
I am deeply concerned about any suspension of the HMR Transitional Fund that may occur with any legal challenge to the way the fund is being spent.
In Woodnook last May, the new Labour Council scrapped the demolition programme of the outgoing Conservatives and began a programme of refurbishment turning some 100 unwanted and mostly empty properties into 70 modern, larger, desirable properties.That £7m scheme would be in jeopardy without HMR TR which is required to fund the purchase of the remaining properties.
The criticism by the Empty Homes Agency is around demolitions. In Hyndburn there will be no demolitions.
As a board member of the EHA I have to say that I do not recognise the wholesale criticism of the HMR programme or the reasons given in the opposition to demolition. Housing minister Grant Shapps has also made unfounded adverse comments about HMR that diversified from reality from the very first word.
This weeks summary document form the 12 pathfinder chairs offers a balanced review of the programme and should be obligatory reading if lessons are to be learned.
Like many HMR areas there are more houses than people. Critics have failed to recognise this point and subsequently are unable to determine a satisfactory outcome.
At
the end of the HMR programme empty rows were left with residual residents for whom this 'winding up the scheme' fund
was clearly targeted on trapped residents based on occupancy rates of 50% or 10%. That those people
should be helped.
The Housing Ministers offer of an exit fund included no indication of, and neither should there have
been, a top down prescription for the future of those empty terraces once trapped residents had been relieved. Demolition was always an option and should have been an option. Criticism of demolition fails to recognise the facts on the ground. Local authorities should be able to exercise localism on the
future of these empty rows of properties.
It is simply a vain argument to say there are 750,000 empty properties and housing shortage crises. Conflating low demand in HMR areas with waiting lists in other parts
of the country where excessive demand does exist, shows a complete misunderstanding of the
issue in areas where there are more properties than people and further, where housing
choice is limited by mono-type.
I would urge critics to come to Hyndburn and review the consequences
of these dislocated arguments. Schemes such
as the one in Hyndburn seek to attain the governments preferred aspiration of refurbishment.