Show navigation

council tax

should lbbd be able to raise the council tax to cover the cost of front line services all comments welcome

Comments

Showing 10 of 10
du
It must explore all alternatives like raising parking charges and selling for the true market value as much land as it can.
Can it continue to prevent expansion in Emerson park Gidea park where land is available to build housing that will bring in top band council tax.
Its better to build expensive high quality housing than cheap subsidised housing in the other parts of the borough.
By raising parking charges it will get money from people other than the council tax payers the visitors and commuters using Romford.
It can make savings by cutting down on the number of councillors and letting out some room in the town hall for conferences etc.
What is needed is an overall package openly discussed to both save money and collect more.
A ten year plan is needed.
Libraries could be given over to volunteers to keep going and the Council paper should be abandoned and a web site opened at less cost.
Perhaps we should only elect councillors who openly state they will do it on a voluntary basis as it used to be and take no salary only expenses.
This is a plan for Havering and LBBD has its own areas of saving perhaps selling off part of Central park and Barking park for housing.
Barking town hall and the Broadway would make great conference centres.
Ken R inactive
Baldersash. If you can't legitimately build affordable housing in a borough which has the lowest average income in London, which has a lack of land and thereby prevents the increase in supply then you have to reduce the demand by restricting the "immigration" into the borough otherwise the problem will be beyond management. You can hardly compare Emerson and Gidea to the Gascoigne Estate.

As for increasing parking fees; There speaks a genuine "biker". Increase in fees will accelerate the demise of the smaller businesses as it already has in some areas of the borough (Probably both Havering and LBBD). I could go on to challenge the rest of the previous points made if I thought it would have any affect/effect.
du
There is no way to reduce immigration so far as I know there is no government plan to move people to selected areas and with 500,000 Bulgarians and Romanians due next year it can only be more challenging.
Why compare Gascoigne estate with Emerson Park try the Estates around Upney lane and  the Barking park area to Emerson park .
I think there speaks a Gidea park resident.
There is no lack of land in Havering Try Tylers common or the Wingletye lane area lots of land for thousands of affordable homes.Collier row and Havering atte Bower has lots of land all open for building.
Michael Y
Ken I agree Balderdash, pie in sky, away with the fairies.
du
How can the Council equate refusing self funded projects to build housing in one area that would attract wealthy people to the borough who would spend in the community.But accept cheap housing future slums that will attract people who will require subsidy and rate payer support.
Look at the council record refusal to develop in Emerson/Gidea park but acceptance in Harold hill and Rainham.
Its not an acceptable situation and a loss to the council tax payer.
Remember who cost you money at the next election.
Ray Harris
We are all caught up in this social housing versus private house building conundrum.  I started out life as a tenant on the Gascoigne Estate, Barking, in the seventies and am now in my own home in Hornchurch (via Newham!).  I did this under my own steam, but along the way noted how the Thatcher government hoped that by selling council houses they could harness working class votes by creating working class Tories.  Buy your own council house, put a porch on the front and hey presto, you are a Tory voter!!   If instead of selling off council housing at massive discount they had given tenants financial incentives to buy their own house (and leave their council house for someone else who needed it) we would not have the paucity of social housing we now have.  Instead of people buying the houses at massive discount on behalf of their parents as an investment and selling them on after the parents had died - which is what happened - (thus creating a cheap housing market for those, including newly arriving in the country, looking for the best buys) there would have been housing available for sons and daughters of council tenants who needed it.  Those council tenants who genuinely wanted their own home and could afford to buy could have been given money towards a mortgage deposit and could have vacated property for those in need.  Instead of which the council properties were bought by discerning young people who saw it as an investment, with massive discount, to be sold on after their parents die, thus changing the whole demographic of the area and depriving those in need.  The Tories have a lot to answer for on this and whilst those who grasped the investment opportunity will feel no conscience about what they did (and why should they) the legacy that has been left is immoral!
Barry ⚒
I agree with what you say Ray but there was another side to this story, in 1975 along with family I moved from a council flat to a council house which was purchased from a private seller as were many council houses at the time, this was under Ted Heath, not sure how many were purchased in this way but it must have balanced things out a little.
Lynne T
Ray H  I could not agree with you more. Just Like to say that when I started out in life, I too rented a private flat in West London. Lucky to have cheap rent as what was called rent controlled was in place. This meant because an elderly lady had lived for a long time in the house too nobody had to pay more than she did. Not sure what that law was but it was certainly cheap. Then wanted to move with my husband back to nearer my parents so contacted a Church Housing Association who after an interview accepted us to live in a flat for 18 months contract only. We paid an extra high rent and after the time was up we were given enough money back to put a deposit on a house and thats what put us on the ladder. Why can't the councils do the same thing and keep their stock.
I don't know why but I never even thought of asking for council housing.
I always thought it was for very poor people who couldn't work and needed a roof over their head. My parents always rented for most of their life and only after their house was bought from the landlord by the council under Slum Clearance did they get given a council house in East Ham. It was like a palace compared to where they had been living. So much for my ideas on council houses. Eventually they did buy a house though.
Ken R inactive
Add to the above, well made points and facts, the following and it just about covers all the issues relating to housing. First reduce the housing stock by selling off property at a hugely discounted rate ( LBBD was one of only three London Boroughs without a cap on discount). Do this in an area where average property prices are lower ( LBBD property is one of the lowest in London) and then get many Inner London boroughs to pay five figure sums to some tenants to vacate their property. Mix all three issues together and........... I leave you to arrive at the conclusion. ?
Michael Y
What you said about people who buy council houses voting tory is true in at least some cases Ray H, I know a guy who was on benefits, to buy his four bed council house he had to get a job (so he could get a mortgage} .
The council house he purchased was in a very good part of SW London,but needed work done on it,this was at the time when you could get grants for a new roof,loft insulation ect ect.
He claimed every grant possible got his house in pristine condition and sold it as soon as he could making a nice big profit.
As soon as he sold his ex council house with the profit bought smaller house with not much of a mortgage,then he went back on benefits.
Twenty years later and still on benefits the house is worth a small fortune,now every time I see him he tells me what a wonderful woman Mrs Thatcher is and that without the right to buy policy of hers he would still be a council tenant,

Comments are closed. Why not start a new conversation?