|
North East Lincolnshire proposes to flog off its council houses or, as they put it, opt for a Large Scale “Voluntary” Transfer.
The process was initiated by Labour as a sounding exercise to find out what was involved. It is being turned into policy by the Lib-Con Coalition. Council agreed in principle on 24 July with Labour`s councillors (or Magnificent Seven) voting against because the majority refused to offer adequate guarantees of the rights of both existing tenants and the waiting list. Part of the pressure for it comes from Annie Faulder, the Grimsby Obergruppenfuhrer appointed by the Office of the Deputy PM to return North East Lincs to the path of truth and virtue.
Yet privatisation is bad for :-
The Public Finances It costs £430 per house in lawyers, consultancies, surveying fees and propaganda. Most of this is paid for by the council.
Housing debt has to be written off by central government which will spend more on this in the coming year than council house repairs. Houses have to be sold at a loss, particularly when there is negative equity as in NEL. Renovating social housing by councils costs £1,700 less than with housing associations. All this money would be better spend on doing up council housing and building more.
It`s bad for tenants The promises held out by housing associations aren`t always fulfilled. Nothing at all is offered to future tenants and those on the waiting list. Associations are quicker to evict. Many have been doing so on Ground B. They charge higher rents and much higher service charges and are less amenable to democratic control than a council which tenants elect.
It`s bad for council finances An asset is flogged off so councils can`t borrow on rents or service charges. The council makes no money on it, and may even have to pay a dowry and a charge to the general fund because it has to continue to provide housing services and cover homelessness.
All the arguments point to delay The two reports were commissioned by the council. One is by Beha Williams Norman, a husband and wife combo of former housing officers who failed to get tenants support for a privatisation in Salisbury and decided to set up as consultants and make money out of the job. BWN took a quarter of total consultancy fees for transfers in 2001-2 but screwed up big time on Braintree in 1998 when they advised privatisation on financial grounds. The council found that it not only had enough money to renovate the entire stock but build as well. The second report is by TP21, appointed as “tenants` friends”, though these always end up by urging privatisation on reluctant tenants. TP21did too.
Both, however, concur that there is need for an early privatisation. The stock is in good condition and the council can reach the Decent Homes by 2010. So why rush it? If push comes to shove and the council decides to go ahead it will have to win a majority vote from tenants. The proposal will be opposed and the tenants are clearly reluctant. So the council might lose the vote, in which case all the money put into the effort is wasted, time is wasted, and nothing is done to reorganise housing finance or apply for Major Repairs Allownance to deal with the “unity houses” on Yarborough and the 2000 sheltered bed-sits which are not now popular and should be converted into 100 bigger units. These are the real needs. Not ideology. |
