Ask any local authority leader in the country today whether they feel confident about the future. Not their political future, but the future of the organisation they run, the services it provides and the communities it serves. In the teeth of vicious cuts in government support, even the most visionary and confident will give a wry smile before answering.

But no local leader is in the business of managing decline. No local leader – particularly on the left – can accept either the decline of local services, or a decline in the prospects of the people that they serve.

The Northumberland Park estate in north Tottenham, on which Aditya Chakrabortty based his well-meaning but misinformed story (Lives torn apart and assets lost: what this Labour privatisation would mean, 20 January) already endures levels of unemployment, crime and appalling poor health which no family should have to endure. I’m not going to accept that either.

Meanwhile, more Londoners become homeless every week. More families leave London, by their own choice or to be rehoused by desperate local authorities. More families abandon hopes of ever owning part of their own home, let alone all of it.

The London housing market has failed. I’m not going to accept that either. So, if a council wants to tackle these threats and take control of its own destiny, what does it do? It takes the one asset it has left – its land. Land which can provide the homes people need, and long-term income to keep council services afloat.

But a council like Haringey could never borrow the money or recruit the talent to build on this land at the scale and pace that’s needed.

So, rather than sell it to private developers and hope for the best, we’re bringing in the investment and skills from a private partner while retaining a 50% control – a blocking veto – over what happens, and taking a 50% share of the proceeds.

Whatever you want to call what we’re doing, it’s not privatisation. We’ve specifically designed this arrangement to keep the council involved. Our joint venture development vehicle is a bold step, sure, and not without its risks. But the risk of doing nothing – of accepting decline, the failed market and substandard housing – is much, much worse.

In his piece on Haringey’s plans, Aditya Chakrabortty distorts a reality which any right-thinking person would abhor. Or rather, he allows it to be distorted by those who seem to have no qualms about stirring up fear in vulnerable communities to achieve their political ends.

Simply, though, the story he tells is not true. We are very clear in our aim to rehouse all existing tenants in the same area, if that’s what they want, on the same rent and the same terms. We are rebuilding a local school, improving open spaces and driving as much affordable housing out of these sites as we possibly can.

And we are absolutely committed to communicating and collaborating with local residents and businesses throughout – this has already started and will continue until the very last brick is laid.

This government is pushing the worst of austerity on to local authorities precisely in the hope of fights like this. But I will not apologise for taking action where action is so desperately needed. I’m happy to debate and defend my plan, but let’s do it based on facts.

Cllr Claire Kober

Leader of Haringey council

• Join the debate – email guardian.letters@theguardian.com

• Read more Guardian letters – click here to visit gu.com/letters