Pathfinders May Run Out Of Cash

The first signs that the Government's public spending spree may be slowing is in the field of housing renewal.

Inside Housing Magazine is reporting that pathfinders have been asked by Government to find better value for money and to reduce demolition plans.

The recent announcement of £482 million for existing pathfinder projects may be the last at that level. A review of BridgingNewcastleGateshead said that "the extent of future funding at this stage is uncertain".

The Audit Commission was quoted as saying that it was risky to plan for future high levels of funding.

While Gateshead Council pats itself on the back for it's pathfinder bid it may well be left high and dry in years to come with little money for the regeneration it promised residents.


Link: Inside Housing

Housing Renewal May Violate Human Rights

A High Court challenge may stop compulsory purchase of homes under the pathfinder programme.

In a test case Elizabeth Pascoe, a 59 year old grandmother from Liverpool, is to argue that her human rights are being violated by the compulsory purchase of her home. In essence her case is that the council proved the case for renovating homes but not for demolition. A victory in the case could bring the pathfinder process to a full-stop.

Link: Woman Says Human Rights are violated under pathfinder

Gateshead Council Maths: 25+0=74

In December 2005 Gateshead Council claimed that 74% of residents in Saltwell and Bensham agreed with their draft plan which included the demolition of 440 homes.

Only this week have they released the raw data which made up the original claim and the figures dont add up the way they claim. Remember that some 1,400 residents signed petitions specifically against demolition and the council have never specifically mentioned demolition. In fact, before September 2005, they denied any demolition was planned.

According to the council figures some 641 residents attended drop-in meetings. They claim that this number gives them a good statistical breakdown. They claim 74% supported their plans. In fact the statistics show that just 25% supported the plans they presented. Some 20% opposed the plans completely and 49% supported the plans partially. Of those who partially supported the plans the bit they disagreed with was demolition! In order to disguise the opposition to demolition the council even separated out a group that wanted "emphasis on renovation". In other words the council have given the impression that 74% of people positively supported demolition when only 25% actually supported demolition.

Saltwell and Bensham Residents Association have always doubted council claims but the council have consistently hidden the basis on which figures had been calculated. Now we know why. Even their paid consultants couldnt find more than 25% support for demolition.

In other documents earlier surveys of residents show 80% satisfaction with living in the area.

The picture from these surveys shows a highly satisfied community that would like some cash for renovation and improvement. Only 1 in 4 residents wants to see demolition in the area.

The survey showed that 57% of residents believed the plans could be improved. So why have the council gone ahead with the original plans?

The highest level of support was for better management of tenants, landlords and more police. Illustrating that most residents recognised that demolishing houses would not make bad landlords better or poor tenants better.

So when Gateshead Council said 74% agreed with the draft plan for Saltwell and Bensham the actual figure was 25%. It seems that Gateshead Council will say anything to bring in the bulldozers.

Minister Hears About Our Campaign In His Blog

David Milliband is a modern kind of Government Minister. Instead of the usual condescending and patronising talk that tell most people that politicians are not part of the real world he has joined planet Earth by writing a blog.

Seeing an entry on pathfinder I couldn't help tell him about the reality. Read my comments here.

If you want to tell a minister about your experience of pathfinder why not comment at http://www.odpm.gov.uk/davidmilliband and bring ministers closer to the people!

Residents Campaign To Continue

In evening following the council decision to demolish 440 homes in Saltwell and Bensham the Residents Association had an open public meeting to discuss the council decision.

Chairman Tony Bone (photo) addressed a large meeting of local residents and called on the meeting to challenge the council on improvements. He said that residents should insist that people should take the council at its word when it claimed 95% of the proposals were about renovation and refurbishment. Tony Bone expressed the view that the first priority should be to tell the council about the improvements that residents wanted to see.

General concern was felt about the flawed consultation process and the lack of transparency in decisionmaking. One resident highlighted the problem of getting useful information and having to rely on making Freedom of Information requests for even the most trivial report from the consultation process.

The meeting watched a multi-media presentation highlighting the long drawn out demolition process on Sunderland Road. Demolition of properties has taken up to three years and is still going on.

A number of speakers emphasised that Gateshead Council was just the first stage in pathfinder. The plan for demolition would have to go before the board of BridgingNewcastleGateshead and ultimately to the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister. Other routes including legal action could be considered as well as judicial review of the flawed consultation.

The meeting concluded with a vote on whether the campaign should continue. This was carried with no votes against. A collection was held for campaign funds.

Council Votes For Demolition

It was no surprise that last Thursday (23/3/06) Gateshead Council voted to demolish 440 homes in Saltwell and Bensham. If families were not facing the prospect of losing their homes the process could have been described as a farce.

Before the vote councillors were subjected to key questions from Saltwell and Bensham Residents Association. Questions about affordablity were brushed aside as the Leader of the Council attempted to sell the concept of family homes that would cost 10 times the average salary of hard working families in Gateshead.

The Residents Association pushed for a supplementary question to get some clear answers from councillors. Based on Government statistics the growth area of housing is single person homes rather than families so the Residents Association asked that in the light of this shouldn't the Council reconsider the draft plan. The Mayor ruled that this question was not relevant and councillors complained about the number of questions being asked. Given that the Residents Association has been the only people asking any questions at all the comment was somewhat ironic given the role councillors are supposed to have representing their constituents.

The night before the meeting Saltwell and Bensham Residents Association emailed all councillors reminding them of our call for a referendum on demolition. We said that an amendment to have a referendum before demolition could be tabled at the meeting. The Liberal Democrat opposition tabled such an amendment and forced the first debate on this issue in open council. Unfortunately when it came to the vote the Lib Dems sat on the fence and abstained leaving a huge majority for demolition.

So the political process disappeared in a whimper. Little compassion was shown by the councillors for those losing their homes. The debate was a cynical exercise in older councillors talking about their youth and the leaky roof in their Tyneside flats some 40 years ago. As if remembrances of 40 years ago replaced the proper evidence of structural surveys. Not so much New Labour as Jurassic Labour.

Council Offers Woman On Benefit A £100,000 Loan

The promise of "family homes" replacing flats in Saltwell and Bensham is the enticing promise held out to the aspirational buyer in Gateshead. However Gateshead Council have given less thought to affordability of such homes. As the national average house price tops £180,000 - 10 times the average wage in Gateshead.

Assuming new "family homes" will start at a reasonable(!) £160,000 they will replace affordable homes in the area that cost £60,000.

A local resident on incapacity benefit who had paid off her mortage had a chance to voice her concerns to a Gateshead Council official. She asked if her home was demolished and she got full market value for her property how would she afford one of the new family homes.

The official was delighted by this question and explained that people who faced demolition whould have the option of a council backed equity loan on a new property. Doing some straightforward maths the resident concluded that the council would have to lend her £100,000 to keep their promise.

She then said to the official. I am on incapacity benefit so how will I ever be able to repay the loan? The official went silent and disappeared quickly into the background.

Unfortunately for the council these are the real questions that make nonsense of their demolition policy.

Sold in six hours!

By defining Saltwell and Bensham as a "pathfinder" area Gateshead Council are endorsing the pathfinder principle that the market for housing has failed. Intervention, including demolition, is the only way that the area can be regenerated. The council's own literature implies that the worst kind of housing is a flat and suggests that people are leaving the area due to lack of quality property.

The council have ignored the trebling of house prices in the last three years. In 2004 The Guardian newspaper reported that the best housing investment in the country you could have made was to buy a Tyneside Flat in Saltwell and Bensham back in 2001. On average you would have paid £15,000 and you could have sold the property in 2004 for more than £50,000.

So what is the market price today. Three bedroomed flats are selling for £135,000 in the centre of the pathfinder area. Today a residents association committee member told me that her neighbour put a three bedroom flat in Saltwell Road on the market and it was sold in just six hours. Not exactly evidence of a failing housing market.

With prices in the area rising rapidly it's no wonder private sector developers want to get their hands on the land. All they need is a local council willing to help the speculators and use public money to fund private greed.

Rogue Landlords Blight Area say Gateshead Council

Gateshead Council have put the argument that dis-repair and absentee rogue landlords have created poor standards of housing and have brought down the Saltwell and Bensham area.

As if to illustrate the point when Tyne-Tees TV did a news report about the campaign on demolition the council spin doctors sent the film crew down to Armstrong Street. Local TV carried views of the area like this recent photograph.

The Residents Association agrees with the council that rogue landlords ought to keep their property in a better state of repair. The only problem is that these houses are owned by the council - a small fact they omitted to tell the TV crew.

Public Meeting 23rd March 2006

There will be a public meeting at Whitehall Road Methodist Church on Thurday 23rd March 2006 at 7.30pm.

The meeting will provide campaign information and also the very latest on Gateshead Council's home demolition programme in the area. At 2.30pm on 23rd March 2006 the full council is expected to receive the recommendation from Gateshead Council Cabinet that demoliton should go ahead.

The 440 homes that are to be demolished are part of the 15 year pathfinder programme. As yet the council have not guaranteed that the demolitions will stop with these 440 homes.

In East Lancashire a contract was drawn up between local councils and the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister to guarantee that housing in the pathfinder area would be demolished to meet government targets. If councils failed to meet a demolition target they would lose their pathfinder money. Pendle council had to guarantee that 40% of the money it received would be used for demolition and other councils agreed up to 70% of their funds would be used for demolition.

If the same pattern hits Gateshead then much of the regeneration cash will be swallowed up by paying for the bulldozers.

Lord Rogers Critical of Pathfinder

Lord Richard Roger's report in 1999 on sustainable communities was the basis on which the housing renewal pathfinder was later put into action. In an article Lord Rogers criticises the emphasis on demolition and supports (cheaper) renovation.

Link: Demolition of English Homes

D-Day in Saltwell and Bensham

In this case 'D' is for demolition. Yesterday a small committee of councillors failed to listen to 1,400 residents who petitioned them not to go ahead with the demolition of 440 local homes. Gateshead's "cabinet" took little notice of the majority of local residents when it recommended the adoption of it's Neighbourhood Plan to the full council - due to meet in a couple of weeks.

The cabinet received a report from consultants GVA Grimley, having received £600,000 from the council, to carry out a local consultation. This produced an alledged 70% support for demolition plans.

However if you ask who was consulted and how the 70% was made up the story becomes more vague. In many parts of Saltwell and Bensham even the basics were wrong. Residents in Lincoln Street were told by the consultants they were to face demolition because they lived in flats. However Lincoln Street is has three bedroom terraced homes. That threat was then withdrawn. A resident in Westminster Street was told by local councillors that his home is being demolished because of "social reasons". Early consultants maps included two streets called Affleck Street and "boulevards" that removed kitchens and bathrooms to the rear of property with little explanation.

Gateshead Council claim to have "consulted" 43 local organisations and more than 1,000 people to get their 70%. They have done this without asking the fairly obvious question of whether people support demolition. They do this on the basis that the "draft plan" mentioned clearance on it and people know what that means. In fact the draft plan more accurately could be described as obscures mention of any clearance or demolition and discusses the fact that the pathfinder project can make public transport run on time - but fails to disclose how.

Some of the organisations in the area that they didn't consult were; the catholic churches, the protestant churches, the methodists, the schools, the major public transport provider, the bus trade union branch, the credit union, the muslim community, shopkeepers on Saltwell Road and many more. More than 1,400 people petitioned the council to stop demolition and more than 500 people at public meetings objected.

The council have dismissed these objections as being "a minority".

At the last local election the Labour candidate won by 800 votes. How are the Labour councillors representing their constituients - by demolishing their homes.