*6.30pm to 8.30pm
*Thursday 8th May
*Lambeth Town Hall, Brixton
Speakers include:
John McDonnell MP – Chair of the Socialist Campaign Group
Ted Knight – ex-Leader of Lambeth Council
Derek Wall – Male Principal Speaker of the Green Party
Sarah Tomlinson – Branch Secretary of Lambeth NUT
Jean Kerrigan – ex-Chair of Tenants’ Council
*Thursday 8th May
*Lambeth Town Hall, Brixton
Speakers include:
John McDonnell MP – Chair of the Socialist Campaign Group
Ted Knight – ex-Leader of Lambeth Council
Derek Wall – Male Principal Speaker of the Green Party
Sarah Tomlinson – Branch Secretary of Lambeth NUT
Jean Kerrigan – ex-Chair of Tenants’ Council
Lambeth Council is proposing to give massive private companies ten-year contracts to run housing services. They call this “Partnering” – really it is a licence for contractors to line their pockets and decimate the services tenants and leaseholders receive.
Come to this meeting to hear the truth about privatisation.
Help organise the action that is necessary if we are to prevent the end of council housing.
Supported by:
Lambeth and Southwark Labour Representation Committee
Lambeth Trades Union Council
Lambeth Defend Council Housing
For more information please email
stopprivatisation@yahoo.com
What is Lambeth Council proposing?
Not content with going ahead with an ALMO despite massive opposition from tenants, Lambeth Council is pushing through plans to privatise the services provided to tenants dressed up in the harmless sounding name “Partnering”.
Private companies will bid for ten-year contracts to carry out all manner of services, some which are already privatised under smaller contracts (such as repairs and maintenance, graffiti removal and garbage collection), and others which are currently carried out in-house (such as grounds maintenance, out-of-hours repairs and the Lambeth Service Centre).
What will this mean for services?
Even if "Partnering" were to save money, it seems likely that this would be at the expense of the high quality services tenants and leaseholders need and deserve, with contractors seeking to cut corners wherever possible in order to keep costs down and maximise profits, rather than investing in high quality materials and the high level of service which would provide the greatest value for money in the long run. Standards for works on empty properties have already been cut, going against even the minimum void standards agreed by the council.
Among the most worrying proposals is that the council will get rid of technical officers who visit tenants’ homes to specify what repairs need to be done. In this way the contractor could be responsible for specifying, carrying out and monitoring all repairs – a sure recipe for disaster. The council are also considering moving the call centre to a private company out of the borough – or even out of the country! When Westminster council went through a similar wave of privatisation, for example, their call centre was transferred to Dingwall in the north of Scotland!
“Partnering” will mean public services being taken even further away from public control. It will mean less accountability and make it much harder to pick up the pieces when things go wrong.
What’s the alternative?
The extensive experience we have in Lambeth of contractors carrying out sub-standard work and charging for work they haven't carried out suggests that we should be moving away from working with private contractors, rather than handing them the entire budget for service provision.
By directly providing services through a Direct Labour Organisation we could stop profits being taken out of the borough to line the pockets of private contractors. A DLO would also provide jobs and training for local youth. Lambeth officers refuse to even come up with costs and plans for this option – we must press them to at least consider it!
Who decides?
Tenants' representatives are being consulted on the content of the specifications but there is no suggestion that residents will have a say on whether the council goes ahead with this privatisation or not. Following on from the council's recent decision to form an ALMO, despite there not being a majority of tenants in favour of the idea, this could strike another serious blow for the future of council housing in the borough.
We call upon all Lambeth Councillors to reject officers’ plans for “Partnering” and to choose instead to keep the delivery of services within the borough under direct local control.
We demand that the residents have the final say – a ballot of all tenants and leaseholders would be the only fair way to decide whether to privatise services or not.
Come to this meeting to hear the truth about privatisation.
Help organise the action that is necessary if we are to prevent the end of council housing.
Supported by:
Lambeth and Southwark Labour Representation Committee
Lambeth Trades Union Council
Lambeth Defend Council Housing
For more information please email
stopprivatisation@yahoo.com What is Lambeth Council proposing?
Not content with going ahead with an ALMO despite massive opposition from tenants, Lambeth Council is pushing through plans to privatise the services provided to tenants dressed up in the harmless sounding name “Partnering”.
Private companies will bid for ten-year contracts to carry out all manner of services, some which are already privatised under smaller contracts (such as repairs and maintenance, graffiti removal and garbage collection), and others which are currently carried out in-house (such as grounds maintenance, out-of-hours repairs and the Lambeth Service Centre).
What will this mean for services?
Even if "Partnering" were to save money, it seems likely that this would be at the expense of the high quality services tenants and leaseholders need and deserve, with contractors seeking to cut corners wherever possible in order to keep costs down and maximise profits, rather than investing in high quality materials and the high level of service which would provide the greatest value for money in the long run. Standards for works on empty properties have already been cut, going against even the minimum void standards agreed by the council.
Among the most worrying proposals is that the council will get rid of technical officers who visit tenants’ homes to specify what repairs need to be done. In this way the contractor could be responsible for specifying, carrying out and monitoring all repairs – a sure recipe for disaster. The council are also considering moving the call centre to a private company out of the borough – or even out of the country! When Westminster council went through a similar wave of privatisation, for example, their call centre was transferred to Dingwall in the north of Scotland!
“Partnering” will mean public services being taken even further away from public control. It will mean less accountability and make it much harder to pick up the pieces when things go wrong.
What’s the alternative?
The extensive experience we have in Lambeth of contractors carrying out sub-standard work and charging for work they haven't carried out suggests that we should be moving away from working with private contractors, rather than handing them the entire budget for service provision.
By directly providing services through a Direct Labour Organisation we could stop profits being taken out of the borough to line the pockets of private contractors. A DLO would also provide jobs and training for local youth. Lambeth officers refuse to even come up with costs and plans for this option – we must press them to at least consider it!
Who decides?
Tenants' representatives are being consulted on the content of the specifications but there is no suggestion that residents will have a say on whether the council goes ahead with this privatisation or not. Following on from the council's recent decision to form an ALMO, despite there not being a majority of tenants in favour of the idea, this could strike another serious blow for the future of council housing in the borough.
We call upon all Lambeth Councillors to reject officers’ plans for “Partnering” and to choose instead to keep the delivery of services within the borough under direct local control.
We demand that the residents have the final say – a ballot of all tenants and leaseholders would be the only fair way to decide whether to privatise services or not.
e-mail:
