This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/davehillblog/2015/oct/01/what-if-london-housing-associations-reject-tory-right-to-buy-deal

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
What if London housing associations reject Tory right to buy deal? What if London housing associations reject Tory right to buy deal?
(about 14 hours later)
A number of London’s Labour politicians have been urging housing associations (HAs) to reject a proposed deal worked up between the National Housing Federation (NHF), which represents HAs, and the government under which they would voluntarily give their tenants the right to buy their homes instead of being required to do so by law. Crucially, this will mean the controversial change can bypass parliament and any damage that might be done to it there.A number of London’s Labour politicians have been urging housing associations (HAs) to reject a proposed deal worked up between the National Housing Federation (NHF), which represents HAs, and the government under which they would voluntarily give their tenants the right to buy their homes instead of being required to do so by law. Crucially, this will mean the controversial change can bypass parliament and any damage that might be done to it there.
Those politicians include the London Assembly’s Tom Copley, Lambeth’s Matthew Bennett, Hackney’s Philip Glanville, Camden’s leader Sarah Hayward and Islington’s James Murray, who’s sent his borough’s HAs an interesting letter.Those politicians include the London Assembly’s Tom Copley, Lambeth’s Matthew Bennett, Hackney’s Philip Glanville, Camden’s leader Sarah Hayward and Islington’s James Murray, who’s sent his borough’s HAs an interesting letter.
He first seeks to persuade them that the forthcoming Housing Bill, which envisages forcing local authorities to sell their most expensive homes when they become vacant in order to compensate HAs for those they lose through right to buy, can be moderated or even defeated with the help of the House of Lords and London Tory MPs who think, like almost everyone else, the whole thing is a terrible idea. He then politely upbraids those HAs inclined to back the deal:He first seeks to persuade them that the forthcoming Housing Bill, which envisages forcing local authorities to sell their most expensive homes when they become vacant in order to compensate HAs for those they lose through right to buy, can be moderated or even defeated with the help of the House of Lords and London Tory MPs who think, like almost everyone else, the whole thing is a terrible idea. He then politely upbraids those HAs inclined to back the deal:
We are determined to oppose the Housing Bill, and [that is] why we are disappointed that some housing associations risk undermining our position. By agreeing voluntarily to the Right to Buy extension, housing associations will make it far more likely that the other measures in the Housing Bill will become law.We are determined to oppose the Housing Bill, and [that is] why we are disappointed that some housing associations risk undermining our position. By agreeing voluntarily to the Right to Buy extension, housing associations will make it far more likely that the other measures in the Housing Bill will become law.
Finally, he floats a further reason to say no to the Tory-NHF deal:Finally, he floats a further reason to say no to the Tory-NHF deal:
We work closely with many housing associations. We try to make sure that when we offer funding or other support for new developments, the benefit of that support is retained within our borough. We will work with all housing associations who share this goal. If the majority of housing associations sign the government’s agreement, it is unclear how those who do not sign will be affected. However, if it means they remain exempt from the Right to Buy, it would leave them in a particularly strong position to reassure us that the benefit of any funding, land, or other support we put into their new development schemes will stay within our borough in perpetuity. We would welcome this reassurance when deciding how best we can use our resources.We work closely with many housing associations. We try to make sure that when we offer funding or other support for new developments, the benefit of that support is retained within our borough. We will work with all housing associations who share this goal. If the majority of housing associations sign the government’s agreement, it is unclear how those who do not sign will be affected. However, if it means they remain exempt from the Right to Buy, it would leave them in a particularly strong position to reassure us that the benefit of any funding, land, or other support we put into their new development schemes will stay within our borough in perpetuity. We would welcome this reassurance when deciding how best we can use our resources.
In other words, tell the government and NHF to shove their deal and Islington Council will see you right. Murray, who is advising Labour’s mayoral candidate Sadiq Khan on housing policy, wants as much low cost housing delivery capacity in his borough as he can get. Local HAs that join him in battling against the Housing Bill, including by rejecting the controversial deal, will earn Islington’s gratitude.In other words, tell the government and NHF to shove their deal and Islington Council will see you right. Murray, who is advising Labour’s mayoral candidate Sadiq Khan on housing policy, wants as much low cost housing delivery capacity in his borough as he can get. Local HAs that join him in battling against the Housing Bill, including by rejecting the controversial deal, will earn Islington’s gratitude.
The eagle-eyed will have noticed that the scenario Murray sketches contains significant uncertainties. What will be the situation of HAs who don’t wish to be party to the proposed agreement? Could refusing the deal enable HAs to decline to extend the right to buy to their tenants, given that agreeing to it will be voluntary?The eagle-eyed will have noticed that the scenario Murray sketches contains significant uncertainties. What will be the situation of HAs who don’t wish to be party to the proposed agreement? Could refusing the deal enable HAs to decline to extend the right to buy to their tenants, given that agreeing to it will be voluntary?
Those uncertainties seem not to be Murray’s alone. Somewhere deep in the deal-framing undergrowth, housing policy wonder wonks will surely be wrestling with these grey areas in order to bring dazzling light to bear. In the meantime, there’s anecdotal evidence that some smaller HAs feel lost in the dark, though the NHF assures me that it is providing comfort and support.Those uncertainties seem not to be Murray’s alone. Somewhere deep in the deal-framing undergrowth, housing policy wonder wonks will surely be wrestling with these grey areas in order to bring dazzling light to bear. In the meantime, there’s anecdotal evidence that some smaller HAs feel lost in the dark, though the NHF assures me that it is providing comfort and support.
Its final stance on the deal will be informed by the responses to its consultation and the details hammered out with the Department for Communities and Local Government accordingly. It will be interesting to see how any right to buy refusers finally fare. But one way or another, this whole story still looks on course to end badly.Its final stance on the deal will be informed by the responses to its consultation and the details hammered out with the Department for Communities and Local Government accordingly. It will be interesting to see how any right to buy refusers finally fare. But one way or another, this whole story still looks on course to end badly.
Update, 2 October: I should also highlight a passage from Camden leader Sarah Hayward’s letter to her local HAs:
I regrettably feel that Camden will have to reconsider our strategic relationship with housing associations that voluntarily sign up to this deal. Before any proposal is adopted there must be proper consultation, parliamentary scrutiny and discussion of alternative courses of action that safeguard both housing association and council housing stock, now and for future generations – just as many of your founders envisaged. I therefore urge you to reject the NHF deal and to work alongside LB Camden and other local authorities to defend both council and housing association housing.
Many of you have said that the Conservative Government is holding a gun to your heads. If that’s true, it’s no way to do business. Local authorities can, and are, offering genuine partnership. Please walk away from this ‘deal’.
Same message as Murray’s. Is anyone listening?