housing+-+Govt+Review+31.7.08

The Federation's formal response is enclosed below. First here is some background information.
 * Haringey Federation of Residents Associations submission on the**
 * National Review of Council Housing Finance (July 2008) **

On July 31st the Federation responded to a Government Review of Council Housing Finances in the UK by demanding that the government makes adequate resources available to cover the management, maintenance, repair and improvement of council housing to the ‘level of need’ and provide the means by which the council can start building new council homes. As we explain in our Response:

//The Federation is the umbrella organisation for the 163 RAs of all kinds and in all corners of Haringey. Of these 163, around 40 involve mainly residents of Council housing, and many more involve substantial numbers of Council homes as part of their local neighbourhood. There are around 20,000 Council homes in Haringey, about 20% of housing stock.//

//Council housing is not just an issue for the tenants and leaseholders living in such housing, but is a public resource and asset benefitting the whole community. As such the protection, improvement and expansion of Council housing is as important as efforts to protect, improve and expand the public and community services of all kinds which local residents and communities rely on for our quality of life.//

There are growing concerns from tenant and leaseholder organisations that for years money accumulated through Council Housing rents and ‘right to buy’ receipts has been creamed off by the current financial arrangements, rather than ring fenced for public housing needs. We are concerned that government is trying to pressurise councils to get rid of first class public (council) housing providing secure tenancies, lower rents and an accountable landlord in order to force more people into the private housing sector (RSLs, shared ownership, private rent etc) which provide less security, higher rents or charges and are unaccountable.

At our special meeting on housing in March 2008 attended by 19 local residents associations we agreed we should be taking up more often strategic issues to do with Council housing and other social housing. Federation reps continue to attend meetings of the London Tenants Federation, as we have done over the last 4 years, in order to co-ordinate with other boroughs' tenant/leaseholder organizations on issues related to public housing.

Dave Morris HFRA Secretary The Federation is the umbrella organisation for the 163 RAs of all kinds and in all corners of Haringey. Of these 163, around 40 involve mainly residents of Council housing, and many more involve substantial numbers of Council homes as part of their local neighbourhood. There are around 20,000 Council homes in Haringey, about 20% of housing stock. Council housing is not just an issue for the tenants and leaseholders living in such housing, but is a public resource and asset benefitting the whole community. As such the protection, improvement and expansion of Council housing is as important as efforts to protect, improve and expand the public and community services of all kinds which local residents and communities rely on for our quality of life. We welcome the current review of council housing finance and especially the intention to ‘develop a sustainable, long term system for financing council housing'. In 2005 tenants in Haringey only narrowly agreed (54% of the vote) to accept their homes transferring to an Arms Length Management Organisation because they were told repeatedly that this was the only way to get investment to bring many of the local Council homes up to a decent standard. Since then Homes For Haringey (the local ALMO) have been able to borrow £200m to help do this. However if all the money that belongs to council housing nationally (rents and capital receipts) had been ring-fenced and government provided a level playing field on debt write-off, gap funding and borrowing, then we believe residents of Haringey Council housing would have been able to get the improvements needed and are entitled to - and the money needed in the future too - without strings and the moves towards private management of public housing. It’s clear that there is no chance of the private housing sector providing the decent, secure homes at a price that Londoners can afford. Instead of pouring more money into subsidising the private sector government should be channelling funding to local authorities to build a new generation of first class council housing. The fundamental problem facing council housing is insufficient resources to manage, maintain, repair and improve existing council homes and estates and to build new council housing.  If all the money that belongs to council housing (rental income and capital receipts) was ring-fenced and reinvested, and there was a level playing field on debt write off, gap funding, borrowing and Social Housing Grant, council housing could pay its own way.  We believe that successive governments have been taking a profit from council housing each year and then pressurising tenants/leaseholders to accept privatisation. We believe that the Treasury's take from tenants rents and capital receipts far exceeds the allowances they give local authorities for management and maintenance (M&M) and major repairs (MRA) each year.  The recent ‘justification’ for some of this 'robbery' is that tenants should support historic debt. But capital receipts from council housing have apparently been enough to pay off this debt three times over; council tenants don’t have a financial interest in the property; and government doesn’t ‘recover’ money paid to home owners (Mortgage Interest Tax Relief) or Registered Social Landlords (Social Housing Grant) so why make council tenants pay for an asset that remains in public ownership?  Continued discrimination against council housing and the lack of a ‘level playing field’ on debt write-off, gap funding, borrowing and Social Housing Grant cannot be justified.  It is not the principle of a national pooling system that is the problem. Council tenants are angry that government profits from council housing but can also see how the old tactic of ‘divide and rule’ can be used to try and break up a national council (public) housing sector.  We are suspicious that proposals for councils to ‘opt out’ of the national HRA would leave council housing in a more precarious situation and is a stalking horse for privatisation.  Government has to accept that M&M and MRA allowances must be funded at level of need and council housing put on a ‘level playing field’. Then local authorities would be able to plan ahead on the same basis as other landlords and council housing would provide first class secure housing, managed by an accountable landlord at rents people can afford for existing tenants and future generations on a sustainable basis and ‘in perpetuity’.  Our main concern is that the review recommendations must provide for the release of funding which will allow Haringey Council and indeed all Council's to bring all their Council homes and estates up to a decent standard, and to build new council homes with secure tenancies. We want to see this done in a way that best maintains the security, affordability, accountability and quality of council housing in perpetuity. We therefore raise the following areas of concern, while welcoming all serious attempts to address the inadequate current funding arrangements. · We demand that government fund allowances to cover the management, maintenance, repair and improvement of council housing to the ‘level of need’ and provide the means by which the council can start building new council homes. · We are opposed to proposals that expose council tenants to changes in interest rates, inflation and property values. We do not want the council to ‘opt out’ of the national council housing system exposing tenants to new risks. · We are concerned that government is trying to pressurise councils to get rid of first class public (council) housing providing secure tenancies, lower rents and an accountable landlord and force people into the private housing sector (RSLs, shared ownership, etc) which provide less security, higher rents or charges and are unaccountable. · Public land should be used to for public need and not sold off for private uses. We believe it is time that government halt the 'robbery' of council housing, the pressures to move towards greater privatisation, and the pressure to sell off related assets and land. Instead the Government should reinvest all rents and capital receipts, and take over council housing's historic 'debt' (the Government have had enough receipts over the years to pay it off). Now is the time to provide a ‘level playing field’ for council housing and end the discrimination on gap funding and Social Housing Grants. Dave Morris July 31st 2008
 * Haringey Federation of Residents Associations submission on the**
 * National Review of Council Housing Finance (July 2008) **
 * //[Adapted from the response by the Camden Federation of Tenants and Residents Associations]//**
 * Areas of Concern **
 * Secretary, Haringey Federation of Residents Associations **