The social cleansing of social housing.

[marty21]

There is nothing in the tenancy agreements linking rent with income .So, it's likely this will only affect new tenants , and not many new tenants are on that sort of income. They could force people to sign new tenancy agreements which incorporates a rent/income clause but I can't see that happening . It looks like window dressing , Osborne showing his adoring loyal Tories that he is kicking the scum good and hard.

On top of all that , councils don't currently check income unless you are claiming HB or CTB, so I don't know how Osborne thinks there are so many 'high' earners living in social housing . It is going to need more staff to check income , etc at a time Councils are shedding staff due to cuts . The fact that any additional income does not go to the council means they need to employ extra staff to collect money that does not benefit them at all?

On top of this ridiculous idea , is the continued promotion of RTB (I think rather than 1 built for every 1 sold , it is 1 built for every 20 sold ) and the extension of RTB to Housing Associations too

One would think that all this promotion of home ownership is a way to solidify the tory vote

 

[ViolentPanda]

George Osborne wants to further reinforce social housing tenancy as a badge of economic (and moral) failure: Budget to cut housing subsidies for higher earners.

It will also increase demand in an already under supplied mortgaged housing market, while shifting spend from goods and services to servicing debt.

The policy is pure ideology; above average earners in social housing are wrong (they're not making the optimal neo-liberal choice) and need to be shown to be so, while the much greater number of social housing tenants on below average incomes need to be reminded of their place. And all those already mortgaged need the reminder to behave provided by a residualised and stigmatised social housing sector.

Not cheers at all - Louis MacNeice

The piece is pure ideology too. There's no subsidy involved.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Remember the huge campaign calling for this, and the election pledges? No, me either. It's pure 100% proof mendacity.

Seriously, how can all people of good will put aside differences and strategise for not having to put up with half a decade of these denizens of criminality?

Proof system of measurement means 100% proof is 50% ABV. What you mean in 200% proof mendacity.

 

[Louis MacNeice]

The piece is pure ideology too. There's no subsidy involved.

Check out Julia Hartley-Brewer (Oxford) on Broadcasting House this morning: BBC Radio 4 (36.50 mins) She is absolutely explicit about the immorality of higher earners being in social housing.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice

 

[marty21]

Check out Julia Hartley-Brewer (Oxford) on Broadcasting House this morning: BBC Radio 4 (36.50 mins) She is absolutely explicit about the immorality of higher earners being in social housing.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice

They are making it out to be a scandal , despite there being no evidence that the sector is awash with rich people in social housing .

 

[crossthebreeze]

They are making it out to be a scandal , despite there being no evidence that the sector is awash with rich people in social housing .

And what gets me is how its apparently so immoral for a rich person (and £30K per couple is not exactly rich) to continue to rent a council/housing association house - where the house will go back to be allocated to someone who needs a house when you die/need to move on.
But it is apparently not scandalous for the same person, no matter how rich, to buy their council house at a greatly reduced price, so taking it out of the social housing sector forever, and even make a hefty profit on selling it or renting it out at full market rate?

 

[Norwoodité]

There is nothing in the tenancy agreements linking rent with income .So, it's likely this will only affect new tenants

Unless he does it through the tax system, in the same way that child benefit was cut to high earners, or the same as the spare room subsidy.

 

[SpookyFrank]

Have they not thought this through because this is going to cause a massive shitstorm.

Or are they just flying kites to distract from other (bad) stuff?

I don't think it's kite flying, it's part of their long game to give the private sector control over everything so that there's no corner of society left from which the idle rich cannot turn a profit.

 

[SpookyFrank]

Unless he does it through the tax system, in the same way that child benefit was cut to high earners, or the same as the spare room subsidy.

Spare room subsidy never existed in the first place. I challenge you to find any reference to the phrase from before 2010.

The so called 'removal of the spare room subsidy' was in fact a cut to housing benefit, which if we were to call a spade a spade would be renamed 'landlord subsidy'.

 

[RedDragon]

How would 'market rents' be determined via RightMoves

 

[ViolentPanda]

And what gets me is how its apparently so immoral for a rich person (and £30K per couple is not exactly rich) to continue to rent a council/housing association house - where the house will go back to be allocated to someone who needs a house when you die/need to move on.
But it is apparently not scandalous for the same person, no matter how rich, to buy their council house at a greatly reduced price, so taking it out of the social housing sector forever, and even make a hefty profit on selling it or renting it out at full market rate?

"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds". Ambrose Bierce. I'm sure that Osborne and Cameron agree with him.

 

[Puddy_Tat]

The piece is pure ideology too. There's no subsidy involved.

This (the concept that it's "subsidised") is another bit of tory bullshit that the labour party has consistently failed to call out in the last decade or two.

councils' ability to raise finance 'wholesale', the absence of lenders, letting agents and all sorts of other parasites extracting short term profits, and the long term nature rather than 'quick buck' approach to social housing all mean that councils do not charge rip-off rents. that does not mean that those rents are subsidised.

 

[DotCommunist]

wasn't it cmrd crow who said 'I was born in a council house, as far as I'm concerned I will die in one.'

its just the continuation of the destruction of universality for social housing which threatens osbournes only real trick to get figures that suggest growth- re inflation of the housing bubble that caused the new depression in the first place.

they want the housing projects of LA, they want the banleui of france.

 

[treelover]

There is nothing in the tenancy agreements linking rent with income .So, it's likely this will only affect new tenants , and not many new tenants are on that sort of income. They could force people to sign new tenancy agreements which incorporates a rent/income clause but I can't see that happening . It looks like window dressing , Osborne showing his adoring loyal Tories that he is kicking the scum good and hard.

On top of all that , councils don't currently check income unless you are claiming HB or CTB, so I don't know how Osborne thinks there are so many 'high' earners living in social housing . It is going to need more staff to check income , etc at a time Councils are shedding staff due to cuts . The fact that any additional income does not go to the council means they need to employ extra staff to collect money that does not benefit them at all?

On top of this ridiculous idea , is the continued promotion of RTB (I think rather than 1 built for every 1 sold , it is 1 built for every 20 sold ) and the extension of RTB to Housing Associations too

One would think that all this promotion of home ownership is a way to solidify the tory vote

A Journo on Sunday Politics said that Obsborne is convinced that with WTC Brown created his own 'client state' and now he(Osbourne) wants to create a similar one, but with home ownership at its core.

btw, the Tories are incredibly 'political' why aren't the opposition.

 

[peterkro]

"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds". Ambrose Bierce. I'm sure that Osborne and Cameron agree with him.

Ralph Waldo Emerson shirley.

 

[treelover]

Check out Julia Hartley-Brewer (Oxford) on Broadcasting House this morning: BBC Radio 4 (36.50 mins) She is absolutely explicit about the immorality of higher earners being in social housing.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice

Ex Guardian Journo Brewer, said the same on The Papers on BBC News last night, unequivocal

How will this go down with the public?, with the 'poisonous mood'(Sas) I think it will be popular.

 

[oryx]

How will this go down with the public?, with the 'poisonous mood'(Sas) I think it will be popular.

Quite likely, as the public are brainwashed into thinking that a lot of people living in social housing are greedy high earners coining it in - that's the ones who aren't lazy dolescum poncing off taxpayers, of course!

I'm fast running out of words to describe how much I hate this government.

 

[friendofdorothy]

Check out Julia Hartley-Brewer (Oxford) on Broadcasting House this morning: BBC Radio 4 (36.50 mins) She is absolutely explicit about the immorality of higher earners being in social housing.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice

I heard this. There was no mention of any numbers - apart from naming Bob Crow - sounded like it was aimed at him (except he's dead)
Is this another headline policy that will only affect a relatively few people while costing a fortune to implement and further stigmatise all council tenants as being poor? Encouraging more hate and hot air while totally ignoring the real housing problems, and the real problems of austerity.

I think I heard the figure of people earning over £30K being affected - where in London can a people who earns with a family afford to live on that income? Why is it govt policy to keep moving people - how does this help us individually or as a society?

There is not enough social housing for the people who qualify and need homes. The govt, councils and the private sector are doing too little to create more. Property is being built/ bought to be left empty by overseas buyers. Rents are not controlled. In London it effectively means social cleansing of our city of all those who are poor or in housing need. Property prices are ridiculous - serving neither local or national needs. Lambeth has been encouraging those who qualify for social housing into private rentals for years.

Thatcher laid the foundations of this fucked up state of affairs well. We have a bigger fight than ever on our hands now.

 

[Pickman's model]

A Journo on Sunday Politics said that Obsborne is convinced that with WTC Brown created his own 'client state' and now he(Osbourne) wants to create a similar one, but with home ownership at its core.

btw, the Tories are incredibly 'political' why aren't the opposition.

because they're crap.

 

[Pickman's model]

A Journo on Sunday Politics said that Obsborne is convinced that with WTC Brown created his own 'client state' and now he(Osbourne) wants to create a similar one, but with home ownership at its core.

if you bothered paying attention over a number of years you would have seen the same thing said 10 years ago with regard to publick sector jobs. do you think that was true? do you think this is true? do you think? or do you passively read without considering?

 

[marty21]

Unless he does it through the tax system, in the same way that child benefit was cut to high earners, or the same as the spare room subsidy.

Not the same at all , you sign a contract when you sign the tenancy agreement, a contract which can't be changed without you signing a new contract . The bedroom tax is different.

 

[Norwoodité]

Not the same at all , you sign a contract when you sign the tenancy agreement, a contract which can't be changed without you signing a new contract . The bedroom tax is different.

Child benefit then.

 

[marty21]

Child benefit then.

Not sure what your point is

 

[Louis MacNeice]

Child benefit then.

You don't sign a contract for Child Benefit.

Now would you care to have a go at answering my earlier question:

It's almost as if what they're saying is true, and what you believe is ignorant nonsense.

Care to expand on why you think this might be the case?

Cheers - Louis MacNeice

 

[Pickman's model]

Not the same at all , you sign a contract when you sign the tenancy agreement, a contract which can't be changed without you signing a new contract . The bedroom tax is different.

please don't muddy the waters with this sort of technical legal talk

 

[marty21]

please don't muddy the waters with this sort of technical legal talk

He doesn't seem to understand

 

[Pickman's model]

He doesn't seem to understand

you could write it in words of one syllable and he would still be incapable.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

They can come back and answer it under their original account if they want to.

 

[golightly]

Would this policy be applied to people who pay rent and mortgage in a shared ownership property does anyone know?

 

[Dogsauce]

Why is it govt policy to keep moving people - how does this help us individually or as a society?

A transient population won't organise against them. It's a way of fracturing communities, a defensive policy they've been running for decades. Round my way it's manifested in boarded-up social clubs. There is no society.