Field Study's Man in E11 explores the interests of children in the redevelopment of Utopia via the M11 Link Road

I returned to the London Borough of Waltham Forest Archives and Local Studies Library on 8th November to continue looking through the collection of local newspaper reports about the building of the A12/M11 Link Road.

One of the articles concerns how central government (then Conservative) acted in order to protect its local interests, i.e. the safety of constituency seats, while still pushing ahead with national policies which were unpopular on a local level; new road building being one of them.

DON’T LOOK AT ME: JENKIN. Extra Series, 4/9/1984 – reports on Patrick Jenkin’s denial that he had a hand in deciding the controversial route of the South Woodford to Barking Relief Road. Patrick Jenkin, MP (Environment Secretary) decided to ask Ian Gow, MP (Minister for Housing & Construction) to reach a decision on his behalf, regarding road building in and near his constituency of Wanstead and Woodford.

30 years later, who has benefited from those decisions and various connections which can be made to them? The protection and development of ‘interests’ – be they public and/or private, the poor and/or the rich – exists as an extensive site of labyrinthine tensions. One of the characteristics of this site might be that of nepotism.

This week Boris Johnson was approached by Channel 4 News about his role in the procurement of and tendering for a major redevelopment project in London.


The project involves a Chinese company, ABP, which may have abused human rights (in China) and received preferential treatment in its £billion bid for the redevelopment of Royal Albert Docks - a publicly owned site - and one which will probably rely in part for its redevelopment on the A12. When interviewed by Michael Crick for C4 news, ‘BJ’ defended his role in the tendering process. He countered doubts about the integrity of the tendering process, by saying London would get growth – ‘I think it’s our job to do what we can to get investment in the city and to get jobs and growth’. (6.33-6.39) The tendering process appears to have involved high level Tory connections, including the wife of Lord Bates, Xuelin Black.


Who will the jobs and growth be for? ‘BJ’ didn't mention homes in his defence of the relationship with ABP, although the redevelopment plans include residential properties of some sort. Who will be able to afford to live and work there?

I am sceptical about the claims made for ‘affordable’ housing development in London. What sort of social conscience creates so called ‘poor doors’? Are we in the midst of a clearance from central London – e.g. the situation with the New Era estate? Where and how will all the displaced people live?

One of the consequences of development and growth in Central/Inner London might be the growth of poor quality, exploitative housing in the outer London boroughs. Rogue, slum landlords, such as those prosecuted recently by Redbridge Council, will exploit the situation created by what seems to be a cohort of Tory speculators buying up former social housing. Cash strapped local authorities are struggling to maintain various social services and may be unable to keep up with the need and demand for housing standard controls.

I wonder about the strategic foresight of the Thatcher government as it embarked on its new era project in 1979. Ian Gow, a devout Thatcherite, was assassinated by the IRA in 1990. His legacy, aside from nominal decision making on transport matters, was the sell-off of council housing. Is it any surprise that one of his sons, Charles Gow, owns a property company with nearly 40 ex council flats on an estate in south London? This ownership relies on a system of unfair taxation, according to George Monbiot.

A new generation of landlords with property empires founded on the Conservative housing policies of the early eighties seems to be creating conditions for other sorts of landlords identified in the Redbridge council reports. Increasingly, iniquity and inequality seem to be the pervasive forces in society. 
One of the more recent political scandals which epitomized a growing sense of social or societal iniquity and inequality was that of parliamentary expenses. BernardJenkin, an MP (Harwich and North Essex - and son of thee Patrick Jenkin, The Right Honourable, The Lord Jenkin of Roding) was ordered to repay housing/accommodation expenses he had wrongly claimed. Did Lord Jenkin really pay back the expenses on behalf of his son?  The expenses scandal represented, as a whole parliamentary affair, a popular perception of manipulation or exploitation of public funds/property/trust for personal/private gain, and of a political class rotten to the core.


The building of the M11 Link road involved the demolition of homes, many of which were social housing. My exploration of the M11 Link Road and E11, the area through which that road cuts, may also be an exploration of political inheritance and continuing displacement. The darkly comic absurdity of these (my) connections is (I think) accentuated by awareness that, ahead of the APEC Summit in China, the government there ordered the temporary shutting down of factories and imposed restrictions on road use in order to avoid the embarrassment of toxic smog blighting the political gathering. A more recent article in, Waltham Forest Echo, The M11 Link Road: 20 Years On, reflects on the legacy of the road and how or why asthma has disproportionately afflicted so many children in east London - a developmental problem Boris Johnson seems reluctant to address.

Comments