Government slams Barnet for axing warden service
Share
Iain Wright warns that removal of housing support ring fence was not an opening to ‘cut services’
The government has warned councils not to use the removal of the ring fence around housing support to ‘cut services for elderly and vulnerable’ people.
Junior housing minister Iain Wright fired out the warning during a parliamentary debate after Barnet Council decided to strip resident warden services from its sheltered housing schemes this year.
The government removed the ring fence, which protected funding intended for housing support, in April this year.
Hendon MP Andrew Dismore used the debate to attack Barnet’s proposals to axe its warden service.
The cut also sparked a protest rally in north London.
Mr Dismore warned that the human cost of Barnet’s proposal would be the ‘fear and isolation of elderly and vulnerable people’.
Mr Wright also slammed the council for proposing cuts to warden services. ‘The intention behind removing the ring fence was to allow local authorities to provide innovative solutions tailored to local needs and the wishes of the local population,’ he said.
‘We did not see the removal of the ring fence as a green light to cuts in services for elderly and the vulnerable [people].’
The minister criticised the north London borough for deciding to make sheltered housing shoulder one-twelfth of its total financial savings this year, £950,000 out of £12 million.
‘I question whether such a large proportion of cuts or efficiencies should focus on one specific part of the authority’s activities, especially one that provides a service for older and often vulnerable people,’ Mr Wright said.
Lynne Hillan, cabinet member for community at Barnet Council, said the minister’s comments were ‘disingenuous’.
She said her plan was to set aside money to meet the housing support needs of people regardless of the tenure they live in.
‘We have resident wardens in about one-third of our schemes. To be frank, that’s not practical,’ she added.
Have your say
You must sign in to make a comment
Readers' comments (5)
ronny | 15/05/2009 10:50 am
Another in the 'death of a thousand cuts' for public services. With the removal of our social monitors from neighbourhoods things can only get worse. We have lost bus conductors, park keepers, school janitors and now wardens. We will soon be reading about fear isolation and anti social behaviour in schemes around the country are left to fend for themselves. All of these low paid workers above helped our communities to be safe, people to feel safe, and for public standards to be maintained in the absence (getting worse) of parental guidance and control. Very short sighted
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Joe Halewood | 15/05/2009 11:16 am
The 'junior' minister is being disingenuous in this case as everyone who knows a tiny bit about the SP programme predicted this would happen - that councils would cut SP funded services and use that income to fund other 'priorities.'
The govermment stated in its own paper that SP would provide a secure legal and financial framework and then failed to provide this. No rights whatsoever to funding and support has been the outcome and now the Barnet incident will be the first of many councils raiding the SP income (created by providers and not councils) to fund other activities. All of these councils know that taking money away from SP services will cost them more in the next few years - removing the reassurance of a warden in this case, willlead to moreolder persons needing care - and 'care' is something councils have to fund at typically 30 -50 times the level of SP or support funding.
This is short-term madness from Barnet in financial management terms never mind scandalous in moral terms. To take money away from vulnerable people to fund other services (roads, reducing council tax or whatever) is immoral and abhorrent - yet this is precisely what Barnet has done here, aided and abetted by central government numptieswho only seem concerned that their role in this fiasco is that local and not central government get the blame.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
dawn pekie | 10/07/2009 5:31 am
As a former res.warden for kett.Bor.council.
I am living in New Zealand.
I loved my job in the uk as a residential warden.
My husband and I have had enough of New Zealand as we think the work Enviroment in nz is inept and of very low standard.
I would definately consider applying for a residential Wardens Post.
In the Kent or Surrey area. Any Offers Please.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
margaret nolan | 17/12/2009 7:39 am
i as a carer do not approve of getting rid of live in wardens
that's the whole idea of people moving into sheltered housing
to know that a warden is there if needed
anyway it's in their TENANCY AGREEMENT for a live in warden
to be there so the high court should decide
M nolan
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
dawn pekie | 17/04/2010 12:00 pm
I am responding to the enormous amount of publicity from the Barnet council.
C/O the removal of wardens.
I have applied for a Residential Live in Post in and around a prominent Jeweish and asian area.
I Would certainly be putting the Elderly Tenants first place in my role,and the Vital part of this role is daily contact with them.
Any council or Housing Association needing clarification this means basically PUTTING PEOPLE FIRST.
Thank you for your time.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment