Splits over Camden's housing policy

Published: 26th May, 2011

• WE all understand why Councillor Chris Naylor does not want to speak to the New Journal about the Lib Dems’ policies on housing. 

The simple fact is that the Lib Dems find themselves unable to decide whether to advocate or oppose the policies promoted by the Conservative government which they maintain in power.

The Conservatives do not believe that local councils should be providers of social housing. Camden is now one of a minority of councils that retain a housing stock. It will face an uphill struggle to maintain that stock in the face of the Localism Bill. 

The Conservatives are already forcing housing associations into the private sector. As subsidies for new social housing are cut, associations are increasingly resorting to the private money markets to raise funds for new developments. 

Unpublished research by the London mayor’s housing taskforce is said to reveal that the delivery of 50,000 affordable homes in London between 2011 and 2015 will require almost £14billion of private cash.

Last month, the Tenants Services Authority relaxed their tenancy standard to permit housing associations grant-assured, short-hold tenancies at 80 per cent of market rents. 

As the Crown Estate tenants learned during their recent campaign against a sale to a residential property developer, while 60 per cent of market rents are affordable, 80 per cent is beyond the reach of the key workers upon whom Camden relies to maintain our social fabric.

The hard-right Conservative agenda is to encourage for-profit companies to enter the rented housing market. To date, they have shown a marked reluctance to do so.

At least with Conservatives, the voters know what they are getting. 

The Lib Dems were trounced at the polls on May 5 because they have tried to be all things to all voters. Principle has yielded to their thirst for power. 
Robert Latham
Mornington Terrace, NW1

• WHAT is the point of being the Camden Liberal Democrat’s housing spokesman if you refuse to speak about housing? 

I could not believe that one of my local councillors, Chris Naylor, refused to give our local paper a statement about the government’s housing policy. 

The government is proposing to evict council tenants if they get jobs, they are proposing to cut the support that is offered to disabled and retired people to help meet their rent and they are proposing to double the rents that council tenants pay. 

If Cllr Naylor agrees with his party’s policy, he should say so.
Anna-Helga Horrox, NW1

No longer a spokesman

• I DON'T mind being mocked and criticised when there’s good justification – and sometimes there is, as with many councillors.

But I don’t feel your piece about me in John Gulliver last week was appropriate (Home truths for the Lib Dems’ ‘spokesman’, May 19). 

I hadn’t heard anything from the New Journal team for nearly six months – despite sending in story ideas and quotes when requested – so I was a little surprised to be contacted. The only signs I had that I was “chased throughout Wednesday” (your words) were a text at 7.35am and ansaphone message which I couldn’t access while at work.

I then responded: “Thanks for text and phone. In case you’re waiting for sthg I guess I shd say that, not having been very successful with letters, quotes, story ideas in recent months, I’ve kind of given up on you guys a bit for the moment… sorry… best, Chris.” 

I didn’t know I was being contacted as Lib Dem housing spokesman – it’s fairly well known that I’m working on the Localism Bill in Westminster. 

And in taking the trouble to respond, rather than not bothering, I was trying to be helpful. 

Your team could have pushed for a reply, or pointed out I was being asked in my housing spokesman capacity – but no such thing. 

So I was a little surprised at the coverage in the next day’s edition. I don’t in any way think the New Journal has been unfair to me in not using my input, as your article suggests, I didn’t say that. Of course the New Journal should publish what it wants, as I’m sure it always will. In fact, having led on housing here for five years (and always answered the New Journal’s calls), in April I tendered my resignation from the Lib Dem front bench – twice – to the Lib Dem whip prior to our AGM, when these things are reviewed annually. And at the same time I stepped down from the council’s housing scrutiny committee.

Finally, I should say, as to the closing words about my not being one of those “more successful councillors who thrust their views into open debate whatever the criticism from voters” – have the furious battles over the Decent Homes programme been so quickly forgotten? When I championed the first major investment in our council homes for many years, winning tenants’ backing and securing a £450million programme. These improvements benefited 10,000 residents while I was in office and I’m glad to say my successor in housing is carrying the programme forward, albeit with changes and adjustments, as it should be. And there’s many more less headline-grabbing victories I’m just as proud of too.
Cllr Chris Naylor
Lib Dem, Camden Town and Primrose Hill

• Editor’s note: Camden’s Liberal Democrat group did not inform us of any change to Cllr Naylor’s role in the group as housing spokesman. This was checked with the group’s leadership which was not aware of any change.