20-01-2016 2:09 PM
20-01-2016 2:16 PM
In those circumstances, I wouldn`t mind what colour the door was painted.
Sky blue pink with green spots for all I would care
20-01-2016 3:53 PM
Nothing wrong with a bit of red......
20-01-2016 5:16 PM
I doubt it was deliberate discrimination, it seems the landlord company has a lot of properties with red doors - probably a job lot of red paint.
But they are going to be re-painted now.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tees-35358925
20-01-2016 7:01 PM
Mine's Silver
It's life Jim, but not as WE know it.
Live long and prosper.
20-01-2016 7:11 PM
Well Mines Brand New And Red
But I Would'nt Mind A Great Big New Television
20-01-2016 7:19 PM
Red doors? Red doors? Why don't they just give Mick Jagger a call, he'll soon sort it out.
20-01-2016 7:30 PM
We were talking about Doors Sir, Ones Chest hair colour is ones own business.
20-01-2016 8:28 PM - edited 20-01-2016 8:29 PM
I thought you'd be responding about head hair seeing as you have so little and I have plenty.
It's life Jim, but not as WE know it.
Live long and prosper.
21-01-2016 1:51 PM
They moan about the harsh conditions in the country from whence they came, and probably rightly so, they are given a house in a safe and pleasant environment in which to live, and they gripe about the colour of their front door. Beggars belief. Housing Associations, as someone reiterated, buy their paint in bulk, so their housing stock is usually uniform. And why should the colour red denote, or have any bearing as to the nationality of the individual living behind it ?
Perhaps they should have asked them when they moved in if they'd like a blue door, black, green, yellow, brown, or a white one. Or if they'd prefer a nice pastel shade instead ? Shame on the landlord.
21-01-2016 4:09 PM
Isn't the point being made that the colour of the door identifies the occupants as immigrants and that some low-lifes have used this knowledge to light fires, scratch graffiti on the doors and generally make those living behind the red doors feel unsafe. If the colour is unique to this association it's as good as sticking a sign on the door.
21-01-2016 4:14 PM
And incidentally the houses aren't owned by a housing association but by a very profitable business owned by one of the richest tycoons in the North-East and rented out to that venerable organisation G4S
21-01-2016 5:00 PM
It's a storm in a tea cup, The old council estates used to be painted the same in many areas and Housing associations have carried on the tradition in order to standardise paint and other material sourcing. Nothing to do with the homes being owned by a wealthy man or rented to a privately owned security company unless of course you are opposed to private enterprise in its many and varied forms.
21-01-2016 5:23 PM
Bit more than a storm in a teacup:
In every grubby terraced house he was placed by G4S, the outsourcing company contracted by the home office to provide shelter for asylum seekers, the 21-year-old Afghan experienced the same problems: stones thrown at the windows and abuse hurled in his face by youths in tracksuits who would pedal away on bicycles when challenged.
21-01-2016 5:29 PM
Not against capitalism at all - good luck to them if we allow certain companies to fail in what they have been employed to do and yet still employ them - e.g. G4S.
The concern over the door colours is not one over motives, you may well be correct, as Jomast have claimed, that the doors were all painted the same colour because that was the colour they had available - I don't understand though why when one tenant repainted their door white Jomast came round and repainted it red - the resident being told that it was company policy!
My concern is that over 4 years ago this issue was raised with Jomast and not getting any 'satisfaction' from them concerns were passed to the Commons Home Affairs Committee, the National Audit Office and the local MP. In September 2012 a representative from G4S was asked on the Today programme if they would be changing the policy of red doors and gave the blunt answer 'no'. So claims from G4S that they weren't aware of the problem but now that they are they will be repainting the doors is nonsense.
G4S and Jomast as their sub-contractors were contractually employed to supply housing but to do so in a manner that took into account their 'special circumstances', their welfare and also to assist in residents making contact with local services and charities.
As i said earlier, good luck to them if they can get paid for not doing what they were employed to do!
21-01-2016 5:53 PM
There are estates in many towns and cities where such behaviour takes place without reference to Asylum seekers.
21-01-2016 5:59 PM
@fallen-archie wrote:There are estates in many towns and cities where such behaviour takes place without reference to Asylum seekers.
All sorts of people get attacked for all sorts of reasons.
This is about a particular group identified by a particular attribute being targeted.
I'm sure you wouldn't be arguing that because lots of people get attacked it's ok if asylum seekers do as well so I'm a bit lost by that post.
21-01-2016 6:21 PM
Sorry you are lost, I am not suggesting it's right to have public nuisance and threatening behaviour anywhere Therefore I would like to see a general improvement for all who are subjected to abuse rather than continually dragging one minority or another to the front of the queue.
21-01-2016 10:14 PM
The problem in this instance is not the group that is being attacked but the way in which they are being identified.
It would be exactly the same if a red door identified any other group, such as the elderly.
21-01-2016 11:13 PM
I Think It's The Media, Got Nuthing Else To Talk About
There's 12 Door's Here And 7 Different Groups Of People All Red Doors I Think