One of the questions we are often asked concerning the refugees at Rehoboth is why they are housed in the country rather in the bigger centres of population. Some think that it is part of a deliberate policy to disperse them for various reasons, including to spread the load on housing, education etc. Others think that it is preferable to keep families in close proximity for their mutual support. The problem with housing a large group, even in a big city like Toulouse, is being highlighted in the central court tomorrow when eviction notices may be enforced on 200 refugees who have been squatting in a building scheduled for demolition by the housing association Habitat Toulouse. The families have been there since April and are not the only inhabitants - there are people there who rent their apartments, but who also have been told to leave. Both groups of inhabitants are calling on others to show solidarity by demonstrating outside the court tomorrow. Some of the clothes and goods donated by Tag readers last autumn were destined for the association supporting these very refugees.
Habitat Toulouse is accused of wanting to demolish a perfectly good building where it would be cheaper to up-grade and find rent-paying families than to demolish and re-build. As soon as any apartment becomes vacant they take out the doors and windows and destroy the bathrooms. Many of us traditionally hate the idea of squatters as free-loaders depriving owners of their rightful property, but with a shortage of social housing a building owned by the local authority is surely an ideal opportunity to house families in need, be they refugees or indigenous, at an affordable price.
comments to taglines82@gmail.com
