The only people who will lose out on , in the long term,again are the people of Northamptonshire and their children.How can NCC announce the sale of the land if contracts aren't exchanged with Barratts for the deal then to fall through? What has happened? The so called Credit Crunch is not a legal reason for completion of the transaction not to happen. The Councillor responsible (if you can find one of course but there's one obvious candidate) for this transaction should resign!

This land was in public ownership, it is usually all too easy to lose it for ever in the dash for quick cash and more houses. Now we have this merciful credit crunch to bring a more realistic outlook to life, why not investigate partnerships where the land is released cheaply (or even free) to developers who will provide much-needed sports facilities for the community? They'd bite on it if the price was right. Forget the "cash cow" argument, think instead of comminuty enrichment. If the partnership is properly set up, the council, the community, and the private developer could all win from it. Sell (or long-lease) some parcels of OUR land so we can see some benefit. This will allow a realistic pricing structure for the facilities which would then encourage customer use. Steve Riches.

The Barratts deal with Northants County Council for the PFI sale of school fields has collapsed!!
There is a lesson here for NBC and their crazy PFI scheme for some of our council housing.

Northampton Defend Council Housing holds the position and calls for:

An immediate moratorium on expensive stock options appraisals and further stock transfers, PFI, ALMOs and asset stripping council land or property until the outcome of the Review of Council Housing Finance is known, The Review is expected to report to Minsters in Spring 2009

Press Statement from ‘Save Our Services’ Northamptonshire

Northants County Council’s incompetence and the Private Finance Initiative (PFI) scam
- Exposed by collapse of school sites agreement

The collapse of the agreement with Barratt Homes to purchase 18 school sites and playing fields from Northants County Council has thrown into sharp relief both the economic madness of the financial scams known as PFI deals as well as the utter political incompetence of our local councillors from all parties who supported this method of financing new schools.

This deal, so praised by these same councillors, guarantees the PFI speculators high profits over thirty-two years while at the same time charges us, the public, £865 million for capital projects costing only £235 million. The anticipated payment by Barratts of £95 million for the so called ‘surplus’ school sites and playing fields was due to have part funded this nonsense but payments were not guaranteed however - due to further NCC failures. Now that the developer has pulled out of the deal a gaping hole will appear in the Council’s finances, threatening the public with either massive cuts in council services or tax hikes to pay for this fiasco.

The press statement from the NCC mentions none of the above and blatantly misrepresents the truth in an attempt to cover up this scandal. Written in a way that reveals councillors’ concerns to protect this PFI scheme the statement pretends the agreement was ended by negotiation whilst Councillor Jean Kirkbride argues that the PFI scheme is safe and argues, unbelievably and taking us all for fools, that there will be no extra costs to the taxpayer. Also in the same statement an Asset Manager, in words that would make a cat laugh, pretends that alternative purchasers of the school fields are queuing up to make offers and to build on these sites. All of this of course is utter nonsense and fanciful make believe. Let’s be quite clear, building land prices have gone

All of this of course is utter nonsense and fanciful make believe. Let’s be quite clear, building land prices have gone through the floor and the NCC will never get the same price it should have guaranteed (if they weren’t so incompetent) from Barratts. Meanwhile the anticipated receipts of £95 million from Barratt Homes will now have to be found from elsewhere, as they’ve been included in the costing payments (this time guaranteed) to the PFI speculators over 32 years.

All councillors from New Labour, the Conservative Party and the Lib Dems have throughout this PFI affair acted like snake oil salesmen selling dodgy cures. They now carry the responsibility for this appalling state of affairs because of their belief that privatisation of services through PFI would work and they all voted for this PFI scam knowing it would lead to the sale and loss of school playing fields and massive over the top payments to private companies. We now have a privatised, grossly expensive education infrastrucure where private companies now control our schools for 32 years and rip us off at every turn through inflated maintenance costs, extortionate management salaries, company profits and rising hire charges for community use of facilities. All of this when the money could have been better spent on improving education, not lining profiteers pockets.

The NCC and councillors’ incompetence in even thinking this PFI scheme might be a good thing and offer value for money calls into doubt their judgement and political understanding. They and the project have already cost us all a fortune in financial terms as well as in lost playing fields and open spaces, and now they look set to make us to bale out this fiasco.

This whole PFI scheme should be scrapped and the responsible councillors removed from office.

For further information contact: ‘Save Our Services’ 01604 752588. or email davegreen@nhampton.fsnet.co.uk

For Bacon Butty
The proposed PFI scheme set out within this Expression of Interest is an HRA scheme focused on the replacement and refurbishment of council-owned stock on four estates in an area defined as Northampton East.
It contains the demolition of 172 Bungalows
ntactnorman@gmail.com

The money raised from the sale of these old school sites was to be used to pay the contractors, Galiford Try, who have rebuilt Northampton 's schools. If the good people of Northamptonshire are wondering about who will pay for this now? It will be the council tax payer. The government have already paid the county council credits for the rebuild with the proviso that the sale of the school sites will provide the rest. It wasn't that long ago the council announced that they were short of a few million in their budget. Now they are going to be short of a few more. What have we gained from all this redevelopment. School buildings which have been jerry built and will not last as long as the previous buildings. One of them looks like a prison another a factory. I hope the county council are feeling pleased with themselves.

Blame it all on the credit crunch!!!!!!

from Inside Housing today
A London council has launched an investigation into how it manages asbestos risk, following complaints during a refurbishment project.


The £1 million project at the Central Hill estate began last year, but workers were unaware there was asbestos in the 200 flats because Lambeth Council did not have an accurate record of where the substance was present in its 33,000 homes.

The council called in safety experts after complaints from residents who were aware that there was asbestos in certain areas. Specialist equipment was used eventually used to complete the work.

A cross-party group of councillors, dubbed the Asbestos Commission, will investigate how the council monitors asbestos risk and met for the first time last week.

The group is expected to report its findings early next year.

A spokesperson for Lambeth’s new arm’s-length management organisation, Lambeth Living, which manages the flats, said it welcomed the investigation as a way of engaging with tenants and improving practice.

‘We already follow all health and safety legal guidelines and have effective procedures and practices for dealing with asbestos,’ she said. ‘Ultimately we hope this commission will help reassure residents that our procedures and practices around asbestos are safe and effective.’


Readers' comments (1)
Norman Adams |Fri, 7 Nov 2008

Question to readers – is cloned data safe, and should it be used? In Northampton I have been given conflicting positions on this matter 1) "All communal areas within the PFI area have been subject to a type 2 asbestos survey, and 80% of the properties are represented by cloned asbestos surveys based on variants within the stock condition survey. The remainder are a priority within the 2008-9 asbestos-survey programme." 2) “The variant classification does not mean they are a building type, nor necessarily very similar in terms of the building materials in them. It cannot be assumed that in terms of asbesto

Question to readers – is cloned data safe, and should it be used?

In Northampton I have been given conflicting positions on this matter

1)
"All communal areas within the PFI area have been subject to a type 2 asbestos survey, and 80% of the properties are represented by cloned asbestos surveys based on variants within the stock condition survey. The remainder are a priority within the 2008-9 asbestos-survey programme."
2)
“The variant classification does not mean they are a building type, nor necessarily very similar in terms of the building materials in them. It cannot be assumed that in terms of asbestos they have any similarity at all."

Anyone with information on this issue or views please send to ntacnorman@gmail.com