This is one reason why not for profit housing associations are set up as this money can be kept by the association for improvements etc.
I do not know how the government plans to allocates these homes but I would like to see some of this funding allocated to Bracknell.
Perhaps if Bracknell and other councils were allowed to keep 90% of the rents then the local councils would have found it easier to manage their social housing stock, this may of allowed Bracknell to Build some more much needed social housing.
I live in hope.
I believe the best way forward is proposed by the people at really understand all the issues and that is the local government association;
They are calling for;
- Councils to have the financial independence to invest in their housing stock and stimulate the local economy;
- Historic ‘notional debt’ – which councils are currently spending £1.3 billion a year servicing – to be cancelled;
- Councils to have the same freedom as other social housing providers to borrow money to invest in new homes; and
- The government to stop setting tenants’ rent and allow them to reflect local circumstances.
Your find these details here
I did a google of "bracknell negative hra" and came up with the following:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.bracknell-forest.gov.uk/housing-revenue-account-2005-to-2006.pdf
Rents (2004/5) 19,666,000
-ve Subsidy Payable to Govt 9,107,000
Rents (2005/6) 20,134,000
-ve Subsidy Payable to Govt 9,553,000
Looks like near 50% tome.
My guess is that the government spin machine will say that it is one matter, and that the real money will still be ripped of the people of Bracknell and sent to the Labour heartlands.
My guess is that the money that we wold have got to upgrade what were our council houses will now be redistrubuted elsewhere, and the Bracknell council tax payer will yet again have to fill the gap left by this grasping government.
Good work yep thats almost 50% wow thats not very fair on council tax payers. I think there is alot of truth in your comment
ReplyDelete