Government axes national tenant body
Share
The body set up to give social housing tenants a bigger say on the national stage is to be scrapped as part of the government’s ‘bonfire of the quangos’.
Housing minister Grant Shapps met with National Tenant Voice chief executive Richard Crossley and chair Michael Gelling on Tuesday and told them the body, which was set up by the previous government, would no longer receive government funding.
Government officials claimed that the NTV was ‘too distant’ and did not represent value for money.
Mr Crossley said he was ‘bitterly disappointed’, and that the tenants he had broken the news to so far were ‘angry and upset’.
‘Tenants will see the newcomer axing the National Tenant Voice as a signal that the government is not on their side.’
Shadow housing minister John Healey
Mr Shapps has allowed Mr Gelling and the NTV board to explore ways the NTV’s work might continue without government funding.
The council, which had 50 unpaid tenant representatives and a budget of £1 million, received 1,500 applications from tenants across the country. Its budget, which it had already cut by £500,000, had been frozen pending a decision on its future.
Barry Duckett, chair of Canada Estate Tenants and Residents Association in south London, said: ‘Surely it is trying to muffle the views of tenants. How will they liaise with tenants if they have no group to talk to?’
Shadow housing minister John Healey said: ‘This was set up with tenants, for tenants and run by tenants, who will see the newcomer axing the National Tenant Voice as a signal that the government is not on their side.’
A Communities and Local Government department spokesperson said it was keen for tenants to have a more influential role.
He said: ‘The best way to achieve that it by putting more power and voice direct into the hands of tenants.’
The news emerged shortly after the Homes and Communities Agency confirmed two funding programmes for housing will be scrapped.
Kickstart, which aims to breathe life into stalled schemes, and the local authority new build programme, which has seen some councils provide their first homes for decades, will not continue after final decisions are made about which of this year’s schemes will go ahead.
NTV timeline
January 2009 NTV project group publishes report on how the final organisation should be run
Early 2010 NTV funding cut from £1.5 million to £1.25 million
February 2010 National Tenant Voice set up
March 2010 Members of the 15-strong board appointed.
April 2010 NTV appoints Michael Gelling as chair and Richard Crossley as its chief executive
May 2010 £89,000 cut from NTV budget by coalition government
View results 10 per page | 20 per page | 50 per page |
Have your say
You must sign in to make a comment
Readers' comments (54)
Anonymous | 15/07/2010 9:32 am
And this is the same government that announced on Monday that it is setting up a new body "to be the collective voice of patients" (see http://www.hsj.co.uk/home/health-white-paper/healthwatch-to-be-part-of-the-cqc/5017103.article)
If it's good enough for the NHS, how come it isn't good enough for social housing?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
kass | 15/07/2010 9:52 am
Will the conservative party now consider giving tenants a real voice by allowing us to democratically elect our representatives, by giving us tenants the right to the "one tenancy one vote"?
Because until that does not happen no one can claim they are legitimately representing tenants anywhere.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 15/07/2010 10:03 am
There is some interesting mileage in Kass' point of view about elected leaders for housing associations.
It would force them to become accountable to their residents without the need for an expensive and ludicrously expensive AC/TSA etc.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
murray hawtin | 15/07/2010 10:22 am
Now we are beginning to see what the ‘Big Society’ means. Individual tenants can can a voice, and so can local groups – as long as they discuss the right things (eg. how to opt out of council control). But having “power and voice” on larger matters of national policy, or getting together on a regional let alone national, scale is going too far – too much power. Big Society? Not that big!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
ProMan | 15/07/2010 10:49 am
kass | 15/07/2010 9:52 am & Anonymous | 15/07/2010 10:03 am
I agree there may be some mileage in the idea, however would it not cause potential representatives to simply campaign on popularity rather than actually being capable of representing tenants needs properly?
how would you envisage overcoming this?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Progressive Solutions Required | 15/07/2010 10:56 am
Co-operative housing management would deliver the required and beneficial tenant input and control, avoid the beauty pagent effect, and ensure that local standards are applied.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 15/07/2010 10:59 am
OK so let me play devil's advocate for a moment. How many other business do you know where the customer has the power to dictate policy? Electing someone to do a job is all very well, but what if they dont have the first clue about the subject they are required to set policy on? The bigggest problem with electing tenants is that they are not required to have any sort of knowledge or qualification whatsoever. Woud you like your doctor to be elected because he is a nice guy who wants to help people or would you rather have them qualifed, or the guy who checks the brakes on your car or flies your plane?
I sat in a meeting with a tenant representative just this week on a very basic subject that she had no idea about and in the end had to leave the meeting because it had given her a headache?
Yes, there are tenants with abilities and some are lucky enough to have them on their panels and they may work well, but a lot dont. Most tenants or people in general dont want to be involved in their community, which is their right. Our tenant groups really dont have a clue and putting them in charge of policy or any decisions would be positively dangerous for the other tenants and the organisation in general.
Yes of course tenants should have a say, but it must be an informed realistic say or it will actually make things worse.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 15/07/2010 11:21 am
In these straitened times, and even not in straitened times, MadLabour's proposed tower of babble was a complete waste of time of money.
Shapps is on roll.
Now, can we take another look at right-to-buy. Raise the discounts and extend it to the tenants of housing associations. Power to the people.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Richard Colledge | 15/07/2010 11:22 am
So what does NTV do now? Go cap-in-hand to landlords for funding?
What use would that be as NTV would not be independent ? Seems like the end of the road.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
ann gillette | 15/07/2010 11:30 am
Ooh er anonymous..................well you certainly don't take any prisoners!
I never believed that the NTV would ever see the light of day, it was too expensive to set up and the Hays Recruitment was a costly joke - recruitment which was due to be repeated in perpetuam to replace the tenants. It sounded to me like a disorganised shambles with tenants galloping up and down the country for meetings with all expenses paid. I am surprised that it has lasted this long and did it actually achieve anything?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment