Proposals for new Winchester City Council-run housing company

Basingstoke Gazette: Cllr Stephen Godfrey welcomed the proposal. Cllr Stephen Godfrey welcomed the proposal.

WINCHESTER could be about to see a rise in the number of affordable houses to meet overwhelming demand.

City council officials met to discuss new recommendations for a council-owned housing company to be set up specifically to develop new houses for rent and possibly sale.

Other suggestions included the possibility of entering into a joint venture with private sector developers and the option of sale and leaseback. This would result in council-owned land being sold and leased back to a developer or institutional investor.

Case officer, Andrew Palmer, said: “We have been reasonably successful in providing affordable housing over the last few years. However the national landscape for such housing has changed significantly over the last three years. We have a large number of sites coming up in the district over the next 10 years and it's prudent that we provide more affordable housing.

“We may not have the ability to develop these sites in the future. The Government has been very reluctant to increase its debt cap. However we have had discussions with local enterprise partnerships who are keen to see these houses developed.”

Mr Palmer said the council would have to look into any “additional debt headroom” before committing to a strategy.

Cllr Stephen Godfrey: “I think this is a really important and exciting proposal that we must investigate.”

Mr Palmer added that other district councils were looking into similar schemes and suggested collaborations with them would help officers to shape the final proposal.

He said: “We are aware of several councils who have established companies like this so there are district authorities who have already set the precedent.”

Cllr Ian Tait, who spoke on behalf of local residents, said: “I fully endorse the recommendations of the paper and it's absolutely vital we look at extending our affordable housing. We have got 2,000 on the waiting list increasing by 100 people per month so whatever we can do to alleviate that is welcome.”

TACT chair, Judith Steventon Baker, said: “Chairman, you said earlier that Winchester is not a speedy council. Well get speedy: we need affordable housing.”

Comments (2)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

9:33pm Wed 2 Apr 14

wheresthemoneygone says...

What about a headline of " Useless newspaper consistently fails to understand or care about the consequences of blatant council land and housing sell-off policy" How many smug Idiots can a paper represent with a mindless reportage of misrepresentation - This paper used to represent ordinary constituents!

It might be 'exciting' for the rabid, tax subsidized, fully recompensed bureaucrats, but for many it will mean hardship as society walks backwards, tearing up the post-war legacy, into poverty and distress.Now I think the key phrase here is "council owned land being sold".Anything else is smoke and mirrors.Stop selling council houses now.

This word 'Affordabilty' is so easily thrown around and misused - surely nothing is affordable to the homeless or the needy - that's why council, yes council - , houses were built in the first place.If they are not built on their original tenets then they are not council houses.

So we can assume that the council are going to sell off tax payers land and then pay private concerns with tax payers money (whilst being paid by the tax payer) to make private profits from tax payers who in turn will claim benefits paid by taxpayers.In the meantime, tax payers benefits and rights diminish, rents increase, exacerbating poverty and localised degradation.The councilors will profit also from these changes.
What about a headline of " Useless newspaper consistently fails to understand or care about the consequences of blatant council land and housing sell-off policy" How many smug Idiots can a paper represent with a mindless reportage of misrepresentation - This paper used to represent ordinary constituents! It might be 'exciting' for the rabid, tax subsidized, fully recompensed bureaucrats, but for many it will mean hardship as society walks backwards, tearing up the post-war legacy, into poverty and distress.Now I think the key phrase here is "council owned land being sold".Anything else is smoke and mirrors.Stop selling council houses now. This word 'Affordabilty' is so easily thrown around and misused - surely nothing is affordable to the homeless or the needy - that's why council, yes council - , houses were built in the first place.If they are not built on their original tenets then they are not council houses. So we can assume that the council are going to sell off tax payers land and then pay private concerns with tax payers money (whilst being paid by the tax payer) to make private profits from tax payers who in turn will claim benefits paid by taxpayers.In the meantime, tax payers benefits and rights diminish, rents increase, exacerbating poverty and localised degradation.The councilors will profit also from these changes. wheresthemoneygone
  • Score: 2

8:39am Tue 8 Apr 14

jonone says...

wheresthemoneygone wrote:
What about a headline of " Useless newspaper consistently fails to understand or care about the consequences of blatant council land and housing sell-off policy" How many smug Idiots can a paper represent with a mindless reportage of misrepresentation - This paper used to represent ordinary constituents! It might be 'exciting' for the rabid, tax subsidized, fully recompensed bureaucrats, but for many it will mean hardship as society walks backwards, tearing up the post-war legacy, into poverty and distress.Now I think the key phrase here is "council owned land being sold".Anything else is smoke and mirrors.Stop selling council houses now. This word 'Affordabilty' is so easily thrown around and misused - surely nothing is affordable to the homeless or the needy - that's why council, yes council - , houses were built in the first place.If they are not built on their original tenets then they are not council houses. So we can assume that the council are going to sell off tax payers land and then pay private concerns with tax payers money (whilst being paid by the tax payer) to make private profits from tax payers who in turn will claim benefits paid by taxpayers.In the meantime, tax payers benefits and rights diminish, rents increase, exacerbating poverty and localised degradation.The councilors will profit also from these changes.
Think you need to educate yourself to the reality of "affordable housing"

"Poor" and "hard-up" are two things many residents of such housing do NOT appear to be suffering from!

The people really forgotten are those at foodbanks or homeless hostels, who do not have the luxury of tax-payer subsidy for owning multiple cars, or having a raft of children or going on expensive holidays to Florida. Just three behaviours I know people in "affordable" housing have the luxury of.
[quote][p][bold]wheresthemoneygone[/bold] wrote: What about a headline of " Useless newspaper consistently fails to understand or care about the consequences of blatant council land and housing sell-off policy" How many smug Idiots can a paper represent with a mindless reportage of misrepresentation - This paper used to represent ordinary constituents! It might be 'exciting' for the rabid, tax subsidized, fully recompensed bureaucrats, but for many it will mean hardship as society walks backwards, tearing up the post-war legacy, into poverty and distress.Now I think the key phrase here is "council owned land being sold".Anything else is smoke and mirrors.Stop selling council houses now. This word 'Affordabilty' is so easily thrown around and misused - surely nothing is affordable to the homeless or the needy - that's why council, yes council - , houses were built in the first place.If they are not built on their original tenets then they are not council houses. So we can assume that the council are going to sell off tax payers land and then pay private concerns with tax payers money (whilst being paid by the tax payer) to make private profits from tax payers who in turn will claim benefits paid by taxpayers.In the meantime, tax payers benefits and rights diminish, rents increase, exacerbating poverty and localised degradation.The councilors will profit also from these changes.[/p][/quote]Think you need to educate yourself to the reality of "affordable housing" "Poor" and "hard-up" are two things many residents of such housing do NOT appear to be suffering from! The people really forgotten are those at foodbanks or homeless hostels, who do not have the luxury of tax-payer subsidy for owning multiple cars, or having a raft of children or going on expensive holidays to Florida. Just three behaviours I know people in "affordable" housing have the luxury of. jonone
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree