Liverpool - Social Housing Crisis

Sadly many of these articles fail to explain just what is wrong with handing over property to RSLs, preferring to just accuse them of this and that. Any successful campaign is based on fact and believability. The cause is not helped by smearing RSL and housing officers with far left accusations.

I see the same thing is happening in Glasgow too.

The money has to come from either tennants or from government.
There are no other sources. So moving to RSLs does not solve
an underfunding problem.

What are the arguments that the pro campaigners use?
I would suspect that they dont stand up to analysis.

Edseam (Labour Party) scribbed thus

"Unfortunately 25.08.2004 16:27

Sadly many of these articles fail to explain just what is wrong with handing over property to RSLs, preferring to just accuse them of this and that. Any successful campaign is based on fact and believability. The cause is not helped by smearing RSL and housing officers with far left accusations."


There are numerous concerns with to quote you "handing over property to RSLs", loss of tenants 'SECURE' tenancy rights which is number one, an irrefutable FACT! South Liverpool Housing tenants no longer had 'SECURE' tenancies after 1998, as was the case with Pinehurst Tenants transferred to CDS at the same time, as those of us transferred to COBALT Housing Company Ltd in 2003 (after 2002 ballot), along with Berrybridge Housing Company Ltd, along with Lee Park and Netherley Housing Trust, along with Knowsley Council's former tenants transferred over to Knowsley Housing Trust.

There is ZERO accountability with RSLs, Housing Associations, private sector landlords, the only refuge for us tenants is through 'collective action'. They are commercial companies run on a profit/loss business basis, their accounts are more important than their tenants, their primary loyality is servicing their bank/building society debts firstly with tenants repairs and improvements being secondary. Tenant Reps' on the board can't report to tenants externally because they are sworn to 'commercial confidentiality'.

I've not mentioned that the workers lose their rights, TUPE guarantees nothing, that should be for Liverpool's Trade Union leaders to fight for and speak up about.

As a long term housing campaigner with nationwide contacts and personal links nationwide I'm fully aware of the tactics used against opposition to Stock Transfer. After the successful Birmingham NO VOTE in 2002, there was a purge of the LEFT WING from Unison in Birmingham I have that on good authority.

If and when the final 21,500 council housing is transferred rents will rise massively (because there will be no safety net of affordable, publicly owned housing) there will be no refuge from private landlords, there will be no authority with legal duty to house the 'homeless' here in Liverpool, as councils have the legal duty to house the homeless, RSLs and Housing Associations won't house the homeless unless pressure is put upon them.

It's increasingly obvious which side of the line you're on and it's not on the side of tenants opposed privatisation of council housing is it. Anyway Edseam this is YOUR party's policy and YOUR party in Government implementing it nationwide it's even more extreme than Thatcherite housing policies but being implemented by a Labour Government.

stuart wrote:

"I see the same thing is happening in Glasgow too."

All of Glasgow's council housing was transferred in 2002, to the Glasgow Housing Association (GHA), tenant activists were ground down, the tenant movement destroyed as part of this process.

"The money has to come from either tennants or from government. There are no other sources. So moving to RSLs does not solve an underfunding problem."

Council tenants pay on average £50 a week rent (x 50 weeks) that is about £2500 a year on each house, here in Liverpool times that by 21,500 remaining council houses and you get a figure of £53,750,000. I realise that isn't the true figure due to the way the income is distributed, the management fees, the servicing of long term debts, however that is a significant figure. Add in the CAPITAL RECEIPTS (money released from the sale of council houses since the 1980's) were given to the City Council in 1998/99 from the government of many millions of pounds. The Lib-Dem council chose to use CAPITAL RECEIPTS
to fund their Stock Transfer propaganda campaign, ie the videos narrated and featuring well known public figures, Roger Philips for SLH in 2002, two stars of the 'Royale Family' in the Nottingham Stock Transfer video in 2003, the glossy leaflets, posters, tenant sweeteners, etc, etc.

"What are the arguments that the pro campaigners use? I would suspect that they dont stand up to analysis."

They don't stand up to analysis, but they have the power, the money, the resources, the offices, the collaborating home owners in many communities, bought off tenants/residents associations a Tenants Federation paid for by the council, they have the local press and media backing them up, therefore they don't have to be correct, they merely have to hoodwink tenants into surrendering their 'SECURE' tenancies which they do when they VOTE YES.

There will be campaigns against these 21,500 stock transfers here in Liverpool, to our opposition and critics I'd say now "get out the tenants way". Such campaigns have been talked about and are in the advanced planning stages, we're in no mood to compromise, this is the last stand for council housing here in Liverpool, a fight to the death...

Kai

You answer my points without realising it because you like to make everything into an attack and an attack on Labour if possible. Your hatred for anyone who is not as rabid as you clouds the issue and ensures your lack of electability will continue, as well as your lack of progress on issues.

All I was saying was that the articles pointed to were highlighting the situation but without giving people facts that they can use. Any successful argument is built on being able to give the full facts to people and using what is right wisely. Simply shouting at housing officers, accusing them of middle-class corruption and the like gets people nowhere.

However, in your deranged anger you highlighted some of the issues that I was pressing to be highlighted. Next time, read the words and don't just see what you want to see.

I should also add that there are many people in the Labour Party who campaign on behalf of council housing and are opposed to stock transfer.

In response to something I read on the mailing lists.

I think it is worth pointing out to "radged1" that the line about some Labour members supporting council housing is a direct response to the SLP's line about Labour. Censoring the line by Edseam (as effectively party promotion) must also bring about censoring of Kai's attacks on Labour as well as his reference to the SLP in his footer (contacts). The same goes for all people mentioning their party on the Liverpool board. It is also true that Mr Lane has attacked "New Labour" and the City Council without providing concrete evidence for most of his accusations. Many Labour supporters have mentioned Lib Dems by simply sneering and the Green Party mention themselves at every available opportunity. As far as I can see the Lib Dems have yet to figure that this site exists (long may that continue). The SWP and SLP blatantly promote themselves by denigrating other parties as well as straightforward mentioning of themselves at every opportunity.

Can I also point out that saying Councillors and Party activists attended a demo is no different from mentioning a protest group - even by the IMC guidelines.

The issue of censorship is something IMC needs to really come to terms with. It is policed rather ridiculously and somewhat subjectively without considering the full thread. Context must be taken into account.

I am voting "no".
A letter is being distributed by Housing & Neighbourhood Investment, SHeffield City Council, reading: "This is your chance to vote Yes or No to bringing in extra money to improve Council Homes and neighbourhoods in your area through an Arms Length Management Organization or (ALMO).
If tenants vote in favour, the Council will make a bid to Government for ALMO funds that will bring (the letter continues): "in the extra money we need to imporve Council housing in your area up to the decent homes standard. A local board will be set up to make decisions on local housing matters, It will include local tenants.
Now the letter continues to make reference to a blue booklet sent weeks ago, called "What's on offer". It looks like paradise, but i am voting "no". The "need to improve housing... up to the decent homes standard" seems very suspicious in view of Liverpool's struggles and og general policies.

Do you think i am doing the right thing?
Thanks

Sheffield tenant

Sheffield Tenant wrote:

"I am voting "no". "

Good on you.

"This is your chance to vote Yes or No to bringing in extra money to improve Council Homes and neighbourhoods in your area through an Arms Length Management Organization or (ALMO)."

Put like that how would the majority of non-politicised council tenants refuse to vote for more investment in their homes? However we must realise that council housing and housing in general is a massive political issue, the national media have covered it up, and the Defend Council Housing campaign is doing a fine job of 'control and containment' of tenant opposition in alliance with the Labour Party and Trade Unions, it has never been prepared to organise a national protest or demonstation so us tenants can express our collective anger to the government, therefore we 'tenants' appear to be no silent.

Also we're actually being having our housing rights taken away from us, and the majority are being conned into freely voting them away. I compare it to a vampire tricking its way across the threshold only then to suck our lifeblood.

"A local board will be set up to make decisions on local housing matters, It will include local tenants."

Yes and those local tenants, will actually be forbidden due to 'commercial confidentiality' to not reveal the proceedings of the ALMO board, so what use are they then? None at all...

"Now the letter continues to make reference to a blue booklet sent weeks ago, called "What's on offer"."

This is the offer booklet, which all tenants should have received, many often don't.

"It looks like paradise, but i am voting "no". The "need to improve housing... up to the decent homes standard" seems very suspicious in view of Liverpool's struggles and og general policies.

Do you think i am doing the right thing?
Thanks"

You are doing the right thing on 'PRINCIPLE' something too many of us have forgotten, it's a propaganda hard sell, the aim being to abolish publicly owned council housing. But more than that it is your home, your neighbourhood and the land you own in common with the other people as public property is partially (one step privatisation) being given to the ALMO. Here in Croxteth the Housing Company now own a park the council gave it to them to get it off their hands due to the insurance costs of maintaining. In the end it's about losing control and accountability in one of the most essential services and human needs in our lives, 'our homes'.

Until the abolition of publicly owned council housing the free-market can not run riot, as council housing is not run on profit basis, RSLs, housing associations run on a profit/loss basis, they clearly state they have no duty to house the homeless, which the council does/did.

The only way to beat Stock Transfer/ALMO/PFI is to encourage your fellow neighbours to "VOTE NO", to campaign "VOTE NO" and you speak to their family, friends and community.

The house shown above is my former family home, it was unnecessarily demolished in early 2003, the one shown on the right, this happened because my community was betrayed by a house-owner, who abused tenants through the tenants association, but is also a member of the Labour Party who protected him through the Tenants Federation, he also had police backup to intimidate tenants like me who opposed him. We were also betrayed by the Liberal and Liberal-Democrats parties too, a fact.

I HOPE IT'S A 'NO VOTE' WHEN IT IS COUNTED!

Kai Andersen, housing/tenant activist

Sheffield Tenant wrote:

I am voting "no".

Good on you.

"This is your chance to vote Yes or No to bringing in extra money to improve Council Homes and neighbourhoods in your area through an Arms Length Management Organization or (ALMO)."

Put like that how would the majority of non-politicised council tenants refuse to vote for more investment in their homes? However we must realise that council housing and housing in general is a massive political issue, the national media have covered it up, and the Defend Council Housing campaign is doing a fine job of 'control and containment' of tenant opposition in alliance with the Labour Party and Trade Unions, it has never been prepared to organise a national protest or demonstation so us tenants can express our collective anger to the government, therefore we 'tenants' appear to be silent.

Also we're having our housing rights taken away from us under a Labour Government, and many are being conned into freely voting them away. I compare it to a vampire tricking its way across the threshold only then to suck our lifeblood.

"A local board will be set up to make decisions on local housing matters, It will include local tenants."

Yes and those local tenants, will actually be forbidden due to 'commercial confidentiality' from revealing the proceedings of the ALMO board, so what use are they then? None at all.

"Now the letter continues to make reference to a blue booklet sent weeks ago, called "What's on offer"."

This is the offer booklet, which all tenants should have received, many often don't.

"It looks like paradise, but i am voting "no". The "need to improve housing... up to the decent homes standard" seems very suspicious in view of Liverpool's struggles and og general policies.

Beware demolitions of empty properties and the land then given over to private contractors to build housing for sale, see it's all proven that these RSLs, Housing Associations, Housing Companies, Housing Action Trusts, etc are psuedo-commercial operations until no council housing exists, their status will then change and it'll be in the rent sector what it's like with the energer sector, your homes will be bought and sold like so many casino chips, rents will rocket, evictions will rise, Liverpool currently has a 44% increase in homelessness in the past year, that's where we're all heading.

Do you think i am doing the right thing?
Thanks"

You are doing the right thing on 'PRINCIPLE' something too many of us have forgotten, it's a propaganda hard sell, the aim being to abolish publicly owned council housing. But more than that it is your home, your neighbourhood and the land you own in common with the other people as public property will eventually (half way privatisation) be given to the ALMO, check the article I've linked below on ALMOs. Here in Croxteth the Housing Company now own a park the council gave it to them to get it off their hands due to the insurance costs of maintaining it for the local children. In the end it's about losing control and accountability in one of the most essential services and human needs in our lives, 'our homes'.

Until the abolition of publicly owned council housing the free-market can not run riot, as council housing is not run on profit basis, all other housing (other than TRUE cooperatives) RSLs, housing associations run on a profit/loss basis in preparation for the full commercial free market in the private rented sector, they clearly state they have no duty to house the homeless (no profit in that), which the council does/did.

The only way to beat Stock Transfer/ALMO/PFI is to encourage your fellow neighbours to "VOTE NO", to campaign "VOTE NO" and speak to your family, friends and community.

The house shown above is our former family home (pictured centre right), it was unnecessarily demolished in early 2003, this happened because my community was betrayed by a house-owner (after we were betrayed previously by house owners in Norris Green) he abused and threatened tenants through the tenants association, but is also a member of the Labour Party who've protected him through the Tenants Federation, he also had police backup to intimidate tenants like me who opposed him. We were also betrayed by the Liberal and Liberal-Democrats parties too, a fact.

HERE'S HOPING IT'S A 'NO VOTE' IN SHEFFIELD WHEN IT IS COUNTED! WHEN IS THE BALLOT?

Here's some more information on ALMOs on the link shown

ALMO - half way privatisation, Labour government betray council tenants!
 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/regions/liverpool/2004/09/297326.html

The real plans for what the Lib Dems want to do with Council housing are even more insidious. More info as and when I can.