See blog Homes not houses for recent news on Social housing
GHA's Plans for Sighthill.The GHA has announced its plan for demolition of the five multi-storey blocks in the Fountainwell part of Sighthill.(Meeting 28th July)Too right we're angy.
Razing flats 'bid to gentrify area'
House prices 'creat a new kind of poverty'
News from the east- Dundee campaign news
"Finally, it is quite clear that there is growing anger and a willingness to fight by council and housing association tenants against the increasingly punitive approach of their landlords. However, it is also equally clear..."
Defend Council Housing!
Where are the quotes from Scotlands MPs and MSPs championing public sector housing ?
So much for the radial Scottish tradition.
Standing up to housing bullies
"Both East Renfrewshire council and North Ayrshire council have shown a degree of political leadership to stand up against the bully-boy tactics of the Labour and Liberal Scottish Executive who are trying to force councils to transfer their housing stock. "
Sedgefield tenants Vote No to Privatisation
Lobby your MP and urge them to support EDM Future of Council Housing and join the House of Commons Council Housing group
Tenants occupation in Glasgow
Yesterday, Tuesday the 21st of june, tenants from Glasgow, Edinburgh and Dundee occupied the offices of 'Communities Scotland' to protest the run-down of basic services and the erasure of publicly-funded housing in Scotland. They sent out a message that they are organised and willing to resist New Labour's privatisation agenda for housing in Scotland.
Tenants urged to fight changes
Tenants are being urged to stand up and be counted over the changes to concierge services in Glasgow.
Save our homes- Save our concierge -Save our community
1. Do you want your buildings patrolled on a regular basis?
2. Do you wish your elderly tenants to continue to enjoy the regular checks they are entitled to at present?
3. Do you wish your blocks to continue to be clean and vandal free?
4. Do you want a familiar face to continue to attend to your responses throughout the night particularly in an emergency?
OR
A community mental health centre is facing closure
in an area of the city with high rates of attempted suicide.
Creative Community Crafts, in Govanhill, ran out of funding in March and has until August to source new money or be shut down.
The drop-in centre, run by a board of directors from the community, has more than 200 members with 40 regular clients who have mental health problems.
TOWER BLOCK OBJECTIONS
David Nelson, director of Adam (Scotland) Ltd said he was "particularly pleased" with the plans. "They incorporate both contemporary and sympathetic design (real sandstone) with the surrounding tenement properties," he said.
He added that the design included landscaped terraces and integrated car parks, which had proved popular at his firm's other properties in the west end.
Home Office errors blamed as main cause of homelessness among asylum seekers 22 April 2005
Problem board members can be ejected under new NHF rules* 22 April 2005 *HOUSING TODAY [(So what is the situation in Scotland?)
Beat burden of interest with pooled borrowing, RSLs told
22 April 2005
Camden sets annual ASBO target of one per estate officer 22 April 2005 HOUSING TODAY (What is the situation in Scotland?)
Census reveals equality targets are pipe dream ... 22 April 2005 HOUSING TODAY (And again, what is the situation in Scotland? Any answers please reply in an email .)
____________________________________________
Tuesday 19 th April 10.45 am SAVE OUR HOMES ---- PRESS CONFERENCE At 103 Marfield Street, Carntyne .
NO TO UNJUST DEMOLITIONS
NO TO MARKET TENTS
NO TO POVERTY
NO TO LAND SELL OFF
NO TO SECRECY OF GHA LTD
Get the news that the dominant media may decide not news fit to Print and hear and tell what smg (Scottish Media Group, publishers of the Herald and Evening Times) ignore. Will the Socialist Voice be there when mass public sector housing is daily being rubbished by the so called Community based housing associations with the tenant led 'by the nose' involvement through LHOs (Local Housing Officers) to pave the way to full privatisation and the return of pre- World war II landlordism? Will the Big Issue be there?
You should be there if you care about decent homes for all and the terrible policy that will create more homelessness. Come to the this press conference and ask question and go from there and discuss what you have heard. Save our homes campaign
"She told BBC Radio Scotland's Good Morning Scotland programme how her home was slowly falling apart and how she may have to spend up to another five years in the property before moving.
"Glasgow Housing Association is sitting on a £90m surplus after failing to spend 35% of its maintenance budget. "
Asked about the association's repair and maintenance programme, she said: "It's non-existent. Who can live in houses like these for four or five years - it's affecting everybody's health? "
The council should be spending some of their time and money on peoples basic amenities, not super casinos. Making sure the GHA Fix the Cedar Street lifts for instance
Where people have been practically house bound for months! Come along to the Cedar Street Tenants public meeting. Woodside Halls, Clarenden St. Wednesday 13th April 2005, 7:30pm
Sighthill Save our homes PDF
**TENANTS QUESTION TIME:
**RED ROAD BOMBSHELL IS SIGHTHILL NEXT?**
**ST. VALENTINES DAY MASSACRE: DEMOLITION ‘RUMOUR’ TRUE! **
___________________________________________
CAMPAIGNERS CLAIM AREA WORTH FOUR TIMES AS MUCH
CAMPAIGNERS are furious at plans to sell a South Side park for £326,500 to developers - despite the land being valued at well over £1 million. Back Park, in Cathcart, has been earmarked for sale by the city council to AS Homes Ltd - with plans to build up to 80 five and six-storey flats
Council forced to spend £4m on cheap homes
FOUR million pounds of taxpayers' money is to be spent by a Scottish local authority buying back council homes it sold on the cheap, Scotland on Sunday can reveal.
The Case for Public Sector Housing in Glasgow
There is no mandate to privatise Glasgow's Council Housing as only 37 percent (29,000 tenants) supported stock transfer with 63 percent (47,000 tenants) not endorsing housing privatisation at the ballot, on the 5th of April 2002.
I know what I'd do
Council tenants are being offered a gun-to-the-head choice: vote to sell your estate or wait years for repairs Polly Toynbee
Housing staff may train to replace ASBO solicitors
Housing officers could replace antisocial behaviour lawyers under plans being considered by the Home Office.
INSIDE HOUSING Glasgow to transfer 35,000 homes
Sean Clerkin, chair of the Glasgow Campaign Against Housing Stock Transfer, said second stage transfer was being rushed through.'This is not community ownership or community control. It is a free for all - basically a free market in housing replacing the safety of public housing.'
Tenants say no to high-rise demolition
"GHA is a highly secretive organisation and may tenants mistrust what they call "their weasel words".
Tenants 'blackmailed' into housing transfers
Matt Weaver * * Friday October 29, 2004* *The Guardian
Claims that ministers are trying to blackmail tenants into accepting new management of council housing are justified, according to a government researcher.
Labour donor sounds death knell for council housing
The government was today urged to force all councils to transfer their housing stock to housing associations within three years, under provocative new proposals launched by a Labour party donor.
Glasgow Housing tenants WATCH OUT! Updated
My advice to my fellow tenants is as follows: Do not tick the box. Do not return the card. File it in the bin where it belongs.
Please pass this on, quickly, to any GHA tenants you know.
Brian D Finch.
CARNTYNE TENANTS SAVE OUR HOMES CAMPAIGN
Tenants and home owners rejected demolition of their Winget type houses. The people of Carntyne have been campaigning and demanding action to ensure a long life for their homes. Here are the results of the landlords survey:
Houses sold for £20,000 bought back for £115,000 after two years Councilors in East Lothian are planning to spend £4m buying back former council houses they sold for a fraction of the price in order to shelter homeless families.
Tenants say no to high-rise demolition
*TENANTS have told housing bosses they do not want their high-rise homes demolished.*
A survey carried out by campaigners in Sighthill found that 90% who replied wanted to keep the flats if improvements were made.
And more than two thirds said they were against demolition.
The blocks of multi-storey flats are among 20,000 homes under review for demolition.
The Save our Homes campaigners took questionnaires to each house in the area and a total of 350 were sent back.
The results showed nine out of 10 said they were in favour of retaining the homes if the landlord Glasgow Housing Association made improvements.
Another question asked if they were in favour of demolishing the homes.
The answer came back as 67% saying no.
Alan Graham, of Sighthill Save Our Homes, said: "When we found out GHA was doing a survey and would only be asking 15% of one of the areas and 100% of another, we decided to carry out our own."
A spokesman for GHA said: "There are no pre-determined plans for the demolition of any homes in Sighthill.
"Around £10million has been earmarked for improvements"
GHA is a highly secretive organisation and may tenants mistrust what they call "their weasel words". They were told it would be better with the GHA than under council housing but tenants' representatives have been told that cross subsidisation of costs is to be a thing of the past, when it comes to maintaining the more costly high-rise flats, for the new social landlord Glasgow Hosing Association Limited And Graham Campbell told Radio Clyde,"Where are the 21,000 people to go?"
* *Tenants 'blackmailed' into housing transfers*
*Matt Weaver*
*Friday October 29, 2004*
*The Guardian*
Claims that ministers are trying to blackmail tenants into accepting new management of council housing are justified, according to a government researcher.
Academic Hal Pawson, who has carried out a series of official studies for the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, has delivered a scathing attack on the government's troubled housing policy.
Writing in this year's UK Housing Review he claimed that that it was misleading of ministers to claim that their policy of switching homes to new landlords promoted choice in public services.
Mr Pawson, senior research fellow at Edinburgh's Heriot-Watt university, said it as "hard to contest" campaigners' claims that tenants were being blackmailed into voting for new management of their homes.
He said: "Ultimately, the 'choice' offered to the vast majority of tenants consists of no more that an opportunity to endorse or reject a single option, with rejection potentially incurring a heavy penalty in the form of debarred access to capital investment. This is, arguably, hardly a choice at all."
The government has a target of ensuring that all council homes are bought up to a decent standard by 2010. But it insists that the extra resources to achieve this will only be available to councils that switch their homes to housing associations, private finance consortia or arm's length management organisations.
Mr Pawson's comments are the latest blow to this policy. In September the Labour party rejected the policy by backing a resolution calling for direct housing investment in areas where tenants have voted to retain the council as their landlord.
Mr Pawson pointed out that the decent homes standard was itself an "unambitious yardstick", and even if it was achieved it would not represent a "transformation" of council housing.
He also noted that nearly a fifth of transfer housing associations run into trouble with the regulator after being set up.
Mr Pawson said that tenants were rarely consulted about council's decisions to go for housing transfers, and even when they were the tenants involved were not representative of general tenant opinion.
He wrote: "It is hard to present transfer as genuinely part of the 'customer choice' agenda. Proposals are hardly ever bottom-up in the sense of being motivated by tenant preferences."
He accepted that describing housing transfer as 'privatisation' was tenuous. But he added: "The 'fat cat' image of housing association chief executives and the perception of bigger pay differentials than are the norm in local authorities are presented as lending some credence to the 'privatisation' argument.
"Housing association board member payments, as now introduced in England, may well provide further ammunition for this line of attack."
The review is published jointly by the Chartered Institute of Housing and the Council for Mortgage Lenders. They pointed out that Mr Pawson was writing in a personal capacity.
*Labour donor sounds death knell for council housing*
*Matt Weaver*
*Wednesday December 15, 2004*
*The Guardian*
The government was today urged to force all councils to transfer their housing stock to housing associations within three years, under provocative new proposals launched by a Labour party donor.
In a new pamphlet for left-leaning thinktank the Fabian Society, Jeff Zitron argued that tenants should no longer have a vote to keep their council landlords.
Mr Zitron, who runs a housing consultancy that specialises in housing transfers, claimed that currently tenants are being offered a "fake choice" about the future management of their housing.
He proposed that the transfer of the remaining 2.8m council homes should be made mandatory by the end of 2007. Mr Zitron argued that although tenants should lose their right to veto housing transfers they should be given a genuine choice about the new landlords that take over their homes.
The government has pledged that all social housing should be improved to a decent standard by 2010. But it has insisted that the extra resources to achieve this will only be available to councils that switch their homes to housing associations, arm's length management organisations or private finance initiative consortia.
Mr Zitron, who donated £10,000 to the Labour in 2002, said in his paper: "The government creates the illusion that tenants are choosing from a range of investment options. But, in reality, many tenants are simply being asked to choose between transfer to a housing association or no investment."
He added: "If choice is currently a nonsense, the options are either to stop pretending there is choice, or to give tenants a real one.
"The choice offered to tenants should not be about whether to transfer, it should be about who they will transfer to," he said.
The proposal is likely to anger the Labour's rank and file who at the party's conference in September voted overwhelming against the government by backing new investment in council housing.
Mr Zitron's pamphlet, Transfer of Affections, said: "The division between the Labour government and the Labour party over stock transfer is undermining the interests of tenants and preventing many of our worst estates from being improved."
Mr Zitron said the party needed to change its attitude to housing transfers.
"The party needs to drop what is often an instinctive suspicion of housing associations. Our fastidiousness about the ownership of social housing would bemuse socialists in Europe and beyond who have built their social housing system on cooperative structures."
Many in the Labour movement favour council housing because they claim it is more democratically accountable. Mr Zitron claimed that this is a myth and that now only housing associations offer genuine tenant empowerment.
He pointed out that in 1981 13% of council wards contained a majority of council tenants, but by 2001 this had dropped to 0.7%.
He said: "With these figures, it's clear to see that the direct or unique power of council tenants to hold their landlord accountable, if it ever was a reality, has disappeared."
Responding to the paper, a spokesman for the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister said: "It is vital for tenants to have choice. Transfer, almos and PFI remain the government's three options towards reaching the 2010 decent homes target."
SocietyGuardian.co.uk © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2004
Council says B&B rule to cost it £4m
COUNCILLORS in East Lothian are planning to spend £4m buying back former council houses they sold for a fraction of the price in order to shelter homeless families.
The authority says it is being forced into the move by new rules coming into effect this week, which make it illegal for councils to house families with children in B&Bs for more than 14 days, except in an emergency, and there is no other housing stock available.
One sale saw the council paying £115,000 for a home it sold for £20,250 under a right-to-buy discount two years ago.
Willie Innes, housing convener, said: "We will be looking at £4m to buy back homes .
The Scottish Executive are going on about efficient government. What on earth is efficient about this?"
However, Malcolm Chisholm, communities minister, yesterday denied that there was any need to spend such sums on repurchasing stock and accused the council of exaggerating the problem in order to embarrass the executive.
From Iain : agahst2003@hotmail.com
CARNTYNE TENANTS SAVE OUR HOMES CAMPAIGN
SAVE OUR HOMES News Update November 2004 SAVE OUR COMMUNITY
The Glasgow Housing Association Ltd. carried out a biased
Social Survey asking questions designed to get answers that would favour demolition - THEY FAILED!
People in Carntyne, Glasgow are very angry at the mis- representation of their area in The Herald newspaper.
Tenants and home owners rejected demolition of their Winget type houses. The people of Cartyne have been campaigning and demanding action to ensure a long life for their homes. Here are the results of the landlords survey:
47 percent of tenants were very satisfied with their homes
21 percent of tenants were fairly satisfied with their homes
72 percent of home owners were very satisfied with their homes 20 percent of home owners were fairly satisfied with their homes Taken together 76 percent of tenants are satisfied with their Winget Homes and 92 percent of home owners are satisfied with their Winget Homes
RESULT: NO SUPPORT FOR DEMOLITION This clearly shows that opposition to demolition is overwhelming. Tenants and home owners were asked.. If no action was taken do you think that the Winget Homes would have a long term future?
46 percent of tenants said YES.
31 percent said NO.
58 percent of homeowners said YES.
27 percent said NO.
This is a blatant attempt at managerial manipulation by GHA Ltd. But despite this biased question the community showed again that there is no support for demolition.
The people of Cartyne have not been fooled by this loaded question and there is a clear and consistent demand from tenants and owners for the structural upgrading of their Winget Houses. They quizzed,
"If it is not financially viable to have the Winget Houses repaired, would you support demolition?" Is this another trick question because the people of Carntyne know that it is viable to have the Winget Houses repaired. We are not saying yes to neglect but No
To Demolition. Result: So despite another biased question 59 percent of tenants said NO to demolition and 72 percent of homeowners said NO to demolition. Carntyne is a currently settled and Socially Sustainable Community. It is GHA Ltd whose anti-social financial agenda threatens us. This is not consultation but dark and threatening manoeuvres. The money spent on Structural Engineering Consultants was necessary and shows that the Cartyne people deserve to retain their homes and their Community.
Why is it that a simple question like, "Do you want you winget homes brought up to standard to give them a secure long life?", was not asked?
We Need Our Winget HOMES IMPROVED, NOT NEGLECTED by GHA Ltd and NOT DEMOLISHED! Don't Let Them Grind UsDown !!!
Contact: Tel. 07976 718 111or email: agahst2003@hotmail.com
Our Homes *N*ews *U*pdate
People in Carntyne, Glasgow are very angry at the misrepresentation of their area in The Herald newspaper. One local resident spoke to the author of the offending article who said that Cartyne was part of one the poorest areas with regard to health in Glasgow and one of the poorest in the UK, He also stated that his research amounted to an inaccurate ten year old report. The truth is that Compared to many areas which do have serious social and health problems Cartyne is a paradise, which is not to deny that like all areas even the most desirable it must have Some of the problems typically found almost universally. "No harm to anyone living in an area which has serious problems other than the problem of having a landlord like Glasgow Housing Association Ltd. and a so called 'quality' press which is used by them to spin a community into the ground. Attached are copies of the Herald article and a Save
agahst2003@hotmail.com
____________Start" Tenants watch out"_____________
Letter to the Herald Re: GHA Rent Referendum
Sunday 28th November 2004
Dear Sir,
Chief among the promises made to Glasgow's council tenants to persuade them to support the transfer of the city's housing stock to the Glasgow Housing Association (GHA) was that rents would rise by no more than the rate of inflation before March 2007. This promise was written into the GHA tenancy agreement.
However, in an expensive consultation process, tenants throughout the city are now receiving copies of a glossy single A4 consultation sheet (complete with tear-off free post referendum' postcard attached), sent out with the alleged purpose of consulting tenants '...to hear what, you, our tenants think about an increase in rent'. It seems to me that the only intelligible reason for such a 'consultation' is that the GHA is trying to resile from its promise.
This impression is reinforced by the misleading wording of the proposition put to tenants on the postcard: 'I do not agree with a rent increase by no more than the rate of inflation (tick box if applicable).'
While in standard English a double negative always cancels out, leaving a positive, in Scots vernacular (and in its various dialects - including Glaswegian) double negatives generally function as intensifiers of the original negative. Hence, thinking they are opposing a rent increase greater than the rate of inflation, many tenants may tick the box. The GHA could then interpret the result to say that their tenants do not disagree with a rent rise greater than the rate of inflation. My advice to my fellow tenants is as follows: Do not tick the box. Do not return the card. File it in the bin where it belongs.
Yours sincerely, Brian D Finch
Tel: 0141 946 9213 e-mail: brian@brassneck.net
Reply Article in Herald :
GHA rents will not rise above rate of inflation
Your letters
Brian Finch is right to point out the double negative in our recent tenant consultation newsletter (Letters, November 29). The proposition should have read: "I agree with a rent increase of no more than the rate of inflation."
Glasgow Housing Association would like to once again confirm that rent for our tenants will not be increased by more than the rate of RPI inflation until at least March 2008, in line with our promise made at the time of transfer, and not 2007 as Mr Finch asserts. We have a statutory obligation, agreed with Communities Scotland, to consult with our tenants on rent increases each year.
GHA would like to apologise if phrasing used in the newsletter to tenants has caused any confusion. This is an unfortunate incidence of communication below our high standards and we will endeavour to ensure that it does not happen again. We strive for an environment of openness and transparency in all our dealings. Our commitment to rent increases at RPI was repeated in our latest Business Plan, a document already in the public domain.
Should any of our tenants have any queries on the subject we would encourage them to contact their local housing organisation office.
Michael Lennon, Chief Executive, Glasgow Housing Association, 88 Bell Street, Glasgow.
Brian D Finch's reply to Herald article
Wednesday 1st December 2004
Dear Sir,
While GHA Chief Executive Michael Lennon's retraction of the misleading double negative in the proposition presented to the tenants is welcome, it does not remove all ambiguity. According to Mr Lennon, the proposition should have read: 'I agree with a rent increase of no more than the rate of inflation.' There is no Yes/No option offered (as David Carvel wrongly inferred (Nov 30) from my previously letter. There is merely one box to be ticked in signifying agreement. Yet precisely what is to be agreed is unclear. If tenants did tick the box, would they be presumed to be agreeing to one or more than one annual rent increase of equal to or less then equal to the rate of inflation? If tenants were to disagree, how are they supposed to register such disagreement? What would they be taken as disagreeing with? Would Mr Lennon please either make expressly clear the nature of the proposition he wishes to put to us, or else scrap this ridiculous consultation? Indeed, had the GHA chief executive not explicitly stated 'that rent for our tenants will not be increased by more than the rate of RPI inflation until at least March 2008, in line with our promise made at the time of transfer, and not 2007 as Mr Finch asserts', this ill-conceived question might still be seen as an attempt to trick tenants into releasing the GHA from said contractual promise. Finally, I did not assert that the promise was only valid until 2007. The GHA did. The document received by the tenants states: 'Tenants were promised that rents would increase by no more than the October rate of inflation, up until March 2007.' Had Mr Lennon not corrected this mis-statement, it would have furnished the ammunition for my next attack.
Yours sincerely, Brian D Finch --
56 Fingal Street [0/2] Maryhill
Glasgow G20 0DH
Tel: 0141 946 9213 e-mail:
brian@brassneck.net
My 1st reply wasn't printed. Here is a better...
Thursday 2nd December 2004
Dear Sir,
Contrary to the rubbish written by GHA chief executive Michael Lennon (Dec 1) the claim, 'that rent for [GHA] tenants will not be increased by more than the rate of RPI inflation until at least March...2007 as Mr Finch asserts', was not in fact sired by me. It was the GHA itself wot dunnit. The document received by the tenants explicitly states: 'Tenants were promised that rents would increase by no more than the October rate of inflation, up until March 2007.' Now, according to Mr Lennon, the proposition should have read: 'I agree with a rent increase of no more than the rate of inflation.' Unfortunately, this new formula possesses little more clarity than the original gobbledeygook. Are we being asked to concur with an increase equal to, or less than equal to, to the rate of inflation? If we vote no, will we still get one anyway? Will ticked postcards with the initial flawed proposition count? I note that Mr Lennon has neither rejected their use, nor said that a better worded question will be sent out. Why not?
Yours sincerely, Brian D Finch --
56 Fingal Street [0/2]
Maryhill
Glasgow G20 0DH
___________________________________________
Words matter (from the Evening Times)
THE errors contained in a new GHA questionnaire may be merely grammatical but housing bosses cannot afford to make such mistakes.Although they are keen to point out they did not mean it, even appearing to canvas support for above-inflation rent rises does them no favours as they attempt to build relationships with Glasgow's former council tenants.Despite the progress already made in improving city homes, the GHA has an uphill struggle to convince a cynical minority they have the best interests of tenants at heart.This means that in everything they say and do, GHA bosses must be upfront, unambiguous and use their language with care.
I wonder where the Times discovered this little unaccredited snippet. A crusading journalist perhaps. B
____________________End "tenants watch out"_________
Herald article > "...People in Carntyne, Glasgow"
Tenants reject plans to demolish run-down houses
STEPHEN STEWART Herald November 18 2004
TENANTS of Europe's largest social landlord in one of Scotland's most socially deprived communities do not want their homes demolished, a survey shows. More than 2000 Glaswegians in an area with severe social problems were asked for their opinions on the long-term future of their homes. The results of the survey by Glasgow Housing Association revealed that nearly 60% of tenants in Carntyne, in the east end of Glasgow, did not want to lose their houses despite nearly two decades of doubt over their structural viability. Tenants hope the results will ensure that the area, particularly popular with elderly people despite being blighted by drugs and gang violence, is given a new lease of life after surveyors said the homes had a working life of no more than 10 years unless major improvements were made.
The 70-year-old Winget homes were built in a way which does not conform to modern building standards, and will be very expensive to upgrade under the decade-long programme of improvements promised under housing stock transfer of 80,000 homes from Glasgow City Council to GHA. The survey showed that some 98% were very satisfied or fairly satisfied with the location of their home, and 39% said they had lived in the area for more than 21 years. Tenants were asked whether, if it was not financially viable to have the winget houses repaired, they would support demolition. A total of 59% said No, 24% said Yes, and the rest either refused to answer or did not know.
Margaret Crawley, manager of the community housing organisation which covers Carntyne, said it was encouraging that so many tenants were prepared to play their part in helping decide the future of the area. "Overall this was an extremely worthwhile, productive exercise," she said. "We want to take detailed account of the hopes, aspirations and views of the people of Carntyne and wherever possible we will try to help them reach those ambitions. "We will, however, also have to take into account the relevant technical and financial issues when we come to make a decision on appropriate solutions." Linda Russell, 45, a mother of two, has been a resident of Carntyne for 17 years and is sceptical about the consultation exercise. "If they (GHA) have decided that they are pulling them down then, that is what will happen regardless of what people say," she said. "There are a lot of old folk in this area and I don't think they could handle a move and that is why they are dead against it. I think the houses should be upgraded, not pulled down. I wouldn't even want to move along the street, let alone anywhere else." A further five social surveys are being carried out across the city, including one in Sighthill to determine the fate of the area's multi-storey flats.
Housing staff may train to replace ASBO solicitors
Housing Today, 21 January 2005 - 415
Councils could save ‘millions’ in legal fees by using in-house staff to prepare cases
By Ben Cook
Housing officers could replace antisocial behaviour lawyers under plans being considered by the Home Office.
Housing Today can reveal that the Home Office antisocial behaviour unit is considering training housing staff to be able to apply for antisocial behaviour orders and housing injunctions directly, rather than spending money on solicitors, in a move that could save 95% of legal fees.
Manchester council – which has secured about 750 ASBOs, more than any council – is known to be considering legal training for its housing staff (see “ASBOs: the facts”, right).
Securing an ASBO can cost local authorities and housing associations up to £9000, with the average cost estimated at about £2000.
The Home Office proposals are based on a scheme developed at Newport-based Charter Housing Association in October 2003.
Bill Pitt, head of the neighbourhood nuisance team at Manchester council, said: “The Charter initiative has attracted the attention of both Manchester City Council and the Home Office.”
Pitt, who is also seconded to the Home Office, said the initiative could enable local authorities and housing associations to make similar types of savings to that achieved by Charter. The housing sector could save “millions” in legal fees, he added.
Charter, which manages about 4000 homes, said it had cut its legal spend from £108,000 per year to £4500 per year – a saving of 95% – as a result of its nuisance prevention scheme, which involved training housing staff to prepare housing injunction cases and present them in court.
The Home Office has had discussions with Charter as part of a study into the feasibility of the scheme. There are no details yet when it could be rolled out.
“Charter Housing is one of the leaders in tackling antisocial behaviour and we are interested in any scheme that can reduce costs,” said Louise Casey, head of the antisocial behaviour unit.
John Priday, Charter nuisance prevention team manager, said: “We do everything on our own for housing injunctions including presenting the case in court.
“The cost of legal action is not an excuse for associations not to tackle antisocial behaviour – you can work without solicitors, prepare the papers and appoint a barrister yourself,” he added.
But Howard Clark, chair of the G17 Antisocial Behaviour Group – which represents the 17 largest housing associations in London – expressed reservations about housing staff handling complicated cases.
He said: “Some cases will be complex and you’re going to need to use a solicitor to ensure that no mistakes are made.”
CAMPAIGNERS CLAIM AREA WORTH FOUR TIMES AS MUCH
Fury over park price By Ross McKiNNON The Glaswegian 17 Mar. 05
CAMPAIGNERS are furious at plans to sell a South Side park for £326,500 to developers - despite the land being valued at well over £1 million.
Back Park, in Cathcart, has been earmarked for sale by the city council to AS Homes Ltd - with plans to build up to 80 five and six-storey flats.
However, local campaigner John Walsh obtained documents, using the Freedom of Informa-
tion Act (Scotland) 2002, showing die council wants to flog the park for a quarter of its original valuation.
"Back in December 2003 the council's district valuer placed a value of £1,386,000 on the land," said Mr Walsh.
"However, according to the documents I obtained, the council is now only looking for £326,500 and would be willing to accept a minimum of £245,000."
The council insisted
"negotiations" were ongoing and pointed to flood prevention and other work as an explanation for the price being driven down.
A spokeswoman for the council said: "As complex negotiations for the disposal of this site are not yet concluded, the council is not in a position to speculate on what price will prove to be acceptable.
"Thus far, we have followed the normal industry practice in terms of negotiations, and we are confident we will achieve the
best value for our interest in this particular site.
"It should, however, be borne in mind the site in question requires work, including an already identified £500,000 on flood prevention measures.
"It is also the case that any negotiations concluded by officials requires the approval of the elected members, and such a decision will be taken at a publicly open council committee."
However, this doesn't wash with Mr Walsh, who
insisted the council was ignoring the advice of its own engineer when working out the costs involved.
He said: "The council's geotechnical department stated hack in May 2004 that any abnormal costs for the site only amount to £130,000 - and that's for demolition.
"Any other costs should be met by the developers.
"It's bad enough the council is determined to sell off our park but to do it at a knock-down price is unacceptable."
HOUSING TODAY
Home Office errors blamed as main cause of homelessness among asylum seekers 22 April 2005
Paperwork errors at the Home Office are the main cause of destitution and homelessness among asylum seekers in Scotland.
By Damian Arnold
A report published on 11 April found that more than half (52%) of applications to the charity Refugee Survival Trust were from people who needed financial help because their asylum applications had been delayed by errors and procedural hold-ups.
Of those, 95% were due to errors at the Home Office’s National Asylum Support Service, which houses asylum seekers using private and social landlords while they are waiting to hear whether they can stay in the country.
The delays contributed to the fact that a third of people who made funding applications to the trust were homeless or of no fixed abode. The report cites the case of a Sudanese man who was stabbed in Edinburgh after delays in processing his application left him on the streets.
It calls on NASS to tackle the growing problem of homelessness and “provide an effective safety net to support people when delays or unforeseen circumstances occur”.
Funded by Oxfam, the study analysed 1000 applications to the trust between 2000 and 2004.
The trust’s findings were supported by the charity Positive Action in Housing, which said the number of homeless asylum seekers it was housing had shot up from very few to more than 100 in the past year. Its director Robina Qureshi said: “We have dealt with 138 cases of destitute asylum seekers in the last year. These are people who have been evicted from council accommodation and effectively put out onto the streets and it’s a scandal.”
The report was also welcomed by the Refugee Council. “The system, in general, including NASS, struggles to keep up with the complexities of people’s lives,” said a spokeswoman. “We need to look at the way the system works because it is very rigid.”
The report called on NASS to liaise more closely with support organisations to provide housing for asylum seekers and pressed for extra resources to be spent on processing applications more quickly.
The Home Office this week said it had recently changed its procedures to speed up applications from asylum seekers who make their claim late.
A spokesman defended NASS’ record for housing destitute asylum seekers. “One hundred per cent of claims assessed as destitute are resolved within 24 hours and accommodation is provided by NASS. Those who fail the asylum process will normally be required to leave NASS accommodation except for those with children under 18,” he said.
“The government wants failed asylum seekers to leave and programmes are in place to assist them with that.”
Problem board members can be ejected under new NHF rules* 22 April 2005 *HOUSING TODAY* / [ So what is the situation in Scotland?]
New rules for housing associations registering as not-for-profit companies are set to make it easier for them to remove problem board members.
The National Housing Federation received approval for its new model rules from the Financial Services Authority last month.
These enable associations registering as industrial and provident societies to remove board members at the behest of the board alone – as long as they have signed up to the new rules.
Currently they can only be removed if shareholders vote for it, which can be impractical.
Stephen Bull, head of membership and governance at the NHF, said: “[A vote by shareholders] can involve an awful lot of people, some of whom won’t have been involved for long. It can be quite difficult.”
Provident societies that have signed up to the rules will also find it easier to accept applications for paid board members.
Although new applications to pay board members will still be scrutinised by the FSA, Bull said the process would be “lighter touch” because the association had signed up to the new model.
Board sizes are to be cut from a maximum of 15 to 12 under the new rules. Bull said: “We feel an optimum board size is seven to 12. Anything more can be cumbersome.”
Associations applying to the FSA to become provident societies using the new governance rules will also receive much lighter scrutiny.
Housing Today efficiency conference
Beat burden of interest with pooled borrowing, RSLs told
22 April 2005
Benchmarking organisation HouseMark has advised housing associations to pool their bank borrowing to make efficiency savings.
The organisation’s chief executive Ross Fraser told Housing Today’s efficiency conference that large savings could be made by borrowing jointly because associations spent significant amounts paying interest on loans. Interest payments account for about one-third of some associations’ expenditure, Fraser said.
He added that one association had saved £250,000 a year by pooling its borrowing with others.
“Pooling borrowing is one of the motives behind mergers – paying interest is such a large area of expenditure and it’s a good opportunity to refinance existing loans,” Fraser said.
Mike Wilkins, chief executive of DuCane Housing Association and chair of the G320 group of London’s small housing associations, said it was already working with financial institutions on a model for such borrowing. Lenders not already active in the market were particularly keen to get involved.
Bob Wilson, head of finance policy at the National Housing Federation, said pooling could potentially open up the bond market for housing associations.
In this feature
*ODPM’s £1.5bn social housing savings ‘impossible to meet’* <http://www.housing-today.co.uk/story.asp?storyCode=3050037&featureCode=>
*London landlords start choice-based lettings company* <http://www.housing-today.co.uk/story.asp?storyCode=3050040&featureCode=>
*Fusion 21 to spend £400,000 on training* <http://www.housing-today.co.uk/story.asp?storyCode=3050041&featureCode=>
----------------------------------------------------
Camden sets annual ASBO target of one per estate officer 22 April 2005 HOUSING TODAY [What is the situation in Scotland?
I have heard that Housing officers are to get special training in this field, is this true? Answers on an email please asap.]
Camden Council has set its estate officers annual targets for obtaining antisocial behaviour orders,writes Martin Hilditch.
By Martin Hilditch
The officers, who manage about 600 properties each, are set a total of one ASBO or injunction a year. Also, each estate officer is asked to make two referrals a year for each estate concerning noise nuisance to the Camden Mediation Service and two referrals to Camden’s youth inclusion and support panels.
A spokeswoman for Camden council said: “Estate officers manage about 600 properties and the targets are set in relation to the amount of complaints district housing officers get of antisocial behaviour from residents, so we believe this is reasonable.
“These targets show a balanced approach between service provision, complemented by enforcement where necessary, and this approach is supported by the vast majority of council residents at community meetings.”
Camden emphasised that it has a three-pronged approach to tackling antisocial behaviour. It will first try to prevent it through children’s clubs, outreach work and youth inclusion and support panels. It will also try to arrange treatment for people whose antisocial behaviour is caused by drug and alcohol use. The next option is enforcement.
Camden’s move emerged at a launch for pressure group ASBO Concern last week. Matt Foot, the group’s co-ordinator, said targets were not the way forward. “Camden has had something like 150 ASBOs, which is more than the whole of Wales. If they are giving [targets] for workers to impose ASBOs it is even more worrying.”
The news emerged in the same week that Ian MacDonald, violence reduction manager with Liverpool city council, warned that the government must guard against seeing the orders as purely a numbers game.
He said: “If we are not careful, we get pushed into going ASBO crazy when it is only an output [not an outcome].”
© Housing Today Ltd 2005 Terms and Conditions <http://www.housing-today.co.uk/hybrid.asp?typeCode=8&pubCode=58> | Publication Index <http://www.housing-today.co.uk/magazine/html/2005.html>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Census reveals equality targets are pipe dream ... 22 April 2005 HOUSING TODAY [And again, what is the situation in Scotland? Any answers please reply in an email .]
Women run just 13 top 100 RSLs despite NHF goal for equal gender split by 2010
By Chloe Stothart and Kate Freeman
The drive to boost the number of women running housing associations is in danger of missing its target, Housing Today’s leadership census shows.
The Leadership 2010 project – run by the National Housing Federation and the Housing Corporation – aimed to have women heading half the 200 largest associations by stock by the end of the decade.
But our survey of the 100 largest associations by stock found only 13 have a female chief executive two years after the equality drive was launched.
When the project began, just 13% of the top 200 associations were run by a woman.
But a lack of funding has been blamed for stalling progress.
Jane Greenoak, the National Housing Federation’s Leadership 2010 champion, said it had been expected the scheme would get up to £100,000 from the Housing Corporation in innovation and good practice grants.
She added that it was never absolutely certain the project would get the funds.
Greenoak said: “Jon Rouse has gone on record saying there will be funding in 2005 towards this programme but we don’t know how much yet. Nothing has really happened in terms of innovations to make things work yet.”
The Housing Corporation was unable to comment on changes to the innovation and good practice budget, which was cut last year.
But the NHF said it was bidding for money from the fund to cover a leadership training programme with Lancaster University and networking groups.
A spokesperson for the NHF said: “We acknowledge that it is an ambitious target – that is why it is all the more important that the sector and the corporation work together towards achieving it.”
Kate Davies, chief executive of Notting Hill Housing Group, and one of the select band of women to head a top 100 association, said mentoring could help senior women realise they have the potential to be chief executives.
The situation is just as bad in councils, with women running the housing departments of just 12 of the 100 local authorities with the most housing stock.
The figures for the numbers of housing associations and local authority housing departments run by ethnic-minority people are also shocking.
Only one director of housing out of the 100 largest councils by stock is not white – David Lewis at London’s Lewisham council.
And just eight of the top 100 housing associations are headed by a minority-ethnic person – with four of these associations headed by the same person, Anu Vedi, chief executive of Genesis Housing Group.
The problem in numbers
*13* of the top 100 housing associations have a female chief executive *12* of the top 100 councils have a female director of housing *1* of the housing directors at the top 100 councils is from a minority-ethnic group *8* of the chief executives of the top 100 associations is from a minority-ethnic group*
GHA's Plans for Sighthill.The GHA has announced its plan for demolition of the five multi-storey blocks in the Fountainwell part of Sighthill. Of course, the fact that it announced this to the "Herald" and the "Evening Times" several days before bothering to mention it to us mere tenants is upsetting. It looks more like contempt rather than communication. Sighthill Save Our Homes ( sighthillsoh@hotmail.com ) will hold a public meeting on Thursday 28th July at 6.30 p.m. In Sighthill Primary School, 8 Fountainwell Place, G21. All interested are invited to come along.