United Kingdom

Highlands and Islands Enterprise agency launches probe into contract awards

May 7th, 2009

HIE chairman also ran consultancy at centre of plagiarism row

By Jonny Muir Press and Journal

william-roe

MAN IN THE MIDDLE:
HIE chairman William Roe

Highlands and Islands Enterprise is to carry out an internal audit of contracts worth almost £100,000 that were awarded to a consultancy firm run by the agency’s chairman.

The investigation will examine 15 contracts awarded to Edinburgh-based Rocket Science, which is run by William Roe, who is also the chairman of HIE.

The announcement of the audit, which will be overseen by Audit Scotland, comes a month after Mr Roe’s company repaid HIE an £8,000 consultancy fee following an allegation that Rocket Science plagiarised information from two academic studies.

The audit will establish whether there was any further plagiarism in another 14 contracts – worth a combined £95,494 – that were awarded to Rocket Science between 2005 and this year.

The decision to investigate was revealed in a letter from Audit Scotland to Highlands and Islands MSP Mary Scanlon, who has lobbied for an audit.

Last night, Mrs Scanlon said she was pleased the audit would be carried out but called on Audit Scotland to carry out a further inquiry into the number of contracts awarded to Rocket Science that did not go through a tendering process.

She said an investigation was necessary to reassure the public that “contracts awarded by any quango are completely transparent”.

In the letter to Mrs Scanlon, Audit Scotland portfolio manager Bob Leishman said: “Contracts should only be awarded following appropriate procedures, including tendering action, and approval.

“In response to inquiries from other elected representatives, HIE has asked its internal audit team to review the contracts awarded to Rocket Science. Audit Scotland will monitor the outcome of that review on behalf of the auditor general.”

Conservative MSP Mrs Scanlon said: “Concerns were raised with me when it was discovered that Rocket Science had received some £117,000 of contracts from HIE while both organisations had the same chairman in William Roe.

“Not only were concerns raised about the propriety of these transactions, it has now been revealed that one of the reports dealing with skills utilisation was full of plagiarised comments from two other reports.”

She added: “Audit Scotland state in their response that there are no specific restrictions in terms of bidding for contracts but they say, ‘Contracts should, however, only be awarded following appropriate procedures, including tendering action’.

“The fact is that of the 15 contracts Rocket Science won from HIE, only two went to tender. I have now written again to Audit Scotland to ask if this additional information will lead them to investigate the situation with HIE and Rocket Science.

“The public must be sure that contracts awarded by any quango are completely transparent. Stricter guidelines may be a way of restoring public confidence.”

An HIE spokeswoman said: “As soon as plagiarism of the skills-utilisation study was identified, Rocket Science notified HIE and refunded our fee.

“In the light of this, our head of internal audit and compliance is now reviewing all previous reports submitted to HIE from Rocket Science to ascertain whether the example recently publicised is a one-off occurrence.”

The audit is expected to be completed by the end of the month.

Share and Enjoy:

High Court Legal battle against Heathrow expansion launched by Green Groups

Apr 14th, 2009

by Editor.

No comments yet

Legal papers have been lodged at High Court by coalition representing millions

April 2009

Leading green groups, together with local councils and residents’ groups, today launched a legal challenge against the government’s controversial decision to expand Heathrow airport.

The thirteen organisations backing the challenge – representing millions of people – will argue that the consultation process was flawed and that the decision was irrational.

Lawyers representing the coalition argue that a third runway means that the UK risks breaching legal limits on noise and air pollution, that it will seriously undermine our climate change targets and that the costs of the project have not been properly assessed and will not benefit the economy.

Greenpeace, WWF-UK, RSPB and CPRE will claim that expanding Heathrow will massively increase carbon emissions and that this is completely incompatible with the urgent need to tackle climate change.

Lodging the documents at the High Court is the first step in a process which is expected to lead to a Judicial Review of the government’s decision on Heathrow.

If the challenge is successful, the decision would be quashed and the government would have to re-run the consultation. If the Court agrees that the decision was irrational then the government may also be forced to review its entire aviation policy, which supports expanding nearly thirty airports across the country.

Greenpeace Executive Director, John Sauven said:

“The government’s decision to expand Heathrow is completely at odds with the urgent need to slash emissions and stop runaway climate change. This is why we are launching a legal challenge.

“Brown and Hoon know that the sums on Heathrow don’t add up. That’s why, at the last minute, they knocked together a handful of half-baked proposals in an attempt to ‘green’ the runway.

“But however much the government try to dress this decision up, the simple fact is that this runway can not be built if it is serious about tackling climate change.”

David Norman, Director of Campaigns at WWF-UK said:

“The decision to allow a third runway at Heathrow blows the chances of setting the UK onto a low carbon pathway completely out of the water. If the targets set in the Climate Change Act are to be meaningful, the government must stop adopting policies that undermine them.

“Nor does it make sense financially – why expand a carbon intensive industry such as aviation, which will make it incredibly difficult and expensive for the UK to meet the government’s carbon targets – when there are green alternatives such as video conferencing and high speed rail available instead? Every other part of the economy will have to cover the carbon costs created by a third runway.”

Dr Mark Avery, the RSPB’s Director of Conservation, said:

“The RSPB believes climate change to be the biggest threat to life on Earth. We are already starting to see its impacts on wildlife here in the UK, including catastrophic declines among seabirds in parts of the North Sea.

“Against this backdrop, the decision to build a third runway at Heathrow is perverse. We are not opposed to flying, and indeed recognise that for many people international travel is a vital part of their life and work. But encouraging a massive increase in flights, just at the time when we need to reduce our emissions dramatically, shows a reckless disregard for the well-being of our planet, and our future.”

Shaun Spiers, Chief Executive of the Campaign to Protect Rural England said:

“Britain’s aviation policy is badly out of date and lacks democratic legitimacy. It takes very little account of the urgency of climate change or the impact on people’s quality of life of ever more noisy flights and car journeys to airports.

“The decision on the third runway was stitched up behind closed doors, and the Government seems less and less prepared to subject its decisions on aviation to proper public scrutiny. Aviation policy has become so democratically challenged that a legal challenge is the only way for groups like us to influence it.”

ENDS

Contact details:

On behalf of green groups:

Greenpeace press office

T: 0207 865 8255

On behalf of all councils:

Emma Marsh, London Borough of Hillingdon

T: 01895 556064/ 07780 913334

E: emarsh@hillingdon.gov.uk

On behalf of local residents

Geraldine Nicholson

T: 07710 523369/ 01895 556903

Notes to Editors:

1.) Six local authorities in West London (Hammersmith and Fulham, Hounslow, Hillingdon, Kensington and Chelsea, Richmond upon Thames, Wandsworth and Windsor & Maidenhead) are claimants to the challenge, the local residents group (NOTrag) and the national campaigning group against airport expansion HACAN.

2.) In February 2007, Greenpeace won a Judicial Review against the government’s energy review, which backed a new generation of nuclear power stations. As a result the government was forced to run the public consultation for a second time.

3.) If a third runway at Heathrow airport goes ahead, the airport will become the single largest emitter of carbon dioxide in the UK. Unrestrained airport expansion will make it impossible for the UK to play its part in tackling climate change. The Government has committed the UK to cuts of at least 80% in CO2 emissions by 2050. Research from the respected Tyndall Centre shows that if the industry is allowed to expand as predicted, aviation alone would destroy any hope of hitting this target.

4.) Aviation emissions do more damage to the climate because they are released at altitude. Scientists multiply aviation emissions (which include other harmful gases not just CO2) by between 2 and 3 to calculate their increased climate impact – a phenomenon know as ‘radiative forcing’.

5.) The government has also set a new target to reduce aviation emissions to 2005 levels by 2050. Currently, the Department for Transport forecasts that aviation will emit 59.9 MtCO2 by 2050. This new target means that the industry must now halve their emissions to 37.5 MtCO2. The government argues that these reductions can be achieved by advances in technology that make aero planes more efficient. However, this is based entirely on data provided by the aviation industry and has not been subject to independent review and was not consulted on.

6.) Historically small increases in the efficiency of planes have been overwhelmed by an unrestrained growth in flights. There is no evidence to suggest that this will not be the case in the future if action is not taken to constrain expansion. The Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution found that the industry’s targets are ‘clearly aspirations rather than projections’ and there are some basic technological restraints that make major improvements impossible to imagine.

7.) The decision on Heathrow is underpinned by the government’s aviation policy, set out in the 2003 Aviation White Paper, which in principle supports airport expansion in the UK. The climate science has changed significantly since 2003, as has the policy context and law – notably the Climate Change Act 2008.

Share and Enjoy:

Massive Housing Threat to Bromsgrove Green Belt

Apr 11th, 2009

by Editor.

No comments yet

The green belt borders of Bromsgrove are under huge pressure to take thousands more houses under plans being drawn up by regional bodies.

The Wythall and Beoley areas face the prospect of thousands of new houses being built on green belt land which traditionally has formed the border between Birmingham and Bromsgrove and Redditch and Bromsgrove.

The threat comes from the Government’s Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS) which has been given the task of deciding where future houses will be built in the West Midlands having been informed by the now defunct West Midlands Regional Assembly as to how many new dwellings will be needed.

Their conclusions make disappointing reading for residents in the Wythall and Beoley areas who could find large new housing estates being built in their area with no democratic accountability for the decisions which have been taken.

Conservative Party MP, Julie Kirkbride is implacably opposed to these developments and will fight to protect Bromsgrove’s green borders.

Click here for more information and to register your concerns.

****************************

Julie Kirkbride

Member of Parliament for Bromsgrove

Tel: 01527 872135 / Fax: 01527 575019 / House of Commons, London, SW1A 0AA.
Email: julie@juliekirkbride.com / Web: www.juliekirkbride.com

Julie was born in June 1960 and brought up in Halifax, the youngest of three children. Her father was a lorry driver who died when she was seven and her mother worked as a secretary at Rowntree Mackintosh’s. She went to local schools including the local grammar school, which at the time was known as The Highlands and is now the North Halifax High School, followed by Girton College, Cambridge to read economics and history. Whilst at university, she was Vice President of the Cambridge Union Society and active in Conservative politics.

Upon leaving university, she spent a year working for the House magazine in Parliament and then from 1982 to 1983 as a Rotary Foundation scholar studying journalism at the University of California in Berkeley. Between 1983 and 1986, she worked as a researcher for Yorkshire Television in Leeds, between 1986 and 1989 as a BBC News and Current Affairs researcher/producer in London, and from 1989 and 1992 as a producer/reporter for ITN’s Parliamentary Unit. In 1992, she became a political correspondent for the Daily Telegraph and in 1996 Social Affairs Editor on the Sunday Telegraph.

In November 1996, she was selected to fight the Bromsgrove seat which she won the following year. In August 1997, she married Andrew MacKay MP, the Conservative Member for Bracknell, and they have a son, Angus.

Julie Kirkbride’s Experience

Julie’s political career began when she joined the Young Conservatives in Halifax at the age of fourteen and she continued during her time at Cambridge University. When she started working for Yorkshire Television, and subsequently the BBC and ITN, she stopped an active political career due to the potential conflict of interests and likewise whilst she was a political correspondent for the Telegraph.

Her political career therefore resumed in November 1996 when she was selected for the Conservative held seat of Bromsgrove. As a Member of Parliament since May 1997, she has been a member of the Social Security Committee and now sits on the Culture Media and Sport Select Committee. She also sits as a member of the Commons Catering Committee. From November 2003 to September 2004, she was Shadow Secretary of State for Culture, Media & Sport.

Her interests in political issues range across the spectrum with perhaps her highest profile campaign so far being to encourage the Government to introduce single vaccinations alongside the MMR.

Share and Enjoy:

Tulloch Homes announces new facilities for Milton of Leys

Apr 10th, 2009

by Editor.

No comments yet

Residents say developer’s original pledges for community services have been greatly watered down

Tulloch Homes announces new facilities for Milton of Leys

By jonny muir Press and Journal

Published: 10/04/2009

Developer Tulloch Homes has revealed plans to build a care home, a church, a primary school and shops on land at Milton of Leys, south of Inverness, which would be the first community facilities in the area.

But residents there have accused the developer of watering down the long-awaited community facilities after it slashed the amount of open space and upped the number of houses.

At present, the nearest school or shop is four miles away, which has made Milton of Leys the butt of jokes as its only existing community facilities are a postbox and a £10,000 “bandstand”.

Despite welcoming Tulloch’s proposals, residents say they are bemused that plans for community facilities mooted a year ago have been scaled down.

A substantial area that was once earmarked for open space with play facilities, including £100,000 of play equipment, has shrunk to a small wedge of land on the site’s periphery, even though it would overlook homes.

It is now envisaged that play facilities and a recreation area will be created within the grounds of the school, prompting concerns that the facilities will not be accessible outwith school hours.

Milton of Leys Residents’ Association chairman Gavin Norton said: “As a growing community of 600 homes, we are thrilled that we are going to get a primary school, but it can’t be at the expense of losing other community facilities.”

Mr Norton said there was also frustration that Tulloch had increased the amount of land allocated for housing on the community site from 1.5acres 12 months ago to 2.5acres now.

Residents learned about the proposals in a letter from Tulloch saying that an application had been submitted to Highland Council seeking permission for a “district centre, including retail, residential, care home, children’s nursery, community facility and primary school”, but it was not until the residents’ association obtained detailed drawings that the full extent of the changes emerged.

Mr Norton said: “Tulloch has done nothing wrong. They have provided all they need to provide. But the first reaction of most people will be: ‘what one earth is going on’?”

Milton of Leys community councillor Barrie Haycock said: “It smacks of Tulloch trying to increase its profit margin by putting as many homes on the plot as possible.”

Inverness Crime Prevention Panel chairman Jim Ferguson said there were signs that antisocial behaviour in Milton of Leys was on the rise, making it vital that community facilities are provided on the estate.

Tullochs were not available for comment.

Share and Enjoy:

Feltham Gravel Pits Hounslow

Mar 12th, 2009

by Hounslow38.

9 comments

Plans to redevelop former gravel pits in Feltham and build up to 1,000 new homes on Green Belt land have received a mixed response from residents.

The results of a public consultation into the ambitious proposals for the Lower Feltham Lakes site, in Chertsey Road, have finally been released.

This story appeared 11th March 2009 in the Hounslow Chronicle

Story Continues

This is a Land Banking site of Green Belt and Nature Conservancy land which used to be a gravel pit. A company called Profitable Plots in Singapore bought the site in 2006. confusingly the company that offers the site now is called Profitable Group also based out of Singapore. Previously in marketing the site was called Concorde Village Hounslow but seems to have been renamed in this article to Lower Feltham Lakes. Profitable Group have chopped the site into 9000 plots and are offering the plots to investors in Asia and Canada. You can see the Singapore TV advert for the land plots here. In the advert they are estimating a 250% return in 3 years for investors.

Presumably this survey and press effort is designed either to influence the local authority in Hounslow or convince investors in Asia that progress is being made. There is nothing in the article about what the Hounslow Planning Authority thinks.

Share and Enjoy:

Dunfermline Building Society backs Highland Housing Fair

Mar 11th, 2009

by Editor.

No comments yet

So the Dunfermline Building Society emerges as probably the sole sponsor of this fiasco which is thought to have cost the tax payer some £3Million so far.

The farce recently attracted headline TV and Press comment following the approach to MSP’s at Holyrood Parliament for funding guarantees off the back of a grossly misleading brochure produced by its organisers claiming that substantial community facilities were in place when in actual fact the only community facility for the existing development of around 600 properties was a single post box.

Time for Housing Fair chairwoman Jean Urquhart to face up to the reality that the whole process has been flawed from start to finish and provides no community benefit whatsoever.

A building society has offered £15,000 to support a controversial show of innovative housing.

Stone House, designed by NORD Architects

The fair organisers claim The Development is being organised to showcase innovative designs

Scotland’s Housing Expo – The Highland Housing Fair is to be held at Balvonie Braes, Inverness, in 2010.

Dunfermline Building Society’s offer of sponsorship was announced at the latest meeting of the fair’s board of directors in Inverness.

Complaints about how Highland Council handled the project were rejected by the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman.

In April 2008, two members of the public raised concerns with the SPSO about how outline planning was dealt with.

They said there had been inadequate consultation and permission for the site should not have been granted.

The SPSO declined to uphold 11 complaints and concerns about the council’s handling of the application.

Housing Fair chairwoman Jean Urquhart said: “This is a great indication of the kind of support within the private sector for such a ground-breaking project.

“Dunfermline Building Society are one of the first to come forward showing great foresight to give money and support to the Housing Expo.”

BBC original article link

Share and Enjoy:

Affordable Homes – Beware the Hidden Cost of Management Charges

Feb 17th, 2009

by Editor.

No comments yet

The benefit of buying in to the “affordable homes” schemes trumpeted by Government, Councils, Developers and Housing Associations is often stated, but the downside of the hidden cost of potentially fast rising management cost fees is never fully explained.

As with Land Management companies, the shock of rapidly rising bills is only discovered long after the happy purchase event.

The failure of consumer protection legislation is once more exampled in this excellent Guardian article written by Miles Brignall.

How soaring charges soured the dream of ‘affordable’ homes

Fighting mad – the shared equity tenants who have suffered more than their share of pain. Miles Brignall hears a salutary tale

m.brignall@guardian.co.uk

Shane Conway and his neighbours have seen service charges rocket. Photograph: Frank Baron/Guardian

If you have been thinking about buying one of those “shared equity” homes that are aimed at struggling first-time buyers, you may reconsider after reading Shane Conway’s story.

Six years ago, the corporate manager was one of seven tenants who bought shared-equity flats in a newly built scheme in Greenford, west London – lured in part by the government-promoted dream of owning his own “affordable home”.

Today these tenants are facing demands for £1,100 per household, on top of the £2,000 a year they pay in service charges, to cover overspending by the housing association that is supposed to look after their interests.

They say the dream of homeownership has turned into a nightmare, and they fear being stuck in flats no one wants to buy. They blame “appalling mismanagement” by Shepherd’s Bush Housing Association (SBHA), which owns and manages 5,000 homes.

Conway’s story is perhaps typical. It started in 2003 when, with his brother, he bought a 75% share in a two-bedroom flat then valued at £185,000.

“It was a brand-new and very smart apartment block being offered through the government’s shared ownership scheme,” says Conway. “We had all saved for our deposits, and this was our first step on the property ladder. The scheme was advertised as a means of affordable housing, and we all agreed a monthly service charge of £90 to pay for the upkeep of the block through the housing association, Bush Homes, which later became Shepherd’s Bush Housing Association.”

Within months of his moving in, it became clear that the building had problems. “The housing association had also put council flat tenants into the block and a minority of them quickly went about vandalising the premises. We endured graffiti, damage to walls and doors, young children running wild and a woman with mental health problems who slashed her arms and bled heavily in the corridors.”

As a result, Conway says, the service charges started rising steadily and within two years hit £160 per month, or almost £2,000 per year.

The residents felt this figure rather made a mockery of the “affordable housing” tag and, distinctly unimpressed with the service they were getting for such high fees, got together to fight the increases. They took Bush Homes to the Leaseholders Valuation Tribunal in 2006, arguing the charges were excessive. The tribunal found in their favour and was critical of the association, saying the higher charges were unjustifiable because Bush Homes could not produce details of, or vouchers for, any repairs carried out.

“The judges also said that the absence of all receipts was ‘suspicious’ and ordered the association to pay each of us a partial refund on the services charges we had paid, and to cap the service charges for a period of one year at £119 a month,” says Conway.

However, as soon as the year ended, SBHA raised its service charges again, this time to £167 per month. The final straw came last October, when SBHA demanded that the tenants pay £1,149 each on top of what they had already paid for 2007-08, because it had overspent for the last financial year. The group, who had bought all of, or part shares in, their affordable homes found themselves paying up to £3,153 year.

“The whole thing is incredible,” says Conway. “I have friends in South Kensington who aren’t paying this much in service charges. We are apparently being asked to pay for the housing association’s incompetence. We are perfectly willing to pay charges that are fair and reasonable, but these are absurd. We have asked them to justify the figures and they won’t. They have treated us with utter disdain. I would advise anyone else thinking of buying a shared equity home to think carefully.”

Fellow resident Allison Clancy says: “The charges have gone crazy at a time we can least afford it. I’ve just gone back to work after maternity leave, and the whole thing has been very stressful. We were supposed to have a meeting with the bodies concerned last week and they didn’t turn up. We’ve asked for information and they’ve ignored us. How can you deal with people who behave like this?”

A spokeswoman for SBHA blamed the big increases on the privately run management company, Ringley, that controls most of the costs associated with the service charge. She said there had been an emergency lift door replacement, and that the association had failed to include water charges.

“We recognise that a request for payments of between £800 and £1,000 for under-recovery of service charges in 2007/08 is unwelcome. We are pursuing Ringley for clarification and proof of the charges, but we have a legal duty to collect it and then refund if necessary,” a statement said. “SBHA arranged a meeting between residents and Ringley on 13 January, but Ringley didn’t attend as planned. SBHA will continue to pursue Ringley.”

It said that the service charge would return to previous levels next year, but offered no explanation as to why many of its charges had risen so much, or why it had not acted sooner to try to reduce the tenants’ costs. Ringley said it was unaware of the planned meeting and that the increase in charges reflects problems with car park gates. “The early service charge levels were based on projected day-to-day running costs. This did not allow for the cost of future major works projects. We have estimated that the external decorations, programmed for 2010, will cost in the order of £65,000. From 2005 we phased in reserve fund collection gradually,” it said. It added that someone in a privately-owned flat in the same block and of similar size to Conway’s is paying a £1,700 service charge this year – substantially less than the £3,153 he is paying for the year.

Conway is unimpressed. “They have been blaming Ringley for five years, and the excuse doesn’t wash any more. My contract is with them, but they have failed us. I would caution anyone thinking of buying a shared equity home to take a long look at the housing association and how it’s managed before signing up.”

Share and Enjoy:

Land management firm could be taken to tribunal after complaints

Feb 13th, 2009

by Editor.

No comments yet

Dissatisfied north-east customers urged to sign up to campaign

By Gillian Bell – Press and Journal

Published: 13/02/2009

ANGRY: Carol Kidd, who lives on the Kirkstyle estate at Kemnay, has refused to pay Greenbelt charges

Article link and pictures

A land management company which has received complaints about poor service from people across the north-east could be taken to a tribunal.

Paula Hoogerbrugge, who has led a campaign against the Greenbelt Group, is appealing for others who are dissatisfied about the firm’s service to come forward and consider launching a test case against it.

It comes after the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) said contracts between land management companies and customers should be tested at the Lands Tribunal for Scotland.

Greenbelt Group is the largest land management company in Scotland with some 24,000 customers. Two other companies exist, Scottish Woodlands and Ethical Maintenance, which have around 1,000 customers in total. The companies buy open spaces on developments and charge developers, residents, or a combination of the two, for their upkeep. But because the companies own the land, it can prove very difficult for residents to switch to a competitor.

The OFT has been in discussions with Consumer Focus Scotland, which has offered to support a group of residents who want to change their land maintenance provider.

An OFT report released yesterday said the test of law was “desirable” and added: “The OFT cannot test the law, this needs to be done by a group of homeowners. But of course the costs, uncertainty and difficulty obtaining legal advice may be a deterrent to those seeking to take such a case so we are pleased to say that Consumer Focus Scotland has agreed to take on a role to help facilitate a test of the legislation.”

Mrs Hoogerbrugge, who runs the Greenbelt Group Action website, said she had received complaints about the company’s services from 15 of the 16 estates it maintains in Aberdeenshire.

She said it was “wonderful” that Consumer Focus Scotland has offered its support and appealed to dissatisfied residents to come forward through the website so they can mount a test case.

Carol Kidd, who lives on the Kirkstyle estate at Kemnay, has complained to Greenbelt about its “sporadic” service in the past and refused to pay its charges. She said Greenbelt were “modern-day cowboys”, adding: “It would be great if someone took them to the tribunal.”

Greenbelt managing director Alex Middleton said last night: “We broadly welcome the OFT report and its principle recommendation that Consumer Focus Scotland should support home owners in bringing forward a test case applying legislation which may allow owners to switch land maintenance company.

This is an avenue we have been pursuing with a small number of our customers and we believe the involvement of Consumer Focus Scotland will aid that process.

We are happy to cooperate with Consumer Focus Scotland and the Scottish Government in whatever way they feel is appropriate.”

Share and Enjoy:

Highland Housing Fair – Local Community Totally Misled

Jan 23rd, 2009

by Editor.

No comments yet

Housing fair brochure branded ‘fabrication of reality’

HUNDREDS of glossy brochures promoting a controversial housing project on the outskirts of Inverness are to be destroyed after it was discovered they contained misleading information.

By Val Sweeney – Inverness Courier

Copies of the 26-page booklet, showcasing the Highland Housing Fair, were distributed at the Scottish Parliament in a move by the organisers to secure £4.75 million of public money for the event, due to be held next year at Balvonie Braes.

The brochure clearly stated that the site was chosen because it is close to Milton of Leys which has a primary school, church hall, local shops and public house, surgery, day care facilities and playing field.

However, after angry local residents and community leaders pointed out that the only community facility in the area is a postbox, housing fair organisers were forced to acknowledge their error.

A spokesman said that 500 copies were printed in time for a reception held at the parliament on 13th January.

Some had been handed out to those present, including MSPs, but the rest will now be withdrawn and destroyed.

“There was no intention to mislead anyone,” the spokesman said. “It was an error made in the haste of getting the booklet ready for the reception. The error in the booklet will be corrected for future print runs.”

Barrie Haycock, a local resident and chairman of Planning Watch UK, described the document, which contains the Highland Council logo, as “greatly misleading”.

“It is a complete fabrication of reality,” he said. “There are no community facilities with the exception of a postbox at Milton of Leys.

“It is an absolute disgrace that Highland Council could put its name to a document which is misleading to any person who takes the time and trouble to read it.”

The brochure at the centre of the controversy. Alasdair Allen

Bob Roberts, chairman of the Inverness South Community Council, was equally bemused by the publication, which states: “The site is well-located next to the Milton of Leys local centre which is easily accessible on foot.”

The council gave an additional £40,000 to the housing fair’s board last year. The money was to be used for a range of things including ticket and brochure printing plus advertising and promotion of the fair.

“Is this what they are using the money for?” Mr Roberts queried.

“I am absolutely outraged at this. The community at Milton of Leys has been totally misled by this. We have been promised these facilities for years and years and still they never appear — yet they seem to say they exist in this publication. We would love them to exist.”

Such was the concern about the lack of facilities in the rapidly-expanding suburb that a steering group, including Highland councillors, community councillors and other community representatives, was set up last year. A wish-list of priorities included a school and a multi-purpose community hall with sports facilities.

The housing fair, based on a Finnish model, is due to showcase 55 eco-homes which will be sold afterwards. The event, billed as the first of its kind in Scotland, had been due to be held in August but was postponed until 2010 due to the economic climate.

v.sweeney@inverness-courier.co.uk

Share and Enjoy:

Highland Housing Fair – Brochure described as “absolute fiction”

Jan 23rd, 2009

by Editor.

No comments yet

A new dawn for the Housing Fair at Milton of Leys looks increasingly unlikely. Gary Anthony

Is sun setting on housing fair?

By Val Sweeney – Inverness Courier

A CONTROVERSIAL housing project scheduled to take place in Inverness next year could be in doubt as all the funding is not yet in place.

The Highland Housing Fair, which is due to showcase more than 50 eco-friendly homes at Balvonie Braes, has already been postponed until 2010 due to the economic climate.

But unless the Scottish Government now agrees to underwrite the project to the tune of £4.75 million, and persuades banks to provide development funding, it is unclear how the event will proceed at all.

It comes amid further disarray after it transpired hundreds of brochures — designed to attract government support — are to be destroyed because they contain inaccurate information. And with time running out for work to start, this latest twist has prompted furious opponents to demand sackings at the highest management level.

The financial difficulties facing the housing fair are contained in the minutes of a meeting of the Scottish parliamentary cross party group on architecture and the built environment at which there was a presentation by housing fair representatives including the board’s chairman, Councillor Jean Urquhart, and Susan Torrance, chief executive of the Highland Housing Alliance.

The December meeting also included discussion on the economic requirements for the fair to proceed.

Although the cost of the affordable houses will be met from housing association grants, the current economic climate has resulted in a reluctance from banks to fund individual private developers.

“Currently, plan A is to ask the Scottish Government to underwrite the costs and encourage the private finance sector to support the developers,” the minutes state. “No official application has been submitted to the government in this respect at present. It was not clear how the fair would proceed without this support.”

The minutes also summarise comments made by Ms Torrance. “The key message from her team is that they need some serious influence and support to persuade the banks to provide the development funding and allow the project to proceed,” it is reported.

Yesterday, however, she insisted the housing fair was going ahead and that infrastructure was already in place. “We are not applying for public money,” she said. “We are asking the government to steady the nerves of the banks.”

But opponents of the project, which has been dogged by controversy from the start, think the government should not support it, while some queried whether it would now go ahead. There was also continuing anger about a brochure showcasing the event which wrongly claimed the nearby Milton of Leys area had an array of shops, a school, pubs, church and sports facilities.

Councillor John Holden (Inverness South) described the brochure as “absolute fiction”.

“Heads should roll over this,” he declared. “This has to go to the top of the tree in relation to the Highland Housing Fair.”

He said the event, which was to be developed on designated green belt land, was tainted from day one. “I can never see a situation where I personally would support one more penny going to the housing fair,” he said. “I can never see it taking off.”

Mary Scanlon, Highlands and Islands Conservative MSP, who was present at last month’s parliamentary presentation, also questioned the management of the project.

“They have not worked with the community and their recent charm offensive at the Scottish Parliament was based on a brochure of lies and untruths,” she said. “I think the management of this project is rapidly losing credibility and trust from funders.

“The management of this housing fair is highly regrettable because I have not met anyone who does not support the idea of the housing fair of environmentally-friendly sustainable houses.”

v.sweeney@inverness-courier.co.uk

Share and Enjoy:

Highland Housing Fair hits the headlines again for the distribution of grossly misleading information

Jan 19th, 2009

by Editor.

No comments yet

Highland Housing Fair – Brochure endorsed by Highland Council ‘exaggerated’ facilities

A brochure promoting the area’s “facilities”, including a church hall and a public house, was distributed to MSPs

An area whose only amenity is a post box has been billed as a thriving Highland community in a brochure aimed at securing cash for a housing project.

Organisers of the Highland Housing Fair have been accused of “talking up” the facilities at Milton of Leys, near Inverness, to secure cash from MSPs.

A pamphlet for the event in nearby Balvonie Braes appears to say the area has shops, a pub and a school.

The people behind the brochure said it was meant to show the area’s potential.

But local residents said the brochure was misleading.

Eco-homes

The housing fair is due to showcase more than 50 designs for eco-homes.

There are to be built on the Balvonie site and later sold.

The event had been due to be held in August but has been postponed until 2010 due to the economic climate.

A brochure showcasing the event was displayed at the Scottish Parliament last week in a move to raise £4.75m of public money to help potential developers concerned about the downturn in the housing market.

Barrie Haycock, a local resident and chairman of Planning Watch UK, said the organisers had made an outrageous mistake in the brochure.

He was sent the document in the post and noticed the error as he flicked through the pages.

The only facility at Milton of Leys is a single post box

Barrie Haycock

Mr Haycock said: “The recorded information in the document appears to be a complete and utter fabrication.

“The only facility at Milton of Leys is a single post box and perhaps it would be fair to say that there are a couple of pieces of play equipment, that is the top and bottom of it.

“No primary school, no church hall, no local shops or public house, no surgery and day care facilities and no playing field – so how Highland Council can justify their quest for financial support for the venture is just beyond belief.”

Fiona Porteous from the Highland Housing Alliance, the co-ordinator of the Highland Housing Fair, said the aim of the publication had been to highlight the current and future benefits of the Balvonie Braes area as the location for the fair.

She added it had never been their intention to overstate what community facilities were available locally at the moment.

A series of complaints about how Highland Council has handled the housing project were rejected by the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman (SPSO) in April 2008.

Two members of the public raised concerns with the SPSO about how outline planning was dealt with. They said there had been inadequate consultation and permission for the site should not have been granted.

The SPSO declined to uphold 11 complaints and concerns about the council’s handling of the application.

However, the project still faces scrutiny over the use of public money.

BBC web link

Share and Enjoy:

West Lothian Council Sleaze charge alleged

Jan 5th, 2009

by Editor.

2 comments

Sleaze charge rocks West Lothian Council

Dec 24 2008 by Alistair Watson, West Lothian Courier

AN award winning council is in turmoil as allegations of corruption and sleaze threaten to tear it apart.

Council leader Peter Johnston faces calls for his resignation after Councillor Gordon Beurskens was reported to police over his role in an £8 million planning application for a mixed development scheme at Whitrigg, Whitburn.

Councillor Beurskens, who helps prop up the SNP administration, was working as a consultant for Aftondale Ltd, the firm who lodged the application, while sitting on the local authority’s development committee.

Councillors on the committee must show impartiality on planning applications but the Action to Save St John’s councillor is at the centre of a row regarding a financial interest in the plan being approved.

Despite the plan being rejected by planning officials the proposal was pushed through by councillors at a meeting last month with the casting vote coming from SNP committee chairman Jim Dickson. Councillor Dickson has since stood down from his post pending an independent inquiry.

Graeme Morrice, Labour group leader on the council, claims the allegations of wrong-doing go straight to the heart of the administration. He has called on Councillor Johnston to step down while the police and Standards Commission investigate.

But the council leader called the complaints a politically motivated campaign from the Labour party to discredit his administration.

He added that he was unaware of any substance to the allegations, which will also be investigated in an independent inquiry.

Councillor Johnston continued: “I think it’s important to recognise that the council has no evidence whatsoever to substantiate the claims made by Labour councillors in relation to irregularities by Councillor Beurskens.

“The council has, quite rightly I think, passed them on to the police for them to investigate.

“I would expect any responsible political party to wait for the results of the inquiry before celebrating.

“I am confident that the matters will be fully investigated and he will be completely exonerated.

“The results will be fully published and we will do that in an open and transparent manner and there will be no hiding anything.

“I think the political administration will come out of this clear and clean.”

It has also been revealed that council leader Peter Johnston was copied into e-mails sent to planning staff by Councillor Beurskens in his capacity as a consultant on the Whitrigg plans.

In some he uses choice and threatening language and in one he wrote it would take him “two minutes to change the complexion of a council”.

Councillor Johnston added: “I can’t condone his use of language in the e-mails. It wasn’t appropriate for council officers to be addressed in this way.

“We want the officers working in an environment that they are completely comfortable with.

“I think everyone will learn lessons from this. One of them will be that officers are to be treated with respect and not as political footballs.”

Labour leader, Councillor Morrice, said the council leader couldn’t distance himself from the actions of those members of his administration.

He added: “These actions go to the heart of the administration. It has now been revealed that Councillor Johnston was aware of these alleged wrong doings and did nothing about it. He is therefore complicit.

“Public confidence in the planning system is essential and people need to know that they can trust those who are taking the decisions.

“Before the SNP, Conservative and single issue local hospital councillors took over control of the council from Labour at the election, West Lothian Council was regarded as one of the best politically managed and highly regarded local authorities in Britain.

“Today, this reputation has been left in tatters.”

As the Courier went to press, Councillor Beurskens was unavailable for comment.

A West Lothian Council spokesman commented: “A serious complaint about a planning issue was made to the council. Given the nature of the allegation we have asked the police to investigate. As this is now an on-going enquiry it is not appropriate to comment further.”

Link to original article

Share and Enjoy:

Tax Payers Alliance – Council Spending Uncovered: Councils spend average of £1 million a year on publicity

Dec 13th, 2008

by Editor.

No comments yet

In December 2007, the TaxPayers Alliance produced the first ever examination of the growth of town hall spending on publicity over the last decade, which is itemised in the annual accounts of the 450-plus local authorities in the UK. It found that councils had doubled their spending on publicity, creating a £450 million publicity machine, at the same time as doubling council tax. A year later, in the midst of the economic crisis, the first paper in the new Council Spending Uncovered series updates the data for the last financial year.

The report, released today, shows that the average local authority spends almost £1 million (£971,985) on publicity. There are 6 local authorities spending more than £5 million on publicity and the 20 councils spending the most money on publicity accumulated an over £100 million bill. However, it’s not all bad news. At least 217 councils have decreased spending on publicity, collectively cutting over £25 million from their budgets and proving that councils can cut unnecessary spending. To read the full report, please click here.

The media coverage is coming in thick and fast, and so far includes:

The Sun, £430m for UK councils’ PR

Teletext, £430m for council publicity

Daily Express, Town Hall spin doctors wasting £430m of our money on propaganda

BBC News Online, Council ‘spin budgets’ condemned

Daily Telegraph, Councils spend £1m each on spin and publicity

The Mirror, £430m bill to promote town halls

ConservativeHome, Mark Wallace: Councils spend £1 million each on PR

Hull Daily Mail, £4.5m spent by council on ‘propaganda’

Belfast Telegraph, Councils shell out £4m for publicity in a year

Liverpool Daily Post, £7.5m bill for council publicity

Birmingham Post, Taxpayers slam councils for millions spent on spin

Western Mail, Big council bill to make penny drop

Watford Observer, County council ‘spin’ budget revealed

Evening Standard, Councils spending £65m on public relations in year

Ealing Times, Ealing’s PR spend in top ten per cent

South Wales Echo, South Wales councils spent at total of £4.3m on publicity last year

Kent Messenger, Publicity costs reined in – but KCC still among the big spenders

St Alban’s & Harpenden Review, Council’s PR spend revealed

Boston Standard, Lincolnshire council named in top 10 publicity spenders

Brand Republic, Pressure group slams councils’ adspend

LocalGov.co.uk, Group slams councils £1M publicity bill

Politics.co.uk, Average council spends £1 million on advertising

Southern Daily Echo, Hampshire’s Councils £12m bill for publicity

Wigan Evening Post, Cost of council publicity has gone up 77%

TPA spokesmen also appeared on BBC London, BBC Radio Humberside, BBC Radio Essex, ITV Central, ITV North East, BBC Radio Solent, Time FM and Town 102 FM

Gordon Brown responds to the TPA

You may remember TPA Campaign Manager Susie Squire’s ‘Ask the PM’ question, which was included in the bulletin a few weeks ago.

Thanks to all your votes, Gordon has answered – well, sort of. He posted this last night.

Susie is in the process of compiling a video response, but you may have noticed there are a few things he has neglected to mention. Yes, depsite that winning smile Gordon, you can’t get anything past us! Even by official estimates, our current debt stands at £633 billion. But, when you include such off balance-sheet costs as PFI debt created under Brown (£110 billion), the Nuclear Decomissioning bill (£73 billion), Public Sector Pensions (£1,071 billion) and Network Rail (£20 billion) our debt adds up to a whopping £1.9 trillion, or 129% of GDP.

Crucially, Mr Brown doesn’t answer Susie’s question. Ultimately, Britain’s economic picture, as shown by the above figures, is bad enough. But what about going forward? The picture is bleak. Alistair Darling announced in the recent pre Budget report that a gigantic £512 billion will be added to this our nation’s debt. This will amount to more money (taking into account RPI inflation) than we borrowed to win World War 1. This is terrifying, as it will double official debt to £1 trillion, and push up the cost of servicing our debt from £30.8 billion to £40 billion. The longer term implications of this are higher interest rates – markets will decide we are not such a safe economic bet any more, sterling will devalue further, and everyone will feel even worse off than they do now.

But the real question is: why all this borrowing in the first place? Because the other side of this equation is that public spending has gone through the roof under Brown. And if we constantly have to feed this government’s addiction to a big state and a bloated, costly public sector, we won’t ever be able to stop the steam train of debt.

A bittersweet victory for the ‘No’ campaign

It was announced this afternoon that the people of Greater Manchester voted in force against the proposed congestion charge, with the 53.2% (1,030,000) turnout voting overwhelmingly against this additional road tax.

No less than 79% of those who voted wanted to reject the charge, and no more than 28% voted yes in one any local authority area. This landslide victory marks the death of the Manchester TIF bid and has hopefully discouraged other areas - not least the West Midlands councils - from further pursuing this unpopular scheme.

Yet, though our congratulations go out to the No campaign, it is worth noting that this is a very bittersweet victory with huge amounts already having been spent on a project that was disliked from its inception. Though families in Greater Manchester will no longer have to pay the hefty £1,200 per year that a congestion charge would mean, a startling £34million has already been spent consulting, debating, drawing-up and promoting the TIF bid according to the Drivers Alliance, all funded by ordinary taxpayers. It just makes it worse that the very residents whove paid for this road pricing ambition seem to have been dead against it from the start, and in the end this £34million bought 218,860 yes votes thats £155 each.

This money has been frittered away by those with a blind commitment to the congestion charge, encouraged by those who stood to benefit. Perhaps, at this very moment the proponents of road charging are busy wondering how to bring its spectre back to life with a different guise and new spin and, if they manage a successful resuscitation, lets hope our councils recognise it for what it is and remember this Manchester vote.

Letters to follow up our reports

As you will have seen in the papers, on the radio or local TV today, our report on local council publicity spending has hit the headlines. But we need your help to follow up our reports with short, sharp letters to your local paper making the points that councils spend and waste too much of our money. TPA activist Bruce Lawson emailed in a letter he got in the Shropshire Star to promote our Public Sector Rich List 2008. You can read his letter here. If you get any letters printed in your local paper, do let us know. Weve already seen here the publicity our supporters can get when they write into their local papers.

2009 Action Days

Were busy compiling a list of leafleting and petition days across the country for 2009. If youd like us to have an action day in your area with other TPA supporters and campaigners, email our grassroots coordinator Tim Aker and well organise an action day near you.

In response to last weeks bulletin we have action days already booked for 2009. The dates and venues are:
Swanage 6 February and 30 April
Shipley 6 June
If youd like to come to these campaign days, please email Tim.

Bristol and South West TPA branch established

Last Saturday our Bristol branch met to formally set up a branch to monitor Bristol council and, for the time being, other councils in the South West. If youd like to get involved please email our organiser James Barlow. You can keep up with the campaign by visiting their blog.

A council is not a bank

We found this week that Lancashire County Council has been using taxpayers money to lend to other councils in the UK. Today TPA activist Steve Atkinson found through a Freedom of Information request that Cumbria County Council has £112 million deposited in foreign and domestic banks. You can ask Lancashire County Councils leader why theyre lending to other councils instead of cutting tax here.

Stoke Council rejects TPA offer to find savings

TPA supporter and Stoke councillor Gavin Webb recently tabled a motion at Stoke Councils full council meeting inviting the TPA to come in and find savings in the council budget. Sadly, the motion failed Stokes councillors are clearly happy with politics as usual and higher taxes for all. You can read our blog on the debate and Gavins comments here.

Best of the blogs

Campaign: Leek TPA Action Day attracts attention
Campaign: The us and them Olympics
Better Government: Fiddling with Human Rights Law
Better Government: Ageing Britain
Burning our Money: Servicing The Government’s Debt
Non-job of the Week: Non-job of the week

www.taxpayersalliance.com

Share and Enjoy:

Manchester Congestion Charge – A bittersweet victory for the ‘No’ campaign

Dec 13th, 2008

by Editor.

No comments yet

It was announced yesterday afternoon that the people of Greater Manchester voted in force against the proposed congestion charge, with the 53.2% (1,030,000) turnout voting overwhelmingly against this additional road tax.No less than 79% of those who voted wanted to reject the charge, and no more than 28% voted yes in one any local authority area. This landslide victory marks the death of the Manchester TIF bid and has hopefully discouraged other areas - not least the West Midlands councils - from further pursuing this unpopular scheme.

Share and Enjoy:

Scottish government urged to probe residents’ claims over factor

Aug 1st, 2008

by Editor.

No comments yet

Firm ‘takes money for work it does not do’

By Gillian Bell – Press and Journal

Published: 01/08/2008

The Scottish Government has been asked to launch an investigation into north-east residents’ claims that a factor has taken money for work it has not adequately carried out.

Aberdeenshire councillor Martin Ford said he has been contacted by a “number of people” about the Greenbelt Group, which maintains open spaces in housing estates across the north-east.

A resident of the Redcloak estate at Stonehaven had claimed the company has not cut the grass there in more than seven months, despite having already been paid to do so.

The company disputes the time period, but admits there have been problems with a few of its contractors over the last three to four weeks.

Residents at an estate at Newmachar had also complained about the company halving the frequency of its visits.

In a letter to Community Safety Minister Fergus Ewing, Mr Ford said: “It appears that there is a widespread problem of poor or no grounds maintenance when the Greenbelt Group are responsible.

“This seems to be the case both when residents are paying on an annual basis and when the developer has paid a lump sum on completion of the development.”

The Liberal Democrat member for East Garioch added: “I have been a councillor for nine years and I have been aware of recurring problems involving the Greenbelt Group.

“I would ask you to look into the problems surrounding the operations of this company. I would also ask you to examine whether we can revert to the situation prior to 1992 where it was almost invariably the case that public open space passed to the local council.

“In my experience, the local council provides the only reliable and sustainable maintenance solution for public open space.”

Greenbelt’s managing director Alex Middleton said problems with contractors over the last three weeks have caused the company difficulties in the north-east.

He said: “Greenbelt has had problems in the north-east and are trying to resolve them as quickly as possible. We will take a look at the particular problems and value for money.

“We are committed to the sites in the north-east and are committed to giving a good service.”

Press and Journal article link

Share and Enjoy:

Gordon Banks MP backs Mike Marriott in Menstrie Land Maintenance Battle

Jul 31st, 2008

by Editor.

No comments yet

Government backs residents in land row

By Nicola Findlay

Image related to story, see caption or article text

Gordon Banks MP has been supporting residents in their dispute with Greenbelt.

CAMPAIGNERS on a Menstrie housing estate have welcomed support from the Scottish Government in their bid to oust land management company Greenbelt.

Angry residents say the company is not doing its job properly and recently 251 of the estate’s 300 residents signed a petition to get rid of Greenbelt.

However, the petition was rejected by the firm who said it would carry on to maintain the land around the estate, as was agreed with developer Gladedale.

But an email from the Scottish Government has now been sent to a homeowner on an estate in Livingston, also managed by Greenbelt, stating that under the Title Conditions (Scotland) Act 2003 owners within an estate can “dismiss a manager and appoint another” without applying to a Lands Tribunal.

Mike Marriot, who is leading the Menstrie campaign, welcomed the support from the Scottish Government saying it proved the residents were well within their legal rights to submit their petition.

He said their ultimate goal was for Clackmannanshire Council to take over the maintenance of the land.

“We signed the petition in March and, since then, homeowners have been bombarded with letters and demands from Greenbelt Group, saying they don’t recognise this,” said Mike.

“We very much welcome the Scottish Government’s backing in this situation, and hope it will encourage both Gladedale and Greenbelt Group to see sense.”

The email also informed homeowners that Government guidance on the management of open spaces was republished last month and now no longer names Greenbelt Group as a suitable provider for the long-term care of open spaces in Scotland.

Gordon Banks MP has been supporting the residents in their dispute with Greenbelt and has been heading an All Party Working Group in Westminster looking at land management companies.

He said, “It is good news that the Scottish Executive confirmed that the action the residents took in their dispute with Greenbelt has been confirmed as the correct course of action.

“Up until now Greenbelt has tried to ignore the actions of the residents at Menstrie Mains and I hope that it will now take on board the strong legal footing on which the residents have based their campaign, and understand that they no longer want Greenbelt to supply land management services.

“I hope that both the Greenbelt and Gladedale can find a constructive way to bring this long standing problem to a solution which meets the aims and objectives of Menstrie residents.”

However, Greenbelt says that the information on the email from the Scottish Government is out-dated and that the Title Deeds Act is a complicated piece of legislation which residents do not necessarily understand the full implications of.

Managing director of Greenbelt, Alex Middleton, told the Advertiser that following the petition a circular was sent to all residents to give them help and guidance, and that Greenbelt has never purported to offer legal advice to residents but said they should seek independent legal advice.

He went on, “Greenbelt has never considered itself to be a manager of the land but, in fact, the owner of the land, which is a significant difference to what is being said by other parties.

“Soundbites have been taken from a very complicated piece of legislation which needs to be understood as a whole and is very technical.

“There is an agreement in place between ourselves and the developer and that will continue.

“We are obliged to manage and maintain the land and residents are obliged to contribute fully and equally.”

A spokesperson for Gladedale added, “We are aware of the issues between the residents and Greenbelt and are hopeful that an amicable solution can be reached between the two parties.”

Link to original article

Share and Enjoy:

Lack of maintenance for outdoor areas angers Aberdeen fee-paying householders

Jul 30th, 2008

by Editor.

1 comment

Residents hit out over grass-cutting frequency

By Gillian Bell Press and Journal

Published: 30/07/2008

GROWING: Carol Kidd and son Calvin at a Kemnay path where the grass is sprouting. Kami Thomson

North-east residents claim they have paid an independent company thousands of pounds to maintain open spaces – but that work has not been done for “more than seven months”.

People at the Redcloak estate at Stonehaven are among thousands who are contractually obliged to pay Glasgow-based Greenbelt Group for services.

Last night, Greenbelt blamed contractors for the problem, saying it had explained issues to residents.

Householders at Newmachar have already complained that Greenbelt halved the frequency of its service, leaving them with “unkempt” public areas.

Ian Matthews, of Redcloak Park, Stonehaven, has paid Greenbelt an annual fee of around £90 to keep the open areas tidy.

Mr Matthews said there were around 100 houses on the estate, each of which paid a similar charge.

He claimed: “The residents of Redcloak have not had any maintenance at all this year.

“This lovely area has become an embarrassment. I have contacted them consistently since May but nobody ever gets back to me.”

Carol Kidd, who chairs the residents’ association at Kirkstyle Farm Estate, at Kemnay, claimed Greenbelt had not cut the grass there for more than six weeks.

“Even Place of Origin, which was opened by the Duke of Kent with great fanfare in 2006, has been allowed to go to ruin,” she added.

Mrs Kidd, of Wilson Place, said she contacted Greenbelt a number of weeks ago to ask why the work was not being done and received a letter blaming problems with the contractor, Inverness-based R. Sleigh Landscapes.

The contractor’s solicitor, Timothy Thomas, of Ledingham Chalmers, said Greenbelt owed his client, Henry Sleigh, a “very large sum”, thought to be about £100,000.

“We have been demanding payment for some months now and have been told by their solicitors that they have had cash-flow problems.

“They have said recently they are disputing some of the work done, but it is certainly not all.”

Greenbelt has now replaced Sleigh with another contractor, but the problems persist, according to Mrs Kidd. A number of other estates in the north-east are also thought to be having problems with Greenbelt, including at Provost Clemo Drive at Insch, the Hallforest estate at Kintore, Meadowlands at Westhill and Leddach Grange estate at Elrick.

People living in the Rosewell Park estate at Westhill and the Greenacres-Pitblae estate at Fraserburgh have also reported difficulties.

A website called Greenbelt Group Action has been set up by dissatisfied customers.

Greenbelt’s managing director Alex Middleton admitted one contractor had not been paid, but said it was because of a “performance issue, and it is quite right we should do that”.

“In one or two cases we have had problems with contractors and we have explained that to our customers,” he added.

He refused to offer the residents of Redcloak at Stonehaven a refund and said residents of Greenbelt-maintained estates were “contractually obliged” to pay.

“There is a need on one or two sites to improve,” he said, adding that it was a priority.

Mr Middleton seems to have his own particular unique definition of contractual law and frquently seems to demonstrate that he thinks his company can collect payments and not deliver the contracted services…
Editor

Share and Enjoy:

UK Government Eco-towns plan ‘may be unlawful’

Jul 23rd, 2008

by Editor.

No comments yet

Eco-towns of up to 20,000 people each are proposed

The government’s approach to delivering up to 10 eco-towns could be “unlawful”, councils have warned.

Ministers are to publish a planning policy statement to set out standards and potential locations in England.

But the Local Government Association said the proposals went against the principle of development through plans drawn up by local authorities.

This might show a wish to avoid “proper scrutiny”, it added. But the government said it “absolutely” disagreed.

‘Deeply flawed’

The eco-towns scheme aims to deliver settlements of 5,000 to 20,000 homes which are zero-carbon overall.

The government shortlisted 15 proposals for new settlements in April and has said up to 10 final approved bids will have to go through the planning process once they have been chosen later this year.

Lawyers John Steel QC and James Strachan, representing the LGA, said an existing planning policy statement covered the concept of providing housing in new settlements in an environmentally sustainable way.

‘ECO-TOWNS’ SHORTLIST

Bordon, Hampshire

Coltishall, Norfolk

Elsenham, Essex

Ford, West Sussex

Hanley Grange, Cambridgeshire

Imerys, nr St Austell, Cornwall

Leeds city region, West Yorkshire

Marston Vale and New Marston, Bedfordshire

Middle Quinton, Warwickshire

Pennbury, Leicestershire

Rossington, South Yorkshire

Rushcliffe, Nottinghamshire

Weston Otmoor, Oxfordshire

Source: Department of Communities and Local Government

The plans: Site-by-site

There did not seem to be any justification for promoting eco-towns outside the existing rules, “other than the government’s wish to avoid the system due to the proper need for scrutiny, which takes time”, they added.

The LGA said the legal advice showed the government’s approach to eco-towns was “deeply flawed”.

Chairman Sir Simon Milton said the LGA was not opposed to the eco-towns as a way of meeting housing needs and combating climate change.

But he urged: “Ministers must talk to council leaders about adopting a new approach that will deliver development in places where councils and local people agree that eco-towns can work.

“Eco-towns must be delivered without bypassing the planning processes and ensure that new developments have good transport connections alongside the schools, health and leisure facilities which are needed to create places where people would want to live.”

Bidders for eco-towns at Manby, in Lincolnshire, and Curborough, Staffordshire, have pulled out, while part of a third bid at New Marston, in Bedfordshire, has also been withdrawn.

‘Stretching standards’

A Department for Communities and Local Government spokesman said: “We absolutely disagree with the LGA’s claims and believe this legal advice can only have been obtained on the basis of a misrepresentation of our policy.

“We have made it absolutely clear throughout that eco-towns will be different and will have higher environmental standards than a normal development and the applications will also have to be considered through the normal planning process.”

Shadow housing minister Grant Shapps said the legal advice would add weight to the argument that ministers had “effectively destroyed their own eco-town project”.

Liberal Democrat communities spokeswoman Julia Goldsworthy said: “What this government fails to understand is that centrally imposed solutions are doomed to failure.”

Share and Enjoy:

Highland Housing Fair 2009 – Cancelled

Jul 23rd, 2008

by Editor.

No comments yet

The worst kept secret of 2008 is now receiving press attention following continuing investigation by Planning Watch UK members.

At 9.05am Monday morning, Barrie Haycock, Planning Watch UK Chairman, contacted the Inverness Courier to make the newspaper aware of the latest turn of events following four years shambolic waste of tax payers money arising from the ego trips of those involved with the promotion of the Highland Housing Fair.

The action triggered frantic “pass the hot potato ” calls as Highland Council and Highland Housing Alliance frantically tried to put their “spin” on the latest twist of events, resulting in a statement being issued by beleagued Councillor Jean Urquhart, chairwoman of the Highland Housing Fair board, who finally admitted delaying the event was already looking like the most likely outcome, attempting to convince the enquiring reporter that the event would be delayed until 2010.

The news has since been reported on BBC websites, Moray Firth Radio and other media resources.

This latest twist of events was blamed on the “Credit Crunch” but it is thought that in reality there had been little financial support for the venture from Sponsors or firm sales of building plots concerned.

Susan Torrance, Chief Executive of Highland Housing Alliance had always claimed that the huge cost of promoting the event was adequatly covered by anticipated revenues from sponsors and sale of building plots, and public monies were not at risk.

It is thought that the organisers were so oblivious to reality that Event Insurance cover is unlikely to have been purchased leaving the huge investment of public monies totally exposed.

In November 2007, Mary Scanlon Conservative Party MSP forced Highland Council via a Freedom of Information request to reveal the extent of the costs incurred to date which were revealed to be around £1.92 Million and it is thought those costs have probably now increased to around £2.5 Million.

So the question is, will the event ever take place?

It was always claimed that the design expertise could influence developers in future years, but ignored the hard fact of life that major developers are only interested in maximising profitable return for any given parcel of land. Put simply, maximum build of the lowest cost box option to satisfy particular market end customer requirements.

The controlling factor will always be Government defined Building Regulations. Are they likely to change?
We don’t think that in the short term this is likely, so developers will continue to plough along regardless.

The irony is that not a single developer offered a suitable building site to Highland Housing Alliance for the event which demonstrates the importance that developers held for this proposed 100 odd unit development “passed off” as a Housing Fair.

All involved with the fiasco were forced to turn to a Green Wedge area of prime farmland and force through the planning consent. Tulloch Homes have been reported as profiting to the extent of £500,000 from the land transaction.

For the Fair to take place in 2010, building work would have to commence in the summer of 2009. Are developers likely to take a flyer on this given the downturn in the market?

We think highly unlikely, so just how are Highland Council and Highland Housing Alliance going to get out of this financial mess?

Watch this space…

Housing fair faces delay of 12 months

By Lorna Paterson – Inverness Courier

Published: 22 July, 2008

The site of the Highland Housing Fair at Balvonie Braes.

THE controversial Highland Housing Fair is facing another major blow — it is set to be delayed for a year.

The exhibition of sustainable housing, billed as the first of its kind in Scotland, had been scheduled to take place in August 2009 at Balvonie Braes in Inverness.

However, it emerged yesterday that growing financial pressures and a downturn in the housing market meant the event will not now be staged until 2010.

Architects and developers from the south were briefed on the latest developments in Perth last week, while developers from the Highlands will be informed on Friday at a meeting in Inverness.The board will then meet to make a final decision although Councillor Jean Urquhart, chairwoman of the Highland Housing Fair board, admitted delaying the event was already looking like the most likely outcome.

She confirmed some developers involved with the project were facing financial difficulty and rather than putting pressure on them, the board would be making the recommendation to its partners.

In the worst case scenario she anticipates the delay to be for 12 months.

However, an on-line architects’ website said there were fears the project, led by Highland Housing Alliance, would lose momentum, particularly if it was postponed for more than a year.

Barrie Haycock, chairman of campaign group Planning Watch UK, while criticising organisers for not forecasting the impact of a declining housing market, also remained sceptical over whether the fair would now go-ahead.

For the event to take place in 2010, he said, the new homes would still need to be built next year, but with experts predicting it to be two years before the housing market recovers he sees this as unlikely. “It was obvious that any downturn in the housing market would put the project at risk,” he said.

He claimed it had collectively landed the tax payer with an enormous bill out of the rush to force it through the planning process.

Inverness MP Danny Alexander said it was a reminder of what impact the global credit crunch was having on the Highlands. “This is very disappointing,” he said. “The fair would have made a great contribution to the Highlands in terms of leading new ideas on how homes can be developed.

Councillor Urquhart (Wester Ross, Strathpeffer and Lochalsh) explained there had been no public announcement about the delay because it was still in consultation with developers and architects.

The housing fair, on an area of green-wedge land, will showcase the best in housing design, innovation and technology.

It has been dogged with controversy with allegations over the conduct of planning officers and unacceptable land deals playing their part but Councillor Urquhart stressed the event would go ahead.

“It makes me angry that people see this as some kind of trumped up nonsense that doesn’t need to happen. There is absolutely no suggestion this will be a cancellation,” she added.

l.paterson@inverness-courier.co.uk

Wilson’s Weekly Wrap

27 Jun 2008

Highland Housing – Fair?

On the surface, things seem to be going not too badly at the moment for the Highland Housing Fair, given the perverse local opposition encountered at the outset of the project and the high drop out rate of developers who found innovation and profit on a single house plot to be incompatible concepts. Down at the coalface, however, a number of the selected architects are finding the going considerably tougher.

Time is flying, and deadlines for Building Warrant applications, for example, are being missed due to the shifting economic times in which we live. Several of the projects are still without either client or developer, never mind a contractor, and with building work for most projects scheduled to be on site by late Autumn, some critical decisions need to be made at a more strategic level if we are not to see a half-constructed built landscape when the Fair opens its doors to the public next August.

A number of the project designs are predicated on imported components such as massive timber panels, now made infinitely more expensive by the £’s poor showing against the €uro and without significant alteration at this late stage, the houses may simply fail to emerge. Obviously the credit crunch was not on anyone’s radar when the idea of the Fair was first mooted, but life is not as it was a year ago and the project sponsors need to radically – and rapidly – revise the business plan if the Fair is to be a success.

In Finland, the first Housing Fairs were publicly-funded with small towns competing for the privilege to build: the model used here presumed that developers could be encouraged to innovate (without subsidy) and even profit from the construction of a single housing unit, a questionable approach anyway given the concept’s first outing in Scotland.

Now that the tectonic plates of banking have shifted inexorably to a position of financial denial to housing developers, the Fair’s initiators at government and public agency level need to dig deep into their pockets to make sure the project does not become an architectural disaster zone: should the project fail, there will be no second chance to learn from the experience. And, be assured, as the various previously-interested parties cover their tracks, it will be the architects that will end up carrying the can for their supposedly un-fundable designs. The reputational damage to the profession just doesn’t bear thinking about.

Wilson’s Weekly Wrap

http://www.architecturescotland.co.uk/news/685/Wilson’s_Weekly_Wrap.html

4 Jul 2008

Highland Housing Fair, Part Two

It’s not often I get to see such immediate impact from something I’ve written and in truth it was probably more serendipity than prescience on my part, but following my ‘warning light’ comments last week about next year’s Highland Housing Fair in Inverness, the organisers seem to have taken my advice to heart and moved with commendable rapidity to postpone the event by a year. This is far from being a bad thing – the number of developers unable to raise bank finance for their individual projects was reaching a dangerously high level and the people responsible for the Fair have made the only prudent move possible in the circumstances. Far better to delay than to fail ignominiously and in any case the reasons for the postponement can be readily understood by all. What developer was going to proceed – even had they been able to secure the necessary funding – with construction at current Inverness price levels when the bottom is dropping out of the housing market and likely to pummel the post-Housing Fair sales values?

That said, invoking Plan B can only be seen as a necessarily reactive move and the need for a well thought through Plan C is now pressing. With a shade more time on the delivery side of the project, the need to reduce construction costs without diminishing the design quality of the individual houses needs some real creative thinking. Consideration could, for example, be given to the implementation of a professional sponsorship programme focused on in-kind provision of materials and products for all of the houses planned for the site. Hardly complicated, it is one of the few routes to overall cost reduction that are available in the current economic climate, but it will require co-coordinated – and speedy – action rather than allowing the projects to individually stand or fall. 2010 is not that far away.

Highland Housing Fair Postponed for a Year

4 Jul 2008

steven.raeburn@carnyx.com

The Highland Housing Fair, billed as the first event of its kind in Scotland to showcase house designs of the future, has been unexpectedly postponed.

The event, scheduled to kick off in Inverness in a year’s time, was intended to be a showpiece event where over 50 conceptual, sustainable houses would be on display, will now take place in August 2010.

The downturn in the property market, the poor prospects for the resale of the homes to be constructed, and a lack of finance have been blamed for the postponement.

“A recommendation will be made to the Highland Housing Fair board to delay the Fair from August 2009 to August 2010, in recognition of the economic climate and the shortage of finance available to realise the ambitions of the developers who are committed to the project,” the organisers said in a statement.

“The recommendation will be made at the meeting of the Highland Housing Fair board which will take place in August 2008.”

It had been planned that the houses constructed for the fair would be available to buy, to become a “living community” once the fair ended.

Writing exclusively for architecturescotland.co.uk, Peter Wilson speculated that fear of the declining property market may have prompted the postponement.

“Far better to delay than to fail ignominiously and in any case the reasons for the postponement can be readily understood by all,” he writes.

“What developer was going to proceed – even had they been able to secure the necessary funding – with construction at current Inverness price levels when the bottom is dropping out of the housing market and likely to pummel the post-Housing Fair sales values?”

Share and Enjoy:

Construction Council to be established by CBI

Jul 12th, 2008

by Editor.

No comments yet

The CBI has announced that it will be enhancing the role it undertakes on behalf of the construction industry.

Following discussions with the major construction companies, the CBI has agreed to set up a Construction Council chaired by John McDonough, chief executive of Carillion plc and vice chairman of the CBI’s Public Services Strategy Board.

The Council, which will represent contractors, house builders, civil engineers, component and product manufacturers, designers and support services, will begin its work in September.

The CBI’s director-general, Richard Lambert said: “The UK construction industry consists of over 250,000 firms, employing 2.1 million people in a wide variety of roles, and accounts for almost 9 per cent of GDP.

“Until now, this important industry has not had the single unified voice it deserves.

“The Construction Council will work closely with the major trade bodies to strengthen their efforts to represent the construction industry and ensure its concerns are clearly heard.”

John McDonough, who will lead the work of the new Council, added: “These are challenging times for the construction industry. While many companies continue to enjoy good markets in the UK and overseas, others, particularly those with exposure to the UK residential market, are facing challenging times.

“Setting up the new Construction Council is, therefore, particularly timely. The Council’s new strategic role at the heart of the CBI will enable the whole sector to benefit from the CBI’s unrivaled access at the highest levels in Whitehall, Westminster and Brussels.”
The Construction Council will be considering a broad range of issues including the economy, energy, land use planning, procurement, climate change and skills.

Share and Enjoy:

Government Affordable Housing Targets at risk

Jul 11th, 2008

by Editor.

No comments yet

Slowdown ‘risks housing targets’

The CIH said more people will need affordable homes as mortgages dry up

Concerns have been raised that the credit crunch could prevent government affordable housing targets being met.

The Chartered Institute of Housing (CIH) called for “imaginative” measures to build 35,000 homes a year by 2015.

It said the Scottish Government should work with housing associations or councils to use homes or land started by private firms which are lying empty.

The communities minister said he was open to working with others to buy unsold privately built homes.

The CIH’s director in Scotland, Alan Ferguson, said the current financial climate made it harder for those building affordable homes to borrow the money needed for their developments.

He said this must lead to concerns that targets would not be met for affordable housing.

The housing association sector is in a very strong position to weather the credit crunch

Scottish Government spokesman

“As the credit crunch bites, we may also expect to see more people in need of an affordable solution as access to mortgages continue to dry up,” he said.

“At the same time we are seeing private housing developers struggling, leading to job losses and severely reduced building programmes.

“We believe it is time for the Scottish Government to promote some more imaginative solutions that will help deliver more affordable houses, assist first-time buyers and assist struggling private builders.”

Ministers have set a goal of increasing the rate of house building to 35,000 new homes a year by the middle of the next decade.

A Scottish Government spokesman said: “We welcome the CIH’s support for our efforts to improve the supply of affordable housing.

“The changes we have made to our subsidies to housing associations are essential if we are to achieve that objective at a time of great pressure on public expenditure.

“The housing association sector is in a very strong position to weather the credit crunch and the Scottish Government will continue to work with them in the meantime.”

Earlier, Deputy First Minister Nicola Sturgeon announced a £25m package to build new council homes.

Mr Maxwell said action was already being taken to increase social housing

Last month, she also revealed details of a range of housing measures, including a £250m boost for shared equity schemes that allow people to own part of a property.

The government also plans to launch a Homeowners Support Fund, providing £25m over the next two years to help those at risk of repossession.

Communities Minister Stewart Maxwell said the measures announced by the government showed it was taking action.

He stressed the importance of dealing with the underlying problem – the “under-supply” of housing – and said he would consider working with others agencies to buy unsold privately built homes.

The minister said: “I’m open to that suggestion.

“I think the issue here is housing associations and house builders have to get together and find out what is the most appropriate way forward bring forward projects which provide houses of the right type in the right place and at the right price.

“When that’s done we’ll certainly look at them and see whether that’s affordable and that’s the right thing to do.”

Link to original article

Share and Enjoy:

Human cost of Yorkshire floods – 2007

Jun 16th, 2008

by Editor.

No comments yet

BBC Survey shows flood toll a year on

By Mike Chilvers
BBC News, South Yorkshire

Catcliffe near Rotherham during the 2007 floods

Much of the village of Catcliffe was left under water for several days

The human cost of last summer’s floods in South Yorkshire has been revealed in a survey of the worst-hit communities.

More than eight out of 10 of those who answered a BBC Yorkshire questionnaire said they suffered mental or physical ill health as a result of the floods.

More than a fifth (22%) were so traumatised they had taken medication.

And one in five said they were not insured for the damage caused to their property in the deluge which hit the area on 25 June 2007.

Thousands of people were forced to leave their homes as flood waters rose in towns and villages around Barnsley, Doncaster, Rotherham and Sheffield.

Last month, BBC Yorkshire carried out a survey in some of the worst-affected streets, selecting 2,000 addresses from areas known to have requested the most aid from the South Yorkshire Flood Disaster Relief Fund.

Of the 242 people who replied, 43% had been forced out of their homes for more than six months.

The average time away from their homes was nine months, but many more have yet to return to properties which are still awaiting repair.

See full survey results

Almost a third (32%) of those who replied to the survey said the strain of coping with the aftermath of the floods had had a detrimental effect on their family life and relationships.

The Downson family, of Hunt Lane in Bentley, near Doncaster, is still living in temporary rented accommodation because of delays to house repairs.

Mark Downson told the BBC his efforts to repair the property had been dogged by a catalogue of wrangles with his insurance company and builders.

He and his wife had suffered depression and the stress had taken its toll on his two sons, aged 15 and 10.

“They’re used to having their own space and we’ve lived in four different houses since the floods,” he said.

“I’ve seen their behaviour change – they’ve become more disobedient.

“If your home life’s not as it should be everything else becomes a problem, it wears you down.”

In total 84% of those who responded said their health had suffered to some degree, either mentally or physically.

Some 67% had suffered physical ill health, including chest infections, stomach upsets and skin complaints.

Meanwhile, 70% had seen a deterioration in their mental health, including 26% who said they had suffered significant problems.

Several families said their children had been left scared of heavy rain.

‘Very confused’

Mother-of-four Lyndsey Hamblett, whose family spent 10 months living in a caravan, moved back into her house in Toll Bar 11 weeks ago.

She said: “When it started raining badly again the other week, my two boys were running around with school rulers measuring the depth of the water in the garden.

“They remembered how quickly the water had risen in the floods and were saying: ‘We’ve only got two hours to get out of the house’.

“My youngest is only just three years old and when we moved back into the house she kept saying she wanted to go home to the caravan. She’s very confused because she can’t really remember living here.”

The survey also gives an insight into the financial impact of the deluge, with 20% of those who responded saying they were not insured, leaving them with hefty bills to replace damaged possessions.

The Association of British Insurers said: “The people who do not take out home contents insurance usually make that decision because they are on a tight budget.

“They are the ones who can least afford to replace stuff once it’s damaged.”

The majority who were insured have also been adversely affected as insurance companies raised premiums when they renewed their policies.

Flooded street in Catcliffe, South Yorkshire

Some residents in Catcliffe said the floods brought the community together

Before the floods, Pauline Warburton, of Bickerton Road, in the Hillsborough area of Sheffield, paid £250 for a policy with flood cover, but says she has now been asked to pay up to £900 without flood cover for a new policy.

Property values in many areas also dropped immediately after the flooding.

Jon and Andrea Smith, of Wombwell near Barnsley, told the BBC survey that two neighbouring houses which had been on the market at about £180,000 before the floods were re-valued at £130,000 to £140,000 in the immediate aftermath.

Despite their problems, 48% of the survey respondents said they had received a good or very good response from their insurance companies when they submitted their claims.

Amid the trauma of the flooding, the survey reveals a significant number of people felt the emergency brought communities and even families closer together.

One third (33%) said the experiences of last June had had a positive impact.

Michael Torr, who lives in Catcliffe near Rotherham, said before the floods he had not known his next door neighbours, but now they were best friends.

Both families had been forced to live in caravans during the clear-up, and since moving back into their homes they have taken their caravans on holiday together.

Mr Torr and about 10 other neighbours set up a flood wardens scheme to alert each other to imminent flooding.

He said: “People have got more pride now in Catcliffe.

“As much as I’d like to move for fear of flooding, I wouldn’t like to because of the neighbours.”

Share and Enjoy:

New laws to stop companies selling plots of agricultural land at inflated prices is demanded

Jun 7th, 2008

by Editor.

No comments yet

MP demands end to ‘landbanking’

A Liberal Democrat MP is calling for the introduction of new laws to stop companies selling plots of agricultural land at inflated prices.

By Paul Lewis – BBC Radio 4′s Money Box

The land is sold on the hope that planning permission will be granted and the investors will make a big return.

Greg Mulholland, Liberal Democrat MP

Greg Mulholland has campaigned on landbanking for many years.

But Greg Mulholland wants legislation to end those schemes which are “obviously a scam”.

A government spokesman said a number of schemes had already been closed down under existing laws.

Recent action

Mr Mulholland, Liberal Democrat MP for Leeds North West, was speaking after the Financial Services Authority (FSA) declared the UK’s biggest landbanking scheme illegal.

It’s time the government woke up and took action

Greg Mulholland, Liberal Democrat MP

The FSA asked the High Court to wind up the company which ran it, UK Land Investments Limited (UKLI).

Mr Mulholland told Money Box on BBC Radio 4,

“I’m delighted that the Financial Services Authority has taken this action and is now homing in on other companies who are carrying out what is clearly an illegal as well as an immoral activity”

The FSA confirmed it was aware of 70 landbanking schemes that had sprung up since 2005.

A warning

Jonathan Phelan, head of retail enforcement at the FSA, said,

“Our action against UKLI, should serve as a warning to other companies that might be breaking the law in this way.”

But Greg Mulholland called for legislation to bring about “the end of landbanking which we have seen blight so many people’s lives over the last few years.

“It’s time the government woke up and took action so that by 2009 or 2010 we can look back and say… it can’t happen again in this country.”

Companies Investigation Branch has investigated a number of these cases

BERR spokesman

More than 4,500 people were persuaded by UKLI to invest £69m in small plots of land, none of which has been given planning permission.

They paid around £15,000 for each plot, some of which have been valued at a few hundred pounds.

Lee Manning, the joint administrator of UKLI and a partner with Deloitte, told the BBC,

“The company itself has very little net assets left.

“I would doubt if creditors would get more than a few pence in the pound.”

Crack down

A spokesman for the Department of Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (BERR) said it was able to take action against such schemes under existing laws.

“Companies Investigation Branch has investigated a number of these cases and in many instances has brought proceedings to wind up the companies concerned.

“We will continue to crack down on companies which mislead the public in this way.

“Anyone approached by companies offering plots of land on the promise of future planning permission should be very wary and thoroughly question the information they are given.”

BBC Radio 4′s Money Box was broadcast on Saturday, 7 June 2008 at 1204 BST.

Share and Enjoy:

House building targets warning – Professor Stephen Nickell

Jun 7th, 2008

by Editor.

No comments yet

Ministers are “very unlikely” to achieve housing targets, the UK’s chief advisor on home building has warned.

Stephen Nickell
Fears housing chances are becoming social polarised.

Professor Stephen Nickell said that, unless conditions change, the target of three million new homes in England by 2020 will not be met.

To get to this target, the housing industry needs to be building 240,000 homes a year, a figure that few think they will achieve this year.

The industry is already behind in its construction targets.

Just over 200,000 new homes were built last year.

Priced out

Homebuilders have cut back new building this year as a lack of mortgage products and falling house prices have cut demand.

Mr Nickell, who heads the National Housing and Planning Advice Unit, believes that alongside the financial constraints local authorities are also holding up new house building.

The wealthier people in society can satisfy their housing demands, more or less, as they get richer

Professor Stephen Nickell

“Unless local authorities are given a strong incentive to allow house building in their locality, it seems to me very unlikely that we will hit the housing targets,” he said.

“And if you don’t keep building these houses the prices just keep going up relative to people’s incomes.”

Government figures published recently showed that new housing work was down 5% in the first quarter of this year compared with the same period in 2007.

The Home Builders Federation, which represents major house builders, said that new building work did not show any signs of picking up.

“Right now the credit crunch is stopping people from getting the finance that people need to buy homes,” said John Slaughter, director of external affairs at the Federation.

“Longer term we need a better business environment and less regulatory cost to get the industry moving.”

The big building companies are beginning to show the strain with rumours that they may have to raise new capital to survive.

The two giants of the industry, Taylor Wimpey and Barratt Developments, carry a total of more than £2.5 billion of debt.

That equates to more than double their combined market worth.

The financial pain being felt by the companies has already forced one of them, Persimmon, to put a halt on all new building projects.

Falling prices

Figures from the Nationwide this month showed a 2.5% drop in house prices in May, with some predicting a 20% drop by the end of 2008.

But despite falling house prices, Professor Nickell said the current situation seemed to be only benefiting the richer parts of society.

“The wealthier people in society can satisfy their housing demands, more or less, as they get richer. While the rest of us get squashed into smaller and smaller houses.” he said.

And he added that if present trends continue, things are looking bleak for the future of housing in England.

“If the present situation continues we will be less well housed than the majority of people in Europe, Australia or the United States,” he said.

Original Article

Stephen Nickell

Is currently Warden of Nuffield College, Oxford. He was an External Member of the Bank of England Monetary Policy Committee from 2000-2006 writing a number of pieces on the subject of the UK housing market. Until 2005 he was School Professor of Economics at the London School of Economics, following this role from 1984-1998 as Professor of Economics and Director of the Institute of Economics and Statistics at the University of Oxford. He has also had earlier roles as an economist at the London School of Economics, in Paris and at the University of Princeton. He has been awarded a number of academic honours including Fellow of the British Academy and Foreign Honorary Member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. He has published widely in numerous branches of applied economics.

Share and Enjoy:

Growth being led by developers, says campaigner

May 31st, 2008

by Editor.

No comments yet

ASK Barrie Haycock why he decided to move to Inverness, he will tell you it is because he thought the Highland Capital was a good place to come to.

Growth being led by developers, says campaigner
By Calum Macleod – Inverness Courier

Four and a half years on, ask him if it is still a good place to come to and he hesitates.

“It’s difficult,” he said.

“It’s no better than other areas throughout the UK. The bottom line is that Inverness has the opportunity to learn from other areas and plan accordingly but no-one seems willing to do it.”

This apparent unwillingness to get to grips with the area’s planning deficiencies seems even more surprising to Barrie given the Highlands’ economic reliance on tourism.

“Tourists do not travel to see rows of soulless housing,” he pointed out.

For Barrie, who retired from a career in business at the age of 50, coming to the Highlands was an easy move to make as communications technology allowed his own public relations and allied services firm to operate from anywhere he chose.

He still enjoys getting out on the hills at the weekends and journeying to the unspoiled West Highlands, but soon learned that other parts of the region, not least Inverness itself, were going through what he describes as a quantum change.

To Barrie, Inverness’s rapid growth is being led by developers at the expense of community benefit and with little or no strategic planning or effective planning control “The emphasis in Inverness is on trying to build houses and then try and sort out the problems afterwards,” he said. “Exhibit A is the new trunk road with talk of bulldozing the new church at Inshes and compulsory purchase of properties. You would have thought they would have reserved the land, but that would be too easy.

“There is a growing view of many people in Inverness that the council should firmly get to grips with the situation and control planning so that development can take place in a properly thought out manner.

“Consultation is a joke. It’s a meaningless word in the planning process. Objections are rarely listened to and it’s the will of the developer that prevails over the will of the community.”

His awareness of discontent with the planning situation in Inverness was only heightened by his involvement with local community organisations.

Barrie is a founder member of the Milton of Leys local residents association, a member of Inverness Crime Prevention Panel and an Inverness South Community Councillor. More recently he has become involved with the Highlands and Islands Resilience Group, a disaster planning initiative designed to look at how threats such as pandemic influenza and terrorism could affect the Highlands.

These activities bring him into regular contact with a range of business owners, chamber of commerce members, police officers, community leaders, MPs, MSPs and Highland Council officials and local councillors.

A common topic of conversation has been concern at the way Highland Council is being run and its rapidly growing external debt problem which, by March this year, stood at a gross figure of 580 million.

The loss of prime farm land to residential housing with no meaningful infrastructure is another area of concern.

It was a prominent local councillor who initially suggested that a “Planning Watch” organisation was needed.

Barrie took up the suggestion and, as communities throughout Britain have similar issues to Inverness, widened the remit to create Planning Watch UK.

The organisation’s aims, objectives and interests are not confined to property matters. The regulation of the building industry, including land maintenance and property management companies, remains of prime importance.

“At present the new house build purchaser has been described by the National Consumer Council as having less consumer protection in law than when buying a kettle. This cannot continue and in general allows developers to make huge profits at the expense of the unsuspecting purchaser,” Barrie declared.

Nationally, Planning Watch UK members and contributors are working with MPs, MSPs and other organisations to introduce legislative changes to give houseowners the protection they need, just as locally the organisation wants to see more evidence of meaningful strategic planning.

Barrie Haycock, Planning Watch UK campaigner.

“The developer profit-driven process ignores the crucial requirement of infrastructure,” Barrie commented.

“Any future development must also look at education, health and transport services through to the massive number of jobs required to support the growing communities.”

Equally important are forward planning for roads, sewage and water supply and potential flood risk in certain areas. While there are plenty of bad examples of planning in Britain Telford in Shropshire or Scotland’s post-war New Towns there are also more positive designs which the Highlands could look to, such as Poundbury in Dorset. Designed by architect Leon Krier for landowner Prince Charles, this is an integrated community of shops, businesses and private and social housing and one which the planners of the Highlands would be advised to follow, Barrie suggested.

There are similar projects proposed for the Highlands, such as the “New Urbanist” community at Tornagrain, but for Barrie these being built are on too limited a scale and the principles which they adopt should be applied throughout the Highland region.

His work for Planning Watch UK and his other activities does take up a lot of his time and includes researching and studying local authority documents or fielding inquiries from journalists, but it is something he enjoys. “I don’t like to see people misled or ripped off and I have particular empathy and concerns for elderly people who are hung out to dry by the process. Who do they turn to for support?”

Barrie is scathing of a council which, he says, “would rather spend 300,000 on a fireworks display than care of the elderly.”

“The elderly are always the first to suffer when councils run into funding problems, yet the fat cat desk jockeys who decide the financial cuts continue to thrive,” he stated.

“This issue is constantly being raised by those who suffer and is a high priority for Planning Watch UK. Care of the elderly, young and disabled has to be of major importance but is so often put at the end of the bureaucrats’ list.”

Which is why Planning Watch UK highlights anything it regards as a waste of taxpayers’ money and wants to see local authority and government quango spending kept under strict financial control.

“A local example seems to be the bizarre reported redundancy payouts made to HIE members of staff, some of whom seem to have moved to highly paid new jobs some within Highland Council while collecting massive redundancy payments. This is an absolute disgrace!” he declared.

Barrie stood as an Independent candidate in the 2007 Highland Council election for Inverness South and came last, but reveals that he feels happier outside the political system.

“If you are part of the current system, you could very quickly get drowned under the current method of operation,” he said.

That system has been made even less effective, he believes, by the recent move to a party political council from one with a tradition of political independence and the creation of multi-member wards.

“The multi-councillor ward system isn’t working, full stop. None of the councillors can agree amongst themselves. End result: chaos,” Barrie said.

“Our councillors are paid salaries now, so there should be accountability all the way down from the chief executive to the most junior councillor.”

What is not so important, to Barrie at least, is the political hue of those councillors or even the MPs and MSPs.

“I’m apolitical,” Barrie stated.

“I don’t give a damn what party is in power as long as there are sensible policies from that party and I believe most people think the same.”

c.macleod@inverness-courier.co.uk

United Kingdom

HIE chairman also ran consultancy at centre of plagiarism row

Julie Kirkbride

Member of Parliament for Bromsgrove

Julie Kirkbride’s Experience

Residents say developer’s original pledges for community services have been greatly watered down

Tulloch Homes announces new facilities for Milton of Leys

How soaring charges soured the dream of ‘affordable’ homes

Dissatisfied north-east customers urged to sign up to campaign

Highland Housing Fair – Brochure endorsed by Highland Council ‘exaggerated’ facilities

Sleaze charge rocks West Lothian Council

Best of the blogs

Firm ‘takes money for work it does not do’

Government backs residents in land row

Residents hit out over grass-cutting frequency

Wilson’s Weekly Wrap

Wilson’s Weekly Wrap

Slowdown ‘risks housing targets’

MP demands end to ‘landbanking’

Register & Log In:

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Archives

Tags

Authors

Categories

Contributors

Links