A decision by council chiefs to withdraw from a deal that would see Bristol build its own council homes at two key sites in the city has been ‘called in’ for a second look after opposition Labour councillors said it was ‘a slap in the face’ for councillors and democracy.
But the council’s own housing company Goram Homes has said the controversial decision announced just under a fortnight ago should not impact or even delay the building of the homes, with work due to get under way at the two sites – Baltic Wharf on the Harbourside, and Hengrove Park in South Bristol – within the first few months of next year.
The homes plan is still going ahead – the row now is about who will fund the building of the affordable homes share of the new houses and flats. The previous Labour administration signed deals that would see Goram Homes fund the building of around 100 new council homes as part of phase 1 of the Hengrove Park development, and at least 66, but as many as all 166 new homes, at the Baltic Wharf development site, on the waterfront at Spike Island.
But on September 20, the Green councillor chair of the housing committee, Cllr Barry Parsons, said he and vice-chair, Tory councillor Richard Eddy, had unilaterally decided that the council couldn’t afford that – because the bill for repairing the council’s existing housing was too big.
That has left Goram Homes needing to find one or possibly two housing associations to step in with the money for the new affordable homes instead. Bristol Live understands this process could be relatively swift, and Goram is not expecting any delay to either project, with work at Hengrove Park to begin in the New Year, and at Baltic Wharf in the spring of next year.
But Labour councillors are unhappy at the decision, and the way it was done. They have ‘called in’ the decision, calling it undemocratic, because the committee members themselves weren’t even told about it or given a say.
Cllr Kerry Bailes (Lab, Hartcliffe ) said the number of affordable homes at Baltic Wharf looks like being cut. The previous plan was that all 166 new homes to be built there would be council-owned, with 118 for social rent – the most affordable kind of ‘affordable housing’ with 48 for shared ownership. Now, the latest council statements say that’s back down to 66 with only 50 for social rent.
“This decision was made behind-closed-doors, without a vote, and puts the council’s whole 30-year council housing plan at risk,” she said. “We’ve ‘called-in’ this decision so that councillors have a chance to scrutinise it.”
Cllr Bailes said the way the decision was made calls into question both the Greens’ promise to be open and transparent, and the whole new committee system itself.
“There’s no dedicated scrutiny committees in the committee system. Scrutiny is instead meant to happen in the committee itself,” she said.
“How were we meant to scrutinise this proposal, when they announced the decision had already been taken? All good decision-making processes need ways to challenge the leaders, we weren’t able to do that.
“The more we learn about this decision, the clearer it is that it needs rethinking. There’s no guarantee housing associations will take over the site, just that there’s been ‘positive interest’. The decision notice states there ‘may’ be opportunities for the housing association to acquire additional homes with funding. Labour’s plan, that was approved by Full Council, was for the council to acquire all 166 homes at Baltic Wharf for council-owned housing.
“Apparently, there’ll now only be 50 social-rent homes there, but housing associations ‘may’ choose to take on more. That ‘may’ is doing a lot of heavy lifting,” she said.
Green housing chief Cllr Barry Parsons said they had to take the decision to scrap the funding for more than 200 new council homes because the council’s existing 27,000 need a lot of maintenance and repair.
But Cllr Bailes said this should be properly considered. “I want to reiterate that the standard of tenants’ homes is a top priority,” she said.
“As a council tenant myself, I know from my own experience how much work needs to be done. It might be the case that withdrawing from these developments is a must-do for the council to continue the improvement works, but we don’t know that. If that’s true, then I understand it. But the manner this has been handled and lack of information hasn’t been good enough.
“Nobody’s been consulted on this, the decision well exceeds the financial threshold to be voted on by committee, and councillors haven’t had access to all the information. As well as that, council housing and social housing are not the same thing. There’s no Equalities Impact Assessment provided; the council needs to understand how this decision will affect the people it impacts – people on the housing waiting list.
“I don’t think it’s right to make a permanent decision, that will having lasting ramifications, without democratic input or any scrutiny,” she added. “After all the Greens’ calls for transparency, this feels like a bit of a slap in the face.”
What do the Green Party say?
The chair of the committee, Cllr Parsons, (Green, Easton) said he was disappointed the decision is being formally challenged.
“I am disappointed that Labour have questioned the process behind the decision not to purchase social homes from these two developments. Especially as the decision was delegated to officers by the previous Labour administration,” Cllr Parsons said.
“It will now be up to the escalation panel to decide whether the decision-making pathway, as laid out in the council’s constitution, was followed correctly. This escalation does not change the fact that we need urgent investment in our existing council homes, as laid out in the damning judgement from the regulator of social housing, following years of neglect under previous administrations.
“This decision represents a pragmatic and positive choice to contribute our partnership with housing associations to deliver new homes for social rent. This partnership will deliver the affordable and social rent housing that our city desperately needs, which will not be subject to right-to-buy, unlike council-owned social homes.
“It is both financially and socially irresponsible of Labour to say we should be diverting money away from making sure that residents are safe. They are playing fast and loose with the safety of residents, as also shown by their abstaining on a recent policy on fire safety in our blocks,” he added.
Cllr Parsons added that the decision for the council to step back from funding the affordable housing element should not delay either development getting started and the new homes built.
“Goram Homes remains on track to deliver much needed social and shared ownership homes at Baltic Wharf and Hengrove Park,” he said. “These are homes that will be built and will have a positive impact on easing the pressure the housing crisis is putting our city under.
“Our recent decision to amend plans to buy these homes to add to our council housing stock, does not impact on them being built. I’m grateful for the work of officers and Goram Homes to ensure this housing will be delivered and to find an alternative buyer to maintain these new builds as social and shared ownership homes.
“Working in partnership with housing associations and other registered housing providers is critical to ensuring we continue to provide new social and affordable homes across Bristol.
“Working with Goram Homes we will aim to unlock council owned land to provide further opportunities for more much needed social homes to be built in our city,” he added.