Let's talk...

Eastern Fields: Consultations are taking
place on the 20th & 22nd February

As any Relate counsellor will tell you, the first rule of avoiding conflict (and resolving conflict for that matter) is good communication. Politics is not that much different - so often we have to find tricky balances. People rarely get ALL of what they want from political processes, and if I were you I would be deeply distrustful of any politician that can promise you everything. However, by listening, understanding the views of others, and calmly and clearly stating our own views and needs we can usually arrive at compromise where everyone gets at least most of what they want. Politics, as they say, is the "art of the possible", not the "art of the perfect."


When I was first elected as a councillor, I went to see a constituent's daughter (we'll call her Lisa) who did not actually live in my ward, but was in private rented accommodation in the neighbouring ward. Her mother was concerned that the flat her daughter was living in was sub-standard, and she wondered if I could help speed up her daughter's application for housing through the council. Lisa's partner had moved out a year before to move back in with his parents. He had a recent history of mental ill-health, and had needed spells of in-patient care on-and-off. He was clearly struggling to cope, and they agreed the best thing was for him to stay at his parents' home where he could be better supported, and their children would not have to see their father "at his worst." They remained in touch, and were able to be friends.

Lisa lived with their two children in a two-bedroomed flat that was cold and damp. I went to see them in mid-January, and Lisa showed me a broken window pane that she had covered with cardboard and masking tape to try to keep the draught out, and I pointed out that window repair was her landlord's responsibility. "I tried that," she said, "but he's in Spain for the winter. He won't be back until March." 


Lisa could of course have complained, but didn't want to for fear that the landlord would then want her out when he returned to the UK for "making trouble." One part of me wanted landlords like that challenged, yet I also knew the dilemma: we had thousands waiting for housing, and - however substandard - these were precious housing units. Then of course there was the cost. Lisa as a private rental client was paying almost 50% more a month in rent than I was paying for my mortgage on a 3-bedroom house. Housing benefit paid a lot of that, but nonetheless she had to pay a chunk of her wages and benefits (she worked part-time at a shop and a bingo hall) in topping up the rent.


I made enquiries on her behalf at our housing office, and while the officers understood and sympathised with her plight, she was simply too far down the list of "priority cases" to be housed any time soon. The council was busy at the higher end of the list of needs, urgently housing street-homeless pregnant mothers, the vulnerable elderly, and people with learning difficulties whose residential homes had been closed. It can hardly be called a stroke of luck, but some weeks later Lisa's youngest child was hospitalised following a particularly acute asthma attack. Later, we spoke to her doctor who put in writing that the cold, damp conditions Lisa and her children were living in would severely increase her child's risk of serious respiratory illness. As a result, Lisa moved higher up the priority list, and was re-housed some weeks later. It had taken a hospital stay for a sick child to achieve it.


Landlords can get away with treating tenants badly, tenants are reluctant to complain, rents are high (meaning benefit payments are high), house prices are beyond the reach of most local young people, and all but the most vulnerable have long waits for housing for the exact same reason: there are simply not enough houses in the south west to meet the demand. There are two possible solutions. Either those that require houses leave their families, friends and employment to live in areas where there IS available housing (mostly in the north) or we build more houses. 


More houses of course means more people living in an area. That means more traffic on the roads - unless we develop more roads too, or better still increase public transport capacity. It means we also need added capacity in community services too - more school places, more health centres, more parks and recreation grounds, more day nursery spaces, more community centres. Development means, well, more development. 


Fortunately, as I call on the people of Pinhoe whether on the doorsteps or on the telephone, I am relieved at how reasonable people are about the on-going need for developing more homes in the city. Despite the poor economy nationally, Exeter is thriving as a city. A thriving city attracts more people - people who are keen to study here, find work here or simply enjoy the quality of life here. (Articles like this one in the Independent will show how Exeter is seen elsewhere in the country!) However, people are understandably concerned that all this development may impact the very quality of life that is enjoyed here. The fear is that green spaces will be swallowed up, roads will be choked with congestion, housing will be cramped and dense, and views blocked and spoiled. 

Exeter has over 8000 people waiting for housing

So, back to the art of the possible. Exeter has over 8000 people waiting for homes. We need houses. Lots of houses. Preferably affordable ones. The government has scrapped the capital grant subsidy that paid councils to develop affordable and social housing, and have instead introduced the "affordable rent product" and the New Homes Bonus, both of which reward councils for building homes. In short, working with developers to facilitate the building of private homes is the only way for authorities to obtain funding to build social and affordable homes. A balance needs to be struck between the needs of those who need housing, and those of us that are already settled in an area.


Exeter has a Green City agenda. We are committed to opening up green spaces - not tarmacking over them unnecessarily. We want more sustainable transport, and less emissions in the city. Whatever the scare-mongers may say, more homes does not have to mean a poorer quality of life. 


That is why I shall be at the County Council consultations regarding the developments in Pinhoe  that are taking place this month. The events will be part exhibition (to explain the developments and their impact on the Link Road, Chancel Lane and Summerway Bridge,) and partly an opportunity for councillors and engineers to hear from you. 


The events are taking place at Pinhoe School on Monday 20th February from 3pm - 9pm, and then on Wednesday 22nd February at St James School from 3pm to 9pm. 


Please come and hear the facts, look at the proposal options (there are four, I gather) and put forward your views and ideas. This is a two-way process - communication - that I believe can lead to the right compromise and the right balance for everybody.


Two final notes - if you notice the Conservatives trying to making political capital (as they surely will) out of any unease about the Labour-led City Council's development of the much-needed housing for local people within the city, just ask them how vigorously they are opposing their Tory East Devon colleagues' developments of housing right on the eastern fringe of Exeter. People living in those developments will draw on Exeter's services, will no doubt add to Exeter's traffic etc, but will paying their council tax into the coffers of the Tory-run East Devon District Council. The only response I have received so far is that "we can't influence EDDC, they are a different authority" - despite being the same party! 


And next time you read about benefits being so high that a benefit cap is urgently needed, consider what a cap on private rents would save the country...