Say hello to Barratt Homes' 'Brixton Square' on Coldharbour Lane (old Cooltan site)

[leanderman]

The census also revealed the population of England and Wales rose by 7.5 per cent between 2001 and 2011. I doubt we built 7.5 per more cent bed spaces. (Modified as I mis-wrote million)

 

[ViolentPanda]

Right to buy was a terrible mistake. If so much social housing hadn't been sold off on the cheap, I'm sure the current housing crisis would be nowhere near as bad.

Greater London has, IIRC, lost about 600,000 social housing units to social use (about 20% of the entire loss in England and Wales) since 1983 (the year the floodgates were opened with the amendment of the existing Right to Buy legislation).
Housing Associations have built new social housing stock since then that takes up less that 15% of that deficit alone in Greater London.

It's not so much the sell-off that caused the problem, as the accompanying legislation that a), ended the obligation for RtB purchasers to give the local authority the purchased from a "first refusal" to re-purchase the house when the owner put it on the market; b) ended the system of penalties that meant that RtB purchasers forfeited discount if they sold before a statutory minimum residency of 5 years (effectively minimising short-termism), and c) disbarring local authorities from developing new social housing (slightly eased now/since around 2007-08).

 

[ViolentPanda]

Lambeth are still shoving leaflets through doors encouraging tenants to buy their council flat.

So are Fuckstons, tbf.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Fucking Tories.

And these are the fuckers making a killing:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/right-to-buy-housing-shame-third-ex-council-1743338

TBF, Charles Gow was always likely going to be a grasping cunt, given his revolting union-hating, pov-baiting piss-stain of a late father.

 

[ViolentPanda]

We could have been in a very different place now if money from selling council homes had been spent on building more council homes and if policy had made buying ex council easier for 1st time buyers and more difficult for commercial landlords.

The Tories deliberately revised/amended the RtB legislation so that building more council homes was impossible. They knew exactly what they were doing, and they knew exactly what the results would be down the line - They just didn't care and don't care.

 

[ViolentPanda]

How is it that just after WW2 when the country was basically broke it managed to build so much Council Housing?

TBF, the mass of building was '50s-'60s, with a spurt of crap high-rise in the late '60s to mid-'70s, but it got built because of both political will and social and political necessity.
While we have social necessity, we no longer have the leverage on politicians to make the social housing issue a political necessity, which in turn means there's no political will to rock the neoliberal boat.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Disgraceful that Labour did nothing to correct this situation during their time in power.

"Nothing" is an inaccurate description. They did eventually (2007-08 IIRC) legislate so that LAs could develop low-volume social housing funded from their own reserves (ie.e. development that wouldn't be funded by "on book" borrowing), and did loosen the strings on RtB receipts.
So, they did something, just nowhere near enough.

 

[leanderman]

This is all true but, whatever Labour's faults, it's hard to see how they could have built enough homes to cope with a 3.7million rise in the population in 10 years.

 

[Gramsci]

I think how many housing units that translates to matters and if they are settling. A constant round of flatsharing youth has different housing needs to families coming to stay for ever for instance.

I know/ have met a lot of East Europeans. The ones that the previous "Labour" government did not have a clue were coming here as Labour party people were to busy dining out with bankers and the rich to notice such details.

I would say , based on my experience, that half the ones I know have stayed and the rest gone back for various reasons.

One reason the Poles stay here is that compared to Poland this is a socially liberal country. Catholic Nationalism of various types is strong in Poland.

The Romanians and Bulgarians I know come here as there is little work in there own countries. One Bulgarian told me that there is nothing in Bulgaria for her.

I have recently met more Spanish and Italians due to the economic situation in there countries. One Spanish girl told me there are no jobs in Spain of any kind when she left college.

 

[equationgirl]

How is it that just after WW2 when the country was basically broke it managed to build so much Council Housing?

They had to - lots of places that were bombed out needed rebuilding, including large parts of London, the Midlands and Clydebank.

 

[editor]

This is all true but, whatever Labour's faults, it's hard to see how they could have built enough homes to cope with a 3.7million rise in the population in 10 years.

They managed to build 1.2 million new houses built from 1945 to 1951, and given the state of the country then, you'd think we'd at least be able to equal that now.

In 2010, just 134,000 new homes were built in the UK - the lowest number since World War II. It's not right.

 

[teuchter]

They managed to build 1.2 million new houses built from 1945 to 1951, and given the state of the country then, you'd think we'd at least be able to equal that now.

In 2010, just 134,000 new homes were built in the UK - the lowest number since World War II. It's not right.

The 2010 total works out at 23% fewer new homes per year than immediately after a war in which large quantities of housing stock had been completely destroyed, which doesn't initially sound surprising.

In order for these figures to be meaningful they need to be quoted in the context of the population at each time and the number of people without proper accommodation.

 

[editor]

The point being that with sufficient political will, an awful lot more houses could be built.

 

[Mrs Magpie]

They managed to build 1.2 million new houses built from 1945 to 1951, and given the state of the country then, you'd think we'd at least be able to equal that now.

In 2010, just 134,000 new homes were built in the UK - the lowest number since World War II. It's not right.

...and there was much less of an 'us & them' politically just after the war. My Grandfather, who was definitely a tory, sold a field behind his house for council housing after the war because, along with the formation of the NHS, he thought it was the right thing to do for his country. He wasn't a farmer, he'd just moved his surgery into an old farm in the 1930s. Although there were massive social divisions then, there was more of a sense of one nation, and doing what was best for the nation. It's all really selfish now in comparison. I can't imagine a tory selling a field behind his house for council housing now.

 

[Mrs Magpie]

Actually I can't imagine a Labour or Lib Dem with a field behind their house selling it for social housing either these days to be honest.

 

[editor]

Actually I can't imagine a Labour or Lib Dem with a field behind their house selling it for social housing either these days to be honest.

I find it hard to imagine new council housing being built

 

[Mrs Magpie]

Innit, just when we need it just as much as after the war If you'd said to me in the seventies that exploitative landlords would be cramming people into sheds and garages I would have laughed in your face.

 

[teuchter]

Maybe what we need is another war.

 

[Gramsci]

Maybe what we need is another war.

Maybe what we need is a Chavez.

Venezuela continues to see a big surge in housing construction since the government launched the “Great Venezuelan Housing Mission” in April of last year.

“Venezuela is the only country that has built more than 200 thousand homes in a year,” said private constructor Carmelo de Estéfano Ramírez. “No country has been able to do something like that. The best have made around 70 thousand, if that, in a year”.

Last 30 years in this country neo-liberalism has ruled. The invisible hand of market forces untrammelled by interference by the state was supposed to provide goods and services in a more efficient way.

Has not worked.

Chavez (democratically elected) movement has managed to redistribute wealth from rich Oligarch class ( as its known in South America) to the less well off. Thus showing the neo liberal orthodoxy is not the only way.

 

[TonyH82]

Maybe what we need is a Chavez.

Last 30 years in this country neo-liberalism has ruled. The invisible hand of market forces untrammelled by interference by the state was supposed to provide goods and services in a more efficient way.

Has not worked.

Chavez (democratically elected) movement has managed to redistribute wealth from rich Oligarch class ( as its known in South America) to the less well off. Thus showing the neo liberal orthodoxy is not the only way.

http://www.hrw.org/news/2013/03/05/venezuela-chavez-s-authoritarian-legacy

Yeah - he was a great bloke!

 

[peterkro]

Chavez horrendous bloke look at the list of horrors:

http://venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/8133

/thread derail.

 

[Gramsci]

I talked to Zoe of Brixton Blog she has reprinted the joint piece on the application with bit on the planning committee on Tuesday.

See here

Councillors will make a crucial decision about the provision of social housing in the Brixton Square development on Coldharbour Lane next Tuesday March 12, Lambeth Council announced this week.
Brixton Blog, Brixton Buzz and urban75 teamed up to campaign against the application by Barratt Homes to change the quota of social housing in the apartment blocks to ‘affordable’ housing at a percentage of the market rent.
However, the planning officer responsible has recommended that the alteration be approved. This would mean no social housing as previously promised and instead affordable housing with rents pegged to the market rate, which is rising in Brixton. It is now up to councillors at the planning meeting on Tuesday to decide. Although only three speakers are allowed to speak for and against the application, we urge all who want to retain social housing in the area to attend the meeting and make their feelings clear by their presence. It will take place at Room 8 in the Town Hall at 7pm.

 

[Gramsci]

Chavez horrendous bloke look at the list of horrors:

http://venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/8133

/thread derail.

I know you mean his achievements.

It is a derail. But my point is that, like in post 45 in UK, its not inevitable that no affordable housing can be built. It requires political will.

Quote:

15. From 1999 to 2011, the poverty rate decreased from 42.8% to 26.5% and the rate of extreme poverty fell from 16.6% in 1999 to 7% in 2011.
16. In the rankings of the Human Development Index (HDI) of the United Nations Program for Development (UNDP), Venezuela jumped from 83 in 2000 (0.656) at position 73 in 2011 (0.735), and entered into the category Nations with 'High HDI'.
17. The GINI coefficient, which allows calculation of inequality in a country, fell from 0.46 in 1999 to 0.39 in 2011.
18. According to the UNDP, Venezuela holds the lowest recorded Gini coefficient in Latin America, that is, Venezuela is the country in the region with the least inequality.
19. Child malnutrition was reduced by 40% since 1999.

 

[editor]

I talked to Zoe of Brixton Blog she has reprinted the joint piece on the application with bit on the planning committee on Tuesday.

See here

I'll post up about it on the urban blog Monday morning.

 

[Gramsci]

http://www.hrw.org/news/2013/03/05/venezuela-chavez-s-authoritarian-legacy

Yeah - he was a great bloke!

I have friend in Argentina who I correspond with and it all looks different from her South American point of view.

For her ( a supporter of Peronist President Cristina) Chavez is part of long line of heroes of Latin American independence and struggle against Yanqui supporting Oligarchs.

The question is whether the Chavista movement can outlive the death of Chavez like Peronism did in Argentina.

Unlike here, where politics is about opinion polls and managerial, in South America it raises big emotions. Politics means something there. Last election in Venezuela had big turnout.

 

[Gramsci]

The petition against the application got 231 signatures.

 

[jeremyclyne]

I talked to Zoe of Brixton Blog she has reprinted the joint piece on the application with bit on the planning committee on Tuesday.

See here

I see the row over "affordable" or social rented housing levels at 368-372 Coldharbour Lane has exploded again - the self-same site where in 2007 the level of proposed affordable housing was allowed to be cut because it was claimed the developer had paid too much for the site:-
http://www.insidehousing.co.uk/price-of-land-forces-affordability-cut/1448829.article

Back at Lambeth planning committee on Tuesday, almost six years to the day since that was reported to the committee (on March 13 2007)
http://www.lambeth.gov.uk/moderngov/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=101&MId=295

 

[Winot]

I can agree with that. But I find it unlikely that, for example, 500,000 Poles settling in the UK is not a factor in the housing crisis. And I apologise for using this example again, because the Poles have every right to live here. it is national census fact and we have to build the homes to deal with it.

Interesting Tim Harford column in the FT on a related point (free registration needed). Says that immigrants from EU succession countries have been net contributors to public purse every year since 2004.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/45120e10-869d-11e2-b907-00144feabdc0.html #FT

 

[Gramsci]

I see the row over "affordable" or social rented housing levels at 368-372 Coldharbour Lane has exploded again - the self-same site where in 2007 the level of proposed affordable housing was allowed to be cut because it was claimed the developer had paid too much for the site:-
http://www.insidehousing.co.uk/price-of-land-forces-affordability-cut/1448829.article

Back at Lambeth planning committee on Tuesday, almost six years to the day since that was reported to the committee (on March 13 2007)
http://www.lambeth.gov.uk/moderngov/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=101&MId=295

Thanks for this info. The inside housing article says:

Places for People is cutting the level of affordable housing from 50 per cent to 35 per cent on the Brixton scheme to minimise its financial losses.
The group paid £5.6 million for the land. But a planning application report for Lambeth Council, seen by Inside Housing, reveals that if the developer went ahead with the original plans it would lose £6.4 million, taking into account the cost of the land.
The council's financial consultant took the view that the ‘price paid for the site was excessive, resulting in a negative value in residual land valuation', the report says.

A spokesperson for Places for People denied that the housing association had paid too much for the land. ‘The site was purchased at market value two years ago and was valued by an established valuer.'
He also defended the reduction in social housing from Lambeth council targets of 50 per cent to 35 per cent.
‘The percentage of affordable homes at Coldharbour Lane has been agreed with Lambeth's councils and is supported by the planning inspectorate and will help provide a better balanced mix of housing in an area that has a large number of social housing properties.'

Places for People sold the site onto Barratts with the existing planning permission for £8.5 million

What I disagree with is the (Labour) Council continually saying that there is to much social housing in parts of Brixton. It keeps coming up in there docs.

 

[Gramsci]

BTW has anyone else put there name down to speak who put in objection?

CH1