Elizabeth Pascoe is an unlikely campaigner and has arguably become involved in the most important campaign for freedom in the last 50 years. Pascoe is a Liverpool grandmother who was faced with mass demolition in her area under the ill-conceived pathfinder programme. Recently she has lost her case against compulsory purchase of her home in Liverpool after winning two public enquiries and as many court cases.
The Homes and Communities Agency (HCA) has now finally got it's way with a narrow technical victory on the particulars of her situation. The Judge was forced to rule in favour of the Government. Mrs Pascoe was given 21 days to appeal. The HCA tried a compulsory purchase order (CPO) twice in 2006 and 2008.
The context of the case is important. Mrs Pascoe took on the local authority, the regional development authority and the government. All three were determined to demolish to create brownfield sites for development. As with all government demolition sites in the north it was said there was overwealming support for demolition. However the original CPO found more that 53 residents objecting and refusing to sell out of 370 properties where the council had already cherry picked landlords willing to sell. So the support was, at best, among those who see property as an investment rather than a home.
The rationale of Government is that all of these areas in the north have failed markets. Yet the notion of a "failed market" is a construct of the Government. Once prices reach rock bottom then private developers buy them out or new home owners begin to move in and improve less fashionable areas. In pathfinder areas property is being bought for decent amounts of money indicatative of areas that estate agents would expect to sell to first time buyers.
For most northern councils once they heard about pathfinder they started to create areas of market failure to qualify for the funding. Like most government targets pathfinder was just regarded as a quick fix to get cash in for projects in the files. Gateshead owned most of Armstrong Street in Saltwell and Bensham since 2002 and were going to use money to renovate and improve. Once they heard about pathfinder it became an ideal candidate to offer up for demolition. Careful moving in of "difficult" tenants created a bit of anti-social behaviour followed by boarding up of a few houses gave an impression of neglect. Invite some naive Government Minister for a tour and show them the state of housing that was owned by Gateshead to seal the deal.
None of Elizabeth Pascoe's circumstance has relevance in Saltwell and Bensham because the council have not sought compulsory purchase orders. Indeed they have tried to keep their plans for Gateshead very quiet and try to aquire property through people "volunteering" to sell. At the last planning comittee they admitted having no plans for 154 homes they wanted to demolish. Usually residents volunteer to sell because Gateshead Council keep threatening to pull their house down! A definition of "volunteer" that would stretch the Oxford English Dictionary to breaking point.
Pascoe's battle does have resonance with others though. The freedom wing of the Conservative Party are annoyed that people can be thrown out of their homes by local authorities and are extremely hostile to pathfinder. If the Conservatives win the next election pathfinder is almost certainly dead in the water. Labour is also beginning to see the problems with pathfinder. With their ideal of the private sector building millions of houses in the doldrums of the credit crunch housing is now a big issue. There are now too few houses rather than too many and Labour has been demolishing the houses that their voters could afford. If pathfinder doesnt disappear in the next budget it will be servrely curtailled.
So if Elizabeth Pascoe has really lost her battle in Liverpool she can at least sit back and watch the whole pathfinder farce take a last gasp in this financial year before it inevitably implodes.
Links
The Spectator
Inside Housing
0 comments:
Post a Comment