Should council house rents be at normal market value?

[Mecky]

The point is that social housing isn't being built, which is one of the reasons prices are so high & the main reason we have 22 year waiting lists. Market value rents would provide an incentive for councils to build, otherwise they're subsidising it. It'd also help to stimulate the private housing sector.

 

If we were to have a large social building program, that could increase supply in the housing market & bring rents back to a reasonable level.

 

There are people in council houses that could afford to pay market value rent, why should we subsidise them?

 

For those that can't afford it there is housing benefit.

 

 

Social housing IS being built, there's just not enough to go around, now more people want it, because the Tories sold it off with their right to buy scheme. That said, a 10 minute walk around the area in which I live will throw up about 20 vacant council properties.

 

You can get property within a week, however the supposed better off areas (I'm better than you) have longer waiting lists.

[Conrod]

There are 5 million on the waiting list for social housing.

Unemployment (JSA bean counted) is at 2.5million?

I'm not on about building social housing for criminals and the workshy, but for working people whose wages are far below the cost of housing in country with a lack of housing relative to the number of households in it.

Not that many years ago, extended families would live in the same house because they could not afford property for every couple in the family.

 

Why should it be seen as God-given right now? How about if people can't afford something, they don't get it. Simple, really.

Or should the goverment provide social hypercars? I'd like a Zonda rather than a bigger house, but can't afford one - maybe affordable Zondas should be provided for people like me?

[Mecky]

Not that many years ago, extended families would live in the same house because they could not afford property for every couple in the family.

 

Why should it be seen as God-given right now? How about if people can't afford something, they don't get it. Simple, really.

Or should the goverment provide social hypercars? I'd like a Zonda rather than a bigger house, but can't afford one - maybe affordable Zondas should be provided for people like me?

 

That's just an extremely foolish comment as you well know. You will kick yorself for it.

[chem1st]

So there's no reason here to charge a reduced rent in social housing. The housing benefit covers the low income problem, and anyone who's situation improves should end up paying the full market rate and ultimately move on to allow someone else in need to use that house.

 

It's not reduced its been rising above inflation YoY for well over a decade.

 

Increasing the cost of social housing because there is a lack of housing is stupid, even more so when you expect to cover the cost of it with housing benefit.

 

Housing benefit is set to fall, this is one of the things that keeps the price of property high.

 

You cannot prop up the market with housing benefit, that is grossly unfair. You must have a vested interest in high property prices.

 

Social housing is not a quick return investment for greedy banker types, its a long term social investment, that works because we have too many greedy banker types trying to extract every penny from the working man in rent.

[Conrod]

That's just an extremely foolish comment as you well know. You will kick yorself for it.

Probably not. There's nothing foolish about suggesting that people should accept they can't afford everything in life they want.

 

I just don't see why some people automatically assume the poor should have a 'right' to their own house. A house should be the reward of effort and success - and perhaps years of saving for a deposit while living in extended family homes or state hostels.

[Bonjon]

Yeh I think they should, but the poll is pointless as all it does is show who is a council tennet (the no's) and who is a private renting tennat/home owner(the yes's)

[L00b]

(...)They are designed for people who cannot afford to buy a house, yet can afford to pay something towards the house

People in that situation usually rent out. Any EU country you care to name, and it's usually a majority (of the population) rather than a minority. Seems it's mostly (only?) in the UK and Ireland where people have this notion that "rent is dead money". And look where that's put them both, lately.

 

Problem:

They are not designed for people lucky enough to be able to splash out £120k+ on a house, but those on an income of between £20 and £35k per annum, whose only other option is to throw money down the drain renting privately. (...)

Solution:

I just don't see why some people automatically assume the poor anyone should have a 'right' to their own house. A house should be the reward of effort and success - and perhaps years of saving for a deposit while living in extended family homes or state hostels.

It's only common sense, really.

[Bonjon]

Just to add, I think the idea of a council house for life is daft, I fully believe it should be a temporary stop on the way to either buying or renting privatley. And i'm glad the govnmt see it this way now.

[truman]

There are 5 million on the waiting list for social housing.

 

 

Does that include people who are already in it but want to move for whatever reason?

[Greybeard]

People in that situation usually rent out. Any EU country you care to name, and it's usually a majority (of the population) rather than a minority. Seems it's mostly (only?) in the UK and Ireland where people have this notion that "rent is dead money". And look where that's put them both, lately.

 

 

I believe Germany has the highest proportion of renters but also has much tighter regulation on rent control and tenancy agreements etc. than is available in UK.

 

Rachmanism is still alive and well in UK and most people would want better protection from unscrupulous landlords to consider renting as a long term option.