Cameron's comments on Council Housing
Discussion
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2010/aug/03/life...
Just read the comments to this article, I suspect a bit of a pi55 boiling for a lot on here. I can understand why people may not like many of the Conservative's ideas, but why is there such strong reaction - this isn't a chav newspaper read by council house owning mongs. Is it?
IMO we need to stop selling off property, and we need to build more (whether housing assoc or gov't owned).
Just read the comments to this article, I suspect a bit of a pi55 boiling for a lot on here. I can understand why people may not like many of the Conservative's ideas, but why is there such strong reaction - this isn't a chav newspaper read by council house owning mongs. Is it?
IMO we need to stop selling off property, and we need to build more (whether housing assoc or gov't owned).
Only one sensible comment, the rest by hand-wringing, apologist, weak-kneed, spineless Labour voters. The one worth reading which i heartily support follows:-
People get to stay in subsidized housing FOR LIFE? Without an occasional reassessment of their needs? Seriously? And ending this is controversial? Kick the bums out who can afford their own housing and let people who actually need it have it. Between that and the, equally silly, inheritance of government housing, I'm guessing the number of people in such estates who have comfortable incomes is actually pretty high. What a horrible, horrible misuse of funds.
People get to stay in subsidized housing FOR LIFE? Without an occasional reassessment of their needs? Seriously? And ending this is controversial? Kick the bums out who can afford their own housing and let people who actually need it have it. Between that and the, equally silly, inheritance of government housing, I'm guessing the number of people in such estates who have comfortable incomes is actually pretty high. What a horrible, horrible misuse of funds.
Only skeeted over it as busy but :-
"At present council tenants have secure tenancy for life. Housing association tenants have secure tenancy for life after a probationary year. Council tenants have the right to hand the property over to their children, whereas housing association tenants do not."
Sounds like an excellent plan to me, rather than have kids sat on their arse all day doing f
k all as they have no need to if the lease was "short" term then they may think a little.
I can't divulge info bit i have seen with my very own eyes paper work to prove someone is picking up £3500 a MONTH in benefits, FFS if that isn’t wrong then i do not know what is.
This country needs a serious turn around.
"At present council tenants have secure tenancy for life. Housing association tenants have secure tenancy for life after a probationary year. Council tenants have the right to hand the property over to their children, whereas housing association tenants do not."
Sounds like an excellent plan to me, rather than have kids sat on their arse all day doing f
k all as they have no need to if the lease was "short" term then they may think a little. I can't divulge info bit i have seen with my very own eyes paper work to prove someone is picking up £3500 a MONTH in benefits, FFS if that isn’t wrong then i do not know what is.
This country needs a serious turn around.
andy400 said:
Dave_ST220 said:
Council tenants have the right to hand the property over to their children.
someone is picking up £3500 a MONTH in benefits
ssomeone is picking up £3500 a MONTH in benefits
t the bed! Where do I sign up for this!?That's roughly the equivalent of having a £60k job in the real world, if my maths is correct...
king believable. Why run a business with all the risks when I can "earn" that doing fk all with zero worries?My sister bought an ex-council house near Edinburgh an she's one of the only ones on that estate without assisted housing. Her next-door neighbour is a bankmanager with RBS who "inherited" the house(i.e. took over the rent) from his parents, his current salary and perks are over £220k pa! There are many flats and houses on this estate with three earners resident and high individual incomes (if you consider £65k+ high!) and the fleet of cars on the streets and in driveways are all new and very often german middle to high-end cars. Labour council refuses to have anything to do with it as they'd lose votes at the next council and national election.
Means test every councilhouse tenant annually, (all inhabitants of the adress) and throw them out for the really needy. Then we wouldn't have so many ex-forces families (thanks to Labour scum) on the streets!
Means test every councilhouse tenant annually, (all inhabitants of the adress) and throw them out for the really needy. Then we wouldn't have so many ex-forces families (thanks to Labour scum) on the streets!
Edited by JMGS4 on Wednesday 4th August 10:57
Loving the guy on the Guardian's comments page who seems to think that 'downsizing' from a 3-bed house is a 'tent in the back garden'! 
Er.... What about a two bedroom house, or flat, or even a one bedroom property. You know, the sort of place that hard working people often buy for themselves and live in, without the option of a handout.
With few exceptions, all those commenting on the guardian website need a healthy dose of reality, and soon.
Er.... What about a two bedroom house, or flat, or even a one bedroom property. You know, the sort of place that hard working people often buy for themselves and live in, without the option of a handout.
With few exceptions, all those commenting on the guardian website need a healthy dose of reality, and soon.
I'm not a natural Tory voter, but even I can see the sense in this. My Grandparents owned their own home and downsized when they retired- why can't the same be applied to those in council houses? If you don't want your needs to be assessed then either rent privately or save up to buy your own place.
I watched him live and he made sense on council housing. I know several people who have had their council house for many years and really needed it when they got it but now a decade later earn twice the average wage and stay put because it costs them very little. Once you can afford to buy or rent privately you should give up your council house to someone who can't.
The usual piss-boiling is going on at the moment on the Jeremy Vine show.
Perfectly sensible idea in my opinion. As soon as you are able to afford a private let or better, a mortgage, you move out of the council house and allow someone who is really up st street the chance to sort themselves out.
Perfectly sensible idea in my opinion. As soon as you are able to afford a private let or better, a mortgage, you move out of the council house and allow someone who is really up s
t street the chance to sort themselves out.JMGS4 said:
My sister bought an ex-council house near Edinburgh an she's one of the only ones on that estate without assisted housing. Her next-door neighbour is a bankmanager with RBS who "inherited" the house(i.e. took over the rent) from his parents, his current salary and perks are over £220k pa! There are many flats and houses on this estate with three earners resident and high individual incomes (if you consider £65k+ high!) and the fleet of cars on the streets and in driveways are all new and very often german middle to high-end cars. Labour council refuses to have anything to do with it as they'd lose votes at the next council and national election.
Means test every councilhouse tenant annually, (all inhabitants of the adress) and throw them out for the really needy. Then we wouldn't have so many ex-forces families (thanks to Labour scum) on the streets!
Just because they live in a council house, doesn't mean they live there for free.Means test every councilhouse tenant annually, (all inhabitants of the adress) and throw them out for the really needy. Then we wouldn't have so many ex-forces families (thanks to Labour scum) on the streets!
Edited by JMGS4 on Wednesday 4th August 10:57
I think you'll find that housing benefits are means tested.
I hadn't realised people got them for life previously! What a piss take.
When the kids move out the parents should be offered relocation to housing suitable for them or introduced to the private sector. Stupidly I had assumed people and the houses they were in were assessed regularly and placed appropriately.
The worlds mad if it thinks the current system is ok and doesn't need to be changed.
When the kids move out the parents should be offered relocation to housing suitable for them or introduced to the private sector. Stupidly I had assumed people and the houses they were in were assessed regularly and placed appropriately.
The worlds mad if it thinks the current system is ok and doesn't need to be changed.
Alfa numeric said:
True, but I'm guessing the rent they pay is far below market value.
Possibly, I wouldn't know.And surely this is why Cameron is suggesting that as people's circumstances change they should move into privately rented housing?
The other problem is, once these people, who presumably are on low incomes, retire, they will either need to move back into council housing or will receive large amounts of housing benefit in order to pay private rent?
CzechItOut said:
The other problem is, once these people, who presumably are on low incomes, retire, they will either need to move back into council housing or will receive large amounts of housing benefit in order to pay private rent?
Why is that a problem? That could be 40 years in the future - are you saying it's better just to let them stay put for 40 years rather than allow someone who truly needs the place a chance to get back on their feet?!?!CzechItOut said:
The other problem is, once these people, who presumably are on low incomes, retire, they will either need to move back into council housing or will receive large amounts of housing benefit in order to pay private rent?
True, but they will move back into a one-bedroomed retirement residence, not hog a four bedroomed family home until they kick the bucket.Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff