Jump to content

Means tested Council Housing?


observer
 Share

Recommended Posts

Should Council Housing be reserved for the poorest, those who can't even afford a rent, never mind a mortgage, and rely on HB: OR if someone is better off, and prepared to pay the rent (all dead money) on time, boosting the social landlord's coffers, should they too be allowed to rent social housing? :?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Depends on what level you class as being 'better off' than someone who has absolutely nothing Obs?

 

What is the average monthly rental charge on a council house?

 

I'll make my mind up when I know that as it could still be significantly lower than private rental or a mortgage payment for a similar property and area.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Call me Dave" Cameron want's a public debate on the topic, in their effort to make best use of social housing stock and increase social mobility amongst the great unwashed. Wouldn't say social housing rents are cheap, but perhaps the least exploitative. There are several strands to the issue. 1) Efficient use of available unit space - why should the little old lady live in a 3 bed house, blocking a desperate family? 2) In some areas, HB is paying for huge rents in the private sector at inflated prices and cost to the taxpayer. 3) In this new "on yer bike" world, mobility needs to be created by making it easier for Council Tenents to move around from one job to another (btw it's possibly more difficult in a stagnant housing market for home owners to move). Whilst there is some logic in 1) the efficient use of available property types; whilst there is a need to 2) reduce HB costs - the basic problem is that demand is exceeding supply, thanks to years of "right to buy" and the loss of social housing stock - so perhaps they should be building more Council Housing? As for social "mobility", areas of growth, such as the south-east are already chocker - so perhaps new jobs should be being created in areas of deprivation, rather than writing them off? :?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can see where the Tories are coming from with this one..... I know of a couple in Bewsey who both work full time, he has a big 1 year old BMW and she has a 2 year old car and yet they rent a council flat which could be taken by someone who can't afford such luxuries....

 

Part of the problem left by the previous administration is the impression that everyone has a right to to something which under normal circumstances, most would find to be a privilige....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Part of the problem left by the previous administration is the impression that everyone has a right to to something which under normal circumstances, most would find to be a privilige....

 

The crisis in the lack of social housing was not caused by the last administration, It was Thatcher that changed the law to enable people to do so. and the money for the houses went straight to central government, so the councils could not even replace what they lost.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Part of the problem left by the previous administration is the impression that everyone has a right to to something which under normal circumstances, most would find to be a privilige....

 

The crisis in the lack of social housing was not caused by the last administration, It was Thatcher that changed the law to enable people to do so. and the money for the houses went straight to central government, so the councils could not even replace what they lost.

 

I never said that labour caused the crisis in social housing Kije.... I said they made all the chavs and doleys think they were entitled to all the things that hard working people could have; only they wanted the state to pay for it.

 

The Tories were responsible for the big sell off, but once again, such a so called unpopular policy was not reversed or stopped by the labour lot..... 13 years they had to change a lot of things, but in effect did bugger all apart from line their own pockets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Labour did slow the sale of council houses, but the horse had already bolted, the vast majority of council houses were sold in the early days of the legislation. I beleive the Welsh Assembly are voting though stopping it completely now.

 

Part of the problem left by the previous administration is the impression that everyone has a right to to something which under normal circumstances, most would find to be a privilige..

 

I think Maggie did the damage when she let people buy propety at massifly discounted prices, these people would have never have been able to buy housing at the market value. She gave the impression that everyone could own there own house.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Baz, the couple you refer to, with two cars up a drive, in Bewsey - would (in theory) be ideal candidates for Thatcher's "right to buy" - getting a cut price house and taking yet another Council house out of the stock. But yer right about NEW Labour; they forced Councils to outsource social housing provision to (private sector) social housing providers and wouldn't allow the building of much needed Council houses - and now this historic myopia has caught up to bite us back. :twisted:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

New Labour did not force the councils at all, They brought in legislation where people could vote out of council control, and transfer the housing estates into private trusts to run the estates. The idea being that the private trusts could raise money though the banks, something the councils were not allowed to do. It was a good idea on paper, but never worked properly when put in to place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh yes they were forced, gradually perhaps; but forced never the less - status quo wasn't an option, and building new Council houses totally out of the question - it was all down to the PBR nonesense - which given how new Labour borrowed till we were broke, is somewhat ironic. :twisted:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Public Sector Borrowing Requirement appears to be a particularly British obsession, as the French etc don't appear to worry about it, and niether did Bliar/Brown Gov in hindsight - hence the national debt. However, Councils, with their land and housing stock as collateral, were probably a safer long term bet for investment than most, and certainly better than sub-prime. :roll:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...