Council housing : you only get the investment if you vote to privatise your estate

[Fozzie Bear]

The Private Eye piece is reproduced here along with some recent material from DCH.

 

[Gramsci]

The MP Austin Mitchell was criticised for saying that transfer to an RSL was privatisation.Unfortunately due to the lack of funding for new social housing RSLs have to operate more like private developers.

For example in Brixton the "loughborough Park estate"-the Guiness Trust Estate at the end of Somerleyton Road is going to be knocked down and rebuilt.Its an example of early modern "Bauhuas" type design built in the 30s.

The plans put forward by the Guiness Trust will mean the social(affordable in the jargon) housing will be halved.Despite more units being built on the land.The rest of the units will be for sale on the open market at the going price for the area.The sale of the private units will subsidise the "affordable" ones.This is in line with Government policy.

In effect the Guiness Trust is doing little more than a Private Developer would in London.In the past Governments subsidised RSL quite generously(compared to now).In the present miserly funding of social housing RSL end up having to behave like hard headed businesses.

The result of this is increase in evictions of those in arrears.Tenant consultation becomes secondary to the RSLs balance sheet.In the example Ive given the tenants were consulted.The tenants association didnt like the scheme due to the fact that they thought Guiness Trust were acting like a property developer(as well as other things like design etc).Guiness Trust used some of the tactics that Austin complains about in consequence.The issue on the estate is ongoing.

Im not saying that all RSL or the idea of RSLs is bad.What needs to be recognised is that either Council or RSLs work within a funding regime laid down by central Government. Nu Labour have brought in one that is contradictory.Nu Labour make a big thing about "localism",doing things from below,consultation but put in place a funding (or lack of it) that forces organisations to act like profit making businesses (even if they are non profit making).

 

[Gramsci]

On the issue of Housing workers.

Ive met many as a tenants rep.I try my best to distinguish between the role they play in their job and them personally.This can be difficult.The Fat Cats who run the RSLs dont deal with tenants on the ground.As Mitchell says they are trying to get their salaries up to private sector levels.

 

[Gramsci]

In Lambeth their was a Housing Commision made up of Council Tenants who looked into the future of Council Housing in Lambeth.This was set up by the then Labour Council.The Commision said that both Housing and Mge should stay in house.That Mge should be improved.

However no political Party in Lambeth has advocated whole sale transfer to an ALMO etc.What is happening in Lambeth is creeping transfer.Individual estates are being asked to vote on transfer to an RSL.As Prescott reneged on a promise to Labour MPs for a "level playing field" if you dont vote for transfer you effectively dont get any money for your estate.

(Level playing field-back bench MPs got Prescott to agree that Council tenants should be able to get funding if they stay in Council ownership.Prescotts gone back on this.Slimy git).

 

[kea]

there is also an issue in terms of the role of the 'independent' tenant advisor in a stock transfer. which austin mitchell has also spoken out on. ITAs actually remove pro-retention literature from tenants' meetings and have been known to physically force anti-transfer tenants out of meetings. the fact that they are publicly funded to fulfil this role is disgusting.

 

[DaveCinzano]

tenants in bristol have voted to stay council (74%), while those in north somerset went for the almo option (76.5%).

bbc report
bristol city council press release
north somerset council press release

will try and find out more.

 

[William of Walworth]

Bump as a new thread has been started on UK P and P concerning this very subject, and I suspect the other thread starter hasn't seen this old thread ... (understandably as it hasn't been posted on for quite a while).

Newer thread

 

[ViolentPanda]

So, are the coercive tactics for ALMOs etc racking up, or do we not have to worry?

(Me, I'm worried, but I'm also known to be a pessimist.)

 

[totaladdict]

...I suspect the other thread starter hasn't seen this old thread ... (understandably as it hasn't been posted on for quite a while).

Newer thread

no need to be patronising. i had read this thread but while words like backdoor, council and privatisation are the same, the actual issue isn't. this thread was (is!) about privatising council housing, mine is about privatising the customer contact functions of all council services.

 

[William of Walworth]

no need to be patronising. i had read this thread but while words like backdoor, council and privatisation are the same, the actual issue isn't. this thread was (is!) about privatising council housing, mine is about privatising the customer contact functions of all council services.

Well I apologised for my mistake in the other thread, which I belatedly realised was about more than just housing. Not wanting to be patronising at all though, wanted you to see this thread .... the two subjects overlap at least, no?

I suspect our views on privatisation are very similar overall ....

 

[William of Walworth]

So, are the coercive tactics for ALMOs etc racking up, or do we not have to worry?

(Me, I'm worried, but I'm also known to be a pessimist.)

I think your pessimism is entriely justified, if the Aylesbury developments** are anything to go by ...

**See London forum folks, if you haven't seen that thread.

 

[Maidmarian]

A meeting has been called on 17th October to form a National group to represent the interests of Stock-Retained Authorities.

It`s to be called A.R.C.H
(Asscn of Retained Council Housing)

Inaugural meeting will be held at Nottingham Racecourse.

Stock-retained Authorities nationwide have been invited----------(Councillors & Members + Tenant Reps & other "Stakeholders")

Anyone interested in further details please PM.

 

[AnnO'Neemus]

I want my estate to be a TMO. If it remains council or goes ALMO (council in all but name, same old, same old), I think I'll have a nervous breakdown. Am currently taking the B'stards to court over disrepairs. Can't get our estate out of their hands and into the tenants fast enough as far as I'm concerned.

 

[guinnessdrinker]

I want my estate to be a TMO. If it remains council or goes ALMO (council in all but name, same old, same old), I think I'll have a nervous breakdown.

do be very careful with TMOs. it can be a back door to privatisation as some people on the Tabard estate in Southwark will tell you. peabody housing association which effectively ran the the TMO on behalf of tenants was eventually run out of the estate and it went back to the council quite recently. now it appears that they are either selling some of their flats as they go empty for whatever reason, or rent them at market prices. funny enough are quite close to the city (just south of the river) or the jubilee line for Canary wharf....

 

[William of Walworth]

A meeting has been called on 17th October to form a National group to represent the interests of Stock-Retained Authorities.

It`s to be called A.R.C.H
(Asscn of Retained Council Housing)

Inaugural meeting will be held at Nottingham Racecourse.

Stock-retained Authorities nationwide have been invited----------(Councillors & Members + Tenant Reps & other "Stakeholders")

Anyone interested in further details please PM.

Just doing it MM ...

 

[William of Walworth]

Also just posted by me in the 'Southwark Council to demolish the Aylesbury Estate' thread on the London forum (well worth a look for anyone, anywhere interested in Council Housing issues) :

From Inside Housing magazine

Conference debate delivers blow to ministers

Thursday 29th September 2005

Delegates at the Labour Party conference have voted overwhelmingly in favour of a fourth option for investment in council housing.


For the second year in a row, grass roots Labour members have delivered an embarrassing blow to ministers, who have repeatedly said there will be no additional investment options to fund improvements to council housing.


Before the debate this morning, local government and communities minister David Miliband appealed to delegates not to support the motion.


‘Public borrowing is limited, because we cannot take risks with the economy,’ he said. ‘So the only way to meet the demand of the motion would be to rob Peter to pay Paul: less for new build or fewer people helped. We just can’t do that.’


But in a show of hands, the vast majority of delegates ignored Mr Miliband’s plea and voted in favour of a fourth option.


Leslie Christie, a councillor from the Gravesham constituency Labour party who supported the fourth way, slated the local government minister’s speech.


‘What he was saying is if you stay a council house tenant you won’t get a new bathroom, you won’t get new windows and we will make sure you don’t because we won’t give you any money to do it,’ he said.

 

[Maidmarian]

Yep, lots of LA reps signed up at Conference to ARCH, but it seems to be attracting all-Party support.

 

[exosculate]

A meeting has been called on 17th October to form a National group to represent the interests of Stock-Retained Authorities.

It`s to be called A.R.C.H
(Asscn of Retained Council Housing)

Inaugural meeting will be held at Nottingham Racecourse.

Stock-retained Authorities nationwide have been invited----------(Councillors & Members + Tenant Reps & other "Stakeholders")

Anyone interested in further details please PM.

I would say unions/employees would represent another 'stakeholder'

Could you PM me too?

 

[exosculate]

Also just posted by me in the 'Southwark Council to demolish the Aylesbury Estate' thread on the London forum (well worth a look for anyone, anywhere interested in Council Housing issues) :

From Inside Housing magazine

They are lying b*stards! They could just change the accounting methodology as they have in Germany to allow the borrowing, they don't want to for ideological reasons.

They seem to ignore conference decisions - i can't see that changing this time.

 

[Maidmarian]

I would say unions/employees would represent another 'stakeholder'

Could you PM me too?

Of course, to both !

(Ed to add :

Sorry, that SHOULD have read "Councillors & Officers" ----i.e. employees of the Councils) !