Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Housing Scutiny Panel rejects plan for huge joint venture company
Haringey Council’s housing and regeneration scrutiny panel took a very important step on Wednesday, by voting to reject the Council Cabinet’s hugely ambitious joint venture company proposal (the Haringey Development Vehicle), to be worth £2 billion, aiming to demolish more than 4,000 homes, redevelop Wood Green town centre, and take ownership of 173 shops and 224 small businesses.
The vote was unanimous, supported by both Labour and Lib Dem Cllrs.
This is NOT a real regeneration scheme, but a vicious social cleansing plan directed against council housing estate tenants and residents, especially in North Tottenham.
Local people could be driven out of the area by estate demolitions, higher house prices and higher rents. We must do our best to ensure that this does not happen.
Panel members slammed the lack of information about possible detriments to the Housing Revenue Account arising from the joint venture plan, and the lack of any proper assessment of the risks involved.
The sheer size of the proposed company magnifies the risk factor.
It was suggested that if the company was to go bust, Haringey Council could itself go bust, and would then need to be bailed out by central government.
The meeting was preceded by a vocal demonstration outside the Civic Centre, called by Haringey Labour Momentum at just 48 hours’ notice, and supported by Haringey Defend Council Housing; and there were thirty people in the public gallery to hear Cllrs queue up to denounce the joint venture plan.
If this helps to open up a proper debate on the joint venture idea, then that is both welcome and long overdue.
Great work all round - but this was only a small step, and there's plenty more to be done!
Tags for Forum Posts: haringey development vehicle, hdv
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Ian Craine on
-
Merry Christmas to everybody here. But, Ian, could you possibly add something to your moniker so we don't get confused.
-
-
-
BTW it's remarkable how you can draw judgements with absolutely no knowledge of the case which as I've already said I'm not at liberty to divulge. This is no victim.
-
-
Permalink Reply by Ian on
-
a merry xmas and happy new year to you also Antoinette. However you must try not to start trash talj like total tosh and then complain when a logical reply is made to less than sensible comments. I don't need to know all about the case but what you have written is the source for the comment. someone "blowing the proceeds of a sale" cannot be astute as blowing means wasting unless I am mistaken.
-
-
Whatever...you don't know the details of the case and yet know better than I do...very sensible comments there yourself
-
-
Permalink Reply by Adrian Hackney on
-
plus ça change - in this youtube video, at 2m 48seconds, you can see Haringey's cabinet trooping thorugh the government's doors asking for a bail out, the last time they teamed up with the private sector to redevelop Wood Green.
-
Permalink Reply by Finsbury Park Ranger on
-
What are the chances this idea never actually happens? Are the odds for it happening or against it, as things stand?
How complacent can we be that nothing will ever really change?
-
-
interesting video, as is said hope springs eternal and history repeats its self.
-
Permalink Reply by kotkas on
-
Like it or not, there is much room for improvement within Wood Green town centre, and I for one would like to see it change to the better. I have been living on the ladder for a few months, and a few weeks ago for the first time had to go towards Wood Green, and was absolutely shocked. Judging by the ire of individuals on this forum about the state of things, it seems as though the council is simply not sufficiently well funded to make a difference so a joint venture is not that crazy of an idea after all. I do hope it goes ahead in a form that doesn't affect negatively the majority of council tenants, but the direction of travel is quite clear and unlikely to change.
-
Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton on
-
Absolutely everyone can always agree that change for the better is a good thing. And without exception in any area, there is much room for improvement. And sure the road to improvement and change for the better may be paved with someone's good intentions.
I was once in a meeting in the Civic Centre when a resident with a family-owned and run business in Tottenham pleaded with councillors. One councillor who - to his credit - seemed to be listening and not fiddling with a mobile - asked the man why he was against change and regeneration.
The family are likely to see not just their shop and home demolished, but the entire small block. Shops and homes once owned by their parents who came to Tottenham as immigrants many many years ago.
Against change and regeneration? No said the resident - in the few minutes someone is allowed by very busy and important councillors to speak a few works about their lives and work and family and future. They weren't against change and regeneration. They wanted to be part of it.
-
Permalink Reply by pamish on
-
A quick note, the CPO will of course be resisted. We have a strong chance over overcoming it as the other lot has to prove that the public interest would be better served by this confiscation of private property, than would refusing it to allow the other, restoration plan, which has planning permission.
More info to follow, meanwhile we need to raise the ££ for a barrister as there are no funds for challenging a CPO, despite Grainger having assets of £2.8 billion to fund their team of solicitors and barristers and probably a QC. Help us out here: tinyurl.com/savewcc
.
-
-
On the Government website today: 'Under his [super-Nick's] leadership, the council has attracted £1 billion of funding into the large-scale regeneration of Tottenham, using a joint venture to maximise assets and deliver homes and growth.' This is not true of course, but he's been rewarded with a new job!
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/nick-walkley-appointed-chief-exe...
-
-
Bob, when the Dear Supreme Leader banished the last Chief Executive from her realm, people from Barnet contacted and cautioned me about Nick Walkley - previously their own Chief Executive.
They referred to him as "Non-Stick Nick". I took this to mean that whatever the problems, no touch of blame fell on him.
Among the several Barnet-style "reforms" which Nick will now leave behind in Haringey, is a plan to privatise our Parking Service. If anyone's curious about the impact this is likely to have I recommend the website of Derek Dishman, "Mr Mustard". He writes about parking with wit and intelligence.
http://lbbspending.blogspot.co.uk/
Zena Brabazon has contacted Derek and will try to arrange a time in the New Year for him to come and share his Barnet experience.
__________________________________
Everyone needs to know that "£1billion" for Tottenham funding claim was exposed as a lie by a Freedom of Information question. Maybe Nick is referring to a different £1 billion? In the rarefied circles our leaders now move among I'm sure that there are always a few spare billions around.
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
