11:00am Thursday 3rd December 2009 in Where I Live By Oliver Evans
ABOUT £1m of public money could be lost if a council loses a vote to sell off its council houses.
Wycombe District Council wants to sell its 6,500 homes to a tenant-led housing association – and wants to set aside £995,000 for the vote next autumn.
Housing boss Chris Watson said: “It is a risk worth taking. The benefits to the tenants would increase if the transfer took place.”
Bosses say they cannot invest in homes enough because the Government takes half of tenants’ rents for other councils.
A TLSO would be keep all the cash, which chiefs say would massively improve homes, and borrow running costs. Tenants would be on the management board.
The move is likely to prove controversial. Transfer to a standard housing association was defeated in a vote which cost Conservative-run WDC £700,000 in 2000.
A recent survey of about five per cent of tenants found 47 per cent were in support while 28 per cent said no. Some 22 per cent were unsure and the rest did not answer.
The cash for the new vote would be paid from a fund mostly made up of tenants' rents.
Eileen Short, chairman of the Defend Council Housing pressure group, warned a yes vote would mean “privatisation” of the service.
She said: “Tenants are on the board but they are legally company directors and have responsibility in law to putting the interests of the company first.
“Tenants cannot make the housing association buck the market. Council housing has accountability, a de-selectable landlord.”
The council was “rushing” into the vote despite suggestions of a shift in Government housing policy, she said. Ministers are trebling investment it was announced in June.
But Martin Hale, WDC council head of housing, said: “I am picking up that the feeling now is very different from tenants [compared to the last vote].
“There is a lot more tenant involvement. The last time it was seen as something that was done to them.”
Tenants would have the same rights under a TLSO, Mr Hale said, except new ones would not be able to buy their homes.
The sell-off is supported by the Wycombe Tenant and Leaseholder Committee, which liaises with the council on behalf of tenants.
A yes vote would net the cash-strapped council an estimated tens of millions of pounds, which it can spend how it likes. This would return cash spent on the vote.
The counci's cabinet is expected to approve putting aside the cash at its meeting on Monday. This would then be confirmed by the full council with a vote on December 14.
The TLSO would be called Red Kite (Housing the Community) Limited.
Comments(14)
Voyeur
says...
12:44pm Thu 3 Dec 09
678
says...
12:53pm Thu 3 Dec 09
Blueberry
says...
1:04pm Thu 3 Dec 09
wycombenewbie
says...
1:07pm Thu 3 Dec 09
Voyeur wrote:Actually a lot has changed. Have you been under a rock?
Exactly what has changed since the last vote was taken? . Nothing. . At least they could have the decency to put it in their election manifesto and wait until after the next election.
demoness
says...
1:37pm Thu 3 Dec 09
678 wrote:meanwhile in the land of sweeping and offensive generalisations.... a very silly person utters more nonsense.
why should the council sell of houses at a knock down price to people on benefits who don't even work!
davidjc
says...
3:08pm Thu 3 Dec 09
Voyeur
says...
5:08pm Thu 3 Dec 09
DeepThinker
says...
5:15pm Thu 3 Dec 09
wycombenewbie wrote:You say this ... but the government is very likely going tio change its complexion within 7 months. Surely the council could wait until that happens and see if central government still wants to take 50%.
Voyeur wrote: Exactly what has changed since the last vote was taken? . Nothing. . At least they could have the decency to put it in their election manifesto and wait until after the next election.Actually a lot has changed. Have you been under a rock? The Central (labour) Government is bankrupt. So it now takes 50% of tenants rent, leaving WDC with only half. Why does the Government have a right to take any? I'll back the council here, the Westminster government is effectively stealing from the tenants rent. This is outrageous and time can not be afforded to wait for an election just so it can be put in a manifesto, before its brought to an end. 100% of rent should be used to manage the housing stock and to service Labour's loans.
J B Blackett
says...
11:16pm Thu 3 Dec 09
Voyeur
says...
1:14am Fri 4 Dec 09
aspen g
says...
2:33pm Fri 4 Dec 09
ferrellcat
says...
5:58pm Fri 4 Dec 09
bakerbill
says...
9:01pm Fri 4 Dec 09
Search for Jobs
Search Now »
Find the right person for you
Search Now »
Search for Homes
Search Now »
Search for Cars
Search Now »
DeepThinker says...
11:49am Thu 3 Dec 09
-
So who is getting this money for organizing the vote? I'll do it for £650,000!
-
The council will then fritter away the money and in 10 years time (when most of these councillors are no longer on the council) the same old problems will be back, but then there will be nothing left to sell!
-
Tennants will be on the "board of directors". That is all well and good, but the rest of the directors will be "professionals". I can't see the residents representatives being able to stand up to some of these other "directors". You just need to look at similar schemes elsewhere in the country and talk to their residents representatives.
-
It is all a sham to get the cash to cover up the years of mismanagement by the council.