Tuesday, October 19, 2010

No more council houses for life

Social housing budget to be cut in half

The social housing budget in England is to be cut by more than 50% in the Spending Review. Council housing "for life" will be phased out, with the needs of new council tenants assessed over time to see if they still require help with housing from their local authority. At present, council tenants keep their property for life unless they breach their tenancy agreement, for example, by engaging in anti-social behaviour. They can also pass their homes onto their children. Lib Dem deputy leader Simon Hughes said his party was against the idea, which was not coalition policy.

Posted by little professor @ 06:22 AM (2432 views)
Please complete the required fields.



19 thoughts on “No more council houses for life

  • “Tenants will be charged nearer the going market rate, to release cash for the building programme.”Paid for by housing benifits?

    This will be a zero sum game or worse, anyway what will be the going market rate when they revise LHA?

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • Hmmm, nothing is ever perfect but this, on first reading it, looks flawed.

    Firstly and most obviously it seems to take away any incentive to better ones self if you live in a council house.

    Secondly, if you can afford ‘the going rate’ then you can afford to pay a mortgage as the two are so close.
    In fact the country would be better off if they paid a mortgage because then their accommodation doesn’t need to be paid for by the state in retirement.

    This brings me back to a point I made awhile ago that virtually everyone in the country can afford a house (100k tops for a good 3 bed semi) it’s the land underneath with planning permission they can’t afford, which is granted by the local authority.

    Surrly someone can join the dots and come up with s better scheme.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • Maybe they’re opening up a new btl Market by kicking out the prudent council house dwellers.

    It’s the diligent and prudent that get it again.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • It’s hard to see the coalition lasting another 6 months. The feudal tuition fee proposals were already enough for a major lib dem rebellion.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • The comment from Simon Hughes is intriguing. If it’s against government policy then why is it in the spending review? The coalition is already under enormous strain because of the tuition fee debacle and it looks like it’s gone past the point of no return for some in the lib dems. A constituency poll in Clegg’s Hallam constituency last week put him on 33% and labour on 31% – he had a very large majority in the election.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • It’s the rich man that gets the pleasure, the poor man the blame.

    Another cliche for you trashman.

    True, as ever.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • “Despite the cuts, ministers are likely to set a target of building 150,000 affordable homes, changing the way councils charge rent to finance them.
    Tenants will be charged nearer the going market rate, to release cash for the building programme.”

    Are there not enough empty rental properties available at the going rate? Is 150,000 over the whole of England going to make any difference?

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • Does this mean there are to be a lot of private landlords not meeting there target incomes?????

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • I’d like the UK to build at least 1 million ‘council houses’ and I don’t care who lives in them or if they pass them on to their children. It’s a mistake to set up criteria whereby people get evicted if their circumstances improve. All we’ll get is hordes of people hiding their income or deliberately earning under the threshold.

    It doesn’t matter what policies you write or what taxation system you use because it’s all fiddling around the edges. If we built 1 million council houses and 1.5 million private houses, the UK would be more internationally competitive and we would have a fairer more inclusive society. With 2.5 million new houses, we would be immune from the ill-conceived, self serving legislative efforts of the revolting Labour party or the terrible toffs (and even the boozing homo party if they ever got to power).

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • if their circumstances change then make them pay more not chuck them out.

    Councils used to make a fortune from council house rent….now its all down the drain

    In late 80’s there were 6.1 million council houses now around £1.1 million and billions paid out in rent to housing associations

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • sibley's b'stard child says:

    Pah, squabbling over what little social housing stock remains; talk about ever decreasing circles.

    But, yeah, 150,000 new homes will be the panacea to all our ills. By ‘affordable’ I presume that’s not council housing per se but kick-backs to Bovis, Persimmons et al.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • This reporting is a bit clumsy and unclear – I need to read up on the detail..

    ..however, it seems consistant with the government kicking away the props from under the market – if social housing tenants were required to pay the going rate, there would be a huge migration away from the south-east to cheaper areas, with a resultant price implosion in the capital..

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • @flash
    Predict and provide is it? Doesn’t sound very original, and demand is never saturated like that.
    N

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • “predict and provide is it”

    There’s no prediction involved. It’s already obvious that we need more, better quality housing right now.

    Just out of curiosity, why do you always sign your posts at the bottom? It says who you are at the top

    F

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • sibley's b'stard child says:

    Interesting interpetation UT, I hadn’t considered that.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • Flashman

    (and even the boozing homo party if they ever got to power).

    LOL

    I thought the were in power ?

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • No silly, it’s the pulling one off with a plastic bag on your head party, that’s in power

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • The problem as I see it is that we have an aging population leading towards family sized council houses being occupied by one or two pensioners; meanwhile the council has insufficient family sized homes for local need.

    The problem is here and changing the tenancy contract for new tenants will barely scratch this systemic problem in the near or foreseeable future. Probably worth doing for generations ahead to reap the flexibility.

    Shoving older people out of family homes is distasteful and horrid. Rather it would be better to provide good quality, warm, well insulated home suited to and enticing to retirees.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



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

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes:

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>