London council will be first to close ALMO
A council has voted to become the first in the country to wind up its arm’s-length management organisation.
Last night, a cabinet meeting of Hillingdon Council approved a report recommending its ALMO, Hillingdon Homes, close. All properties will return to the council’s management.
At the end of 2009, the council ran an independent test of opinion with its tenants. Of the 1,249 responses, 942 were in favour of returning housing management to the council.
The report had initially recommended closing the ALMO in April 2011, but councillors have said they will seek an earlier date when they meet with the Hillingdon Homes board in early March.
Hillingdon Homes was set up in 2003, and has now completed the decent homes programme on all of the council’s stock.
Philip Corthorne, cabinet member for adult social care, health and housing, said: ‘We have had to deal with the impact of the economic recession and severely restricted budgets means we cannot justify running a separate company to manage housing when we could do it in-house.
‘This proposal will mean we could cut duplicated costs and instead use the money to improve housing services.’
Have your say
You must sign in to make a comment
Readers' comments (7)
zack | 19/02/2010 9:57 am
Hi
This is nothing to do with the enconomic recession, Hillingdon Council used to make a very healthly surplus on PSL leasing. This will come at the end of this financial year as the result of the reform of TA subsidy and this has left a massive hole in the budget.
Pls tell the truth this is the real reason
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
tom | 19/02/2010 2:39 pm
Whatever the reason,its good news.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Jeremy donovan | 22/02/2010 7:49 am
Is this really such a surprise, from memroy most ALMO's were set up to do a specific task, Achieve Decent Homes. Once completed what would happen was always uncertain and subject to political will.
I remember some tiome ago Inside housing had some articles about this and what would happen.
We shoudl be concerned that none of our fellow housing professionals lose their jobs in teh swithch back to the local authority.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Peter | 22/02/2010 10:39 am
Losing some jobs will be inevitable otherwise there will be no point in getting the ALMO back. Most of the savings will come by shedding jobs and using existing staff in the council to carry those duties.
I have to agree with Jeremy that this whole exercise was to get money to do DH programme. It had nothing to with improving the quality and efficiency of the service. A lot of money was wasted in the setting costs of the ALMOs.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
sbbaggies | 22/02/2010 6:11 pm
Haven't the London Borough of Ealing previously agreed to disband their ALMO thus making Hillingdon the 2nd or did I dream this?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
St Alban | 24/02/2010 11:48 pm
I think Ealing does not count on grounds of lack of democracy. Hillingdon have voted to take this action where as Ealing undermined their ALMO into the grave!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Broadsword | 25/02/2010 5:35 pm
At the end of 2009, the council ran an independent test of opinion with its tenants. Of the 1,249 responses, 942 were in favour of returning housing management to the council - question why did tenants want to end it? It could not be the costs? The council state they can run it better by reducing duplicate costs?
Perhaps the ALMO was starved of a fee? Perhaps the council failed to consider shared retained housing services with neighbouring council to minimise their costs?
If the ALMo has met its origional purpose - Hillingdon Homes was set up in 2003, and has now completed the decent homes programme on all of the council’s stock, then they are right to review and if the view is to return to the council - power to their elbow. But I would hope the organised business plan reflects the stock coming back and 30 year implication or will we see another funding gap and another transfer?
As to Peters comments - surley VFM was an issue at transfer - what did the council say when it was first transferred-I wonder?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment