housing and homelessness charity, the structural causes of homelessness are:
social and economic in nature, and are often outside the control of the individual or family concerned. These may include: unemployment; poverty; a lack of affordable housing; housing policies; the structure and administration of housing benefit; wider policy developments; such as the closure of long-stay psychiatric hospitals.3
The sharp rise of homelessness in Manchester led to a number of protests from the public and the homeless themselves. These culminated with the Homeless Action March in April 2015 against austerity and the lack of action on homelessness.4 One outcome of the protest was the formation of a homeless camp on public land outside the Town Hall. This was a protest to raise awareness about the unprecedented rise in homelessness in Manchester, but MCC quickly gained a possession order to evict the camp despite having a duty of care to rehouse the residents.
Residents of the camp moved their tents to another area of public land in the city centre but this resulted in another possession order and threat of eviction by MCC. Again they moved their camp and again this was met with another possession order. This continued until July when MCC gained an injunction at Manchester Civil Justice Centre preventing anyone from setting up a camp on public land anywhere else in the city centre, specifically so that the homeless could not relocate to another visible site in the area of the city centre. This came after the Legal Aid Agency announced its refusal to provide legal support to the camp’s residents the day before the case was due to be heard in court on the grounds that it didn’t satisfy the merits test for public funding.
Following the verdict, solicitor Ben Taylor, who stood in at the last minute to represent the Manchester Homeless Camp on a pro bono basis, expressed his concern about MCC’s policy on homelessness, noting that:
[i]t is disappointing that Manchester City Council’s evidence today was that costs incurred in evicting camp sites generally was £100,000 as that money could have been properly spent providing accommodation for the homeless. If they had the situation would perhaps not be as dire as it is now.
As part of the government’s austerity measures, £350 million a year has been cut from its legal aid budget. In a statement released after the injunction was granted, Carita Thomas, legal aid lawyer and Justice Alliance member, spoke in a personal capacity about the implications of the Legal Aid Agency refusing funding and asked:
[h]ow can justice be done or seen to be done if only the council has the chance to properly prepare [its case]? Homeless camp residents should have funding for a lawyer so they are on an equal footing with the council’s lawyers in this complex case, especially as it raises public interest points that deserve a fair hearing for both sides.
The residents of the camp were already victims of austerity through cuts to the welfare system, high unemployment and unaffordable housing. Now they were victims of austerity cuts to legal aid. While an austerity approach to public services had caused so much pain for the residents of the camp, MCC had spent extravagant sums of money ensuring that the camp was removed from high profile public spaces.
It was after this injunction in July that a group of homeless people set up The Ark at the edge of the city centre on Oxford Road, on a patch of unused pavement that the homeless have used for shelter for many years.
It is a highly visible site and by the end of August, MMU and MCC threatened legal action against inhabitants if The Ark wasn’t taken down. MMU was keen to see it removed before students returned to begin the academic year in September 2015. The precise conflict, however, was about ownership of the pavement area that The Ark was located on. The Ark had been built on property belonging to MMU, a disused stretch of land, but a small section also belonged to MCC.
Keen to remove The Ark, MMU and MCC issued a possession claim and in September they were granted possession orders for the removal of The Ark and the eviction of its residents. MCC asserted their case on the grounds that the homeless people who had set up camp were using the space to ‘protest’ against their policies and were in breach of the injunction from July. Court papers were issued charging two individuals with breaching the injunction that had forbidden those occupying tents to protest against MCC’s homeless policies. The offence carried a maximum prison sentence of two years and/or a £5000 fine. The charge was laid despite residents of the camp repeatedly stating that the camp was there to provide a safe refuge for the street homeless of the city5 and not as a protest.
Community Safety Manager, Justin Mundin, employed by MCC, made an affidavit6 in support of the case against the camp. In it he pointed out that:
[v]arious messages of protest have been written on these signs regarding cuts made by the council to its homelessness budget. The signs also display a message about the injunction in place and asks people reading the signs to think about whether the injunction is, ‘Wright or Wrong’. Lastly the signs display a message stating that, ‘Homelessness is created by the Government and does not need to exist in Manchester’. The signs also display messages about money the council has wasted and asks people to stop for a chat with people at the camp.
In the affidavit he made it clear that he had told residents they could potentially ‘be sent to prison’. This message that it is ok to be homeless so long as you don’t complain is reinforced when he highlighted the presence of other homeless people not resident at The Ark:
[t]here are believed to be other persons also rough sleeping on the other side of the road … although these persons are not considered to be in breach of the injunction as they have not at any point been involved with the ongoing protest camps, or indicated any element of protest.
After numerous attempts to evict The Ark, MMU and MCC won a possession order at the fifth hearing of the case in court. The order didn’t come without criticism with one judge slamming MCC, arguing that it was ‘[w]holly inappropriate to seek to commit people to prison in the absence of an allegation of a breach’.7 And another dismissing MMU for ‘serious failures to comply with the rules, practice directions and court orders’.8 Indeed, the attempts made by MCC and MMU to remove The Ark became so desperate and so aggressive it became clear that their motives were not about land ownership but to ensure this visible evidence of their failure to deal with homelessness was removed from public sight.
The Ark’s residents were forcibly evicted and the shelter destroyed by a security team employed by MMU. This happened despite opposition by the local community who could only watch in shock while the camp was ripped apart with Greater Manchester Police in attendance to ensure the eviction ‘passed without incident’. Following the eviction, residents of The Ark released a statement9 describing this ‘unannounced act of brutal social cleansing executed by the corporate “security” forces of MMU and MCC’. The following testimony of one resident indicates the speed and force with which they were removed:
We were forced from homes and safety in the space of 30 minutes, and had our possessions and property unlawfully confiscated, damaged and destroyed … MMU informed us of procedures to retrieve what remained of our things. We followed them, with no reply. MMU withheld tents, food, water, clothing, first aid and fire protection from us overnight. It is only by the persistent efforts of Laura, an MMU alumni, that a van arrived yesterday with the damaged remnants of the eviction. Whatever wasn’t in the van had been skipped, including everything listed above. We were told to call the MMU switchboard to find out if there was any way of getting them back … After several calls, we were informed we had to speak with MMU’s solicitors.
During the eviction it was clear that the removal team was damaging property belonging to residents of The Ark. Understandably distressed by this, one resident, Ryan McPhee, was arrested as he tried to recover his property. Jackson Gadd and Rosa Methol,10 students at MMU, witnessed the arrest and explained what happened:
MMU have come again to evict homeless people that are living on their land and they have arrested Ryan, a homeless person who made this place his home. They didn’t make it clear on what grounds they arrested him. They said something about a breach of the peace. But he was just trying to get his stuff back, which they are likely to throw away.
As the team working for MMU tore down the camp with total disregard for the belongings of its residents, witnesses expressed their anger. ‘Obviously The Ark was not a protest’, said John Neill,11 an MMU student. ‘It was somewhere for people to feel safe and somewhere for people to live.’ He added:
Alan Kane, the head of MMU security and his team were stood watching our protest yesterday and it was no surprise to see them here this morning laughing and joking whilst they were tearing down people’s homes. You have to bear in mind that this is the same MMU management that is quite happy to make a fortune out of students whilst cutting their services and providing appalling standards of accommodation, and the same Manchester City Council that is cutting services and which turfed out hundreds of homeless people in April last year when they shut their refuges … [we] are not surprised by their actions but we are disgusted by it.
Not only had the residents of The Ark suffered indirect violence of austerity through cuts to welfare, a lack of affordable housing and high unemployment. But they had also suffered direct acts of violence through court threats; physical attacks on the camp; damage to property; and ultimately the smashing of the camp for no other reason than being a reminder of the failed policies of austerity. With the number of rough sleepers in Manchester on the increase, this violent eviction seemed unnecessarily cruel to those who turned up to protest. Deyika Nzeribe,12 a local resident, spoke about the hypocrisy of MMU and the City Council. ‘This feels like the first cold day of the year and what are MMU and the City Council doing?’, he asked.
It’s not just that they are banning homeless people, it is them saying ‘You can’t gather together ... you are ok as long as you are on your own in doorways but if you try to gather together for protection, we won’t let you do that’ … It’s pathetic, and the City Council and MMU laud themselves for their ‘corporate social responsibility’.
‘I lived in the camp for two months’, said Quintino Aiello,13 a resident of The Ark:
For the first few weeks the camp really helped me. After that I stayed there to help out other homeless people. It’s the second time they have kicked us out. Both times they have done it without following any procedures. They just turned up at 7am and said ‘You’ve got half an hour to get out’. I feel frustrated because I see the police and they don’t work in the middle for both sides, they just work for MMU. They don’t care.
Nowhere can the violence of austerity be more tangible than this. High unemployment, a depleted welfare system and unaffordable housing left many young people in Manchester living on the streets (see also Chapter 18 by Daniel McCulloch). The camps they built to help one another and feel safe were torn down. They looked to the courts for justice and they weren’t afforded legal aid due to further cuts.
George Osborne said in his 2016 budget speech, ‘The British economy is growing because we didn’t seek short term fixes but pursued a long term economic plan.’14 In a 2016 BBC interview he also said, ‘the UK needed to live within its means to withstand economic shocks’.15 There is no greater economic shock than the one faced by residents of The Ark.
As The Ark was being torn down, MMU were hosting the Homeless Film Festival in Manchester’s new publicly funded £25 million arts centre. And while Manchester’s Labour Council were wining and dining with wealthy landowners at the MIPIM UK (property real estate exhibition),16 telling the world about the financial incentives of their ‘Northern Powerhouse’ initiative and how it is a ‘magnet for growth’ for the region, the Northern Poorhouse was dismantling the homes of its most vulnerable citizens and making sure they remained hidden from view.
The inhumane hypocrisy of these extravagant yet tokenistic gestures towards solving social issues and huge vulgar demonstrations of economic progress and prosperity are all too common and merely serve the interests of those with so much to gain in sustaining the status quo. Indeed, MCC and some of their major public sector partners are set to benefit from £78 million worth of funding from central government for another arts venue due to open in 2019.17 When the rewards being offered by the architects of austerity are so high, it is no wonder these institutions are willing to enforce austerity so violently.
Websites were last accessed 30 November 2016.
1. Details of the Homeless Film Festival are available at: www.homelessfilmfestival.org
2. Alex Hibbert, ‘Charity boss blasts council figures saying there are just 70 homeless people living in Manchester’, Manchester Evening News, 7 December 2015, available at: www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/charity-boss-blasts-council-figures-10564361
3. Shelter’s position is outlined on its website and available at: http://england.shelter.org.uk/campaigns_/why_we_campaign/tackling_homelessness/What_causes_homelessness
4. Salford Star, 15 April 2015, available at: www.salfordstar.com/article.asp?id=2698
5. See details on The Ark’s Facebook page, available at: www.facebook.com/thearkmcr
6. A copy of the affidavit is available at: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6SaWooJh0pVam81RkhMMThDcFE/view?pref=2&pli=1
7. Salford Star, 30 September 2015, available at: www.salfordstar.com/article.asp?id=2938
8. Ibid.
9. End Homelessness Manchester, Statement from The Ark Manchester, 22 October 2015, available at: www.facebook.com/endhomelessnessmcr/posts/170723183272722
10. Interview with author, 20 October 2015, outside The Ark.
11. Ibid.
12. Ibid.
13. Ibid.
14. George Osborne’s speech in full is available at: www.gov.uk/government/speeches/budget-2016-george-osbornes-speech
15. BBC News, ‘Budget 2016: George Osborne warns of cuts of 50p per £100’, 13 March 2016, available at: www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-35796861
16. See the report on website run by the property development company, CoStar, available at: www.costar.co.uk/en/assets/news/2015/March/MIPIM-2015-Northern-Powerhouse-is-once-in-a-generation-chance/
17. BBC News, ‘Manchester to get new £78m theatre named The Factory’, 3December 2014, available at: www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-30314737