Caerphilly County Borough is to get a share of £5.8 million in Welsh Government funding for social housing.
Finance and Government Business Minister Jane Hutt said the extra funding for this financial year will come from reserves.
The money Caerphilly will get comes to £319,704.
The Finance Minister said: “Housing is central to our preventative approach – this additional investment will benefit people’s overall quality of life and also deliver benefits to people’s health and wellbeing.”
The Welsh Government has a target of building 10,000 affordable homes by May 2016 and has already helped build 7,000 since May 2011.
• A housing development on the site of Aberbargoed Hospital has been officially opened.
The cottage hospital was built in 1909 by the Powell Duffryn Steam Coal Company to provide healthcare for local employees and closed in November 2010.
The land was transferred to United Welsh and using £1.5m of grant funding, the housing association developed 23 homes costing around £2.6m.
This is ridiculous! I have never read such a funny article. The cheapest type of generally accepted housing to build is terrace housing. That cost about £65,000 in 2005 or £87,000 today when adjusted for inflation.
Assuming land was already owned by the council in perfect condition to build this will only allow for 3.6 homes to be built (or 3 as 0.6 of a home is worthless to everyone). The grant is so small it makes no difference to Caerphilly. If you take into account the cost of buying land only 2 houses could be built.
Caerphilly Council are also the recipients of over £3 Million pounds
from the Welsh Assembly to deal with `homelessness` in the borough.
If
homelessness was managed in a more cost effective way by the Council,
instead of lining the pockets of those who have taken the opportunity,
in the private sector,and are recipients of these funds diverted to them
by the Council to provide emergency accommodation for homeless
families, those funds should be intact and should be utilised by
Caerphilly Council to itself provide this sort of managed accommodation,
and, to build houses for strict, short stay, social housing purposes.
This additional housing fund money, £300,000. would then compliment the
funds the Council have already been given.
From a governance priority
point of view, where is the comparison between this £300,000 given back
to the Bought for Housing purposes? and, the £700,000 already granted
for the refurbishment of The Beeches Building in the grounds of the old
Miners hospital?, owned by Social Housing Provider United Welsh Housing
Association, and which only serves to increase the value of the property
portfolio of this HOUSING PROVIDER whilst diverting funds and efforts
from its core Charitable Deed purposes of PROVIDING SOCIAL HOUSING and
in so doing, taking the burden off local tax payers, some kind of dichotomy here I think?.
Caerphilly Council are also the recipients of over £3 Million pounds
from the Welsh Assembly to deal with `homelessness` in the borough.
If homelessness was managed in a more cost effective way by the Council,
instead of lining the pockets of those who have taken the opportunity,
in the private sector,and are recipients of these funds diverted to them
by the Council to provide emergency accommodation for homeless
families, those funds should be intact and should be utilised by
Caerphilly Council to itself provide this sort of managed accommodation,
and, to build houses for strict, short stay, social housing purposes.
This additional housing fund money, £300,000. would then compliment the
funds the Council have already been given.
From a governance priority point of view, where is the comparison between this £300,000 given back to the Bought for Housing purposes? and, the £700,000 already granted for the refurbishment of The Beeches Building in the grounds of the old Miners hospital?, ( a laudable project by volunteers to save an old building) but owned by Social Housing Provider United Welsh Housing Association, and, which only serves to increase the value of the property portfolio of this HOUSING PROVIDER whilst diverting funds and efforts from its core Charitable Deed purposes of PROVIDING SOCIAL HOUSING and in so doing, taking the burden off local tax payers, some kind of dichotomy here I think?.