Labour councillors have been accused of delaying plans for more council homes in County Durham.
Opposition members successfully voted to defer a decision on approving Durham County Council’s latest housing strategy at a meeting on Wednesday.
Local authority leaders were urged to consider introducing new regulations to prevent the rising number of Homes in Multiple Occupation (HMOs) in East Durham. Current planning rules mean that planning permission for an HMO is only required when it will house over five people.
Councillor Kevin Shaw urged the Joint Administration in charge of the council to support concerned residents and address the “massive elephant in the room” which he said was missing from the strategy.
A notice posted onto a property in Seaham, which was previously subject to an HMO application but was later withdrawn (Image: The Northern Echo)
He said: “What is the council going to do to address the public’s concerns of not only the growing number of HMOs but also the impact upon local services, amenities, successful communities, community cohesion, and the loss of valuable family homes?”
Specific measures, known as an article four direction, currently apply to Durham City and the surrounding neighbourhoods to reduce the rising number of student homes. Several Labour councillors who spoke at the Wednesday meeting said those rules should also apply to East Durham.
Councillor Fraser Tinsley said: “This housing strategy presents a lost opportunity, particularly in the issue of HMOs. At the moment across most of the county, there is no control. This issue needs to be addressed and controlled because the situation we’re in is unsustainable in our communities and should not be allowed to continue.”
Cllr Shaw added: “I don’t think it addresses the issues effectively regarding HMOs. We need to set out a clear position on how we prevent and regulate the provision of HMOs, which this policy does not address.”
But cabinet members warned that Labour’s HMO plea would not work without central government involvement.
Campaigners have previously appeared at County Hall in Durham to protest against HMOs (Image: The Northern Echo)
Conservative councillor Richard Bell said: “We all agree on the need to provide more housing across the county and frankly, I’m astonished that because of the HMO issue, which we can do next to nothing about, members would seek to frustrate these plans and delay them from happening.
“If this isn’t playing political football with an important issue then I don’t know what is.”
Opposition councillors questioned why Labour members wanted to delay the housing strategy on the same day Prime Minister Keir Starmer vowed to prioritise house building as part of the King’s Speech.
Mark Wilkes, Liberal Democrat member for Framwellgate and Newton Hall, said: “We’ve had thousands in Durham City, and the reality is you will not stop somebody converting an HMO in the east of the county by deferring this report. What this deferral will do is delay our strategy.
“There is no need to delay what we’re doing to address the issue that’s been raised. It just strikes me as bonkers.”
But Labour leader Carl Marshall urged leaders to make a decision that puts people first.
“If it’s good enough for City of Durham it’s good enough for our ex-mining communities as well and we shouldn’t lose sight of that,” he said.
“The sooner we face up to the problem the quicker we can deal with it. Engage your lugs for once rather than your mouths, speak to people, work collaboratively, and deliver on article four for some of our communities.”
Recommended reading:
- Concern as patients wait up to three hours for hospital beds due to treatment delays
- Health bosses quizzed on dentistry as more Durham and Darlington practices go private
- Durham County Council urged to protect residents
Labour’s plea is echoed by East Durham Communities Standing Together - a community group calling for HMO regulation.
Group spokesman and Peterlee resident Matt Tough fears crime will increase with more HMOs in the area.
Labour’s motion to defer the housing strategy was approved by 48 votes to 45.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel