Camden Council set to oppose government’s homes proposal that ‘would destabilise communities’
‘We’ll snub fixed-term tenancy plan’
Published: 19th May, 2011
by RICHARD OSLEY
TOWN Hall chiefs are planning to ignore a new government policy limiting the length of tenancies for people moving into council flats.
The Localism Bill, which has been discussed in the House of Commons this week, advises councils that the effectively open-ended agreements handed to council tenants should come to an end.
Instead, fixed-term tenancies would give local authorities the chance to review tenants’ needs after a period of time. The idea is to make sure that flats go to people who need them most, but campaigners say it will mean residents will not feel secure in their homes, living under the constant threat of having to leave.
In an article for today’s New Journal, Eileen Short, from the Defend Council Housing campaign group, argues: “It would destabilise estates and communities. Council as well as private tenants would be constantly on the move, turning our blocks into hostels and undermining tenant organisations. It would make tenants wary of getting (more) work or letting family members move in (or out) for fear of losing your home.”
Labour housing chief Councillor Julian Fulbrook said last night (Wednesday) he had already told the government that Camden is not interested in the idea of fixed-term deals, which would be discretionary for each council to use as they see fit.
He added that the Town Hall would try to resist government pressure to bring council rents closer to market prices.
“As currently advised, there is nothing in the Localism Bill to suggest that the twin terrors, the abolition of security of tenure and market rents, are mandatory,” he said.
“The Labour administration in Camden has therefore already indicated that it will not be using these discretionary powers when the Bill becomes law.
“The only insecurity of tenure I’m hoping for is that of Cameron and Clegg in government.”
Liberal Democrat housing spokesman Councillor Chris Naylor declined to speak to the New Journal but group leader Councillor Keith Moffitt said the changes would need a “cautious” approach.
“It would not affect any existing tenants,” he added. “There will be no changes to their arrangements. With the shortage of social housing, however, it seems fair that we try to make sure that those who need it most get it. People’s circumstances change and, for a short snapshot in your life, you might qualify for social housing but it does not necessary mean you qualify forever.”
“What we must do is make sure that people don’t feel the security of their homes is being messed around with and we must not cause a disincentive to try to improve circumstances. People must not feel there is no point trying to get a better job, or earn more money if it means they are going to be quickly kicked out of where they live.”
Conservative leader Councillor Andrew Mennear said: “How can anybody oppose measures that make sure housing goes to people who need it most?”
He added: “When there are so many people on the waiting list, it’s ridiculous that people whose circumstances change and can afford to live elsewhere, like Frank Dobson, can stay in council properties indefinitely. People on the list’s main concern is getting somewhere to live, not what the tenancy agreement will be.”