Harlow Homes for Harlow People

On Monday I asked the Government whether he would encourage every Council to offer the £75,000 discount on social housing, to help make affordable homes for the many.

You can read my question below, or watch the video above.

Robert Halfon (Harlow): Given what my hon. Friend said about right to buy and like for like in social housing, does he agree that the more people who take up the £75,000 discount, the more chance there will be for people to have affordable housing, and will he make every effort to encourage every council to offer that discount so that we can make affordable homes for the many, not for the few?


Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Andrew Stunell): That is of course an important step, and the Minister for Housing and Local Government has also announced a consultation on “pay for stay” to ensure that those on very high incomes do not have the subsidised use of valuable social rented accommodation.

You can read my previous blog post on Harlow housing here.

by Robert Halfon MP - Working Hard for Harlow.

Harlow Housing Money for Harlow People

There was an important debate in the House of Commons today, about Social Housing.  I spoke about Harlow Housing for Harlow people, and Harlow Housing Money for Harlow People.  I meant that local people should have priority over housing lists and that that monies collected by Harlow Council, on rents and capital receipts should be spent in Harlow, and not taken away by central government.  The good news is that the coalition is making important strides in the right direction: the Localism Bill, will give first call to local residents, and the Government have agreed not to take away our £13 million in rent money collected each year.  I also urged the Housing Minister to boost shared equity schemes, so as to give people a first step on the housing ladder and look at the introduction of a housing voucher scheme, so individuals in need of social housing would have a real choice in the private rented sector.

The full debate can be found here.  My excerpt is below.

 Robert Halfon (Harlow) (Con): Our social housing is an enormously valuable national asset, which matters to the 8 million people who live in it. In my constituency, more than 12,000 households are in social housing, which is about one third of the town. A further 4,000 households are on the waiting list, which is down from 7,000 under the previous Government.

Social housing is the No. 1 issue in my constituency mailbox, but it is not just about putting a roof over people’s head—although that is, of course, the central mission. Social housing is a mechanism by which we measure social justice and help people to escape the poverty trap. I want to make three substantive points this morning. I shall acknowledge the major housing problems that we face, set out why some of the coalition’s policies will help to create a more socially mobile society and urge the Minister to go further and faster, particularly on shared equity schemes.

First, let me set out the key problem, which is waiting lists. Nearly 1.8 million households are on social housing waiting lists, which is a substantial increase that has taken place over the past 15 years or so. As I said, although the number of households on the waiting list is decreasing in Harlow, there is still an overhang of around 4,000 households that urgently need homes. The problem is not the queue in itself, which is inevitable, but that many families have no realistic chance of ever getting a home. The waiting lists are particularly clogged up because not enough priority is being given to local people and there are rigid and inflexible tenancies.

I look forward to the day when I can say, “Harlow housing for Harlow people.” I say that because an anguished bus driver—Mr Darren Presland—came to see me at a surgery last Friday evening. He sat in my surgery and was very angry for 10 minutes. He was furious that people from outside Harlow, including many foreign nationals, are allowed on to the Harlow waiting list. It is true that, for many years, local authorities have had to include literally anyone on their waiting list with few exceptions and that they have different bands of priority within the list. Mr Presland was making a serious point: that many people on low incomes are angry and disillusioned with politics because people who are not local are allowed on to the waiting list.

Sarah Newton (Truro and Falmouth) (Con): I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Stafford (Jeremy Lefroy) for securing such an important debate. On the point about local needs, Cornwall council has been effective at introducing criteria so that local people have priority on exception sites for social housing in villages. Not only has that been very beneficial to the people in those communities, but it has enabled the council to increase support for building more homes in rural areas because people have the confidence that those properties will be local homes for local people.

Robert Halfon: My hon. Friend sets out a very interesting idea, which I will come on to later. That is something other councils should follow.

Mr Presland made a very important point. He asked why families on low incomes should pay very high taxes for houses that they are unlikely to be able to live in. Along with many other Harlow residents, he takes the view that immigrants are not only taking away jobs and opportunities from British people, but being given an unfair priority on the housing waiting lists. It is very hard to dispel that view and it is very dangerous— toxic—for the body politic. Mr Presland is not a racist and he did not come to my surgery with an axe to grind or on behalf of the British National party. I am talking about his feelings and those of a number of other residents.

Alison Seabeck (Plymouth, Moor View) (Lab): The hon. Gentleman is going into very interesting and, in many respects, controversial territory. Many local authorities are considering how they offer local people council housing. Newham, Manchester and others are introducing schemes to enable that to happen. None the less, does he accept that there are dangers involved in “local homes for local people”? We saw that in Tower Hamlets in the 1980s, where the BNP got itself elected on the basis of “local homes for local people,” because what it actually meant was “local homes for local white people.” There is a genuine tension there and we must be responsible about how we manage and talk about such issues.

Robert Halfon: Yes, the hon. Lady makes an important point. However, the BNP was elected because, in many cases, the myth was purported that homes were being given to foreigners, and that was believed by residents who were not getting houses themselves. That is why the BNP was sadly successful in that area.

The second thing that clogs up the waiting list and stops the 4,000 waiting households in Harlow from finding a home is the old system of rigid, lifetime tenancies. I welcome the Minister’s pledge that the rights of existing tenants will be upheld but, for too long, social landlords have been forced to give most residents an inflexible lifetime tenancy, which takes no account of how people’s circumstances might improve. I accept that the Localism Bill will help and that it offers many, if not all, of the solutions because it will give councils the freedom to prioritise their waiting list, as voters want them to do. As I said, I look forward to the day when I can say to the hardworking people in my surgeries, “Harlow housing for Harlow people.” When the Government consulted on the matter, two thirds of councils, including many Labour councils, said that they would welcome those powers.

Jeremy Corbyn (Islington North) (Lab): How does the hon. Gentleman define a Harlow person? How long does someone have to live there to be a Harlow person, or is there some other definition?

Robert Halfon: If somebody is brought up and born in Harlow, has spent a significant number of years in Harlow and has paid local taxes, that would define them as a Harlow resident.

The changes to the housing revenue account and the Tenant Services Authority are also welcome. For a long time, I campaigned against the HRA and argued for “Harlow housing money for Harlow people,” because the HRA was taking £13 million pounds a year out of our town. Local residents groups, councils and neighbourhood associations do a much better and cheaper job of talking to social landlords than the Tenant Services Authority ever did. We have some very good residents groups in my constituency.

A number of other changes will also make a huge difference. First, £4.5 billion pounds has been secured from the Treasury to spend on affordable homes over the spending review period. Secondly, there is the raft of schemes for promoting home ownership—Firstbuy, HomeBuy, Community Right to Build and mortgage rescue—and the house building incentives in the new homes bonus, which has brought £250,000 into my constituency this year. Thirdly, I welcome the decision to end the default setting of rigid, lifetime tenancies. That is an important issue, although it is very difficult and I have some questions.

I think we would all agree that the Bob Crows of this world and other wealthy people do not need subsidised housing from the state, but there is the danger of creating a poverty trap if people are disincentivised from earning higher wages because they are afraid of losing their home. My concern is that we must not create ghettos of social housing, where people have no incentive to be ambitious and aspirational. There is a balance to be struck. I understand why the Government want to give social landlords the freedom to set new and more flexible tenancies with a minimum period of two years, but at the same time require that they must publish how their new tenancies protect the most vulnerable, including families with children.

Mr Leech:Does the hon. Gentleman agree that a better way to deal with people who no longer require social housing, due to the salary that they earn, would be to expect them to pay a market rent, rather than saying that they had to move? I do not want to use the example of Bob Crow, but instead of making him pay social rent, why not make him pay market rent for the property that he lives in, rather than expect him to move?

Robert Halfon: My hon. Friend makes an important point. That is worth looking at, but the problem is that the council house does not then become free for the people who need it most. That is an interesting idea, however, and I am sure that the Government will look at that.

I hope and believe that the Minister’s actions will help to tackle the waiting lists. I want to look at some potential solutions to asset inequality and to the housing crisis that we face. During the previous Parliament, the report “Breakthrough Britain”, by the Centre for Social Justice, suggested that social tenants who work, or who make a genuine effort to find work, should be rewarded with increasingly larger equity stakes in their home. The Conservative party adopted that policy in its manifesto, saying that social tenants with a good record should be rewarded with a 10% free equity share in their property, and that that could be cashed in when those tenants left the social rented sector. That could help in many ways; for example, as a small nest-egg for retirement, or as a deposit for their first house. I passionately believe in that policy: it is social justice in action, and rewards people who do the right thing. That is important because an Englishman’s home is not just his castle; it is his pension and an emergency source of funding for care in old age. People who never own equity in a house are shut out from that security, and have to live hand-to-mouth right into retirement.

When the economy improves, I hope that we will have the finance to implement that policy. There are other policies, however, that can have a similar effect. For example, the previous Government cut the right-to-buy scheme, which was so successful in the 1980s and 1990s. For many years, the Labour Government capped the maximum discount at £16,000, raised the minimum sale price and cut back the eligibility criteria. On top of that, Labour allowed the scheme to be eroded by inflation. In 1997, the typical discount was worth half a home’s normal value, but that fell to just a third in recent years. Why not dramatically restore the right-to-buy scheme, with proper discounts? I should also mention Harlow council again at this point. Why is it that, despite our councils paying to maintain homes and owning them outright, 75% of the sale price gets funnelled back to the Treasury—a point alluded to by my hon. Friend the Member for Stafford—rather than kept in the local area? I accept that that is the system we have inherited, but it is against the spirit of localism, and is an issue that could be earmarked for future reform.

Finally, I urge the Minister to look at the possibility—I emphasise the word possibility—of housing vouchers, funded by the sale of social housing as they become empty when existing tenants leave. Housing vouchers would create competition. That would drive more homes up to the decent homes standard and give people real choice. That would be a radical transformation of our society, and benefit new tenants as they enter the social market. Instead of the state owning or running social homes, it would simply pay the cheque to help families access accommodation. Linking the voucher to national insurance numbers would make it easier to administer. To adopt a famous phrase from Chairman Mao that is very apt at present, we could let a thousand flowers bloom and, instead of huge social landlords and corporations running the show, give smaller, nimbler businesses and charities a chance to run social housing.

In conclusion, the Government are delivering Harlow housing, and Harlow housing money, for Harlow people. The Localism Bill represents a huge shift of power to communities—something we have not had for a long time. We must also help families to take that step and take their rightful place in a property-owning democracy by getting a foot on the housing ladder. That is why I support giving free equity to social tenants when the economy allows it, restoring the right to buy, and looking at major innovations such as housing vouchers. 

by Robert Halfon - www.roberthalfon.blogspot.com

A fair deal on Travellers, a fair deal for local residents

Last month in the Commons, I stepped up the pressure on travellers by asking if the villages around Harlow would be free in the future to set their own level of travellers' pitches.


I said to Rural Affairs Secretary, Caroline Spelman:
"Epping Forest has 20 per cent of all travellers pitches in the east of England, over 80 per cent of which are in Nazeing or Roydon in my constituency. Can the Minister reassure my constituents that local communities will now be free to choose how many travellers pitches they accept rather than having them imposed from Whitehall?"

Under the last Labour Government, Whitehall railroaded through new pitches, and totally ignored the wishes of local residents.

With Dale Farm in Basildon, this is continues to be a major issue for Essex.

Following my intervention, and that of a number of othet MPs and hard-pressed local Councils the Government has published new proposed planning guidance for travellers.

The new planning regime will mean the abolition of top-down regional targets with councils able to plan for traveller site provision in a "locally-led way, reflecting historic demand". 'Methodology' will be a matter for local discretion.

It also proposes:

1) Strengthening protection of the Green Belt and open countryside - Labour's guidance on pressuring councils to compulsory purchase land for traveller sites has been deleted. Stronger consideration and weight is now given to the protection of local amenity and the local environment.

2) Helping councils in planning enforcement cases - In addition, the Localism Bill also contains provisions to tackle the abuse of retrospective planning permission. In due course, we will also amend secondary legislation to strengthen councils' powers to issue stop notices.

3) Taking measures to support councils in providing suitable, authorised sites. the Government has secured £60 million of grant funding for traveller sites over the Spending Review period, and the New Homes Bonus will provide a further incentive for site provision.

This is good news and long overdue. For a long time I have been concerned about the number of traveller pitches which are located in the villages like Nazeing and Roydon.  It is time that local people should have a stronger say in where these pitches are located and how many can be allowed."

P.S.  You can see further details on my blog HERE, or the formal Government documents can be found HERE.

Statement on Gilden Way

Many Harlow residents have written to me in recent weeks, with concerns about the potential housing development in Gilden Way.

I have been very active on this, meeting with numerous residents, and also taking local people to meet with the developers just before Christmas last year.

As local MP I have no powers over planning applications. However, I have put out a statement on my views, and I will always represent the views of local people.

STATEMENT ON GILDEN WAY:

Like many residents of Old Harlow (I myself live in Newhall) I have concerns about over development and preserving the original design principles of Harlow - like the green wedges that make our town unique.

I have made these feelings clear to the Council and also to the developers.

Just before Christmas, I took a group of residents including Colleen Morrison from CouncilWatch to express these concerns to the land-owners and developers, among others - including questions about transport infrastructure and pressure on local schools.

As local MP I will always represent the views of people in Old Harlow and other residents, to make sure that their voices are heard.

For over 10 years I have campaigned to protect the green spaces in Harlow, and for local people to have a genuine say in decision-making. This has not changed. The Government's Localism Bill will introduce new powers for residents along these lines, and is currently progressing through Parliament.

Clearly the developers want to develop the land, but ultimately this will be a decision for the planning committee at Harlow Council. I will continue to raise residents concerns with them, as I have done for several months. I am more than happy to meet with residents to discuss this, if they have further questions.

by Robert Halfon - www.roberthalfon.blogspot.com

New Homes Bonus for Harlow: Harlow Housing Money for Harlow People

Yesterday I was really pleased to see a new homes cash boost for Harlow, as part of my continuing fight to get more housing money for our town.

Harlow Council is to receive £231,938 this year, thanks to the Government's New Homes Bonus.

The money, announced today by Housing Minister Grant Shapps, is the first allocation of the New Homes Bonus.

Over the last few months, I have continued to fight hard to get more housing money for Harlow people and have met with Local Government Minister Bob Neill on several occasions, to press the case for extra funding for the town.

The New Homes Bonus means that for each addition to the council's housing stock, including properties brought back into use, Harlow Council will receive extra funding for the council tax paid over the next six years.

This is great news, and will give Harlow the cash it needs to protect our parks, libraries, Sure Start centres and other Council services from cuts.

I especially hope that this will boost regeneration in the town centre.

by Robert Halfon - www.roberthalfon.blogspot.com

Harlow Housing Money for Harlow People

Today I asked a question to Prime Minister David Cameron.

I asked him why the last Labour Government took £13 million a year out of Harlow's housing money, pushing up rents for social tenants, and leading to a situation where nearly one in ten people in Harlow are now on the Council waiting list. (This is twice as many as nearby Chelmsford.)

My full question was:

"Is the Prime Minister aware that the last Government took £13 million a year out of Harlow's social housing budget, to give to their friends elsewhere? Because of this under-investment, one in ten people in my constituency are now on the Council housing waiting list. Does he agree that social housing money raised in Harlow should be spent in Harlow, and that Harlow housing money should be for Harlow people?"

In reply, he was very positive, and made it clear that this unfair bureaucracy will end. He said:

"My Honourable Friend makes a very powerful point. At a difficult time in terms of local budgets, in our relations with Local Authorities, we should be giving them money, and taking away the ringfences, and the complications of all the different grants, and saying: 'You are democratically elected, you decide how that money is spent'. That is what you are going to see from this Government, and I think it will be welcomed by Local Government up and down the country."

The full scale of the money taken out of Harlow over the years was revealed by Housing Minister Grant Shapps MP, in his answer to a written question I asked a few weeks ago. It amounts to nearly £75 million over the last few years.

I am glad that the new Government will finally scrap this unfair system, and keep Harlow housing money for Harlow people.

by Robert Halfon - www.roberthalfon.blogspot.com

A further visit to Berecroft with Conservative Housing Spokesman Grant Shapps

Given that Berecroft residents have endured their third fire in recent times, I thought it important to bring the Conservative Housing Spokesman Grant Shapps today to meet local residents

Mr Shapps was accompanied by prospective Harlow Conservative MP Robert Halfon, Harlow Conservative local councillor and housing committee chairman Lee Dangerfield and Berecroft Residents Association chairman Zulqar Cheema when he visited the estate this morning

The second major fire in the terraced properties in ten months has led to renewed calls for South Anglia - the housing association which owns the properties - to carry out major work to make the homes safer.

Viewing the fire-damaged properties, Mr Shapps observed:

"This is a shocking fire and it must be very frightening for the residents. The construction of these properties is obviously a real worry. I've seen a range of different problems here and concerns too because the housing association involved, South Anglia, has issued a statement saying they are actively working on the estate which turns out not to be true when you come here. I will be writing to the managing director today to find out what they really intend to do. It's quite clear there's not much going on at the moment.\What people want to know is what is going to happen about it."There's a small political point here, I don't think the regulation of the housing associations is anything near right.What should happen is the local authority should get to look after those housing associations and ask them to take action when the construction is as it is here.

At the moment there is some very bureaucratic process involving quangos and the rest of it . I think if we brought that control down to a local level we can help get these problems fixed and faster and that's one of the things we will do if we win on Thursday."

I'm glad that Grant Shapps came to Berecroft. I wanted him to see the terrible fire that took place a couple of days ago. It's wrong that the residents have suffered in this way. I'm going to be seeking an urgent meeting with South Anglia because something needs to be done to make sure this never happens again.

Harlow Conservative councillor and Housing Committee Chairman Lee Dangerfield said:

"I've called for an urgent meeting with local residents and South Anglia Housing. We must make sure these works are done as soon as possible."

Berecroft Residents Association chairman Zulqar Cheema stated : "We need to move a little bit quicker. With these organisations you have this sort of treacle-type movement whereas local residents and people want it done the following day and there should be something that gets it done fairly quickly. We need to push it and get it done."

by Robert Halfon - www.roberthalfon.blogspot.com

Open Source Planning

Whats wrong with planning at the moment? Well, too often it is influenced by arbritary Whitehall targets and unelected quangos. So what' s the answer? The Conservatives have called it 'open source planning'.

In practice this would mean:

• Abolishing the undemocratic and ineffective tier of regional planning overseen by unelected quangos. This would include scrapping the East of England Regional Plan and the prospect of thousands of new buildings on our countryside;
  
  
• Maintaining national Green Belt protection and other special protections for wildlife and the countryside, whilst allowing sustainable development elsewhere in accordance with the local plan;

• Abandoning Labour’s new unelected and unaccountable central planning quango – the Infrastructure Planning Commission, whilst retaining a fast-track process to avoid planning inquiries taking years; and give Members of Parliament a new role to vote on and ratify national planning policy;
  
  
• Increasing council and police powers to tackle unauthorised traveller sites and illegal trespass;

• Changing Whitehall’s restrictive parking rules to ensure more parking spaces are provided in family homes and near local shops, taking the pressure off crowded residential streets;
  
  

Open source planning devolves power down to communities, whilst ending the outmoded concept that the 'man in Whitehall knows best'. If these measures are implemented, it really would mean planning for the people by the people. A real planning revolution.

Good news: Money for Home Insulation

I am really pleased to give backing to bold Conservative plans to help households in Harlow, Hastingwood, Nazeing, Roydon and Sheering protect the environment and save money.

Major policy proposals for a Conservative government include providing up to £6,500 for home insulation improvements at no upfront cost to residents. Under the plans, every household will have the right to have home energy efficiency work of up to £6,500. There will be no upfront cost, as the work will be paid for by the much larger savings on energy bills from the improved insulation.

This will open up a whole new market in energy efficiency, create tens of thousands of skilled jobs and cut carbon emissions. It will also save families money and make homes in Hastingwood, Nazeing, Roydon and Sheering warmer in winter - helping the elderly and 'fuel poor' in particular.

A typical home could see £30 a month knocked off its final bill.

The Green Deal of insulating people's homes for no upfront cost and rewarding people for recycling will not only protect the environment, but also help families and pensioners who are struggling to make ends meet.

A good reason to vote Conservative.

You can read more details of the proposal from Grant Shapps MP (Conservative Housing Spokesman), HERE.

Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device

Green belt future set to be election battleground

Apologies for the lack of postings this week, but I have been moving house. They say it is one of the most stressful things that have ever happened, and it certainly is!

I was interested to read reports in the Daily Telegraph newspapers over the past couple of days about Government plans to build over the green belt.

Sadly, the reports have confirmed my worst fears. Gordon Brown intends to ram through building on our green belt areas, with little consultation.

My main objection to the Government housebuilding plans has been precisely this. Housing targets have been set from the centre. House building (when and where) has been set from the centre. There has been no genuine consultation involving local people and no guarantees of infrastructure funding.

For further information see THIS weblink.

Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device

Radical changes to Housing

One of the biggest beefs I have had with Government policy on housing targets and building over our green belt, is not just because of environmental considerations - although I care about those deeply.

It is also because of the huge concerns over the lack of financial support for infrastructure development (the building of extra roads, schools and NHS facilities to accompany the extra housing).

But, even more than this, I have real problems in the way these housing targets have been decided. Numbers have been set from Whitehall alongside an assortment of various quangos - from the unelected East of England Regional Assembly, to Regional Development Agencies et al.

I think this is approach is fundamentally wrong. If you are to drastically change housing in an area - such as change the nature of a village by building thousands of houses around it - you have to have the consent of the local people affected, through genuine consultation.

By this I don't mean the sham consultation that usually takes place, such as a few public meetings and the odd road show.

Well, I am glad to say that the policy being developed by Grant Shapps MP, (the Conservative Housing Spokesman), seeks to radically change this. He has developed plans that will radically change how, when and where we decide to build the extra housing that is needed.

First: all the regional quangos and regional spatial strategies will be abolished. Constituents will be given a chance to have a referendum to decide whether they accept housing policy. Parish Councils for example, will be able to hold a referendum, and, if there is 90 percent approval, they will be able to bypass local planning committees. Local housing trusts will be established and allowed to deal directly with developers with powers to decide housing. - in some cases having the power to bypass planning committees.

Second: there will be real incentives for people to accept some extra housing.

The Government would match all council tax receipts on local housebuilding and would match by 125% all receipts on social housing. The money would be given directly back to the local community.

I believe that these proposals will do much to involve local people in decision making - and incentivise communities to grow housing organically. This is far removed from the sweeping hand of big government that imposes hundreds of thousands of extra houses on our communities, with no thought for the feelings of local people.

It will mark the beginning of a real housing revolution across our country.

You can read more about these proposals in the weblinks HERE and HERE

Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device

Some guarantees on saving our green belt

When Shadow Communities Secretary, Caroline Spelman MP, visited Harlow and Nazeing in March, she made a number of guarantees about Conservative policy on housing, were there to be a Tory Government after the next election.

I am glad to say that Mrs Spelman's statement in Harlow, has now been backed up in more detail, in a letter sent out to Conservative Councillors and MPs.

The good news is that Conservatives are pledged to abolish all the top down regional and national planning targets, that have imposed arbritrary housing targets across Essex and the East of England - without any genuine local consultation.

As Mrs Spelman notes, the choice at the next election will be clear:

"a vote for democratic accountability and sustainable development from Conservatives on one hand, or unelected, unwanted, unsustainable urban sprawl from a discredited and bullying Labour regime on the other".

Whilst I strongly recognise the need for an even bigger and better Harlow, you cannot build extra houses through central planning, without giving people a real say in what occurs.

Gordon Brown's housing plans are unnecessary, undemocratic and unsustainable. Not enough is being done to build on brownfield land, not enough has been done to really involve local people in the decision making process and no real pledges have been made (with financial resources) to guarantee the new infrastructure that will be a requirement if new housing is to be built.

It is important to note, that, the Conservatives are not saying no to any new housing. Far from it. We just believe that additional housing should be 'evolutionary' and sustainable. This means establishing new Local Housing Trusts to build local housing for local people, building on more brownfield land and incentivising Local Councils financially if they build new developments.

This detailed policy statement could not be more informative (see below):

Caroline Spelman MP

SHADOW SECRETARY OF STATE FOR COMMUNITIES & LOCAL GOVERNMENT

Dear Colleague,

August 2009

Abolition of Regional Planning

Following the publication of our two recent policy papers on localism and housing (Control Shift and Strong Foundations), I have received a number of practical questions about the process for abolishing regional planning. As the issues are complex – a consequence of Labour’s convoluted legislation – I thought these would be best addressed in a letter.

Abolition of Regional Spatial Strategies

1) A Conservative Government will abolish the bureaucratic and undemocratic tier of regional planning. This will include the abolition of the Regional Spatial Strategies (RSS) and the Regional Planning Bodies, the abolition of national and regional building targets, as well as the cancellation of the Labour Government’s plans to move the regional housing and planning powers to Regional Development Agencies and Regional Leaders’ Boards.

2) We anticipate primary legislation in the first year of a Conservative Government, as part of a broader Local Government and Housing Bill. Prior to primary legislation, we will consider whether to use the executive powers of the Secretary of State to revoke the Regional Spatial Strategies in whole or in part. We will also publish our draft policy changes and legislation – as part of a necessary process of consultation required in law. This in itself will have the status of ‘emerging policy’. Hence, even before primary legislation is passed, local authorities will have the ability to put the brakes on elements of Regional Spatial Strategies which they find undesirable (for example, Green Belt reviews imposed on them by the RSS).

3) Your local authority will be able to review their Local Development Frameworks to undo unwanted planning policies which the Regional Spatial Strategies had imposed upon them. In practice, such a review would be a partial revision – changing elements which are particularly unpopular or undesirable. The Local Development Framework regime, imposed by the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, has been so time-consuming and bureaucratic that I sense that there is little desire from local government colleagues to go back to square one, and start the whole torturous process from scratch.

Saying ‘No’ to the Labour Government

4) The Government’s whole Regional Spatial Strategy process is currently in disarray. High Court challenges have successful questioned the deletion of the Green Belt in the East of England, a series of High Court proceedings are challenging the South East RSS, and Ministers have delayed the publication of the final South West RSS to pre-empt similar legal challenges.

5) I recognise that many local authorities are currently in a difficult position, with Government Offices pressuring councils into moving ahead with their Core Strategies and associated Development Plan Documents, imposing the controversial elements demanded by the Regional Spatial Strategies. There is also an implied threat of cuts to central funding if councils do not fall into line, and the veiled suggestion of developers submitting planning applications based on the RSS, prior to any local plan adoption.

6) Such hectoring has a weak basis in fact. It is worth noting that the only financial penalty that the Government has is through the Housing and Planning Delivery Grant (HPDG), which is only partly based on targets on delivering elements in the Local Development Scheme. The sums of money are relatively small and there is only one final allocation round before the general election (likely to be in November 2009, based on data collected in summer/autumn 2009).

7) After that allocation, Labour Ministers have no other tool to bully councils. Under a Conservative Government, there will not be a third round of HPDG funding, as we have pledged to replace the grant with a simpler, clearer incentive scheme to allow councils to benefit from council tax and business rate revenue growth.

8) We will not pay a penny of compensation to speculative developers as a consequence to changes in planning policy. This principle is well established: government planning policy changes frequently. Notwithstanding, we cannot reverse any individual planning application that has been granted in full following all due process and a fair hearing.

The General Election

9) There is, of course, absolutely no guarantee of the election of a Conservative Government: we still have a lot more to do to win the public’s trust and secure a firm democratic mandate. But there is an immovable date of a general election in under a year. As part of councils’ contingency planning, like any responsible business, you may wish to ask your council officers to prepare both for the continuation of current government policy (in the event of a Labour win), and for the radical change of government policy (in the event of a Conservative win).

10) The general election brings with it regulatory uncertainty. In this context, especially given the current legal challenges, we would advise councils not to rush ahead with implementing the controversial elements of Regional Spatial Strategies, expending time and taxpayers’ money that may be wasted. Ultimately, councillors should seek to serve the best interests of their residents while operating within the law, rather than jump to the latest arbitrary demands from Whitehall or the Regional Government Offices.

11) I would encourage councils to say ‘no’ when the Government attempts to force your council to act at a speed which is not a binding legal necessity. Given the likelihood of a general election by May 2009 and the prospect of ‘emerging policy’ after that, the planning process will not be sufficiently delayed in a way that would allow developers to submit speculative bids based on the current RSS.

Promoting sustainable housing

12) Such an approach should be taken in the context of the broader reforms outlined in our recent green papers to encourage more sustainable housing. These include allowing councils to keep the proceeds of council tax and business rate receipt growth from new development, the creation of new Local Housing Trusts to promote the construction of local housing for members of the local community, and freeing up more public sector brownfield land for redevelopment.

Yours ever,

P.S. Further details can be read HERE in today's Sunday Observer

By Rob Halfon ~ Working hard for Harlow, Hastingwood, Nazeing, Roydon & Sheering. http//roberthalfon.blogspot.com

Now Gordon Brown causes a collapse in housing sales in Harlow and Epping

I have found figures which show a collapse in housing sales across the Harlow and Epping Forest districts. This comes as new Government red tape will push up the cost of moving home in the middle of a recession.

Parliamentary Questions have revealed that across the country the number of housing sales in 2008 halved compared to 2006 levels. The latest national figures so far for 2009 show even sharper falls have happened this year. In Harlow there were 924 housing sales in 2008, compared to 1,929 in 2006 a fall of 52 per cent. In the neighbouring Epping Forest district - which includes the Hastingwood, Nazeing, Roydon and Sheering which forms part of the Harlow parliamentary constituency.

There were 1,410 housing sales in 2008 compared to 3,230 in 2006 - a fall of 56 per cent.Yet new Whitehall rules will make it even harder for home buyers and sellers. The Governments Land Registry is hiking fees in July to register a new home or to buy an official property search.

Ironically, the Land Registry are blaming the recession for forcing them to put up prices as housing transactions have fallen so much, cutting their income. The increases in the costs of official searches will in turn increase the cost of the already expensive Home Information Packs (HIPs). This comes as new HIP rules came into effect in April which will further hinder sellers from putting their homes onto the market.

That is why, I am glad that Conservatives are calling on Government Ministers to use their emergency powers to suspend HIPs immediately, and then abolish them. They are also calling for the stamp duty threshold for first-time buyers to be raised to 250,000, taking nine out of ten first-time buyers out of stamp duty altogether, giving an important boost to housing market.

The new figures expose how Gordon Browns recession has sent the Harlow and Epping Forest housing market into freefall. It is incredibly short-sighted for Labour Ministers to increase red tape on the housing market in the middle of a recession and make it even worse. We need action to revive the market, by reducing moving costs for home owners and giving extra help to help first-time buyers get onto the housing ladder.

By Rob Halfon ~ Working hard for Harlow, Hastingwood, Nazeing, Roydon & Sheering. http//roberthalfon.blogspot.com

A Housing Revolution

There is some good news on Housing today, as the Conservatives have unveiled a raft of revolutionary housing proposals. The main - and most far reaching -proposal is to give social housing tenants to right to move. In essence, this will mean that tenants of good standing will be able to compel their Landlord (be it council, or housing association), to sell their house and buy another property elsewhere - in the area they want to move to (providing the price is the same or less). This will have dramatic effects on social mobility, as people will be able to move to areas they want to, rather than be forced to stay in one place.

Another great aspect of the proposal is that tenants who have a good record over five years, will be able to claim for a free 10% equity in the property they live in, giving them a first step on the property ladder. The policy proposals also protect green belt land, incentivises councils to build houses where needed (with genuine local consultation) and allows village residents to establish a special local body to plan for housing needs.

These proposals are dramatic in nature and could have as much an influence as the 'Right to Buy Policy' during the 1980s. All in all,good news for tenants, home owners, and those who care about the green belt. The Guardian has a good summary of all the proposals HERE.

No wonder house purchases have dramatically fallen

I find it amazing that given the terrible state of the fragile housing market in Harlow and the surrounding villages, the Government have pressed ahead with the introduction of complex and expensive new Home Information Pack rules.

From today, extra Home Information Pack (HIP) regulations will hinder sellers from putting their homes on the market, mislead buyers and create a real danger of £200 fines from town hall officials.

The Government is even cancelling the ‘first day marketing’ provision which allowed sellers to market their home if a HIP had been ordered, but had not yet been completed.

Sellers will now have to wait even longer before they can put up a ‘For Sale’ sign. if this were not bad enough - HIPs must have a so-called ‘Property Information Questionnaire’ completed by the seller. The questionnaire is useless, as unscrupulous sellers can sidestep difficult questions that could reduce their house price by ticking a “don’t know” box.

The buyer cannot be certain that the information is reliable about such things as past dry rot or damp, insurance claims, experience of flooding, and whether past alterations had official permission. Honest sellers will also suffer, as disputes over information in Property Information Questionnaires will end up in the courts, with buyers suing sellers.

Town halls have been instructed to “identify specific cases of non-compliance and enforce the requirements” - and start fining homeowners £200 a time if they do not follow the new rules. The Government’s own research has found there is little public knowledge about, or interest in HIPs; that the industry thinks they are a waste of time; that they duplicate costs and that buyers are not bothering to consult HIPs. Ministers have emergency powers under the Housing Act to suspend HIPs, but have refused to use them.

I stongly believe that the introduction of HIPs is a disaster. They have have already damaged the market and discouraged sellers. Now Gordon Brown is making things even worse. You cannot trust the contents of a Home Information Pack, and these regulations will lead to yet more wasted time and expense.

I am glad that Tory Housing Spokesman, Grant Shapps MP has pledged that a Conservative Government will scrap Home Information Packs outright. After all, if Ministers really wanted to help homeowners, they would use their emergency powers to suspend HIPs and provide a shot in the arm to the ailing market. We should be on the side of Britain’s home owners and the many people who want to move on and up the housing ladder.

Good news on our Green belt

One of the issues that I care deeply about is preservation of our countryside and green belt.

For some reason Labour has decreed that thousands of buildings will be plastered across our countryside and green belt, without local residents having any real say. They have also put power in the hands of unelected quangos.

That is why I was delighted that in a major visit today to Harlow Constituency, Shadow Local Government Secretary Caroline Spelman MP set out Conservative plans to curtail Labour's plans to build over our Green Belt.

Visiting the Nazeing Green Belt Action Group, Mrs Spelman confirmed that:

* A Conservative Government would abolish the East of England Regional Assembly &

* Would abolish Housing targets and scrap the Government's Regional Spatial strategy.

I was honoured to welcome Caroline Spelman MP into Harlow and pleased she confirmed that local people would decide housing needs not unelected quangos or Gordon Brown!

Harlow Welfare Rights and the Judge's ruling

Its very sad that the council had been left with what the judge described as "enormous financial pressure" in the first place. As the Judge states (as quoted by the Harlow-Star):

the council had been faced with an increasingly fraught financial situation, confronted by a "perfect storm" of falling income, rising service demand and a meagre rise in Government grants".

Had not the previous Labour and Liberal Administration left the Council coffers empty, had the Government given Harlow a proper grant - only £6000, £271,000 less than the average council, had the Government not taken £13 million from Harlow housing rents every year, this difficult decision would never have been even need to be considered in the first place.

Of course I respect the ruling of the Judge and will read the full judgement.

I am sure the Council will now give further consultation to disabled and minority groups as required.

I have and will continue to urge my colleagues on the council to ensure that Harlow has good welfare advice provision.

Robert Halfon
Prospective MP for Harlow Constituency

Working Hard for Harlow, Hastingwood, Nazeing, Roydon & Sheering

Power to the People!

Time and time again local people contact me worried about the Government's plans to concrete over our green belt with thousands of extra houses.

That is why it is good news that David Cameron has announced today that the Government's housing targets will be scrapped, alongside unelected and costly Regional Assemblies like the one in the East of England (EERA).

The Conservative view is that local people should decide where extra housing goes, not faceless bureaucrats or Gordon Brown.

They have also said they will ensure that more power is given to local councils and voters will be able to call a local referendum against excessive Council Tax rises.

We will also be able to elect our own Police Commissioner so we can have some say on policing in our district.

I think that this is good news. We need more local democracy not less. Everyone has had enough of bossy government telling us what to do. Its time to put we the people back in charge of our own affairs!

For more information, please see HERE.


Rob Halfon ~ Working hard for Harlow, Hastingwood, Nazeing, Roydon & Sheering.

Concern over timescale for transport scheme

I am concerned that much-needed transport improvements in Harlow could be at least four years from even receiving the go-ahead for funding.

The East of England Regional Assembly has made what it describes as an "indicative recommendation" that a host of public transport improvements costing £8m are carried out in the town.
However its recommendation lists the potential scheme among those which could receive funding for the 2013-14 to 2016-17 period.

The improvements could include passenger transport interchanges at Harlow Mill Station, Harlow Town Station, Princess Alexandra Hospital and Harlow town centre bus station.
High quality passenger transport services from the new development areas east and north of the town are also proposed, according to the East of England Regional Assembly.

Whilst I welcome any support for vital funding of our infrastructure, we desperately need funding now. Moreover we need urgent funding for the much-needed by-pass on the M11 to relieve traffic in Harlow and the surrounding villages.

After 12 years of a Labour Government there are still no guarantees of funding for this much-needed road. We need more action on behalf of the Government and less talk.