Skip to content or view mobile version

Home | Mobile | Editorial | Mission | Privacy | About | Contact | Help | Security | Support

A network of individuals, independent and alternative media activists and organisations, offering grassroots, non-corporate, non-commercial coverage of important social and political issues.

the failures of council house transfers

info-girl | 10.06.2002 10:27

the great guardian journalist Gary Younge, on new labours
experiment in council house privatisation

Comment

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brickbats and mortar

By rejecting the 'transfer' of council homes to housing associations, tenants are strengthening democracy

Gary Younge
Monday June 10, 2002
The Guardian

It was when the bucket of paste tipped over his shoes and trousers that Pat Morrin wondered what on earth he was doing. He was flyposting in a rundown area of Birmingham late at night, spreading the word that local tenants should vote against the proposal to sell off the city's council housing, when the bucket went belly-up. "I thought, what have you got yourself into here?" he says. "You're out on the street, covered in paste and taking on the government, the local council and the big banks. You must be mad."
While his sanity may have been in question, the result of the ballot shortly afterwards was beyond doubt. Those, like Morrin, seeking to defend council housing, won the day by a massive two to one margin. The immediate impact of their victory was staggering enough - they have forced a thoroughgoing rethink of central government's housing strategy and given immense confidence to others in their campaign. But the ramifications of their triumph go way beyond the roofs over their heads.

In politics alone this was a crucial event. A group of local people managed to organise themselves to take control of a future that they believed was being taken away from them. "We're sick of being told what's good for us," says Frank Chance, the chairman of the Defend Council Housing campaign in Birmingham, who was battling cancer even as he took on the council.

In a period characterised by a cynicism and alienation that has degraded our political culture and contributed to the rise of the far right, Chance, Morrin and many others like them filled an apparent vacuum. Their tenacity showed that progressive cultures of resistance not only survive but thrive. Their success suggests that they can effect real change. True, so far roughly only one in four of the referendums on stock transfer have voted no. Less than a week before the Birmingham result, in Glasgow, tenants voted 58% to 42% in favour of transfer. But it is the possibility of effecting outcomes that shapes both the level and nature of political engagement, not the certainty.

When it comes to housing, the government believes that what's best for tenants is to "transfer" their homes from local council control to that of a housing association. Like most New Labour projects it is noble in its aims, self-avowedly non-ideological in its conception and self-evidently dogmatic in its execution. The target is to bring all council housing up to a decent standard by 2010. Unlike some other pledges this is ambitious. Given the staggering level of underinvestment, compounded by almost two decades of wilful decline under the Conservatives, Britain's council housing now has a repair bill of £19bn. The fact that this has not become a national scandal is itself a national scandal, telling us a great deal about the priorities of those who set the political agenda - including the media. The recent narrative of housing has truly been of the story of home ownership, be it negative equity, ballooning prices or interest rates. The experiences of those who live in the 2.6 million homes owned by councils, almost two-thirds of whom are on benefit, have barely gained a mention.

That neglect has reached crisis point. No one on either side of the debate disputes the scale of the problem. The issue is where the money is going to come from to solve it. The Defend Council Housing campaign argues it should come from the government. Council housing is preferable, they say, because it provides more secure tenancies and protection against eviction, lower rents and better democratic accountability than housing associations.

The government's approach to housing is similar to its response to almost every other public service in need of resources, from air traffic control to meals on wheels - privatisation. Housing associations raise their money from the private sector; councils receive theirs from the public purse. The government insists that it simply does not have the resources to foot the bill. Transfer pleases the Treasury's number-crunchers too. Take houses off the councils' books and the money they raise no longer counts as public borrowing.

Only one thing stood in their way - democracy. Housing transfers can only go ahead if tenants back them in a vote. The government decided to help them make up their minds. In Glasgow, the Treasury said they would write off the council's £900m housing debt - but only if they voted yes. In Birmingham, they were promised new kitchens and bathrooms on the same basis. The choice, then, was stark. You can have your repairs done and your housing improved if you vote for transfer. Or you can keep your housing under council control and have nothing.

You will find few who positively enthuse about transfer, but many who accepted it for lack of any alternative. Ask the Department of Transport, Local Government and the Regions why the money for repairs could not be released regardless of the outcome of the vote and it has no answer. And so policy was elevated to principle and those who dissented became dissidents. An insider at the department claimed the Birmingham "no" campaign had misinformed tenants with scare tactics while the city council had run a poor campaign. What the official found impossible to fathom was that the tenants might have examined the case for transfer and found it wanting.

The official Whitehall position is that the Birmingham vote has made no difference to government plans. Privately it is somewhere between panic and reappraisal, prompted by the well-founded fear that the result will embolden others to do the same. Responses range from providing even greater incentives for tenants to vote yes to scrapping the 2010 target altogether. Most likely seems a more vigorous push for a watered-down version of transfer, called arm's-length management, where councils retain ownership but contract out the day-to-day management.

In practice, the performance of housing associations, like that of councils, is mixed. There is nothing intrinsic in housing associations that makes them better landlords. Similarly those who defend council housing are really arguing for the potential of municipal-run housing rather than the reality. Most people's experience of council housing is that it is badly run and indifferently maintained. In theory landlords are democratically accountable but in practice they are often huge, alienating monoliths.

There is no doubt that Britain is in desperate need of affordable, accessible housing. But like all politics it comes down to priorities. Transfer is one option. So is raising taxes, reallocating resources - we have a war on terror, why not have a war on homelessness? - and reinvigorating local democracy so that councils can raise the money to build more homes if voters wish them to do so.

The result in Birmingham rejected the choice between private investment and underinvestment. It did not in itself offer an alternative. Quite what this means for council housing in Birmingham, nobody is yet certain. But for many of the tenants it has given them a sense of ownership of their destiny far more valuable than the ownership of their homes could ever be. "I could tackle the world now," says Chance, just back from the doctors. "Health permitting."

 g.younge@guardian.co.uk

info-girl

Comments

Display the following 2 comments

  1. link to DCH — link lover
  2. If you say No — T M Glynn
Upcoming Coverage
View and post events
Upcoming Events UK
24th October, London: 2015 London Anarchist Bookfair
2nd - 8th November: Wrexham, Wales, UK & Everywhere: Week of Action Against the North Wales Prison & the Prison Industrial Complex. Cymraeg: Wythnos o Weithredu yn Erbyn Carchar Gogledd Cymru

Ongoing UK
Every Tuesday 6pm-8pm, Yorkshire: Demo/vigil at NSA/NRO Menwith Hill US Spy Base More info: CAAB.

Every Tuesday, UK & worldwide: Counter Terror Tuesdays. Call the US Embassy nearest to you to protest Obama's Terror Tuesdays. More info here

Every day, London: Vigil for Julian Assange outside Ecuadorian Embassy

Parliament Sq Protest: see topic page
Ongoing Global
Rossport, Ireland: see topic page
Israel-Palestine: Israel Indymedia | Palestine Indymedia
Oaxaca: Chiapas Indymedia
Regions
All Regions
Birmingham
Cambridge
Liverpool
London
Oxford
Sheffield
South Coast
Wales
World
Other Local IMCs
Bristol/South West
Nottingham
Scotland
Social Media
You can follow @ukindymedia on indy.im and Twitter. We are working on a Twitter policy. We do not use Facebook, and advise you not to either.
Support Us
We need help paying the bills for hosting this site, please consider supporting us financially.
Other Media Projects
Schnews
Dissident Island Radio
Corporate Watch
Media Lens
VisionOnTV
Earth First! Action Update
Earth First! Action Reports
Topics
All Topics
Afghanistan
Analysis
Animal Liberation
Anti-Nuclear
Anti-militarism
Anti-racism
Bio-technology
Climate Chaos
Culture
Ecology
Education
Energy Crisis
Fracking
Free Spaces
Gender
Globalisation
Health
History
Indymedia
Iraq
Migration
Ocean Defence
Other Press
Palestine
Policing
Public sector cuts
Repression
Social Struggles
Technology
Terror War
Workers' Movements
Zapatista
Major Reports
NATO 2014
G8 2013
Workfare
2011 Census Resistance
Occupy Everywhere
August Riots
Dale Farm
J30 Strike
Flotilla to Gaza
Mayday 2010
Tar Sands
G20 London Summit
University Occupations for Gaza
Guantanamo
Indymedia Server Seizure
COP15 Climate Summit 2009
Carmel Agrexco
G8 Japan 2008
SHAC
Stop Sequani
Stop RWB
Climate Camp 2008
Oaxaca Uprising
Rossport Solidarity
Smash EDO
SOCPA
Past Major Reports
Encrypted Page
You are viewing this page using an encrypted connection. If you bookmark this page or send its address in an email you might want to use the un-encrypted address of this page.
If you recieved a warning about an untrusted root certificate please install the CAcert root certificate, for more information see the security page.

Global IMC Network


www.indymedia.org

Projects
print
radio
satellite tv
video

Africa

Europe
antwerpen
armenia
athens
austria
barcelona
belarus
belgium
belgrade
brussels
bulgaria
calabria
croatia
cyprus
emilia-romagna
estrecho / madiaq
galiza
germany
grenoble
hungary
ireland
istanbul
italy
la plana
liege
liguria
lille
linksunten
lombardia
madrid
malta
marseille
nantes
napoli
netherlands
northern england
nottingham imc
paris/île-de-france
patras
piemonte
poland
portugal
roma
romania
russia
sardegna
scotland
sverige
switzerland
torun
toscana
ukraine
united kingdom
valencia

Latin America
argentina
bolivia
chiapas
chile
chile sur
cmi brasil
cmi sucre
colombia
ecuador
mexico
peru
puerto rico
qollasuyu
rosario
santiago
tijuana
uruguay
valparaiso
venezuela

Oceania
aotearoa
brisbane
burma
darwin
jakarta
manila
melbourne
perth
qc
sydney

South Asia
india


United States
arizona
arkansas
asheville
atlanta
Austin
binghamton
boston
buffalo
chicago
cleveland
colorado
columbus
dc
hawaii
houston
hudson mohawk
kansas city
la
madison
maine
miami
michigan
milwaukee
minneapolis/st. paul
new hampshire
new jersey
new mexico
new orleans
north carolina
north texas
nyc
oklahoma
philadelphia
pittsburgh
portland
richmond
rochester
rogue valley
saint louis
san diego
san francisco
san francisco bay area
santa barbara
santa cruz, ca
sarasota
seattle
tampa bay
united states
urbana-champaign
vermont
western mass
worcester

West Asia
Armenia
Beirut
Israel
Palestine

Topics
biotech

Process
fbi/legal updates
mailing lists
process & imc docs
tech