CALLS are being made for greater political involvement in how a £1.2 million cash injection for new affordable homes is spent.

Worcester City Council has been urged to show “more transparency” over a deal to hand housing associations money for building new low-rent properties.

The policy, first revealed by your Worcester News in June, is the biggest investment in affordable homes for decades.

The city council’s Labour leadership signed off the move in July, but on the basis senior management would be able to allocate the funding themselves in private “consultation” with Councillor Roger Berry, the cabinet member.

The decision sparked anger from Councillor Marc Bayliss, deputy Tory group leader, who said it needed to be more open.

“This is a lot of money, and one of my major concerns is that there’s no oversight in a public, open forum as to how this money is spent,” he said.

“Without any further reports being published there is no chance for us to have any input on it or make comments.”

Following the plea, Coun Berry has agreed that future decisions on the spending will be put before the entire cabinet before being signed off.

During a debate in a scrutiny committee meeting, a motion was circulated calling on the council to “promote transparency” over decision making by also publishing scoring criteria successful bidders must meet.

It led to disputes between Labour and Tory politicians, with Councillor Joy Squires saying the language used was “inflammatory”.

Coun Bayliss said: “This is a fundamental issue of democracy – we don’t want to see a £1.2m scheme signed off by officers which we never see again.”

The money, which is being drip-fed in three separate instalments between now and 2016, has come from the Government’s New Homes Bonus scheme.

The Government is considering handing as much as 35 per cent of the cash to Local Enterprise Partnerships in the future, rather than councils.

After the meeting, Coun Squires said the debate showed the Tories “fundamentally lack a commitment to providing decent housing to those in need”, but Coun Bayliss called it “pathetic and laughable”.