Wednesday, June 2, 2010
Shows where all our hard earned taxes vanish to
Housing association chief on £400,000 a year
More than 50 executives at housing associations – which provide council houses at taxpayers’ expense – earn more than the Prime Minister. Based on figures from last year, the highest paid executive at a housing association was John Belcher, at £391,000. He was chief executive of Anchor, which provides affordable homes for the elderly. David Cowans, at Places for People, earned £297,000.
Posted by mark @ 08:47 AM (1897 views)
14 thoughts on “Shows where all our hard earned taxes vanish to”
Add a comment
- Your email address is required so we can verify that the comment is genuine. It will not be posted anywhere on the site, will be stored confidentially by us and never given out to any third party.
- Please note that any viewpoints published here as comments are user´s views and not the views of HousePriceCrash.co.uk.
- Please adhere to the Guidelines
cat and canary says:
.. a £391,000 over-paid executive called Belcher! Doesn’t that give you indigestion!?
(Recaptcha: “gruffed off”)
another alan says:
This is very difficult to justify. Anyone have any ideas? (I cannot think of one.)
recaptcha: wobbles in
Si says:
Responsible for affordable housing??
Could he have failed more?!
Pay appears to be inversely proportional to competence in modern UK.
mark wadsworth says:
When I’m in charge, Housing Associations will be in the first wave of quangoes that are scrapped. All their land and buildings will be handed straight back to local councils, where at least it’s subject to some sort of democratic control.
Next.
fancypants says:
I can confirm that this culture goes right through the upper and middle levels of these organisations – its a hangover from the boom times, when they had to compete with the lucrative rewards available by working in the private housing sector. Also, because these organisations are cushioned from market forces to some extent, a certain degree of incompetence and complacency continues – people and business models that seemed to be good during times of ever-rising prices are now failing, and these organisations are struggling to respond.
Expect more taxpayer bailouts.
Ringing Roger says:
Since when were housing associations quangos? Funny how people on here who complain excessively of public sector waste and inefficiency don’t equate these high salaries with marketisation of systems. However, Mark is correct in saying that such salary costs could be cut if stock was returned to councils. Difficult to do though given the effects of the large scale voluntary transfer policies under Labour where council tenants were bribed to vote to move to a housing association through offering free kitchens and bathrooms if they did. Housing associations now control more homes than councils.
inbreda says:
“When I’m in charge”
Don’t you just love MW! Full of intelligent ideas and brimming with confidence! Or is that just extreme hope verging on the wishful thinking 😉
Recaptcha: Social bedsores
mr g says:
@Si “Pay appears to be inversely proportional to competence in modern UK.”
Spot on!
This applies throughout both the public and private sectors.
Stevie Dee says:
A couple of words to describe this: monopoly money, fantasy, hedonism, silly. Time for the united kingdom to sober up. Not envious. As happy in myself, money is the false god. It’s unnatural. And does it demonstrate success? No! Money or an accumulation of possessions is not an indication of success or wealth, as it is not the actual individual concerned. So don’t fret, let the guy enjoy his money. It’s only paper, a state of mind. Perception.
icarus says:
Non-profit organisations? Yes, all the would-be profits go into salaries. Still, if it keeps this important pool of talent in the UK…(cont. p94). Fancy having the cheek to call themselves ‘independent’ when they rely so heavily on the government purse. And regarding MW’s point @3, were local council officers paid this much when they were the ones providing affordable housing – or is it that these HA execs are doing a much better job than the councils were doing? Evidence?
These execs claim that they have jolly responsible jobs if you take into account their large ‘turnover’, expenditure and employee numbers, but their income and responsibilities are pretty well set for them, so they’re not the captains of industry with whom they like to compare themselves when they try to justify their salaries.
maddison says:
This inflated pay of chief executives in the public sector really gets me annoyed! There is a big difference in running a business with 100m budget that you have to fight for in the private market compared to just getting a block grant from the govt to play with.
Catman74 says:
I used to work for the largest HA in the country. Car park was full of Astons and Audi A8s. The director got something in the region of £240k, the finance director £160
Recaptcha: extreme danger (no fooling!)
sureseam says:
Having lived in council accommodation that staggered on for decades without proper maintenance; I think competent housing management does not go hand in hand with democratically accountable councils, especially those where the rascals never get turfed out – partly because they use ‘low council rents’ as a canvasing device.
Housing associations have been pushed away from government funding such that 50% or more of funding for many /new projects comes from non governmental sources (such as banks). The creative business of financing projects now involves serious risk and undoubtedly this needs capable people to do it. Also many of the community HA’s from the early 1980’s have been consolidated into massive organizations with corresponding cost savings due to scale; and running such an organization again takes capable people.
However: £400K is way out of proportion – twice the prime ministers pay – come on thats a joke.
Finally: the risks taken by some housing associations are going to come unstuck at some point.
icarus says:
@12 – “The creative business of financing projects now involves serious risk”.Yes, but who takes the risk? Do these guys have skin in the game? Are their salaries clawed back if their risks come unstuck?