Housing strategy "totally inadequate", claim Lib Dems

This Is Local London: Critical: Stephen Knight Critical: Stephen Knight

The Liberal Democrats criticised Richmond Council’s housing strategy for the next four years as being “totally inadequate”.

The plans were approved by the council's cabinet at a meeting on January 16, with a focus on helping vulnerable people to live independent lives.

Grants will be provided for disabled households on low incomes, such as fitting stair-lifts or specially-adapted showers.

But the Lib Dems accused Richmond’s Tory-led administration of failing to deliver an analysis of future housing needs in the borough, such as setting affordable housing targets.

Leader of the opposition Councillor Stephen Knight said: “In the face of the worst housing crisis in London over the next decade, the Tory administration has come up with a totally inadequate housing strategy.

“It fails to offer any analysis of the housing needs of local residents or how these might be met.

“There is no target for increasing the supply of affordable homes - in fact there are no supply side targets at all within the document.

“If the Lib Dems are elected to run the council in May we will make it a priority to significantly boost the supply of affordable homes across the borough to make sure ordinary families are not pushed out of our borough.”

In the strategy for 2013-17, a clampdown on housing tenancy fraud and antisocial behaviour are also outlined.

The council said that between April 2006 to March 2010, 394 new build affordable homes and “purchase and repair” homes were provided.

Between April 2010 and March 2014 the council said it will have delivered 433 homes, with 394 homes completed and a further 39 to be finished by March.

Richmond Council cabinet member for housing Councillor David Marlow said: “Ensuring that registered social landlords provide good quality affordable homes and protecting our most vulnerable residents is at the heart of the council’s housing strategy.

“By working closely with the private and public sectors, the London Mayor, as well as central Government, we can tackle the borough’s housing needs.

“We will always do what we can to help our most vulnerable residents which is why helping elderly and disabled residents to continue to live independently within our community forms a major part of this four-year strategy.”

Comments (12)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

6:00pm Sun 26 Jan 14

sweeneyted says...

I couldn't agree more with Councillor Knight's sentiments. I and a number of my friends have been looking for somewhere to buy in Mayfair. We like the convenience of the location and the access to local amenities. However Westminster council are refusing to provide anything for us because they say there is a shortage of affordable housing in Mayfair. There are plenty of buildings such as the Royal Institute or open spaces like Hanover Square that could be converted/built upon to provide a solution to this terrible Mayfair housing crisis. What about my rights to live where I want to ?
I couldn't agree more with Councillor Knight's sentiments. I and a number of my friends have been looking for somewhere to buy in Mayfair. We like the convenience of the location and the access to local amenities. However Westminster council are refusing to provide anything for us because they say there is a shortage of affordable housing in Mayfair. There are plenty of buildings such as the Royal Institute or open spaces like Hanover Square that could be converted/built upon to provide a solution to this terrible Mayfair housing crisis. What about my rights to live where I want to ? sweeneyted
  • Score: 5

6:45pm Sun 26 Jan 14

metis says...

sweeneyted wrote:
I couldn't agree more with Councillor Knight's sentiments. I and a number of my friends have been looking for somewhere to buy in Mayfair. We like the convenience of the location and the access to local amenities. However Westminster council are refusing to provide anything for us because they say there is a shortage of affordable housing in Mayfair. There are plenty of buildings such as the Royal Institute or open spaces like Hanover Square that could be converted/built upon to provide a solution to this terrible Mayfair housing crisis. What about my rights to live where I want to ?
Very good Sweeneyted. I like your style !!
[quote][p][bold]sweeneyted[/bold] wrote: I couldn't agree more with Councillor Knight's sentiments. I and a number of my friends have been looking for somewhere to buy in Mayfair. We like the convenience of the location and the access to local amenities. However Westminster council are refusing to provide anything for us because they say there is a shortage of affordable housing in Mayfair. There are plenty of buildings such as the Royal Institute or open spaces like Hanover Square that could be converted/built upon to provide a solution to this terrible Mayfair housing crisis. What about my rights to live where I want to ?[/p][/quote]Very good Sweeneyted. I like your style !! metis
  • Score: 4

7:44pm Sun 26 Jan 14

Twickenham resident says...

Con Stephen Knight has a short memory. When he was last in office he and his comrades created the infamous "linked sites strategy" so they could flog off prime sites for luxury private housing and bung the social rented housing off elsewhere. As a result they actually built just a fraction of the houses they could have done and those they did build cost far more than they should have. Not good value for money and a lot more people could have been housed if they had had a different approach.

Under Con Knights watch the land in Water Lane Twickenham was granted planning permission and handed over to a social landlord in 2008 - yes 2008! yet this land remained derelict until the end of last year (perhaps after repeated enquiries they remembered they had it?) Up to 8 people will be squeezed into this patch of land.

There are still suitable sites in the Borough to build social rented and affordable housing. However, now Eric Pickles has changed the planning laws there is no need to have a planning department anyway and empty High Street shops can be turned into houses.
Con Stephen Knight has a short memory. When he was last in office he and his comrades created the infamous "linked sites strategy" so they could flog off prime sites for luxury private housing and bung the social rented housing off elsewhere. As a result they actually built just a fraction of the houses they could have done and those they did build cost far more than they should have. Not good value for money and a lot more people could have been housed if they had had a different approach. Under Con Knights watch the land in Water Lane Twickenham was granted planning permission and handed over to a social landlord in 2008 - yes 2008! yet this land remained derelict until the end of last year (perhaps after repeated enquiries they remembered they had it?) Up to 8 people will be squeezed into this patch of land. There are still suitable sites in the Borough to build social rented and affordable housing. However, now Eric Pickles has changed the planning laws there is no need to have a planning department anyway and empty High Street shops can be turned into houses. Twickenham resident
  • Score: 8

8:07pm Sun 26 Jan 14

Twickenham Bob says...

I would advise all the people above who don't want to provide social housing, and would like to see the return to 1930's slums along with associated communicable diseases such as rickets, TB, diphtheria and other social ills to contact the local Tory party offices for a membership form as they will be welcomed with opened arms.

The Tory's have a good track record at turning back the clock - rocketing levels of malnutrition, hypothermia, rickets, children turning up at school hungry. Not forgetting the jewel in the crown - the Dickensian principle of deserving and undeserving poor.
I would advise all the people above who don't want to provide social housing, and would like to see the return to 1930's slums along with associated communicable diseases such as rickets, TB, diphtheria and other social ills to contact the local Tory party offices for a membership form as they will be welcomed with opened arms. The Tory's have a good track record at turning back the clock - rocketing levels of malnutrition, hypothermia, rickets, children turning up at school hungry. Not forgetting the jewel in the crown - the Dickensian principle of deserving and undeserving poor. Twickenham Bob
  • Score: -17

9:54pm Sun 26 Jan 14

sweeneyted says...

In response to Twickenham Bob.
I seem to recall that the types of diseases that Twickenham Bob thinks people will catch if they cant live in LBRUT are in in fact exacerbated in the conditions that he would like to see created: Overcrowding. The current so called housing crisis is a result of millions of people (and growing) all desiring to live in London and it's suburbs. This is bad for London and the rest of the country. If we were to invest in Keynesian style stimuli in developing the once productive cities and regions, then maybe they would become desirable places for people to live and business to thrive. Consequently the pressure on housing in the South East will decrease and we could all breathe a little easier in a less centralised economy and a less crowded city.
BTW I'm not against social housing in particular but all developments in a borough with a stressed infrastructure.
Also in response to Twickenham resident re; Eric Pickles/High Street shops and planning. I note the staggering hypocrisy of the recent court challenge by LBRUT against Pickles High street planning changes. This council is busy slipping through the plans by Haymarket to build 250 flats at the Teddington studios site, wants to develop the employment sites in Waldegrave Rd into housing and recently oversaw the development at Somerset House into (super high density) housing .All three were/are large employment sites.
In response to Twickenham Bob. I seem to recall that the types of diseases that Twickenham Bob thinks people will catch if they cant live in LBRUT are in in fact exacerbated in the conditions that he would like to see created: Overcrowding. The current so called housing crisis is a result of millions of people (and growing) all desiring to live in London and it's suburbs. This is bad for London and the rest of the country. If we were to invest in Keynesian style stimuli in developing the once productive cities and regions, then maybe they would become desirable places for people to live and business to thrive. Consequently the pressure on housing in the South East will decrease and we could all breathe a little easier in a less centralised economy and a less crowded city. BTW I'm not against social housing in particular but all developments in a borough with a stressed infrastructure. Also in response to Twickenham resident re; Eric Pickles/High Street shops and planning. I note the staggering hypocrisy of the recent court challenge by LBRUT against Pickles High street planning changes. This council is busy slipping through the plans by Haymarket to build 250 flats at the Teddington studios site, wants to develop the employment sites in Waldegrave Rd into housing and recently oversaw the development at Somerset House into (super high density) housing .All three were/are large employment sites. sweeneyted
  • Score: 7

6:29pm Mon 27 Jan 14

dellboy twick. says...

sweeneyted wrote:
I couldn't agree more with Councillor Knight's sentiments. I and a number of my friends have been looking for somewhere to buy in Mayfair. We like the convenience of the location and the access to local amenities. However Westminster council are refusing to provide anything for us because they say there is a shortage of affordable housing in Mayfair. There are plenty of buildings such as the Royal Institute or open spaces like Hanover Square that could be converted/built upon to provide a solution to this terrible Mayfair housing crisis. What about my rights to live where I want to ?
just had a look online, lots for sale in Mayfair, a mansion for 39 million down to a 1 bed at about 1 million. The average seems between 3 to 10 million, where is your problem.
[quote][p][bold]sweeneyted[/bold] wrote: I couldn't agree more with Councillor Knight's sentiments. I and a number of my friends have been looking for somewhere to buy in Mayfair. We like the convenience of the location and the access to local amenities. However Westminster council are refusing to provide anything for us because they say there is a shortage of affordable housing in Mayfair. There are plenty of buildings such as the Royal Institute or open spaces like Hanover Square that could be converted/built upon to provide a solution to this terrible Mayfair housing crisis. What about my rights to live where I want to ?[/p][/quote]just had a look online, lots for sale in Mayfair, a mansion for 39 million down to a 1 bed at about 1 million. The average seems between 3 to 10 million, where is your problem. dellboy twick.
  • Score: 0

10:16am Tue 28 Jan 14

metis says...

sweeneyted wrote:
In response to Twickenham Bob.
I seem to recall that the types of diseases that Twickenham Bob thinks people will catch if they cant live in LBRUT are in in fact exacerbated in the conditions that he would like to see created: Overcrowding. The current so called housing crisis is a result of millions of people (and growing) all desiring to live in London and it's suburbs. This is bad for London and the rest of the country. If we were to invest in Keynesian style stimuli in developing the once productive cities and regions, then maybe they would become desirable places for people to live and business to thrive. Consequently the pressure on housing in the South East will decrease and we could all breathe a little easier in a less centralised economy and a less crowded city.
BTW I'm not against social housing in particular but all developments in a borough with a stressed infrastructure.
Also in response to Twickenham resident re; Eric Pickles/High Street shops and planning. I note the staggering hypocrisy of the recent court challenge by LBRUT against Pickles High street planning changes. This council is busy slipping through the plans by Haymarket to build 250 flats at the Teddington studios site, wants to develop the employment sites in Waldegrave Rd into housing and recently oversaw the development at Somerset House into (super high density) housing .All three were/are large employment sites.
Largely in agreement about the problem, but take issue with Keynesian stimuli being the solution. Isn't that just another form of centralisation? (Gov dictating/cross subsidising the regions.
I'd prefer a Hayekian approach and just get the gov out of the way - leave people alone and watch them flourish.
[quote][p][bold]sweeneyted[/bold] wrote: In response to Twickenham Bob. I seem to recall that the types of diseases that Twickenham Bob thinks people will catch if they cant live in LBRUT are in in fact exacerbated in the conditions that he would like to see created: Overcrowding. The current so called housing crisis is a result of millions of people (and growing) all desiring to live in London and it's suburbs. This is bad for London and the rest of the country. If we were to invest in Keynesian style stimuli in developing the once productive cities and regions, then maybe they would become desirable places for people to live and business to thrive. Consequently the pressure on housing in the South East will decrease and we could all breathe a little easier in a less centralised economy and a less crowded city. BTW I'm not against social housing in particular but all developments in a borough with a stressed infrastructure. Also in response to Twickenham resident re; Eric Pickles/High Street shops and planning. I note the staggering hypocrisy of the recent court challenge by LBRUT against Pickles High street planning changes. This council is busy slipping through the plans by Haymarket to build 250 flats at the Teddington studios site, wants to develop the employment sites in Waldegrave Rd into housing and recently oversaw the development at Somerset House into (super high density) housing .All three were/are large employment sites.[/p][/quote]Largely in agreement about the problem, but take issue with Keynesian stimuli being the solution. Isn't that just another form of centralisation? (Gov dictating/cross subsidising the regions. I'd prefer a Hayekian approach and just get the gov out of the way - leave people alone and watch them flourish. metis
  • Score: 7

12:21pm Tue 28 Jan 14

sweeneyted says...

dellboy twick. wrote:
sweeneyted wrote:
I couldn't agree more with Councillor Knight's sentiments. I and a number of my friends have been looking for somewhere to buy in Mayfair. We like the convenience of the location and the access to local amenities. However Westminster council are refusing to provide anything for us because they say there is a shortage of affordable housing in Mayfair. There are plenty of buildings such as the Royal Institute or open spaces like Hanover Square that could be converted/built upon to provide a solution to this terrible Mayfair housing crisis. What about my rights to live where I want to ?
just had a look online, lots for sale in Mayfair, a mansion for 39 million down to a 1 bed at about 1 million. The average seems between 3 to 10 million, where is your problem.
To Dellboy Twick

In my post re: housing in Mayfair I did say that I needed affordable housing in that area. I can't afford to buy on the open market. I'm not sure what you're inferring by listing current property values.
Are you suggesting if I can't afford to live in Mayfair then I shouldn't expect to live there ? If so you are a nasty beastly Tory who wants to engage in Sarajevo style social cleansing......Shame on you.
[quote][p][bold]dellboy twick.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sweeneyted[/bold] wrote: I couldn't agree more with Councillor Knight's sentiments. I and a number of my friends have been looking for somewhere to buy in Mayfair. We like the convenience of the location and the access to local amenities. However Westminster council are refusing to provide anything for us because they say there is a shortage of affordable housing in Mayfair. There are plenty of buildings such as the Royal Institute or open spaces like Hanover Square that could be converted/built upon to provide a solution to this terrible Mayfair housing crisis. What about my rights to live where I want to ?[/p][/quote]just had a look online, lots for sale in Mayfair, a mansion for 39 million down to a 1 bed at about 1 million. The average seems between 3 to 10 million, where is your problem.[/p][/quote]To Dellboy Twick In my post re: housing in Mayfair I did say that I needed affordable housing in that area. I can't afford to buy on the open market. I'm not sure what you're inferring by listing current property values. Are you suggesting if I can't afford to live in Mayfair then I shouldn't expect to live there ? If so you are a nasty beastly Tory who wants to engage in Sarajevo style social cleansing......Shame on you. sweeneyted
  • Score: 3

3:41pm Tue 28 Jan 14

Twickenham Bob says...

metis - the housing crisis is the result of speculation and the combination of tax breaks for buy to let landlords, no capital gains tax on house sales, and a growing inequality of income.

Buy to Let is the perfect example of the rich getting richer from taking from the poor.
metis - the housing crisis is the result of speculation and the combination of tax breaks for buy to let landlords, no capital gains tax on house sales, and a growing inequality of income. Buy to Let is the perfect example of the rich getting richer from taking from the poor. Twickenham Bob
  • Score: -6

10:52pm Tue 28 Jan 14

metis says...

"The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of misery."

You dont get it Bob, probably never will.
Leftists mistakenly believe that one person must become poor for another person to become rich, that total wealth is limited and redistribution is the only way to improve the living standards of the less fortunate.
It is not a fixed pie!!
"The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of misery." You dont get it Bob, probably never will. Leftists mistakenly believe that one person must become poor for another person to become rich, that total wealth is limited and redistribution is the only way to improve the living standards of the less fortunate. It is not a fixed pie!! metis
  • Score: 10

8:13am Wed 29 Jan 14

dellboy twick. says...

sweeneyted.
prices in Mayfair are governed by supply and demand, it would have to be high density housing that could outstrip demand thereby reducing prices. A few extra properties coming on the market would start a bidding war keeping the prices up.
I'm not saying you should not live in Mayfair, the fact of supply and demand is.If there were enough properties to reduce prices it could change the reason you wanted to move there in the first place.
sweeneyted. prices in Mayfair are governed by supply and demand, it would have to be high density housing that could outstrip demand thereby reducing prices. A few extra properties coming on the market would start a bidding war keeping the prices up. I'm not saying you should not live in Mayfair, the fact of supply and demand is.If there were enough properties to reduce prices it could change the reason you wanted to move there in the first place. dellboy twick.
  • Score: -2

11:53am Wed 29 Jan 14

metis says...

dellboy twick. wrote:
sweeneyted.
prices in Mayfair are governed by supply and demand, it would have to be high density housing that could outstrip demand thereby reducing prices. A few extra properties coming on the market would start a bidding war keeping the prices up.
I'm not saying you should not live in Mayfair, the fact of supply and demand is.If there were enough properties to reduce prices it could change the reason you wanted to move there in the first place.
and you point is ?
Sweeneyted made an ironic post perfectly illustrating that if you cant afford to live in a desirable area you shouldnt expect ordinary folk to subsidise you.
[quote][p][bold]dellboy twick.[/bold] wrote: sweeneyted. prices in Mayfair are governed by supply and demand, it would have to be high density housing that could outstrip demand thereby reducing prices. A few extra properties coming on the market would start a bidding war keeping the prices up. I'm not saying you should not live in Mayfair, the fact of supply and demand is.If there were enough properties to reduce prices it could change the reason you wanted to move there in the first place.[/p][/quote]and you point is ? Sweeneyted made an ironic post perfectly illustrating that if you cant afford to live in a desirable area you shouldnt expect ordinary folk to subsidise you. metis
  • Score: 6

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree