LBWF spin

Why is LBWF so poor at delivering ‘affordable housing’, particularly genuinely ‘affordable housing’?

August 4, 2022 Housing, LBWF spin

A previous post (see links below) examined LBWF’s recent performance over ‘affordable housing’ (AH). It noted that though the word ‘affordable’ is vague and often used confusingly, what’s referred to as AH in fact encompasses housing let at four different rent levels, two, called Social Rent and London Affordable Rent, specifically designed so as to be genuinely in reach of the less well off. And it went on to show that from 2012-13 to 2020-21, LBWF had fallen far short of its long-term and often stated promise that 50 percent of housing completions would be ‘affordable’; a... »

LBWF housing scandal: just 5 per cent of the new homes built in Waltham Forest since 2012 were classified as ‘genuinely affordable’…and this from a Labour council!

As this blog consistently has argued, for some years now LBWF has overlooked its responsibilities to those with least means. Further evidence of this regrettable trend is revealed by examining how LBWF has performed when measured against its oft repeated promise to ensure, using its planning powers, that 50 per cent of the new homes which developers and construction companies complete each year in the borough are ‘affordable’. It’s worth emphasising at the outset that the word ‘affordable’ in this context often triggers confusion and cynicism, because, as veteran London journalist Dave Hill no... »

The Housing Ombudsman Service berates LBWF for its error-strewn response to a resident’s routine request for information

Hardly a week goes by without someone from the Town Hall popping up to insist that, in everything LBWF does, it is ‘resident focused’. However, as previous posts have suggested, whether such a boast can be sustained remains debateable. In this context, a recent complaint that a LBWF tenant lodged with the Housing Ombudsman Service (HOS) is significant. The tenant had wanted to confirm that her tenancy automatically would be handed down to her son, and believed that the relevant information was contained in a council document called ‘Appendix 10’. But when she had looked for ‘Appendix 10’ on LB... »

Complaints by residents about Waltham Forest councillors: another can of worms

As many readers of this blog will know, Waltham Forest councillors must comply with the ‘Code of Conduct for Members’, Part Nine of the LBWF Constitution. This document covers matters such a ‘General Standards of Conduct’ and ‘Registration of Pecuniary and Non-Pecuniary Interests’; applies only when councillors are acting in their official capacity; and is presided over by Mark Hynes, Director of Governance and Law. An interesting question is what happens when councillors are alleged to have breached the Code, and here some recent data unearthed by indefatigable Walthamstow resident Charles Ed... »

Crime and policing latest: the Waltham Forest Safer Neighbourhood Board hits the skids again, and now LBWF – controversially – wants to disband it

The Waltham Forest Safer Neighbourhood Board (WFSNB) brings together councillors and residents, and is a potentially very important component of the local fight against crime, supported, as it is, by LBWF, the Metropolitan Police Service,  and the Mayor’s Office for Policing And Crime (MOPAC), and charged with ‘bringing police and communities together to decide local policing and crime priorities, solve problems collaboratively and make sure that the public are involved in a wide range of other community safety decisions’. However, five years ago, when this blog last looke... »

Cllr. Clyde Loakes and food standards: Waltham Forest revealed to be London’s least hygienic borough when it comes to visiting eateries, pubs, and supermarkets

Every now and again, Cllr. Clyde Loakes, the relevant Cabinet portfolio holder, pops up in local media, and assures residents that LBWF is taking food hygiene very seriously. Thus, earlier this year, when LBWF closed three restaurants down, he opined ‘“This sends a very clear signal to that small minority of food businesses which think they can flout the law…We want residents in Waltham Forest to be able to order their food with confidence that it has been prepared in a safe and clean environment. There is no excuse for standards to drop and I hope that restaurant owners and their suppliers pa... »

LBWF, the London Fire Brigade, and ‘controlling the narrative’ over fire crew response times in Low Traffic Neighbourhoods

As this blog has reported over the years, LBWF spends a good deal of time and money attempting to ‘control the narrative’, that is burnish its reputation through fair means or foul and, crucially, head off legitimate criticism. Previous posts have looked in detail at how this works, focusing on spin (‘the selective assembly of fact and the shaping of nuance to support a particular view of a story’) and manipulation of the Freedom of Information Act (FIA), the latter recently provoking a firm rebuke from the Information Commissioner’s Office. However, a short sequence of e-mails ... »

Private Eye reports the Cann Hall mural fiasco

From Issue 1549, 11-24 June 2021 »

LBWF’s flat entrance door scandal: an update on developments

In the past few weeks, fresh revelations have emerged about the scandal surrounding LBWF’s 2017-18 purchase and installation of the 217 flat entrance doors (FEDs) at Walthamstow’s 21 floor Northwood Tower, and four sheltered housing blocks (Boothby Court, Goddarts House, Holmcroft House, and Lime Court) – FEDs which all remain in place today. The following provides a summary. Certification When selling to customers, manufacturers of FEDs routinely provide certification for each item in the order, confirming details such as batch number, fire safety rating, fire and smoke test h... »

LBWF’s Cann Hall murals, Cllr. Sally Littlejohn, and £14,500 of public money that has disappeared down the drain, lost forever

As previously reported here, in the past few years, and encouraged by a £40,000 Town Hall grant, Cann Hall councillors have been intent on installing an artistic mural in the ward, but on two separate occasions, their plans have fallen through and been abandoned. That’s the bones of the story, but it can now be revealed that these failures have come at a cost.  For in both cases significant sums of money were paid out in design fees prior to the decision to abort, while in one case there also were unexplained ‘closure costs’. And when these various sums are totted up, they come to no less... »