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/nov/13/report-backs-community-control-of-hammersmith-and-fulham-council-homes
The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 0 | Version 1 |
|---|---|
| Report backs community control of Hammersmith and Fulham council homes | Report backs community control of Hammersmith and Fulham council homes |
| (about 4 hours later) | |
| The borough of Hammersmith and Fulham (H&F) encompasses six-and-a-bit square miles of very expensive, highly coveted London land. Sharing its eastern border with stately Kensington and Chelsea and lined to the south by the Thames, it is an inner city tapestry of high-end gentrification and older working-class redoubts that weaves central London at its filthy richest into the fringes of suburbia - a zone of transition in more than one sense. | The borough of Hammersmith and Fulham (H&F) encompasses six-and-a-bit square miles of very expensive, highly coveted London land. Sharing its eastern border with stately Kensington and Chelsea and lined to the south by the Thames, it is an inner city tapestry of high-end gentrification and older working-class redoubts that weaves central London at its filthy richest into the fringes of suburbia - a zone of transition in more than one sense. |
| This landscape of change has become a closely fought political battleground. Last year, Labour recaptured the council following eight years of radical Conservative control. Holding on to it will be hard, as will protecting the things there that Labour holds dear against any Tory resurgence. That is the backdrop against which the recent endeavours of former Labour housing minister and MP for Streatham Keith Hill and nine residents of H&F’s council estates have taken place. | This landscape of change has become a closely fought political battleground. Last year, Labour recaptured the council following eight years of radical Conservative control. Holding on to it will be hard, as will protecting the things there that Labour holds dear against any Tory resurgence. That is the backdrop against which the recent endeavours of former Labour housing minister and MP for Streatham Keith Hill and nine residents of H&F’s council estates have taken place. |
| Labour’s manifesto pledged to “take immediate measures to protect council homes now and in the future” and to “work with council housing residents to give them ownership of the land their homes are on.” The context for these commitments was a Tory programme for the sell-off and demolition of several large estates, beginning with two in North Fulham as part of the wider Earls Court Project redevelopment scheme. Now, Hill and his team have produced a report for the council about how best to honour them. | Labour’s manifesto pledged to “take immediate measures to protect council homes now and in the future” and to “work with council housing residents to give them ownership of the land their homes are on.” The context for these commitments was a Tory programme for the sell-off and demolition of several large estates, beginning with two in North Fulham as part of the wider Earls Court Project redevelopment scheme. Now, Hill and his team have produced a report for the council about how best to honour them. |
| Their headline recommendation is that the council divests itself of its housing stock completely. All 17,100 homes H&F owns, 12,000 of them rented to tenants, would be transferred to the ownership of a new, community-owned housing association set up for the purpose. This full scale “stock transfer” to a not-for-profit body is, the report concludes, the best option available to the council for safeguarding the homes concerned “against the threat of sales to developers for demolition and redevelopment,” and would also have the benefits of maximising investment in the properties and devolving power over their future to residents themselves. | Their headline recommendation is that the council divests itself of its housing stock completely. All 17,100 homes H&F owns, 12,000 of them rented to tenants, would be transferred to the ownership of a new, community-owned housing association set up for the purpose. This full scale “stock transfer” to a not-for-profit body is, the report concludes, the best option available to the council for safeguarding the homes concerned “against the threat of sales to developers for demolition and redevelopment,” and would also have the benefits of maximising investment in the properties and devolving power over their future to residents themselves. |
| The council’s cabinet member for housing Lisa Homan says that the report makes a “compelling case.” She is right. It also serves as an education in the kind of predicament London boroughs, especially Labour-led ones, find themselves in as housing need broadens and deepens and Conservatives at national level apply themselves to the heroic task of making meeting that need more difficult. | The council’s cabinet member for housing Lisa Homan says that the report makes a “compelling case.” She is right. It also serves as an education in the kind of predicament London boroughs, especially Labour-led ones, find themselves in as housing need broadens and deepens and Conservatives at national level apply themselves to the heroic task of making meeting that need more difficult. |
| Those 17,100 homes represent 21% of the housing in the borough and are lived in 16% of its population of over 180,000. Most are part of high or medium-rise estates, but around 4,000 houses and flats are in street properties. About two-thirds of them are more than 50 years old, which is younger than a lot of their occupants - over-65s represent a greater proportion of those living in council-owned housing than is found in other tenures. | Those 17,100 homes represent 21% of the housing in the borough and are lived in 16% of its population of over 180,000. Most are part of high or medium-rise estates, but around 4,000 houses and flats are in street properties. About two-thirds of them are more than 50 years old, which is younger than a lot of their occupants - over-65s represent a greater proportion of those living in council-owned housing than is found in other tenures. |
| These buildings and those living in them need to be looked after. So do local people who don’t live in council-owned homes for whom private rent levels are alarmingly high and cannot possibly afford to buy. The Hill report notes: “The Council’s homes are therefore a key resource in meeting local housing need and ensuring that people on lower incomes can continue to live in the Borough.” | These buildings and those living in them need to be looked after. So do local people who don’t live in council-owned homes for whom private rent levels are alarmingly high and cannot possibly afford to buy. The Hill report notes: “The Council’s homes are therefore a key resource in meeting local housing need and ensuring that people on lower incomes can continue to live in the Borough.” |
| It also summarises developments in national housing policy that have occurred during the period in which the commission has been doing its research. These crucially include a four-year annual 1% reduction in social housing rents to come into effect from next year. That won’t do very much for tenants and, at the same time, H&F says it will harm its housing finances to the tune of a £70m shortfall. Add this to the cap on council borrowing for housing - something even Boris Johnson has said he wants to see raised - and you get some idea of the pressures London boroughs are being subjected to. | It also summarises developments in national housing policy that have occurred during the period in which the commission has been doing its research. These crucially include a four-year annual 1% reduction in social housing rents to come into effect from next year. That won’t do very much for tenants and, at the same time, H&F says it will harm its housing finances to the tune of a £70m shortfall. Add this to the cap on council borrowing for housing - something even Boris Johnson has said he wants to see raised - and you get some idea of the pressures London boroughs are being subjected to. |
| Is the Hill commission solution the right one? He is clear that it would not “insulate the properties from the provisions of the Housing and Planning Bill.” Its proposed extension of the right-to-buy to housing association tenants is not the problem here, as when the transfer of council housing stock takes place the existing council right-to-buy transfers with it. Hill even detects in the Bill’s small print “some possible discretionary provision to force the sale of former council homes even after they’ve transferred to a housing association if they become void.” | Is the Hill commission solution the right one? He is clear that it would not “insulate the properties from the provisions of the Housing and Planning Bill.” Its proposed extension of the right-to-buy to housing association tenants is not the problem here, as when the transfer of council housing stock takes place the existing council right-to-buy transfers with it. Hill even detects in the Bill’s small print “some possible discretionary provision to force the sale of former council homes even after they’ve transferred to a housing association if they become void.” |
| Moreover, very idea of “stock transfer” is just a form of privatisation to some, and Hill its long-standing “Blairite” champion. Housing associations have greater borrowing power than councils, which should means more money for maintenance and repair and also for building more homes. But would also mean more money for “regeneration”, often a weasel word for knocking people’s homes down and clearing the ground for dubious developer exploitation - the very thing the council wants to prevent any future Tory H&F administration from indulging in. | Moreover, very idea of “stock transfer” is just a form of privatisation to some, and Hill its long-standing “Blairite” champion. Housing associations have greater borrowing power than councils, which should means more money for maintenance and repair and also for building more homes. But would also mean more money for “regeneration”, often a weasel word for knocking people’s homes down and clearing the ground for dubious developer exploitation - the very thing the council wants to prevent any future Tory H&F administration from indulging in. |
| The report engages directly with these issues. It recommends that the council carries out “a study of opportunities to deliver new homes and community-led regeneration”. This, it says, would help finance the new housing association which could then assist delivery of the extra homes local people want. For Hill, this is in line with what those living in council properties desire. “We recognise objectively that there is a housing crisis,” he says, “and many of the residents we spoke to told us of their fears about where their children will live. So it will be of benefit if what we’re proposing means that more suitable housing is built.” | The report engages directly with these issues. It recommends that the council carries out “a study of opportunities to deliver new homes and community-led regeneration”. This, it says, would help finance the new housing association which could then assist delivery of the extra homes local people want. For Hill, this is in line with what those living in council properties desire. “We recognise objectively that there is a housing crisis,” he says, “and many of the residents we spoke to told us of their fears about where their children will live. So it will be of benefit if what we’re proposing means that more suitable housing is built.” |
| Hill defines what he sees as the key difference between regenerations led by private developers and how a community-led housing association would approach adding to and improving existing properties: “Private developers instinctively go for highervalue, but community-led schemes will tend to produce a more mixed offerthat would embrace some private as well as extra social housing, and alsointermediate homes.” | Hill defines what he sees as the key difference between regenerations led by private developers and how a community-led housing association would approach adding to and improving existing properties: “Private developers instinctively go for highervalue, but community-led schemes will tend to produce a more mixed offerthat would embrace some private as well as extra social housing, and alsointermediate homes.” |
| The key to that difference is the community dimension. The report firmly favours the “community gateway” model for housing associations pioneered by the Co-operative movement to place controlling powers in the hands of residents. The example of Phoenix Community Housing in Lewisham really enthused the commissioners, Hill says. The hope, as set out in the report, is that this approach can accommodate preserving existing homes - their proposals presume no demolitions - building more and, by placing the power to make decisions about remodeling or rebuilding estates in the hands of those who live on them, give “regeneration” a positive new meaning. | The key to that difference is the community dimension. The report firmly favours the “community gateway” model for housing associations pioneered by the Co-operative movement to place controlling powers in the hands of residents. The example of Phoenix Community Housing in Lewisham really enthused the commissioners, Hill says. The hope, as set out in the report, is that this approach can accommodate preserving existing homes - their proposals presume no demolitions - building more and, by placing the power to make decisions about remodeling or rebuilding estates in the hands of those who live on them, give “regeneration” a positive new meaning. |
| The report also talks about London examples of housing organisations working productively with the residents they serve. Tory Barnet Council has run into opposition with estate redevelopment but its “arms-length management organisation” (ALMO) Barnet Homes impressed the H&F commissioners. “There was a high level of resident satisfaction and very good relationships with council officers,” says Hill. Wandsworth Council’s housing service got a good review too. | |
| The report is due to be considered by the council on 7 December and a favourable response looks on the cards, although its deliberations might be influenced by an element of the government’s comprehensive spending review, due later this month. One advantage for councils of stock transfers going ahead has been that their housing-related debt has been written off. Should the chancellor decide not to renew this provision, the council would need to take that into account. | The report is due to be considered by the council on 7 December and a favourable response looks on the cards, although its deliberations might be influenced by an element of the government’s comprehensive spending review, due later this month. One advantage for councils of stock transfers going ahead has been that their housing-related debt has been written off. Should the chancellor decide not to renew this provision, the council would need to take that into account. |
| If it embraces the report, the plans would then be put to a vote of residents. Should they vote “yes”, it would require the communities secretary to give the transfer the green light. It would be helpful, Hill thinks, if local Conservatives gave their support. Would they? There wasn’t much sign of it back in May. It would be rather ironic if they did. | If it embraces the report, the plans would then be put to a vote of residents. Should they vote “yes”, it would require the communities secretary to give the transfer the green light. It would be helpful, Hill thinks, if local Conservatives gave their support. Would they? There wasn’t much sign of it back in May. It would be rather ironic if they did. |
| Another irony is that the very H&F estates whose treatment by the Tories in their enthusiasm for the Earl Court Project informed Labour’s moves to pre-empt any repetition would not, as things stand, be encompassed by the Hill report’s proposals, even though campaigners want to set up a resident-led housing association resembling the sort the Hill report supports. There’s no politics like the politics of housing policy. Has the H&F residents commission found the way forward for low cost housing in high price London? | Another irony is that the very H&F estates whose treatment by the Tories in their enthusiasm for the Earl Court Project informed Labour’s moves to pre-empt any repetition would not, as things stand, be encompassed by the Hill report’s proposals, even though campaigners want to set up a resident-led housing association resembling the sort the Hill report supports. There’s no politics like the politics of housing policy. Has the H&F residents commission found the way forward for low cost housing in high price London? |
| Read the full report via here. | Read the full report via here. |