Aspirations vs. Action: The Glaring Gap in Telford’s Housing Strategy and the Plan That Offers Real Teeth
Labour led Telford and Wrekin Council has unveiled its draft Housing Strategy for 2025-2030, which will be sanctioned and rubber stamped by the Labour cabinet on the 4th December 2025.
It's a document that speaks of "higher standards" and "more options." But a closer look reveals a strategy long on past achievements and future aspirations, yet critically short on the binding, concrete actions needed to address a growing housing crisis for its most vulnerable residents.
In stark contrast, Mark Webster, the Green Party’s Disability Officer for Telford and Wrekin, has laid out a comprehensive and actionable critique, exposing the strategy's weaknesses and presenting what he calls a "common-sense" alternative with the teeth to force real change.
The core difference is simple: one plan hopes for a better future, while the other mandates it.
The Weakness of Aspiration: A Strategy Built on Influence, Not Enforcement
The Council’s strategy confidently highlights past efforts—the £2 million annually spent on Disabled Facilities Grants, the 42 adaptable homes built by its company Nuplace. While commendable, these become a shield against criticism, suggesting that what has been done is sufficient. The plan for the next five years relies heavily on vague verbs: to "secure," to "influence," and to "engage."
This approach is fundamentally flawed because it lacks enforceable targets. When the strategy promises to "use the emerging Local Plan to secure higher accessibility standards," it places its faith in a slow, uncertain process of negotiation with developers. There is no minimum quota, no non-negotiable target to ensure a specific percentage of new homes will be accessible from day one.
This is a missed opportunity of monumental proportions. Without a mandated quota, accessible housing remains a nicety, not a necessity, leaving disabled residents on waiting lists for years while suitable homes fail to materialise.
The Plan with Teeth: The Green Party's Mandate for Concrete Action
Mark Webster’s response is not just criticism; it is a fully-formed shadow strategy built on specificity and accountability. Where the council offers principles, Th Green Party provides pound-for-pound solutions:
· On New Homes: Instead of "influencing" developers, they demand a minimum 10% quota for M4(2)/M4(3) accessible standard homes in all new builds. This isn't a hope; it's a hardwired rule that would transform housing supply.
· On Homelessness: While the council talks about "supported living options," the Green Party names proven models like "Housing First" and demands a cast-iron "no eviction into homelessness" guarantee from council-owned stock. This shifts the focus from managing homelessness to preventing it altogether.
· On Adaptations: The council rightly celebrates its £2m DFG investment. Mark Webster asks the crucial follow-up question: But how fast is it delivered? He demands a 10-working-day fast-track for urgent adaptations, a policy that would directly improve safety and independence for those in crisis.
· On Transparency: The council describes a "co-production" process. The Green Party calls for public, accessible dashboards tracking everything from repair times to tenancy success rates. This moves engagement from a one-time consultation to ongoing, real-time accountability.
A Systemic Failure of Ambition
The contrast reveals a systemic issue in how the Council approaches problem-solving. Its strategy is one of incremental improvement, celebrating past wins while cautiously nudging the system forward. The Green Party plan is one of systemic safeguard, designed to pre-empt crises and hardwire fairness into the very fabric of housing policy.
By relying on partnership and influence, the Labour Council’s strategy leaves the well-being of disabled and vulnerable residents at the mercy of market forces and protracted negotiations. The Green Party plan places their needs front and centre, making them a legal and operational priority, not just a talking point.
The people of Telford and Wrekin deserve more than a strategy that simply describes the status quo with optimistic language. They deserve a plan with teeth—one with binding targets, clear timelines, and ruthless transparency.
Mark Webster and The Green Party have provided just such a blueprint. The question now is whether the Labour-led Council has the courage to look beyond its own aspirational document and adopt the concrete, life-changing actions that are so clearly needed.
Or will the Labour Cabinet just rubber stamp the 2025-2030 strategies? The credibility of their entire housing strategy depends on it.
Labour led Telford and Wrekin Council has unveiled its draft Housing Strategy for 2025-2030, which will be sanctioned and rubber stamped by the Labour cabinet on the 4th December 2025.
It's a document that speaks of "higher standards" and "more options." But a closer look reveals a strategy long on past achievements and future aspirations, yet critically short on the binding, concrete actions needed to address a growing housing crisis for its most vulnerable residents.
In stark contrast, Mark Webster, the Green Party’s Disability Officer for Telford and Wrekin, has laid out a comprehensive and actionable critique, exposing the strategy's weaknesses and presenting what he calls a "common-sense" alternative with the teeth to force real change.
The core difference is simple: one plan hopes for a better future, while the other mandates it.
The Weakness of Aspiration: A Strategy Built on Influence, Not Enforcement
The Council’s strategy confidently highlights past efforts—the £2 million annually spent on Disabled Facilities Grants, the 42 adaptable homes built by its company Nuplace. While commendable, these become a shield against criticism, suggesting that what has been done is sufficient. The plan for the next five years relies heavily on vague verbs: to "secure," to "influence," and to "engage."
This approach is fundamentally flawed because it lacks enforceable targets. When the strategy promises to "use the emerging Local Plan to secure higher accessibility standards," it places its faith in a slow, uncertain process of negotiation with developers. There is no minimum quota, no non-negotiable target to ensure a specific percentage of new homes will be accessible from day one.
This is a missed opportunity of monumental proportions. Without a mandated quota, accessible housing remains a nicety, not a necessity, leaving disabled residents on waiting lists for years while suitable homes fail to materialise.
Mark Webster’s response is not just criticism; it is a fully-formed shadow strategy built on specificity and accountability. Where the council offers principles, Th Green Party provides pound-for-pound solutions:
· On New Homes: Instead of "influencing" developers, they demand a minimum 10% quota for M4(2)/M4(3) accessible standard homes in all new builds. This isn't a hope; it's a hardwired rule that would transform housing supply.
· On Homelessness: While the council talks about "supported living options," the Green Party names proven models like "Housing First" and demands a cast-iron "no eviction into homelessness" guarantee from council-owned stock. This shifts the focus from managing homelessness to preventing it altogether.
· On Adaptations: The council rightly celebrates its £2m DFG investment. Mark Webster asks the crucial follow-up question: But how fast is it delivered? He demands a 10-working-day fast-track for urgent adaptations, a policy that would directly improve safety and independence for those in crisis.
· On Transparency: The council describes a "co-production" process. The Green Party calls for public, accessible dashboards tracking everything from repair times to tenancy success rates. This moves engagement from a one-time consultation to ongoing, real-time accountability.
A Systemic Failure of Ambition
The contrast reveals a systemic issue in how the Council approaches problem-solving. Its strategy is one of incremental improvement, celebrating past wins while cautiously nudging the system forward. The Green Party plan is one of systemic safeguard, designed to pre-empt crises and hardwire fairness into the very fabric of housing policy.
By relying on partnership and influence, the Labour Council’s strategy leaves the well-being of disabled and vulnerable residents at the mercy of market forces and protracted negotiations. The Green Party plan places their needs front and centre, making them a legal and operational priority, not just a talking point.
The people of Telford and Wrekin deserve more than a strategy that simply describes the status quo with optimistic language. They deserve a plan with teeth—one with binding targets, clear timelines, and ruthless transparency.
Mark Webster and The Green Party have provided just such a blueprint. The question now is whether the Labour-led Council has the courage to look beyond its own aspirational document and adopt the concrete, life-changing actions that are so clearly needed.
Or will the Labour Cabinet just rubber stamp the 2025-2030 strategies? The credibility of their entire housing strategy depends on it.
Previous Article
Public Consultation
http://disabiltygreenpartytandww.blogspot.com/2025/08/draft-housing-strategy-2025-to-2030.html
Comments
Post a Comment