Labour Local Government Association Conference 2024: Day 2

 

Picture collage from yesterday evening and day 2 of the Conference held in Warwick. Labour is now the largest political party in UK local government. 

There was a number of workshops, formal speeches and panel debates. It was informative and interesting. A great but rarely found combination in municipal politics! 

Powerful speech by our deputy Labour Party leader, Angela Rayner, stressing that Labour will fund councils on the need of its residents not on the politics of its governing party. Unlike this Tory Government. 

Former Council leader and now MP Jim McMahon pointed out that local government had lost 900,000 workers since 2010 due to cuts but central government had gained 900,000 workers. A massive centralisation of power and resources. 

I asked a question of Shadow Social Care Minister, Andrew Gwynne about the role of local government in the future "fair pay" (sectorial bargaining) of the care sector by the Labour "New Deal for Working Families". All of the panel made reference to the importance of making sure that care workers get decent pay and conditions. Andrew made it clear that while "New Deal" was not part of his portfolio (I should have asked Angie) he is sure that local government will play an important role. Which makes sense to me. 

It was also an opportunity this weekend to share with the many unison members presence an early celebration of "Love Unions" week (starts tomorrow 12 Feb)

Labour LGA Conference 2023 - Campaign Workshops

 

I am back home this evening after attending the annual Labour Local Government Association conference in Nottingham. It was a a great conference, with lots of practical ideas for Labour Councillors but also very inspiring as it seems (touch wood, fingers crossed, don't trust polls, need to work still very hard etc. etc.) that we need to change from being the "official opposition" to be being a real "Government in waiting". 

I arrived late yesterday and was only able to attend one of the 30 workshops held that day on "Digital Ward Councillor: The Basics" led by Cllr Michael Payne, Gedling Council, Deputy Leader LGA Labour Group. Which despite being a longstanding Labour social media "warrior" was excellent and I learnt a lot. I will post more on the conference during the next few days. 

Be an effective Newham Councillor training - with Lewisham Mayor, Damien Egan

 

It was great to see so many Newham Councillors, new and old, turn up for this training led by Lewisham Mayor, Damien Egan, the LGA and Newham officers. 

I have known Damien since before he became Mayor and he is an great exemplar of British civic office. He is in my experience, a genuine, consensual politician who is also thoughtful, courteous and promotes the role of Councillors above himself.  

I still don't believe in an executive mayor model in UK local authorities but he would make a natural leader in any Committee model council. 

Give Newham the dosh you promised us Chancellor!

Later today the Chancellor will announce the details of the Comprehensive Spending Review, which sets out the government’s departmental spending plans for the next financial year.

Let us not forget the financial impact COVID-19 has had on local government and Rishi Sunak’s broken promise to do ‘whatever it takes’ to support councils to get through this.

Covid has cost Newham £59.5 million so far. Newham needs the support it was promised. Hat tip to LGA

UPDATE after the announcement

Support Unison #10billionbailout campaign

From Leader of the LGA Labour Group, Cllr Nick Forbes  - 

"We’d urge all Labour councillors to get behind Unison’s #10billionbailout campaign, which is calling on the government to fix the current funding shortfall, which is estimated to be £10bn. 

Unison have warned that unless the funding shortfall is fixed, there could be tens of thousands of job losses and catastrophic cuts to local services. 

 If cuts were to be applied equally across all services, it would mean £1.9bn slashed from children’s social care spending, £1.1bn from environmental services and £3.5bn from adult social care –an area already in crisis before the coronavirus outbreak. 

You can read the press release about the campaign here, and you can sign the petition here".

Labour Party Conference 2019: Monday (#Lab19) Twitter

Made it for a pre #LabourConference2019 #lab19 run. As you can see my selfie taken today is much better than that in yesterdays run

Great to meet up with #Newham Labour comrades at last night's informal social

Typical #Lab19 #LabourConference2019 dilemma. Clash of #housingfringe. I had to leave this one after 10 mins to go to housing roundtable next door

At my 1st #housing fringe on innovation with @JohnHealey_MP and great contributions from

@UKLabour councils in Croydon, Southampton and Leeds #lab19
My comment to panel was that it was great to hear of all the great work on housing by

@UKLabour councils & how similar all our problems our. My q was that in #Newham we dismantled our Tenant Resident Associations & we are now restarting them. Do you have any good practice TRA? Croydon and Leeds report back on successful TRAs. It is difficult to engage with people who all live busy lives

Now at packed #housingfringe by @Shelter with Ed Milliband speaking
@LabourSJ up next. #Lab19 #LabourConference2019 #BuildSocialHousing

Labour Party Conference 2019: Sunday #Lab19 (twitter)

Feeling very smug that managed to go for run this morning. I was/am looking a little rough for some reason. Will I make it tomorrow?

At @thefabians @unions21 #Lab19 fringe on does labour have a progressive plan for the NHS?

Now at @LGAcomms #councilscan fringe on why the Queens speech important for local government #LabourConference2019 #Lab19

My question to the panel was at recent #LGA conference to my surprise both the former & new conservative Chairs were very supportive of council housing? They sounded like speakers at a Defend council housing rally. Does this signal change?

Cllr Nick Forbes said in Tory party their councillors have more power & influence over policy than Labour

Next fringe Newham Mayor @rokhsanafiaz explaining the horror of austerity & the devastation it has caused. Our budget cut by 60%, 27k waiting list, 1:24 residents are homeless, overcrowding. Need #JC4PM. But not just waiting for @UKLabour victory, paying #livingwage, building 1k counci homes ...taking on the banks who caused austerity over toxic #lobo loans, saving us £143 million.

At #communitywealthbuilding Fringe #LabourConference2019 #Lab19. A relaxed social with expert panel. It is fantastic that there so many #CWB projects in councils up and down the country
@MatthewBrownLab

On Sunday had very relaxed pleasant Newham Labour social

"Labour councils working with Trade Unions"

This is good news agreement for the Labour movement family.  We should never forget that one of the reasons why the Labour Party was ever able to win power in the first place was that they were able to prove that they were on the side of the workers when in power in local government by paying decent wages, pensions and other terms and conditions.

"The Local Government Association (LGA) Labour Group has developed and formally adopted a ‘Labour Local Government and Trade Union Principles’ document, in partnership with the local government unions – UNISON, GMB, and Unite. The agreement is designed to help establish and strengthen the dialogue between Labour council leaders and councillors and local staff trade unions.

It sets out the standards which the LGA Labour Group believe should be met by Labour councils in their relationships with the unions and their policies, and covers austerity, good industrial relations, exemplary employment practice, the LGPS, promoting equality and in-house services, opposing academisation, and the Trade Union Act.

The document is reviewed annually, and was formally adopted by the LGA Labour Group in July 2018".

Hat tip Keith from UNISON

Newham Council Cabinet Meeting 2 July 2018

A busy agenda but great news that we agreed at the cabinet meeting that the Champions Statute should remain in East Ham and also a programme to oppose further school academies in Newham.

Check out Facebook Live is you want to watch the actual meeting (a great cure for insomnia I understand).

After the meeting finished I had to travel to Birmingham for the Local Government Conference. 

Lobby LGA Employers Pay Consultation: London Councils Monday 14 August

I have a clash but hope this important lobby in support of decent pay for all Council workers goes well! I will be submitting a motion on pay to the next Newham Labour Group and branch/CLP meeting. 

Council and school workers deserve a pay rise!

As a Councillor I was sent this motion by UNISON which I support and will send to our Council Labour Group, Newham School Governors and West Ham Labour Party Branch and General Committee.  

(Please note that workers in local government and schools, pay and other terms and conditions are determined by a negotiating body; the National Joint Council (NJC) for local government services)

Personally I think that all workers should have their pay decided by joint employer and employee wage councils.

MOTION ON PAY TO COUNCILS 

This London Borough of Newham Council notes that: 

• NJC basic pay has fallen by 21% since 2010 in real terms 

• NJC workers had a three-year pay freeze from 2010-2012 

• Local terms and conditions of many NJC employees have also been cut, impacting on their overall earnings 

• NJC pay is the lowest in the public sector 

• Job evaluated pay structures are being squeezed and distorted by bottom loaded NJC pay settlements needed to reflect the increased National Living Wage and the Foundation Living Wage 

• There are growing equal and fair pay risks resulting from this situation 

This council therefore supports the NJC pay claim for 2018, submitted by UNISON, GMB and Unite on behalf of council and school workers and calls for the immediate end of public sector pay restraint. 

NJC pay cannot be allowed to fall further behind other parts of the public sector. This council also welcomes the joint review of the NJC pay spine to remedy the turbulence caused by bottom-loaded pay settlements. 

This council also notes the drastic ongoing cuts to local government funding and calls on the Government to provide additional funding to fund a decent pay rise for NJC employees and the pay spine review. 

This council therefore resolves to: 

• Call immediately on the LGA to make urgent representations to Government to fund the NJC claim and the pay spine review and notify us of their action in this regard 

• Write to the Prime Minister and Chancellor supporting the NJC pay claim and seeking additional funding to fund a decent pay rise and the pay spine review 

• Meet with local NJC union representatives to convey support for the pay claim and the pay spine review

50 councils face residents’ objections to LOBO loans

Check out MJ article (Municipal Journal - you need to have a paid account unfortunately) on the up to 50 objections by residents in different Councils (including Newham) at the use of  "controversial Lender Option Borrower Option (LOBO) loans,

a campaigner has predicted. Joel Benjamin, of Debt Resistance UK, said the next step after that would be to ‘escalate the issue up the chain to the Local Government Association [LGA] Mr Benjamin revealed the strategy after Newham LBC’s cabinet member for finance, Cllr Lester Hudson, said his council had discussed the issue with the LGA and would consider participating in joint legal action’.

LGA legal advice on Pensions for Councillors

The Local Government Association has publised guidence obtained from Eversheds solicitors on "Powers of Councils to Pay Pensions to Elected Members".

The summary of this advice (copied below) is in its latest newsletter which can be found here.  

The actual advice can be found on on this legal opinions page.

I have contacted the Newham Monitoring office (again) as a Councillor expressing my concerns about the Executive decision to go ahead with Pensions for Councillors in light of this advice.

I have been refused access to internal legal advice given to Newham Cabinet members. 

"This advice has been obtained to clarify whether a council in England can make contributions to alternative pension provision for its elected members following the changes brought about by the LGPS (Transitional Provisions, Savings and Amendment) Regulations 2014, which ended the power for councils in England to offer their elected members membership of the LGPS.

It is Eversheds’ view that, whilst councils have a general power of competence under s1 of the Localism Act 2011, such a power does not permit a council to do anything which it has been specifically prohibited from doing. The changes brought about by the Transitional Regulations 2014, which were explicit in ending the option for councils in England to provide pension provision to elected members, would mean the general power of competence could not be used to make contributions to alternative pensions provision.

The advice from Eversheds also considers that auto-enrolment would not apply to councillors as they are office holders and would not meet the definition of workers under the Pensions Act 2008. The advice notes particular provisions relating to the Greater London Authority and Mayoral Development Corporations which interested parties are advised to be aware of"

Eric the Trekkie at the LGA Parliamentary Reception 2014

New(ish) Labour MP and former Lambeth Council leader, Steve Reed spoke first at last months Local Government Association event in the House of Commons Terrace Pavilion. 

Steve contrasted his experience as a Councillor with that as an MP. He felt the experience was very different especially since local people could attend Council meetings to let Councillors know their views but the House of Commons seems isolated in comparison.

Next was the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government Eric Pickles. He described himself as a Star Track fan and told us that "all resistance to freezing Council tax rises was futile".

Apart from this joke Eric's speech was actually non partisan and even very "un-Eric". He praised local authorities for their response to the recent floods and said he thought Councillors were excellent local advocates and champions. He claimed that if he ever seems grumpy as Secretary of State we should remember that he loves us all a lot.

The head of the LGA, Conservative Cllr Sir Merrick Cockell spoke next and actually said how sad he was that due to property price increases his children are not able to live in the borough (Kensington and Chelsea) he has led as Council leader for the past 13 years. Which I found to be a pretty amazing thing to hear. If his kids cannot live there then who can? 

He also called for more homes to be built, to support small builders and for a 5 year long local government grants settlement by National Government rather than yearly. Which makes perfect sense to me.

Final speaker was Baroness Bakewell who had served beforehand for 20 years in Somerset Country Council and she reflected on the 8 times so far the Lords had defeated the Government and the many other times that they had made them rethink their policies.

Local Government under Labour - Setting the Agenda

On Wednesday evening I went to the Local Government Association (LGA) headquarters in central London for the launch of a new report on the future of Councils under a Labour Government.

Paul Hackett from the Smith Institute opened the meeting and noted that we were in Bevin Hall in what use to be "Transport House", the former national offices of the T&G union.  There must be various labour movement ghosts of the past in this room and building.

Paul hoped that this report will help bring together Labour Councils and the Parliamentary Labour Party. 

Clive Betts MP was first speaker. He thought that after the the fundamental attack on local government by this present government we cannot just go back to the way things use to be. There is also a disconnect between the political class and those we serve that has to be addressed. 

Labour needs to think in opposition now since we will be too busy when in government.

 

Next speaker was Hilary Benn MP, the Shadow Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

Hilary thought that there is a struggle between local and central government. In the NHS we need national standards but there is an appetite for change for what local government provides. 

Interestingly he thought that the referendum on independence in Scotland will settle the Scottish Question but then the English Question on decentralisation will have to be answered. 

He talked about the crisis of confidence in our politics and the failure of consumerism, where far too many people think they can just sit back and do nothing but moan about the way things are run and don't realise they need to contribute. 

He ended by stating his belief that the tide is flowing towards real localism.

Cllr Lib Peck, the leader of Lambeth Council spoke about canvassing and speaking to people who said they "don't do voting". She wanted to ask them "what bit of voting do you not get?". 

The next Labour government needs to be bold. Emphasis the core values of public service. Councils need greater income raising powers, the ability to borrow and planning powers to get rid of too many payday loan and betting shops.

Final speaker was Cllr Sir Richard Leese, Leader of Manchester City Council. He asked what Labour authorities wanted to do? They want to encourage economic growth and jobs. End social determination but not by the tools of the past. Instead of national programmes there should be  devolved economic development.

I asked a question to the panel that a future Labour government needs to trust Local Authorities with taxation and spend. I appreciate there is a battle with our Treasury team over expenditure but times have changed and in the Party we have largely got rid of out trot head bangers who wrecked local government in the 1980s. We can only get rid of the centralised nanny state if you trust the people to hold councils to account for their money.

Hilary responded by saying that while he wished that there was a political consensus on income raising for local authorities there is currently not one.

There followed a wide range of interesting questions and answers. I think that it is fair to say that there was a consensus about the need to devolve real power from the centre and a wish that Labour made its mind up quickly before 2015 and if elected, took no prisoners and got on with things from get go. 

Check out of course, the excellent Chapter 10 of the report: "Troubled families in troubling times" which just happens to be written by my local MP, Lyn Brown, Shadow Fire and Communities Minister :)

Council pensions, mergers and the infrastructure cacophony

(this is an article I wrote for Professional Pensions which was published yesterday on behalf of the AMNT. An earlier John's Labour Blog version is here).

"Recently Sir Merrick Cockell, Chair of the Local Government Association announced that he personally supported the merger of the 101 different Local Government Pension Schemes (LGPS) into 5 “super schemes” each worth around £30 billion each.

He was being interviewed about a report from The Future Homes Commission on the need for investment in residential property. He argued that to invest in such infrastructure you need massive scale. There are claims that this merger and investment could result in 300,000 more homes being built every year with 15% of pension assets being invested

His comments are likely to be more than a little controversial in the sedate world of Council pension funds.  Merger is controversial. Some funds have consistently argued for merger in the past not only to enable infrastructure investment but to increase returns and slash costs. Others say "rubbish", bigger doesn't mean better and small is often beautiful (and more democratic and responsive).  The fragmentation of pension funds in the private sector is also far worse.

Yet, the governance concern about these proposals is even more significant than a spat over size.

As a LGPS member nominated representative I have been in favour of looking into the merits of merging Council pensions schemes for many years. Also investing in rented residential properties as an asset class with the prospect of long term inflation linked returns has always seemed attractive.

But remember pension funds must be run in the interests of the scheme beneficiaries and not make up for an inadequate state housing policy or the need to stimulate demand in the wider economy.

Have Councils in favour or opposed to merger actually consulted beforehand on this issue with their beneficiaries? Why is the government being let off the hock and not asked for guarantees?

The local government trade unions have quite rightly objected to this plan which was made without any consultation with them.  There is a planned cap on employer contributions to the LGPS so if this infrastructure investment goes belly up then active beneficiaries will be left to pick up the pieces.

15% is a very significant amount of assets to invest in any one class. Nothing in life is risk free. There is an obvious risk of property price crashes or even that future housing benefit cuts could derail plans.  Hundreds of organisations are cited as contributing to the Future Homes report but there is no input from those whose money it is being proposed should be put at risk?

For this still worthy proposal to have any legs there needs to be firstly proper consultation with the representatives of scheme beneficiaries on why this is good for them and then the drawing up of a business plan as water tight as possible".

Update: The Government are now consulting on plans to allow Council Pensions to invest up to 30% of its assets in infrastructure? Up from the existing limit of 15%. Hello, 30%! What is going on here?

Council Pensions, Mergers & the Infrastructure Cacophony

This morning I was surprised to hear Sir Merrick Cockell, Chair of the Local Government Association (and Leader of Kensington and Chelsea) say on the Today radio programme that he (personally) supports the merger of the £150 billion Local Authority Pension Scheme (LGPS) into 5 or so funds only. There are currently 101 different and separate LGPS funds.

He was being interviewed about a report from The Future Homes Commission  about the need for investment in residential property. He argued that to invest in such infrastructure you need massive scale. There are claims that this merger and investment could result in 300,000 more homes being built every year.

His comments are likely to be more than a little controversial in our sedate world of Council pensions. I am reminded of the bun fight in City Hall here between "merger-ists" and "merger deniers" and the epic battle earlier this month here between the "Wandsworth" Council bulldog and "Gentleman Jim" LPFA.

One side argues that if the schemes merge they will be big enough to invest in such infrastructure funds that will not only provide homes, a much needed boost to the economy but also increase returns and slash costs. The other says "rubbish", bigger doesn't mean better and small is often beautiful (and more democratic and responsive).

By coincidence on Wednesday evening I went to the Parliamentary launch of the report by the Smith Institute "local authority pension funds: investing for growth".  It makes a number of recommendations but broadly supports the idea of a "clearing house" and "pooled" LGPS funds to invest in social housing and infrastructure. Local Authority Pension Fund Forum (LAPFF) Chair Ian Greenwood made it clear at the meeting that the forum was "neutral" with regard to merger of its funds.

In the Q&A I made the point that the report itself didn't appear to address any significant beneficiary concerns and a major reason why pension funds can't already invest in social housing is that property fund managers don't want anything to do with "plebs" and only want to invest in shiny new shopping centres and warehouses. Comrade Michael Johnson threw his usual hand grenade into the proceedings by stating that the LGPS is an Empire run in the interests of the Empire rather than its beneficiaries.

Following this mornings report UNISON has quite rightly reminded everyone that the absolute legal duty of pension schemes is to act in the interests of its beneficiaries (not to make property developers rich).  While I am pretty sure that this does not mean that UNISON is necessarily opposed to such investment, those who propose it need to be damn sure that these investments benefit our members.

Out of the hundreds of organisations that are cited as contributing to the Future Homes report there appears to be no input whatsoever from those whose money it is being proposed should be put at risk?

Check my twitter account @grayee for more details on the "epic battle" (10 October) and Smith report (24 October).

LGPS 2014: The Future of the British Sovereign Wealth Fund?

Yesterday there was an announcement that the trade unions, the LGA and the Government had come to an agreement on new proposals for the Local Government Pension Scheme (LGPS) in 2014.

If you are not in the LGPS bear with me, since this is an important issue.  The LGPS has assets worth over £145 billion and collectively is the biggest pension fund in the UK and the 4th biggest in the world. It is a major shareholder in Britain and the world economy. Arguably it is the British equivalent of a Sovereign wealth fund. Over 4 million Brits are members of the LGPS with 1.6 million active members in England and Wales alone.

Why I understand that there are a lot of people who have genuine fears and concerns about these proposals there is also a lot of old nonsense being put out by the usual suspects who should know better and are just scaremongering.

I'll use a comment in a post I did yesterday from the "we don't care how good this offer is we just want to go on strike all the time to bring about the revolution" brigade to illustrate what I think about the proposals.

I will say this is early days and once we have been properly briefed on the offer and given time for it to sink in I will probably post again. Please note that is my own summary and interpretation and no-ones else's.

Q. Are we paying more?
A. No, average contribution remains at 6.5% gross.  Some part time workers may well pay even less. Those earning under £43,000 per year will pay the same while those who earn more will pay a little extra but after tax relief even those who earn over £150,000 will still pay less than 7% net. At long last if you have financial problems you will be able to reduce your contributions by 50% (with reduced benefits) until things improve rather than just pulling out.

Q. Are we getting less out?
A. No, the majority of members will get more out of LGPS 2014 than the deal in 2008. The accrual rates is far better. It is also a more valuable and better scheme. Especially for the low paid. For too long we have allowed a small number of very high earners to milk our pension scheme for their own benefit. For the first time workers will also build their pensions on non contractual overtime and allowances. A real improvement to those who rely on such money.

Q. Are we working longer?
A. Yes, in line with state pension age. Many of our members earn so little that they will not be able to retire without the state pension in any case. Remember we're living longer. It's supposed to be a good thing. In return we get a world class guaranteed pension scheme. There is also a 10 year protection. There also may be scope for members to "downsize" when they are older into less stressful and demanding jobs under Career Average than Final Salary

In many ways this is unfinished business from 2008. There was no agreement reached back then about future cost sharing over longevity. It had to be sorted sooner or later. Final Salary was always unfair to the mass of our members when compared with a decent Career Average scheme. We also never could agree with the need to modernise, get meaningful member representation and consider merger to deal with the 101 different ways that the financial services industry rips us off (i.e 101 separate LGPS funds).

What I really hope is that LGPS 2014 can be an an affordable and sustainable model for pension schemes that the millions and millions of public and private sector workers who don't have any access to such security in old age.  If we don't get such a model established in the private sector then the public sector schemes will always remain vulnerable.

What happens next? We ballot. Let the members decide.

LGA Labour Group Spring Conference: Ed Miliband

Today I went to my first LGA Labour Group Conference. The opening keynote address was by Ed Miliband in the historic Labour movement Bevin Hall.  The hall was packed to over flowing and there was standing room only.  Ed gave I thought a passionate and polished speech.  He particularly handled the Q&A very well.

Some key points from his speech were: - How unfair these Tory cuts will be - South Tyneside Council will lose £130 per person while Richmond Council will only lose £5.  7 out of the 10 most deprived local authorities will face the biggest cuts. Back office expenditure in Councils is only 9% of budget yet 28% will be cut. 

There is an alternative.  The cuts are so fast and so far that there is no time to adapt. They say the reason for the financial crisis is because we had a deficit.  Wrong - the reason we had a deficit is the financial crisis. 

It is very, very important we make it clear that this government is not just assaulting the poor - it is assaulting everyone on low or middle income.  The  top 1%-10% will be okay,  it is everyone else who will suffer.  Families with children who rely on Local authority services will lose £2700 per year and those without children will lose £1700.

The Tories are trying to shirk blame for these cuts by trying to devolve responsibility on local Councils. We need to judge this government on their deeds and not their words.

I tried to ask a question about the TUC March for an Alternative on Saturday the 26^th but was not chosen on this occasion.   (There was widespread support for the March.)

The Q&A was quite different from normal. Ed asked questions back to those who raised issues.  Which is something I haven’t seen before and I think it “worked” and made the session far more interesting than usual. 

Next was the breakout sessions – I choose the one on “Representing our roots”.  Will post later-ish.

Housing matters 18 Jan 2010

Inside Housing is making the case for public housing in the forth coming General Election. They have launched the “HOUSEPROUD” campaign.  There is a on-line petition; you can suggest a housing pledge for the main political parties; you can help publicise the campaign housing statistics (see picture); you can ask prospective MP’s about housing and get them to sign the on-line petition and send Inside Housing photos, videos, blogs, statistics etc about the value of housing in your area.  I’ve signed petition and suggested that all parties should sign up to the UNISON “Million Voices for a Million Homes” campaign.

While Roof reports that the recent freezing weather has resulted in many people being unable to afford both food and fuel. Especially the elderly. Also Christmas was paid for this year by over 100,000 of the poorest families in our community who used loan sharks to lend £29 million who charge 825% interest rates and now owe some £82 million.

The LGA show that the recession has widened the gap in the UK between the rich and poor cities.

Public Finance appear to be saying that Council and Housing association rents will converge in 2012/13 not 2020 as previously thought. Which I am not sure is necessarily good news for tenants with either landlord? Somebody is going to be a loser.

This report is a little late but the CLG report Housing Minister John Healey’s announcement of the biggest Council House building programme in nearly two decades.

Finally, I was chatting to some housing solicitors recently about the problem of rogue private landlords who do not manage their properties (full stop) and who allow their tenants (only a very small minority) to cause a bloody awful nuisance to their neighbours and who blight the local community. They suggested that if the “use of the premises is associated with significant and persistent disorder or persistent serious nuisance to members of the public” then as a last resort a “premises closure order” could be sought. Which could close the house down for 3-6 months. Which would probably sort the problem out for that house and send a message to landlords in the locality to get their act together (court costs and no rent).