| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
246 local authorities have used, or are expected to use, one or more of the three options for additional investment (ALMO, LSVT or PFI). A list of these authorities has been placed in the Library of the House.
There are a number of authorities which are reconsidering their investment options, following the need to change their original plans. These authorities have yet to confirm whether they will deliver decent homes without using additional investment.
Mr. Rogerson: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government pursuant to the answer of 22 May 2006, Official Report, column 1394W, on housing, what the timetable is for further bidding rounds for the investment options mentioned; and how much additional funding will be made available from central Government for each option. [79412]
Yvette Cooper: Applications for the round 6 arm’s length management organisation (ALMO) programme, and the 2006 large-scale voluntary transfer programme (LSVT) are due by the end of July. We aim to announce the outcome at the end of September. The funding available to deliver these options will be determined through the comprehensive spending review.
The application period for the round 5 housing PFI programme closed on 31 March, 14 bids where received. We aim to announce the outcome of the PFI bidding round by the end of July. The funding for these schemes will come from the £1.2 billion allocated in the 2004 spending review. Funding for future bidding rounds will depend on the outcome of the CSR.
Mr.
Kemp: To ask the Secretary of State for
Communities and Local Government (1) if she will ask the Housing
Corporation to increase its allocation under the National Affordable
Housing Programme
2006-08 to the bid submitted by Housing 21 in partnership with
Sunderland city council to fund developments across the city of
Sunderland;
[79507]
(2) what criteria the Housing Corporation took into account when deciding the size of the allocation under the National Affordable Housing Programme 2006-08 scheme to the bid submitted by Housing 21 in partnership with Sunderland city council to fund developments across the city of Sunderland; [79508]
(3) if she will ask the Housing Corporation to publish in advance the guidance it will follow in future decisions under the National Affordable Housing Programme on allocation of finances to local projects, with particular reference to extra care developments; [79509]
(4) what factors the Housing Corporation took into account when deciding not to allocate finance for plans by the Sunderland housing group for an extra care scheme at Houghton under the National Affordable Housing Programme 2006-08; [79510]
(5) what assessment she has made of the adequacyof the allocation of resources to the bid by Housing21 in partnership with Sunderland city council from the National Affordable Housing Programme 2006-08. [79511]
Yvette Cooper: The Housing Corporation’s Affordable Housing Programme (AHP) is a competitive bidding round.
In assessing bids the Corporation used a two stage process for the 2006-08 AHP round. Bids were assessed for compliance with the competition requirements as follows:
(i) Additionality—grant must be necessary for the affordable housing to be delivered;
(ii) Rent levels in accordance with Corporation or statutory rent regimes to ensure affordability;
(iii) Schemes must be financially independent;
(iv) Schemes must meet or exceed the minimum standards covering design and quality (expressed through the Corporation’s Scheme Development Standards, Housing Quality Indicator system, and a Very Good EcoHomes rating);
(v) Schemes must start on site by 31 March 2008;
(vi) Schemes must complete before 31 March 2011;
(vii) Schemes must conform to the relevant regional housing board priorities;
(viii) Schemes must meet management and maintenance standards (for housing associations schemes must comply with all of the Corporation’s regulatory requirements in relation to the management and maintenance of affordable homes);
(ix) Bidders must have the capacity to enter into a programme agreement.
Bids which met these competition requirements were then subject to competitive assessment using four criteria:
Value-for-money;
Quality;
Fit with regional and local housing strategies;
Deliverability within the programme time scale.
The Housing
Corporation assessed that the bids from Housing 21 and the extra care
scheme at
Houghton submitted by the Sunderland housing group did not represent
value for money compared to other bids
received.
The Housing Corporation is continuing to work with registered social landlords and Sunderland city council over future housing needs in the city.
The Housing Corporation intends to publish it’s prospectus for the next bidding round in summer 2007. This will set out the general criteria including that for extra care schemes.
Andrew Stunell: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government (1) how many cases have been decided by local authorities under section 185(4) of the Housing Act 1996 where the outcome has proved incompatible with article 14 of the European convention on human rights, where all proceedings are complete; and if she will make a statement; [79526]
(2) how many representations she has received in respect of the decision of the Court of Appeal that section 185(4) of the Housing Act 1996 is incompatible with article 14 of the European convention on human rights; what plans she has to rectify the situation; and if she will make a statement. [79527]
Yvette Cooper: Two declarations of incompatibility have been made regarding section 185(4) of the Housing Act 1996; one by the Court of Appeal in the case of Sylviane Pierrette Morris v. Westminster city council [2005] EWHC 1184 (CA), and another bythe High Court in the case of the Queen (on the application of) Gabaj and the First Secretary of State, CO 7458/2005. In both cases, the court proceedings are complete. The Government are currently considering how to remedy the incompatibility. The Department has received one representation about the decision of the Court of Appeal (from the Housing Law Practitioners Association).
Housing (Wirral)
Stephen Hesford: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what progress has been made towards the decent home standards for social housing in Wirral West; and if she will make a statement. [78384]
Yvette Cooper: According to Annual Regulatory Statistical Return (RSR) 2005, the total social housing stock in Wirral was 23,235 of these 8,815 or 38 per cent. failed the Decent Homes Standard. Of the former council stock now owned by Wirral Partnership Homes, 59 per cent. of homes failed the standard.
Wirral Partnership Homes has started its stock investment programme and is confident that it will meet the Decent Homes Standard by 2010. Many associated benefits will flow from this work including regeneration, improved housing management performance and tenant empowerment.
We do not hold any specific data for Wirral West, data is recorded at local authority level.
Housing (Luton)
Margaret Moran: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government how many single vulnerable households were accepted as homeless in Luton in each of the last five years. [80365]
Yvette Cooper: Statistical returns on homelessness reported by local authorities to this Department distinguish the number of households accepted as eligible for assistance, and unintentionally homeless according to the main category of priority need the applicant falls within. The returns do not identify the number of people in the household. Information reported by Luton borough council in each year since 2001-02 is summarised as follows:
| Households accepted by Luton borough council as eligible for assistance, unintentionally homeless and in a priority need category | ||||
| Of which: | ||||
| Total households | containing dependent children | containing an expectant mother | All other accepted households( 1) | |
| (1)
As well as applicants, or members of their household, accepted as
vulnerable for some reason, figures also include applicants accepted as
having a priority need because they were homeless as the result of an
emergency, they were aged 16 or 17-years-old, or they were under 21 and
had previously been looked after, accommodated or fostered when aged 16
or
17. Source: DCLG P1E Homelessness returns (quarterly) | ||||
Margaret Moran: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what proportion of (a) black and ethnic minority and (b) all households are classified as overcrowded in (a) Luton, (b) Bedfordshire and (c) England. [80370]
Yvette Cooper: Using the bedroom standard, the estimated proportion of black and minority ethnic households in England that were overcrowded during the three years 2002-03 to 2004/05 was 10.7 per cent. The equivalent figure for all households was 2.5 per cent.
These figures were derived from the Survey of English Housing. Reliable figures for areas as small as Luton and Bedfordshire are not available on a regular basis because the survey sample sizes are too small.
An ad hoc report based on combined data from both the Survey of English Housing and the Department for Work and Pension's Family Resources Survey for the three years 2000-01, 2001-02 and 2002-03 provides estimates of overcrowding (across all households) of4 per cent. in Luton and 1 per cent. in Bedfordshire. Separate estimates for black and minority ethnic households are not available.
Margaret Moran: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what (a) failed and (b) successful bids have been made by Luton council for Housing Corporation funding; and what assessment she has made of the reasons for the decision in each case. [80517]
Yvette Cooper: No bids were made by Luton borough council for the Housing Corporation’s Affordable Housing Programme (AHP) 2006-08. All bids for the Luton borough council area were made by registered social landlords and other developers. Successful schemes in Luton were allocated a total of £7.5 million for the 2006-08 AHP.
The Secretary of State does not make decisions on individual schemes. An overall package of funding and outputs is submitted to Ministers by the Corporation. The schemes making up this programme have been assessed by the Housing Corporation as part of a competitive bidding round.
In assessing bids the Corporation used a two stage process for the 2006-08 AHP round. Bids were assessed for compliance with the competition requirements as follows:
(i) Additionality—Grant must be necessary for the affordable housing to be delivered;
(ii) Rent levels in accordance with Corporation or statutory rent regimes to ensure affordability;
(iii) Schemes must be financially independent;
(iv) Schemes must meet or exceed the minimum standards covering design and quality (expressed through the Corporation’s Scheme Development Standards, Housing Quality Indicator system, and a Very Good EcoHomes rating);
(v) Scheme must start on site by 31 March 2008;
(vi) Schemes must complete before 31 March 2011;
(vii) Scheme must conform to the relevant regional housing board priorities;
(viii) Schemes must meet management and maintenance Standards (for Housing Associations schemes must comply with all of the Corporation’s regulatory requirements in relation to the management and maintenance of affordable homes);
(ix) Bidders must have the capacity to enter into a programme agreement.
Bids which met these competition requirements were then subject to competitive assessment using four criteria:
Value-for-money;
Quality;
Fit with Regional and Local housing strategies;
Deliverability within the programme time scale.
Margaret Moran: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government if she will list the bids for Housing Corporation funding submitted by Luton council in each of the last five years for (a) general family housing and (b) elderly housing. [80518]
Yvette Cooper: No bids were made by Luton borough council for the Housing Corporation’s Affordable Housing Programme (AHP) 2005-06 or 2006-08 these being the first opportunities for local authorities to bid for Housing Corporation funding after the change in legislation following the Housing Act 2004 which allowed bodies not registered with the Housing Corporation to bid for funding.
All bids for the Luton borough council area were made by registered social landlords and other developers. The following tables show accepted new build bids for Housing Corporation Affordable Housing Programme funds over the last five years and for the last bidding round of 2006-08. The tables identify which client group these schemes have been primarily identified for. To be successful bids needed to meet the criteria set out in the answer given on 3 July 2006 to my hon. Friend’s question 80517, in particular meeting Regional Housing Board priorities.
| 2001-02 | ||||||
| RSL name | Programme | Heading | Scheme | Units | £ | Client group |
| 2002-03 | ||||||
| RSL name | Programme | Heading | Scheme | Units | £ | Client group |
| 2003-04 | ||||||
| RSL name | Programme | Heading | Scheme | Units | £ | Client group |
| 2004-06 | ||||||
| RSL name | Programme | Heading | Scheme | Units | £ | Client group |
| 2006-08 | ||||||
| RSL name | Programme | Heading | Scheme | Units | £ | Client group |
These tables do not include schemes funded foropen market Homebuy, Voluntary Purchase Grant, re-improvements or works to registered social landlord stock.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |