Memorandum submitted by Cllr Steve Radford,
Leader Liberal party Group Member of the Liverpool Housing Scrutiny
Committee
May I express our thanks for your recent report
and investigations into the Pathfinder project.
I would like you to explore the following key
concerns that have troubled myself and others in Liverpool, which
are in our view, dysfunctional impacts of the way pathfinder is
being rolled out in Liverpool:
The demolitions are reducing the supply of affordable
housing and pushing thousands onto the waiting lists for public
authorities. In liverpool I believe our property pool lists has
grown from 7,500 to 18,500 in thre years. By the rules of market
supply and demand pathfinder, better to be named housecrusher,
reduces the supply of homes and increases demand. The conclusion
must be rising prices. however in a low wage economy like Merseyside
this puts houses out of the reach of many local residents.
In the demolitions areas with an average wage
of £10,000 how many people can afford the new homes at £120,000.
The real problems of the area are a reflection of a low wage economy
not a reflection of the Housing Stock. Demolishing the housing
of the poor does not remove poverty.
Housecrusher is penalising the working class
owner occupiers, who after being forced out by blight, and few
of CPO are often £30,000-35,000 worse off after being moved
into like houses in neighbouring areas.
As a member of the housing committee I have
been led to believe the current three year programme of demolitions
will add 3000 people to be displaced into other social housing.
The unique level of 9% city wide vacancies is
not being assisted by pathfinder but aggravated by pathfinder.
The blighting of areas targeted for demolition creates an area
of long term vacants which them immediately deflates normal market
interest in adjoining streets in densely populated working class
terraced districts.
As a consequence of population decline with
clearance community facilities are undermined. school rolls drop
and mergers are forced, local small businesses go bust.
To use the phrase is "the medicine worse
than the illness its supposed to cure"?
All my efforts to encourage alternative programmes
in renovation as a cheaper and less divisive policy approach appear
to have fallen on deaf ears.
Lastly I would challenge the genuine nature
of the consultations in Liverpool.
To use an example Prescot Road and Prescot Drive,
Fairfield,previously in my ward, where targeted for decanting.
At no time were we as ward councillors or local residents immediately
effected consulted over the decanting policy. This programme became
self evident by its destructive influence, the housing associations
and council then discovered they had insufficient monies to progress
this area which was by now utterly blighted.
I appreciate your report is not just focussed
on Liverpool, however I as a tax payer find it unbelievable that
so much money is being poured into destroying houses and communities.
In particular when six out of seven of these houses are structurally
sound according to evidence given at recent Inquiries.
If Liverpool Pathfinder and City Council do
not readjust their policies of whole scale demolition and instead
cater for the needs of a low paid economy where people should
be able to afford to remain in their communities, then I urge
that the moneys given to Liverpool New Heartlands should be dramatically
reduced.
The only clear beneficiaries now are the four
national house builders who have an effective monopoly over their
sector of the inner city for the purchase development of significant
land sites, this restrictive practice being at the exclusion of
local building companies.
19 November 2007
| 
