Leeds puts revised PFI scheme to tenants

16 May 02
Campaigners opposed to the Private Finance Initiative are continuing their struggle with Leeds Council over a multimillion pound housing refurbishment scheme.

17 May 2002

Two months after residents on two council estates rejected proposals to raise £45m through a PFI scheme, the local authority this week sent new ballot papers to 1,538 tenants on one of the estates.

Leeds argues that it is within its rights to reballot tenants in Little London because 53% of them supported the proposal last time even though the overall result, covering 2,286 tenants in Little London and Woodhouse, saw the scheme rejected by 821 votes to 703.

But John McDermott, spokesman for the anti-PFI group Defend Council Housing, accused the council of redrawing boundaries on the estates to manufacture a result of its choosing.

'The mood on the estate is one of astonishment. We will be calling on people to reject this PFI scheme again, just as they did last time,' he said. 'The council has shown arrogant disregard for people's feelings.'

The ballot is due to continue until the end of next week with the result due before the end of May. An outline business case must be submitted to the Department for Transport, Local Government and the Regions by June 3 if Leeds is to proceed with a modified scheme.

If the project goes ahead in Little London, £39m will be spent on improvements – £6m less than originally proposed. Controversial plans to demolish blocks of flats on the estate have been dropped by the authority.

Keith Wakefield, the council's executive member for housing, denied it was being underhand by balloting tenants again as other consultations carried out before and after the ballot had suggested that people were broadly in favour of the scheme.

This time, he promised, the council would respect the result. 'We have constructed a separate proposition in a different geographical area with a different set of proposals for the high-rise flats,' he said. 'If the PFI is the route [to gain money] then we have to use it.'


PFmay2002

Did you enjoy this article?

AddToAny

Top