| Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Boston Manor Park Gates still closed one week on from music event | |
| Posted by: | Joseph Gerald Bourke | |
| Date/Time: | 11/05/18 14:52:00 |
| Guy, what I am challemging is the trope that the costs of public service provision are automatically reduced when services are brought in-house, on the basis that the profit element earned by private providers is eliminated. In too many cases that is not the outcome, for a number of reasons. As I understand it, Libray services were brought-in house last summer. It is the Parks contract that has recently been brought-in house and was the subject of your initial comment. While the S106 levy can be applied towards site specific affordable housing or infrastructure, the Community Infrastructure Levy can be applied towards the physical infrastructure necessary to make sites elsewhere viable for the building of homes by housing associations. I believe other local authorities may be endeavouring to use the CIL in this way. Is it not also the case that the council may apply to clawback receipts from right to buy sales to replace council housing stock lost under the scheme? |