WORCESTER council tenants' overwhelming vote in favour of their homes being transferred to a not-for-profit landlord restores our faith in common sense.

Some people fear the association will eventually sell the houses on to a bigger group and rents will shoot skyward.

One, John Baddeley, is concerned tenants will lose the right to buy their houses, and goes as far as to say that people who voted for this have been "extremely misguided and conned".

What's more, he adds, councillors "have sold us down the river".

Anyone who shares the view, we think, is doing their elected members a dis-service, and missing a significant point.

The transfer will see a £40m cash injection, which will be spent on significant modernisation works on the homes over the next six years.

It will also see rent levels kept at an affordable level, improvements to housing services, tenants' rights protected and residents having a say in the running of the service.

What was the alternative? The city council, strait-jacketed by Government spending rules, has been unable to meet the cost of renovating their housing stock.

As far as we can see, tenants' homes would have continued to crumble, and anyone who remembers the dire condition of council housing in the 60s would not wish to return to those awful days.

One final thought. Almost 54 per cent of the 5,553 tenants eligible to vote took the time to study the information and had their say. Oh for the same level of interest come the local elections.

WORCESTER council tenants' overwhelming vote in favour of their homes being transferred to a not-for-profit landlord restores our faith in common sense.

Some people fear the association will eventually sell the houses on to a bigger group and rents will shoot skyward.

One, John Baddeley, is concerned tenants will lose the right to buy their houses, and goes as far as to say that people who voted for this have been "extremely misguided and conned".

What's more, he adds, councillors "have sold us down the river".

Anyone who shares the view, we think, is doing their elected members a dis-service, and missing a significant point.

The transfer will see a £40m cash injection, which will be spent on significant modernisation works on the homes over the next six years.

It will also see rent levels kept at an affordable level, improvements to housing services, tenants' rights protected and residents having a say in the running of the service.

What was the alternative? The city council, strait-jacketed by Government spending rules, has been unable to meet the cost of renovating their housing stock.

As far as we can see, tenants' homes would have continued to crumble, and anyone who remembers the dire condition of council housing in the 60s would not wish to return to those awful days.

One final thought. Almost 54 per cent of the 5,553 tenants eligible to vote took the time to study the information and had their say. Oh for the same level of interest come the local elections.