Motion on Housing

At tomorrow’s Council meeting Susan Wise and Robin Cross are proposing the following motion:

“That this council notes that in 2007 nearly 20,000 households were on Lewisham’s housing register and that 3332 families were living in overcrowded accommodation in the borough, as of 31 January 2008; recognises the devastating impact that poor housing conditions can have on an individual’s health and ability to succeed at school or in the job market; welcomes the importance attached to providing affordable housing in Lewisham’s sustainable community strategy and the draft local area agreement; calls upon the Mayor to propose a 50% affordable housing target for new development in the council’s emerging planning policies as well as a 35% target for affordable family homes (3 bed or larger) as per the London Housing Federation’s “Think Big” report.”


About Andrew Brown

I live in Lewisham, South East London, and spent 9 years as a Labour councillor in the borough between 1997 and 2006.
This entry was posted in Lewisham, Lewisham's Politicians and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to Motion on Housing

  1. Lone Ranger says:

    Not one to stir things up but does this indicate a split between The Mayor and his cabinet member for housing?

    Didn’t the Mayor of Lewisham recently tell the former Mayor of London a target of 50% was not appropriate for Lewisham and he was sticking with 35%?

    If the Mayor doesn’t accept 50% is Cllr Wise going to do honourable thing and resign, she wouldn’t be fool enough to propose this motion without consulting her employee first?

    I see the council’s waiting list (Housing Register) has increased from 9,774 in 2000 to
    19,850 last year. Also the numbers of homeless people has also increased significantly in recent years.

  2. Andrew Brown says:

    We’ll have to see how Steve responds tomorrow! But I suspect he’ll be well disposed to the motion.

  3. Max says:

    Is this an insider information or are we still in time to place bets?

  4. Kate says:

    recognises the devastating impact that poor housing conditions can have on an individual’s health and ability to succeed at school or in the job market

    My two younger children have missed over half of the school time avaialable this year so far. Everyone from doctors to teachers to the education welfrare officer have acknowledged that how we are living has made this the case. This then causes the problem that i have been unable to study or gain employment because i am constantly looking after sick children.
    It will be interesting to see how this goes.

  5. ross says:

    lets be clear also that even though lewisham currently has a 35% affordable home policy they are way off even complying with this, ranking the 7th worst borough in london in the latest london monitoring report, delivering only 22% over the latest 3 year monitoring period

    so the policy (whether it’s 50% or 35%) in itself doesn’t really mean anything (which was why i wasn’t taken in by sian berry’s mayoral manifesto pledge to raise the london policy from 50% to 60% – a more stringent enforcement of the existing policy would deliver more real & tangible benefits than playing around with headline policy targets will, however we all know how much our politicos are addicted to headline grabbing soundbites which can be safely discarded/diluted when it’s time to get down to business

  6. rp says:

    its a token gesture, no more, no less, but as such, in this respect, it’s utterly disgraceful.

  7. Lone Ranger says:

    Maybe the motion should be moved and seconded by Cllr Wise like this….

  8. Brian Robson says:

    The 50% target passed (almost) unanimously – but I’m not totally convinced by the way the Council’s proposing to achieve it – it’s at least partly by reducing the total number of homes (the new target for affordable housing is actually only 44% of the old target agreed in April this year for homes of all types)
    I’ve tried to explain this here:


  9. ross says:

    i hate to say this, but i think boris’s position on affordable home provision is actually more robust than the % targets, as i understand it he wanted to set absolute targets for affordable provision rather than % targets, from when i last looked the net position of both ken’s (so far unachievable) 50% target and boris’s 50,000 affordable homes were pretty much the same in actual number of affordable homes based on current estimates for the next 3 years, however the differences being that with an absolute target it’s harder to trick compliance with it like the reduction in total provision that you refer to above

    an absolute target also decouples the provision of affordable housing from the state of the general property market (people still need homes regardless of the state of the market), as 50% of next to no homes built during a downturn doesn’t help anyone out, apart from the great & good of the council & the mayor of london who can claim compliance with a policy even though it doesn’t deliver according to need

    not saying i don’t doubt that, like his predecessor, boris will fail to deliver on this pledge, or will loosen the definition of affordable to make it meaningless, but as a method for ensuring needs are met, absolute targets seem to be a more sensible approach in doing just that

    (i know the nu labour hacks will shudder at the prospect of decoupling anything from market forces)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s