POLITICAL and social ideas tend to go in cycles. We learn what doesn’t work, start to do things better, then a generation on we forget those lessons and make the same old mistakes.

So I was really alarmed to hear Deputy John Gollop claiming on my wireless that it was Housing Department policy to mix older tenants with young families. He was a member of Housing until last year, so I thought he must be right. Luckily, it seems he was spouting misinformation.

The comments related to the new Guernsey Housing Association development at the Bouet, and elderly tenants being accommodated in ground-floor flats below families.

I’m a huge supporter of the GHA; indeed I think it’s the best thing to ever happen to social housing in Guernsey.

I’m also delighted that the Housing Department has had the courage to raze the Bouet estate and start again. So I was shocked that they were apparently going to spoil it all by expecting elderly tenants to live cheek by jowl with youngsters.

This is not because I am against a real social mix on estates. The idea of owner occupation, social rental and partial ownership, all on one site, is sound and will help to break down some long-ingrained Guernsey stereotypes. However, any idea that pensioners really enjoy living with youngsters is misguided. That may sounds ageist to some, but it’s true – I know from experience.

I was on the Housing Authority in the 80s. Our biggest estates, the Bouet and Les Genats, had been built over the previous 20 years. The philosophy in the 60s had been to cater for all ages on one site. Sociology professors, with leather patches on their elbows, insisted that a ‘natural age spread’ was needed on housing estates.

Younger tenants would take care of their elderly neighbours, mow their lawns, fetch their groceries and look in on them during cold snaps. The older residents would sit at their open windows or in their front gardens enjoying the antics of their young neighbours and providing positive role models. It was utter nonsense.

In reality, I heard constantly from pensioners who hated the arrangement. They loved their flat but not the noise and frenetic activity of their neighbours. I’m not talking about the real anti-social behaviour we sometimes hear about, but quite normal and acceptable activities.

Kids like to kick a football, teenagers get motorbikes, young adults like an occasional party.

We all did it. We were noisy and boisterous.

Of course, young families live next to older folk all over the island, but the potential for disturbance is far greater on estates, where the population density is so much higher.

What’s the alternative? Well, in the 80s we created quiet estates aimed specifically at our more mature tenants. The classic example was Rodley Park.

Its creation remains one of the political achievements I’m proudest of. Critics said the elderly would hate it.

‘You are putting them on an old person’s reservation – nothing will be going on and they’ll be bored.’ We heard all the 1960s sociology trotted out.

In reality, having previously had difficulty persuading under-occupying, older tenants to downsize, we suddenly had a flood of applications. I was forever fielding phone calls from the over-60s asking for a bungalow at Rodley Park. The waiting list grew rapidly and phases 2 and 3 had to be built.

The States always talk about the need for ‘consultation’. So when I heard Deputy Gollop’s comments – and other media reports – suggesting an ‘all-age estate’ was being created, I wanted to scream: ‘Ask the old folk.’

Luckily, before putting my initial, rather scathing, comments into print, I decided it was wise to check with the staff at Housing.

The truth is somewhat different.

I am assured there will be no children on the new development.

There will be a mix of elderly tenants and middle-aged couples.

Some of the latter may still have dependents living at home, including young adults. So it’s not ideal in terms of giving older tenants their own, quieter, developments.

However, it is an understandable compromise given the need to tackle a range of social housing issues.

So why make a song and dance about a false alarm?

Well, firstly because it’s a misimpression that has never really been corrected.

Also just to plead ‘never, never repeat the mistakes of the 60s’.