|
|
 |
| |
How carelessly the council are squandering our assets
• IT was a pretty appalling story, your lead article (Fat flipping profits are incredible, August 27).
Inevitably, we had an official response, with Councillor Chris Naylor telling us (We have to sell some homes, September 3) how “very disappointed” he was “to read your misleading article”.
Who’s misleading who, though and can the good councillor be even half as disappointed as local taxpayers, seeing how carelessly the council is squandering the borough’s assets?
They need to be reminded – Councillors and officials alike – they don’t own the borough housing stock, they’re simply the stewards of public assets, built up by wiser men than them.
Making a pretty shabby job of it they are, too, but it’s not their fault, of course, it’s all down to the wicked Labour government, ratting on their promises of five years since.
Yes, it’s that legendary £283million again, though I thought it had been conditional on tenants accepting arms-length management organisations, which Cllr Naylor doesn’t mention, somehow.
No matter, though, that’s a mere detail compared to the fuzzy math and fantasy of the rest of his letter.
As he tells us, they plan to sell some 300 homes.
If they get the same prices as the Aspern Grove properties, they’ll be raising £56million, not £283million, with no explanation of the shortfall.
Perhaps that’s enough, though, after all they’re only doing up 15,000 homes.
Or perhaps not, for while officials talk a lot about “best value” it’s the last thing they actually get.
How often do government projects come in at treble the estimate or more?
Given that history, Cllr. Naylor’s glowing words “50,000 residents... waking up each day to better heating, improved kitchens and bathrooms, safer wiring...” are just pie in the sky.
Nice, yes, but still claptrap – all the more so when you hear tales about the newly done-up Chalcots estate, and the appalling work done by council contractors there.
What the officials still haven’t grasped, it seems, is the need for rigorous quality control, for regular inspections of contractors’ work before the money’s paid. It’s such an elementary mistake, such obvious bad housekeeping, our councillors should be screaming blue murder; but instead of that, they’re off on their deluded fantasies.
So Cllr Naylor can tell us about “getting the maximum return from selling the minimum of homes” and “selling through public auctions to get the best returns”.
Did you ever hear such rubbish?
And don’t they know about reserve prices at auction? They’ve held a fire sale, turned 200 grand of our money into profit for some unnamed speculator – and still they see nothing wrong.
One really has to question their motives and their logic.
R Warren (Liberal Democrats do not represent estate’s interest, Letters, September 3), asked two simple questions.
“How stupid are they? How stupid do they think we are?”
I would add, what did we do to deserve a Town Hall?
Jack Smith
Fellows Road, NW3
Sitting on £100m
• IT'S disappointing that Councillor Chris Naylor won’t take responsibility for decisions taken by him and his Liberal Democrat colleagues.
He seems willing to blame all-comers rather than put his hand up to decisions he and his colleagues have made.
Camden’s current housing policy is controlled by the Liberal Democrat/ Tory coalition. They and they alone have taken the decision to sell off council properties, many at well below market rates. Far from the claim they’re selling properties they can’t afford to renovate, many seem to need little more than a lick of paint.
It’s also disappointing that Cllr Naylor is willing to present such a partial, and misleading picture.
Currently the Liberal Democrat/ Tory administration are sat on reserves close to £100million. Yes that’s right, £100million.
This cash, our cash, has been hoarded by cutting youth services, raising meals on wheels charges by over 20 per cent, the inept housing sales among other disastrous policies.
This £100million represents nearly £7,000 for each of the 15,000 flats that Cllr Naylor acknowledges don’t meet the Decent Homes standard.
That’s a lot of renovation work by anyone’s standard, never mind an organisation with the buying power of Camden Council.
Perhaps we shouldn’t be surprised at the ruling Liberal Democrat’s lack of back bone. They’re currently insulting the intelligence of voters by using leaflets to try to pass off Right to Buy sales to long-term council tenants under the previous administration as comparable to their own inept sell-off to private developers.
But what is clear is that while Camden continues to sit on these hoarded millions council leaders, Liberal Democrats and Tories, can decide what to do with it.
Why don’t they fund some work that Camden people want like housing renovations?
SARAH HAYWARD, NW5
Who is to blame?
• WHEN the Liberal Democrats impose cuts on the Maiden Lane youth centre, it’s Town Hall officials’ fault.
When they sell off council homes to developers, it’s central government’s fault. So when they close homeless people’s centres, whose to blame then?
As a concerned resident, I think it’s high time the Lib Dems took responsibility for their actions and started helping the more vulnerable in our community.
ROBERT HIGSON, NW2
Stop the sell-off
• COUNCILLOR Chris Naylor (Letters, September 3) says that we need to sell our priceless homes to the private market so that we can raise much-needed money to carry out work to our housing stock.
Due to the fact that Labour government withheld much needed money, because the tenants decided not to take up the offer of an Almo.
I say to Cllr Naylor and his colleagues, stop selling our homes.
We have lost so many already to leaseholders who have either sold on their affordable homes to people who could afford to pay mortgages or pay high rents in the private sector, and who are also sub-letting their properties for a profit, also charging rents that you would only see in the private sector.
Why doesn’t Cllr Naylor and his high-paid colleagues, who can probably afford such high rents or could so easily afford a mortgage, stop and think about the not so well off, who are desperately seeking a roof over their heads. Selling one affordable home keeps a person on the waiting list or in temporary accommodation longer, which is not cheap. It’s about time they looked after the interest of voters and stood up to the government and not be bullied into meeting the Decent Homes standard.
It’s not worth one brick on any of our affordable homes,
They should say that because the government in power refuses to give us much needed funding we will meet the Decent Homes standard in our own time, managing with the money we receive in rents back from the government in due course without selling the council silver.
Come on Camden, grow a backbone. This is why we vote our councillors into power, to serve us and talk for us, not to be told by the housing minister we must do the impossible by sacrificing our much-needed homes.
Especially when the minster is a part of the government that refused to give us our much needed money in the first place.
name and address supplied
Crisis due to Labour
• ALTHOUGH Councillor Roger Robinson (Letters, September 3) complains about the reduction of local housing stock, his own Labour Party has for the last 12 years consistently pursued a policy of selling off Camden Council homes.
Prime Minister Gordon Brown has no qualms about disposing of Camden Council property and raking in the money for his government’s coffers at the expense of Camden.
From 1998/9 to 2004/5 the Labour government sold off 4,176 local council homes and still continues to sell them under its right to buy policy.
The Labour-run council also reduced the total Camden housing stock by a further 637 between 1998/9 and 2004/5. This means that since 1998/9 Labour has reduced the housing stock in Camden by a total of 4,564 homes.
It is clear that it is the Labour Party, who are responsible for the current housing crisis in Camden.
The government’s failed economic policies will not make Camden’s job any easier.
D SiMMONS, NW1
So why no change of policy?
• IN his letter (September 3) Labour councillor Roger Robinson takes issue with the current council for selling off empty council properties.
His own government is far from blameless.
A New Journal article some time ago about Labour’s deputy leadership election has stuck in my mind, so I looked it up on the website.
The article is dated June 14 2007; the headline reads: Give ’em the homes’ millions, says Brown’s deputy (whoever that turns out to be).
It goes on to state that: “Six candidates back direct investment to end housing crisis. ALL six candidates vying for the post of Labour deputy leader are supporting a change in government policy that would finally allow direct investment in Camden’s crumbling council homes”.
Harriet Harman the eventual winner is reported in the article as saying: “What we shouldn’t have done is say to tenants: you’ve got the choice, you can either vote for going out of the council being your landlord and going into a housing association or an Almo in which case you have your estate completely refurbished.
“Or you can stay with the council and your estate will fall down around your ears.”
The sad thing is that now the deputy leadership election is over no change has taken place in government policy and still no money is forthcoming.
Another Labour minister and deputy leadership candidate said at that time: “The crisis is so acute that all of the options should be on the table and all of them should be used.”
Quite clearly the government was aware that it was placing Camden Council in a very difficult position. Until the government changes its hostile approach to Camden’s council residents, the current local council, whether it likes it or not it would seem, is forced to fall back on that advice.
CAROLINE MACDONALD
NW1
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
