JOIN OUR 'UK RAAC CAMPAIGN GROUP' FB PAGE (HERE)
Deputation Speech to Aberdeen City Council's Communities, Housing and Public Protection Committee 11.03.25
Chair,
Councillors, and Officers,
Thank you
for allowing me to present this deputation today.
Due
Diligence and Financial Model
In reference
to point 1.2 of your report, I must ask whether the Council believes that due
diligence has been adequately undertaken in regard to the RAAC Homeowner
situation and whether the correct financial model has been followed. At the
last meeting, Stephen Booth admitted that only desktop reviews had been
conducted in regard to costs for repairs. Across Scotland, we have seen that
thorough cost assessments have led to significant reductions in estimated
replacement costs. For example, Clackmannanshire Council has now cut the
estimated cost of roof replacements from £39,000 to £20,000 per homeowner,
resulting in a new sundry debt proposal following direct engagement with
homeowners and myself.
Furthermore,
Mr. Booth previously stated in two separate meetings with myself and members of
the Torry RAAC Campaign Group that a roof replacement for a four-bedroom home
would cost £71,000. However, he later denied this in a full Council meeting
despite confirmation from Mr. Meiklejohn in a BBC article. Even his revised
estimate of £50,000 appears to be excessive when compared to other local
authorities that have obtained actual costed assessments from validated
contractors.
Environmental
Impact Assessment (EIA)
On point
1.3, I acknowledge that the Torry RAAC Campaign Group is also speaking today
and calling for an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) to be included in the
planning process. I raised this very issue in my last deputation, albeit in a
more measured way, simply seeking clarity on why the Council believed an EIA
was not required for this project.
Additionally,
I warned that the Torry RAAC Campaign Group’s proposal could fail
if an EIA was deemed necessary. I even suggested amendments to their
application during a meeting with Mr. Booth, Chief Officer - Corporate Landlord and Ms. Eleanor Sheppard, Chief Executive Families, Communities and Housing, as well as in my
previous deputation, yet these concerns were ignored. Following a subsequent
meeting with Ms. Sheppard—where Mr. Booth was absent due to an ongoing
complaint regarding his previous responses—I was invited to submit an amendment
for review, which I intend to do later today.
Exploring
Viable Alternatives
Section 2.1
states that plans can still be adapted and that engagement with homeowners will
continue. I sincerely hope that my proposals will be considered in this spirit,
particularly in light of developments in other local authorities. Dundee City
Council is set to announce a 40% grant towards homeowners’ RAAC replacement
costs, while Clackmannanshire Council is offering a sundry loan. A hybrid
approach combining both of these models is entirely within the powers of
Aberdeen City Council and would provide a fairer solution for affected
homeowners and no doubt cost you less overall, than demolition and
redevelopment. You would also reduce loss of crucial housing stock.
Demolition
Programme and Voluntary Acquisitions
In Section
2.4, the Council acknowledges that the demolition programme is subject to
interdependencies, which could delay proceedings. Given this, I urge the
Council to recognize that a significant majority of homeowners are refusing to
accept the meager voluntary acquisition offers currently on the table.
Despite
acknowledging the homeowners' plight, the Council has failed to set a precedent
for fair acquisitions. It is widely recognized that the current situation is
not the homeowners’ fault but rather a consequence of past cost-saving measures
by this very Council in whatever guise was operating at the time, during the
construction of these properties.
Transparency
and Homeowner Support
Regarding Section 2.10, with so much uncertainty around property values and acquisition processes, I formally request an amendment to reinstate verbal reporting on rehoming numbers at future committee meetings. This is particularly crucial considering that, at the last full council meeting, Stephen Booth stated that 50 people were still engaging in the voluntary acquisition process. However, your report lists the total number of participants as 55, with only 29 still actively engaged. Clear and transparent updates are essential to ensure accuracy and accountability.
In Section
3.3, the report acknowledges that some properties within the wider site are
privately owned and that affected homeowners can pursue their own solutions.
However, the Council has failed to inform these homeowners that they could
submit group applications for available financial assistance, including loans,
shared funding, or grants for remedial works.
Moreover, I
have repeatedly requested information on the location of these private
properties but was denied access under the guise of GDPR and confidentiality
laws. Yet today, the Council has openly shared this information in its report.
Ms. Sheppard confirmed in our latest meeting that this data is now publicly
available. I demand an apology from the Council for previously withholding this
information, as well as a commitment to transparency moving forward.
Furthermore,
I request that no misleading or distorted statements be made following my
deputation, particularly through the use of leading questions that misrepresent
my position after I have spoken and am unable to respond. I bring to your
attention that I have an ongoing complaint against a Councillor present
today, which has been submitted to the Ethical Standards Commissioner.
Public
Inquiry
It is also
worth noting that none of the properties classified as medium or high risk have
progressed to critical risk. This strongly suggests that the Council’s actions
thus far have been premature and rushed. Given the likelihood of a public
inquiry into the handling of RAAC, I call on the Council to pause its current
demolition and acquisition plans and instead focus on properly exploring all
viable alternatives, as other local authorities have done.
Your council
may not have the authority to call for a public inquiry, but it can urge the
Scottish Government to do so. You also have the power to continue advocating
for a national fund. My proposal, submitted through the Scottish Parliament
Petitions process, suggests using the cladding levy, the affordable homes
budget, or the creation of a dedicated fund to support affected homeowners.
This proposal has been publicly endorsed by a RICS spokesperson and is
available online for anyone to review. Surely, it is time for ACC to intensify
its efforts toward securing a national solution.
Aberdeen
City Council has a duty to act with due diligence, transparency, and fairness.
Homeowners affected by RAAC should not be forced into financial ruin or
displacement due to past decisions beyond their control.
I urge the
Council to reconsider its approach, explore more sustainable solutions, and
ensure that affected residents are provided with the support and financial
assistance they deserve.
Thank you
for your time.
No comments:
Post a Comment