Populist parties force reduction in number of social and affordable homes

There was a range of issues in Ballymun - the design of the towers made them hard to maintain and eventually the council fell so far behind on basic maintenance that basic amenities like lifts were left not working.

Can you remember reading about the annual costs of repairing those lifts? They were jaw-droppingly astronomical - and, it was often said (off the record, naturally) by Dublin Corporation officials that a minority of the tenants made it their duty to vandalise them as soon as they had been repaired.
 
Its a good 30 minutes walk to Santry from where the Towers used to stand! Poor public transport was a major bugbear in the area for a long time.
 
I'm going to heavily disagree with that. My father grew up in the same tenements many of the Ballymun people would have. And I recall he had a neighbour who ended up living in Biscayne in Malahide. My relatives who live there started out in Coolock - but so did the vast majority of their families most of whom did not end up in social housing at all.
 
"Most of whom did not end up in social housing at all"

But what about the ones who stayed in social housing.

The people who could get up and go got up and left. It's the people who were left behind, either in the tenement area or in the social housing areas they were relocated to, I'm talking about. There aren't many flats in Darndale, does that not have similar social issues?
 
We had a few relatives who had social housing in Tallaght and Priorswood, only one of whom fell into the kind of dysfunction that Ballymun was known for - and by the way lots of people who grew up in Ballymun finished school, got jobs and led normal lives too.
 
Well to me it's an open question how much the issues in Ballymun were down to the concept of the flats themselves versus the particular population that was relocated there / poor maintenance / transport links. Presumably also over time as Ballymun acquired a certain reputation either for the poorly maintained state of the flats / area / social issues that people on the social housing list opted elsewhere as much as they could, so the people who ended up there were not a random distribution of people from the social housing list.

Even if the consensus is flats bad for social housing, I stand over my earlier comment:
Had Ballymun been used as accomodation for airport workers, Beaumont hospital workers or students, and maintained properly, perhaps they would still be going ok today.
 
I still think this is perception rather than reality - there were some horribly rough council estates in the 80s and early 90s, not just Ballymun. Tho a singer in choir I conducted in the 90s, who retired from in rent payments section of the corpo a couple of years earlier did say to me that "bad payers" were put in Ballymun - again, as I say, its anecdotal and perception rather than definitive evidence. Given the collapse of social housing builds after the LDF was abolished by McSharry in 1987, you had to be pretty poor to get social housing at all after 1987.
 
That's kinda along the lines of what I suspected. I think both your points and mine while differing in some respects are both to the point that the perception of Ballymun is not the whole story, and the real story is much more complex. The posts on this thread have been deeper than the vast majority of coverage of Ballymun in media and political commentary.
 
Exactly - and remember that Ballymun played a critical role as "housing of last resort" for social tenants in the city after 1980 or so. This role disappeared after the demolition leaving the council entirely dependent on emergency housing only or PRS. Sizing was considerably bigger than city centre, for example and its fair to say that services in the city were depleting rapidly as jobs vacated the city first, followed soon by schools and hospitals. Its part was in the context of a hollowing out of the inner city and dedensification in general.