Clays Lane: a suggestion

In the 4 June edition, you outlined the “tug of love” at Clays Lane Housing Co-operative, which wants to voluntarily transfer its engagements to another cooperative (page 31). This is in opposition to the Housing Corporation, which ordered it to transfer to the Peabody Trust, a non-democratic registered social landlord, in the paternalistic non-democratic mould of the Housing Corporation.

Am I the only one to strongly object to this outrageous, however well-meaning, attitude on the part of the Housing Corporation?

All over the world the concept of democratic control of enterprises is being advanced and advocated. Why then is the Housing Corporation hell-bent on crushing this co-operative? Its own performance indicators show that it’s hardly the worst-performing housing provider.

May I suggest a reasonable compromise: Clays Lane would probably be more inclined to transfer to the Peabody Trust if Peabody did the decent thing and converted to a fully mutual housing co-operative, with all its board democratically elected by tenants.

Isn’t it time the main stakeholders had the main say?