Your browser is no longer supported

For the best possible experience using our website we recommend you upgrade to a newer version or another browser.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

Haringey votes to end controversial development vehicle

  • 1 Comment

Haringey LBC’s cabinet has voted to withdraw from a controversial £2bn regeneration partnership with the firm Landlease, which would have resulted in the council’s commercial portfolio being transferred to a public/private development vehicle.

A recommendation to end the process of establishing the Haringey Development Vehicle (HDV) was approved last night, with Haringey now set to proceed with an alternative council-owned development company.

A report to cabinet says the new Labour administration does not agree with the transfer of public assets at the scale planned in the HDV proposal and the portfolio should remain under council ownership “on principle”.

It adds the administration “is not prepared to accept the scale and nature of risk implied by the aggregated volume of the proposed HDV programme”.

Landlease recently wrote to the council to warn it would have “no choice but to seek to protect [the company’s] interests given our very significant investment over the last two and a half years” if the HDV does not go ahead.

The cabinet report says the development of the HDV has to date cost Haringey £2.5m. It has also agreed to pay Landlease costs totalling just over £520,000 as a result of last night’s decision.

Previous Haringey leader Clare Kober (Lab), who backed the HDV, stepped down at the election amid claims of bullying and the influence of the Momentum movement in the party.

  • 1 Comment

Readers' comments (1)

  • Staff are expected to try and save money in local government. Then you read about £2.5 million and if not included in the £2.5m, a further £520,000, getting spent, potentially needlessly.

    That is much higher than any staff member could save on their own. Things like this don't inspire one to do their best to save money.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions.

Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.