Stop Tinkering: Govern and Inform

Who is in charge?

The government is so poor at communicating that we have to guess what is going on. Gordon Brown and Hilary Benn tell us that there will be no immediate cash payment (£100 was floated) for pensioners - because the priority is long term measures (10 year,20 year) to save energy. This is likely to be of small comfort to people in their 80s and 90s.

From press reports, we learn that the reason for the non payment is that the energy companies will not play ball. The foreign controlled companies (French, German) fear that, if they agreed to the £100 payment, their own governments would demand the same.

All of this, of course, demonstrates the folly of privatisation. The position would, clearly, have been very different if energy companies had remained under public control.

Does Democracy mean anything?

We do not elect energy companies: we elect governments. We expect them not only 'to feel our pain' but to do something about it - and to remember that our gas and electricity bills have to be paid NOW.

The finance to support people, and the economy, at the level required (£20-30 Billion) could be acquired from two sources - and the action would receive overwhelming public support.

The first source is a windfall tax on companies (especially energy companies) making obscenely large profits. The government, we are told, hesitates because this would upset the City of London and result in companies moving their bases to other countries.

This would probable not happen on any significant scale. If it did, we should be pleased to say goodbye. The City of London (especially banks etc) contributed significantly to the current economic difficulties. They must not be allowed to govern the country.

The second source is to slash the defence budget, and borrow now against the funds which would become available next year and the year after. This means withdrawing from Iraq and Afghanistan and developing an international policy based on support for the United Nations.

This would, no doubt, upset the USA. But government from Washington is no more acceptable than government by the City of London.

Radical Policy Changes

For detail, including fuller explanation of the policy changes necessary, go to Ebay and buy (at cost £4, including p&p) Capitalism in Crisis: the Socialist Solution - which could be as aptly entitled 'the Common Sense Solution'.

This booklet is also available (same cost) from John Kyte, Flat 27, No 1 Park Hill, Moseley, Birmingham B13 8DU.

Buying Houses and the Government

Government's Small, Faltering Steps

Any help for people struggling in the housing market must be welcomed. It can only be hoped that the measures announced 2nd September will be followed by others in days rather than weeks.

What is striking is the contrast between the seriousness of the economic situation, as reflected in Chancellor Darling's recent comments, and the comparatively minor measures just announced.

The other depressing factor is the continuing evidence that the government is on the side of big business, rather than ordinary citizens.

For example, it appears that the bulk (if not all) of the additional funding for Shared Equity house purchases is to be allocated for new houses property developers wish to sell.

The shortage of funding to help young people to buy (and private citizens to sell) older houses in the housing market gives the impression, again, that the emphasis is on helping developers to sell houses, rather than helping young people to buy them.

If this is not the case, why is there no more support for individual citizens who wish to sell, and buy, houses?

What follows is an account of the experiences of one young couple who attempted to buy a house using the Government Shared Equity Scheme.

The Government’s Shared Equity Scheme and First-Time Buyers

Introduction
A scheme with a government backed loan at low interest acting as a deposit (say 25%), plus a mortgage at a competitive interest rate, appears ideal for First-Time Buyers on modest incomes.

For this reason, we attempted to buy a house for approximately £110,000 – an amount which our joint incomes matched comfortably for repayments.

Unfortunately, although we responded promptly to all requests for information - and met the criteria of the Scheme, when we finally had an offer for a property accepted we were told that the money had run out.

Yet, immediately before we made the offer, we had been told that the money was available for us to go ahead. As any reasonable interpretation of this must be that the money had been allocated, an explanation of what happened to it is obviously required.

The purpose of this report is to draw attention to the difficulties, especially for young people, arising from the way in which the scheme is operating.

Apart from the facts recorded below, there have been innumerable telephone calls and Emails.

There is supporting written evidence for the factors listed below.

Operation of the Shared Equity Scheme 2008

The details which follow show how the scheme operated in our case.

(i) 4^th April MY 4 Walls assessed, and approved, our application for a loan to support (as a deposit) a Shared Equity Scheme purchase.

(ii) 18 April we received a letter from MY Choice Homebuy to confirm notification from our local Homebuy agent.

(iii) We made an application for a mortgage to the Halifax to supplement the loan.

(iv) 20 May we received confirmation from Connells that an ‘in principle’ acceptance had been received from the Halifax for up to £90,000. This was confirmed on a Priority Card.

(v) 23 May we received an Email stating the fees for buying a house for £110,000.

(vi) 10 June we received confirmation to go ahead and make an offer.

(vii) In this context, we made an offer of £90,000. This offer was not accepted.

(viii) We then made an offer of £105,000 for a house in Cromwell Street.

30 June we were informed that our minimum purchase price was £107,000.

This mystified us, as it appears totally unreasonable that there should be a minimum purchase price. In any case, why were we not told this before we made the offer?

(ix) 30 June we received a letter confirming the Scheme acceptance of our application.

(x) As our offer of £105,000 was not accepted, we increased it to £110,000.

(xi) Our offer of £110,000 for 65 Cromwell Street was accepted by the estate agents, Saxon Mee on 11 August.

(xii) 12 August the Scheme administrator was informed (by Email) that our offer had been accepted.

(xiii) 18 August we received forms to be completed from the Scheme Administrator.

(xiv) 19 August the completed forms were returned to the Scheme Administrator.

(xv) During the afternoon of 19 August, the Scheme Administrator ‘phoned and stated that the money had run out.

This was a shock and, obviously, extremely disappointing. We cannot understand how, within days, we were told that the money had been allocated, and then that it had disappeared.

Policy Alternatives: Urgent

For alternatives to the Government's current policies see Capitalism in Crisis: A Socialist Solution. This is available on ebay at cost (£4, including p&p), or from John Kyte (same cost) Flat 27, No 1 Park Hill, Moseley, Birmingham B13 8DU