As the article says, it doesn't cover the northern wards of Vauxhall and Waterloo (where all the most expensive glossy, corporate development has been focussed). Lambeth's reasoning behind this is:
The 23 wards selected have significantly high numbers of privately rented properties in poor condition. The council has chosen to exclude the wards Vauxhall and Waterloo & South Bank as the properties in these wards tend to be relatively new builds and therefore do not have the high levels of housing hazards that we see in other parts of the borough.
Significantly high numbers of privately rented properties in poor condition. Yet their own chart shows that, whilst Waterloo does possibly have the lowest number of privately rented homes in poor condition, it is by no means an outlier. There is only a hairs breadth between Waterloo and Brixton North, Brixton Windrush, Clapham Common, Clapham East, Myatts Fields and Stockwell East. And all of those wards appear to have lower numbers of privately rented properties in poor condition than Vauxhall (which is also excused PRS licensing). I say "possibly" and "appear" because the absolute numbers have not been published and repeated requests for the data behind the chart have been ignored for over two months
Although their statement says that the basis for exclusion of Vauxhall and Waterloo is "
the number of privately rented homes in poor condition", no doubt Lambeth would retrospectively argue that
proportionally the two are lowest. But why are roughly 260 substandard homes in Vauxhall less priority than 240 in Brixton North or Brixton Windrush? Looking at proportionality does not make sense unless they feel that their licensing is a disproportionate imposition on landlords of decent properties. It can't be that because they claim the scheme is a positive thing for the decent landlords subject to it.
The fact is that licensing fees are only allowed to be used to fund the licensing system they form a part of. They cannot be used to raise funds towards anything else. By including the recent luxury developments of Waterloo and Vauxhall (which have the highest numbers of private lets in Lambeth) in the scheme they would be able to spread the cost of the licensing scheme and reduce the fees considerably. Whilst they say that there is no evidence that fees will be passed on, they don't offer any evidence that they won't.
I see that Cllr Hashi is in charge of this. Having seen his impressive outburst in a recent public meeting about anti social behaviour, in which he was put on the spot for failing to deliver a long anticipated ASB strategy, I'm not sure I'd feel all that comfortable challenging him face to face on this myself!