Warning over housing move

Andrew Smith in Blackbird Leys Andrew Smith in Blackbird Leys

OXFORD City Council could net more than £172 million if it sold off its most expensive housing stock, but opponents have warned against the move.

A report for the Policy Exchange thinktank calls on the government to force councils to sell all housing worth more than the average value for the region they sit in.

However, critics of the report have said Oxford would have to sell at least 10 per cent of its stock because house price averages are much higher in the city than in the general south east region.

If 10 per cent of the council’s 7,822 homes were sold off for the regional average price of £220,126, the council would make £172,182,577.20.

The report has been criticised by many Labour politicians, including Oxford East MP Andrew Smith , who predicted that at least 10 per cent of Oxford’s council housing stock was worth more than the south east average figure.

He said: “If Oxford was forced to sell off higher value council housing, it would threaten council housing in areas like Headington, Cutteslowe, and Jericho. This would be socially unbalanced, denying many parts of the city mixed communities.

“The report is also muddled in assuming this housing could be replaced elsewhere, as Oxford is desperately short of sites for social housing, thanks in large part to the government’s own restrictions on building on the outskirts of the city.”

Related links

Although areas including Blackbird Leys, Churchill, Barton, Sandhills, Rose Hill and Iffley carry the majority of the city’s social housing, some more affluent areas also house a surprising number of council tenants.

The council has 271 properties in Osney and Jericho, where house values are higher.

City board member for housing, Scott Seamons, said: “The report assumes that replacement social housing can be built elsewhere in an area, but in a city like ours, with few sites available for development, this is not the case.”

Former Tory adviser Alex Morton, author of the report, said: “Expensive social housing is costly, unpopular and unfair. Social housing tenants deserve a roof over their heads, but not one better than most people can afford, particularly as expensive social housing means less social housing and so longer waiting lists for most people in need.”

Comments(8)

Myron Blatz says...
6:37pm Wed 22 Aug 12

For once Andrew Smith got it almost right - except he forgot to add that for at least 13 of the past 15 years, it was a Labour government which kept Oxford in planning shackles and restrictions with regard to both social and other housing.

Feelingsmatter says...
10:03pm Wed 22 Aug 12

Affordable housing needs to be built in areas where public service is required. Oh wait, that's every area! I noticed some beautiful new homes have been finished recently in Headington for "Key workers". I hope this really means key workers, and not just foreign nurses flown over form the Philippines to fill positions which British nurses need. And before I get accused of racism, imagine how my 16 year old son felt two weeks back when he had a gastroscopy and the only nurses in the room were Philippine and spoke no English through out the entire procedure except to tell him to stop talking.

Sell off some of the housing, but use the money to build new council houses in the same area. We cannot create ghettoes of rich and poor without damaging essential services and causing social tension.

Andrew:Oxford says...
10:31pm Wed 22 Aug 12

Feelingsmatter wrote:
Affordable housing needs to be built in areas where public service is required. Oh wait, that's every area! I noticed some beautiful new homes have been finished recently in Headington for "Key workers". I hope this really means key workers, and not just foreign nurses flown over form the Philippines to fill positions which British nurses need. And before I get accused of racism, imagine how my 16 year old son felt two weeks back when he had a gastroscopy and the only nurses in the room were Philippine and spoke no English through out the entire procedure except to tell him to stop talking.

Sell off some of the housing, but use the money to build new council houses in the same area. We cannot create ghettoes of rich and poor without damaging essential services and causing social tension.
Did the consultant speak English?

There are parts of Central Oxford (Friars Wharf) that should be raised to the ground and rebuilt with blended properties (ie 1 social for every 2 normals).

Forget flats or apartments for social housing, the few unsociable that the authorities are forced to accommodate make them hell for the majority who are honest, decent and sociable. Key-workers who work unsocial hours and live in social housing are particularly vulnerable to the unsociable living through the wall.

Social Housing should either be detached or semi-detached, have decent sized family rooms bathrooms and bedrooms, utility rooms too.

Maybe all new-builds should be the same...

Feelingsmatter says...
10:57pm Wed 22 Aug 12

Yes, the consultant did. I think she should have asked the nurses to speak English.

Utility rooms? I know a lot of people who don't have utility rooms.

I agree with key workers needing peace and quiet, and that they need subsidised housing. If we don't have this, we won't get quality staff. However, we cannot allow nimbiism (I don't think that's a word, but you know what I mean) to stop affordable housing being built amongst expensive new-builds. Social housing isn't exclusively inhabited by inconsiderate spongers.

Lady Penelopee says...
8:24am Thu 23 Aug 12

Feelingsmatter wrote:
Yes, the consultant did. I think she should have asked the nurses to speak English.

Utility rooms? I know a lot of people who don't have utility rooms.

I agree with key workers needing peace and quiet, and that they need subsidised housing. If we don't have this, we won't get quality staff. However, we cannot allow nimbiism (I don't think that's a word, but you know what I mean) to stop affordable housing being built amongst expensive new-builds. Social housing isn't exclusively inhabited by inconsiderate spongers.
No, social housing isn't exclusively inhabited by inconsiderate spongers. 95% of those who occupy social housing are lovely.

It's the other 5% that case 95% of the problems, and make life a misery.

I would have no objection to leaving near social housing if the council were quick to evict problem tenants who cause a nuisance.

I lived in a street in Oxford (OX4 2) with 1/3 social housing, and regardless of how many complaints we made to the council/police about 1 or 2 households, nothing was done. It was awful, and 2 years later I moved. We're talking foul language, trees and street vandalised, car windows smashed, bikes stolen, late night fights. The list went on...

Myron Blatz says...
10:22am Thu 23 Aug 12

Even in this day of 21st century enlightenment, its really sad how some folk view council or social housing as a 'cancer' and only for 'benefit scroungers' in a throwback to them 'good old days' when the snobs with mortgages (and usually in debt up to their necks to banks and building societies) were happy to build divisions like the infamous 'Cutteslowe Wall' to establish quasi middle class ghettoes - more recently sold as 'exlusive developments' to people who believe property ownership indicates one's status in society, until the 'self-made' go bankrupt or lose their jobs in their 40s and 50s, find their endowment mortgages and pensions worthless, and have their homes reposessed ..... and then try to get council housing! Nowhere else in mainland Europe or Scandinavia is such 'stigma' attached to either social/local authority housing, or even to renting property.

Buffetcrasher says...
11:05am Thu 23 Aug 12

Completely agree with you Myron.

father dowling says...
4:09pm Thu 23 Aug 12

DO NOT VOTE FOR ANDREW SMITH AT THE NEXT ELECTION - what has he ever done for you ?
Answers please :

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree