“Yes well done Paul. Everything you say is backed up by the written word, as always. Defend Council Housing have approached NPT CBC asking for a meeting between themselves and the WHQS team within NPT CBC who work with the Tenant Advisers but they will not respond to the request. Letters have been sent to this newspaper by the NO campaign which sadly never make it on to the pages. The whole issue is one sided and until there is honesty and the reasons given why NPT CBC are so desperate to get rid of this housing stock as quickly as possible before legislation changes, perhaps in favour of council housing, then we will not get the truth. Is there more to this than meets the eye apart from a desperation to borrow money against the collateral of 9000 plus houses and ultimately put those tenants homes at far more risk than staying with the council would mean?”

“Well said Paul! I think you should have been an independent tenants adviser...it would have cost so much less than the present crew and also the tenants would have been given a great deal more to think about rather than an empty promise of anew bathroom.
David”

“As well as the first two comments here made by 'GT' and 'Paul Johnson' of Port Talbot there has recently been three letters published in the Post refering to the proposed transfer of council housing stock in Neath Port Talbot (Post, October 29 and 30), all of which have a common thread - and that is they all dismiss the Defend Council Housing campaign as inaccurate and irrelevant, therefore encouring tenants not to listen those who are putting the case against stock transfer. This type of behaviour I believe is mendacious or is at least a gross ignorance on their part.

It is only fair tenants are made aware of the case against stock transfer before they are asked to make such a historic decission on the future of their homes. However, it would seem there are some who would prefer tenants are denied this information, and thus a fair and balanced debate.

In all the years I have been involved with Defend Council Housing I have noticed the only tenants who have been in favour of stock transfer are those who have based their opinions only on the subjective one sided propaganda put out by those promoting stock transfer, rather than listening objectively to both those promoting stock transfer and the evidence accumilated by the House of Commons Council Housing Group, DCH, the trade unions, etc. It is therefore little wonder these minority of tenants form the opinions they do, after all they are, in effect, only listening to the prosecutions case and not the defence before making a judgment.

Not only that but it is disengenious for Neath Port Talbot Cabinet Member for Housing, Councillor Peter Rees, to insists the money to improve housing stock would not be available should tenants vote against the transfer (Post October 22). Homes will have to be brought up to the Welsh Housing Quality Standard even if tenants vote against the transfer. His other claim that rents could double trebble if tenants voted no is outright bullying in my opinion, and has since been refuted by both the Deputy Minister for Housing at the Assembly, Jocelyn Davies, and South West Wales AM, Peter Black, as totally unrealistic!

There is a strong argument that tenants should have a 'level playing field' with regard to standards and services whoever they choose for their landlord. The House of Commons Council Housing Group have been making this case for some years, along with the Defend Council Housing campaign, trade unions and three consecutive votes at Labour conferences. And, collectively, we are now winning that argument.

Throughout the UK tenants determined opposition to stock transfer privatisation, and the financial crisis hitting housing, have forced government to change policy. The case for council housing is at last being heard. Government on 21 July 09 published proposals to reform council housing finance and address the funding injustices which have caused disrepair and misery for many tenants, and driven controversial privatisation.

Ministers promised the Review of Council Housing Finance will "ensure that we have a sustainable, long term system for financing council housing" and the government has now produced concrete proposals as a result of the review. But, most importantly, it should be noted the consultation document explicitly promises "a level playing field between transfer and retention".

The question tenants need to asking is why Neath Port Talbot Council are ignoring these facts and pressing ahead with the proposed stock transfer ballot. I suggest the answer can be found in the House of Commons Council Housing Group's latest report, 'Council Housing: Time to Invest', which states: "The demand for privatisation through stock transfer, PFI, ALMO or Local Housing Companies is driven by government, private landlords and developers including RSLs, and other would-be beneficiaries. Many have massive financial interests and much to gain materially or professionally by driving through privatisation with hard se”

“The House Of Commons Report referred to by Paul Lynch is an all party report.
It is a very timely document and has come out at a most appropriate time for NPT tenants.
The MPs led by Austin Mitchell MP took evidence from numerous sources including tenants,tenant groups, academics, Local Authority , Housing officers and trade unionists etc.
On page 55 it states 'Stock transfer is privatisation'. That is about a clear staement asit comes.But why is this never mentioned in any of the literature sent out by the council or its consultants.
The consultants say that we should not listen to 'rumours' but this authoritative report is surely more than a rumour.
I think the New Labour controlled council is so keen to off load the housing that it has ignored privatisation and several other key issues for tenants such as the financial viability of privatised Housing Associations,many of which have been severely hit by the financial crisis that has hit property prices and registered social landlords during the past 2 years.
Can we trust the council and its consultants to give us the facts? I have to agree with Paul Lynch and the Defend Council Housing Camapaign. Vote NO for housing security and against privatisation!
David”

“Spare a thought for the poor employees of NPT Building Services and Management who will be told to transfer to NPT Homes or become redundant. While they will keep the same pay and conditions under TUPE, I am baffled after reading an independant staff newsletter published in August 09 that says NPT homes will apply for it's company to be admitted into the Local Government Pension Scheme. How can this be? Surely they will become private employees, and any future pensions should come from NPT Homes and not the taxpayer. Looks like the council is trying to decieve it's workforce as well.”

“By the way, the so-called Independent Tenants Advisor, Patrick Harkness, is not from Neath Port Talbot either!

Nor is he in any way independent. He is in fact the Managing Director of Dome Consultants (see:Tact@Dome), an orginisation NPT council are paying crazy amounts of taxpayers money to to promote the privatisation of NPT council housing stock.

But even more interesting is the fact that he is also a Director of Somer Housing Group, i.e. a RSL involved with taking over and merging smaller RSL's (just like NPT Homes perhaps...) and who have set up a related profit-making company, SOMACO Ltd, so that as well as managing the homes of transferred tenants it could also develop "new and diverse activities including shortlife leasing; market and sub market renting; care services and repairs contracting."”

“Linda Ware, we both know that I have disagreed with you on a number of issues via this website. This time I fully support your views. It is a disgrace that a Labour controlled authority is even thinking about getting rid of their responsibilities re Social Housing. If you live in Council owned social housing then you have the unique position of being able to elect your landlord. They are accountable to the public and should stay that way. People need to know that once a transfer has taken place there is no going back. Even if the new Housing Mutual proves to be an absolute disaster there is no mechanism for a return to Council ownership. What will happen is that a predatory private landlord will snatch the stock, rents will increase, evictions will increase and be in no doubt poor maintenace will follow. To those who think that only council tennants should have a say in this they must remember that every one of us may at some time in our lives need to be housed by the council. I don't live in a council property at the moment but I was born in one. My children may choose to live in one. We are all rate payers and this is such a big decision we should be listened to. If a transfer goes ahead following the ballot just remember that when you run into your local councillor in your village don't bother letting him/her know about some problem you may be having with your council house cos it won't be his/her problem anymore. They would have washed their hands on you. Think hard before you vote because you are voting on the future. Just remember to vote no. The vote in Merthyr was won by the yes supporters by the slimest of margins. If you have any doubt then vote NO. We elect our council for them to carry out certain functions not to pass them on when the going gets tough. Direct investment with public money is the only logical way of providing for social housing. Don't let Neath PT Council get away with this.”

“GT, none of the information I have provided in this article is mis-leading or factually incorrect, as you claim. Each of my statments can be found in the House of Commons Council Housing Group report, called "Council Housing: Time to Invest". I suggest you Google it and read it for yourself so you can see whithout doubt that stock transfer is indeed privatisation.

Also, the statment: "The promise of capital grants in excess of £6 billion to meet the backlog of outstanding work offers real hope to those areas where tenants have refused to be blackmailed into transfer," can be found on page 8, fourth paragraph.

"It is time to end the privatisation of council housing, and the blackmail and bullying of tenants," can be found in the last paragraph on page 4.

"the Government had now produced concrete proposals for a sustainable, long-term system for financing council housing", can be found in the second paragraph, page 8.

"councils had crazy amounts of money to promote privatisation, yet there was no budget to ensure tenants heard both sides of the argument." is in the seventh paragraph, page 49.

And, as for a "fair and balanced debate" there's a whole chapter on this issue which starts on page 49 and ends on page 54.

Definately worth reading!

Hope this clears things up for you...”

“I think one of the most misleading facts given by Neath Port Talbot council is they claim virtually all council run homes in the area are below the Welsh Housing Quality Standards (Issue 1 of transfer letter states 9324 homes fall below the standard - who did this survey?), and they would all be updated by 2012 if transferred to NPT Homes. My dad lives in a council house and he asked me to investigate further as he was confused by that claim. The WHQS (available online and I recommend tenants to read it before making up their minds)sets out the MINIMUM standard required for all council homes by 2012. In my opinion (I work in the construction industry) my father's house would pass WHQS, and therefore would not require immediate work to be carried out. I also suspect that would be the case for a few more tenants hoping for new kitchens/bathrooms! It is shameful that NPT are making these claims and are using bullyboy tactics. As for cllr Rees, isn't he on the shadow board for NPT Homes?”

“To answer GT, Port Talbot. I am a council tenant of NPT CBC and a supporter of the NO vote and as such a member of the Defend Council Housing group. I have spoken out and in fact I wrote a letter to this very paper last week which has not been printed. I also attended one of the theme group meetings at the Aberavon Beach Hotel a few months ago where I was verbally attacked by members of the Tenants Representative Panel within the meeting and called a liar in public which I am not. I complained as was my right to this body and received a missive from the Chair of the Tenants Representative Panel to inform me they would do nothing about the two verbal assualts I suffered at that forum and that in fact my complaint was not really a complaint but a gripe. I have also received first hand complaints that lone people in their 80's are being visited by either members of NPT CBC or their representatives and being pressured into voting 'Yes' by them, they have been told their houses will fall into disrepair and the people visiting them will lose their jobs if they do not vote to transfer. I agree with you wholeheartedly GT, we the tenants will make up our own minds but to put pressure on the elderly in this manner is bullying. I have suffered bullying from the people concerned with the transfer and can only say once again when given a vote surely we have a choice to vote whichever way we wish without this rediculous pressure being put on the shoulders of a vulnerable section of our society who are not responsible for the finances of NPT CBC.”