Well off council tenants must pay market rent

[the fonz]

Local plans in a national framework. We might be at cross purposes here but you're not making it clear what you think local planners do or what the national framework is. The person opposite me does it professionally but they are looking a bit bemused at what you have written.

 

In March 2012, the Government published the National Planning Policy Framework. This provides a balanced set of national planning policies for England covering the economic, social and environmental aspects of development. The policies in it must be taken into account in preparing Local Plans and neighbourhood plans and it is a ‘material consideration’ in deciding planning applications. (taken from the planning portal)

 

They disagree in respect of principal housing sites and is about to blow a blood vessel at the idea that getting planning permission in general is easy. I may have to sign off to calm them down.

 

I meant in terms of the expected outcome/ risk, granted you have to jump through more hoops but although the process is more onerous the outcome is more predictable. If your site is in a plan as residential, chances are you can build residential.

 

Im guessing your colleague works in the private sector. Consultants will always take on tricky sites as these bring in more revenue (and stress but the shareholders don't mind that).

Edited February 9, 2016 by the fonz

[herbalharry]

Why should it?

 

And how could it be?

 

throw it back at you - why should you suddenly pay more if you are earning £30k?

if you cant answer that beyond doubt then council housing should be available to all people.

[Orzel]

They would have an impact, if they were routinely granted.

 

The rest of Europe has far more self building than we do. They don't have building companies who build hundreds of identikit houses at a time, that's a uniquely British thing.

 

They do, but they build cheap affordable housing only.

Here there seem to be no other option.

 

---------- Post added 09-02-2016 at 18:42 ----------

 

throw it back at you - why should you suddenly pay more if you are earning £30k?

if you cant answer that beyond doubt then council housing should be available to all people.

 

Council housing is subsidised by having rents unrealistically low.

If they get cheap rent why shouldn't I?

Because I wasn't skint enough to qualify?

[herbalharry]

Housing should be available to all, not council housing.

 

so we have a further private housing bubble? no thanks.

if we (the gov) built enough council houses & houses in general we would have council housing for all who need it and it takes pressure off private and keeps prices low...and the gov wouldnt do these silly financial, money saving things which will only create more division...

 

what next cheap council houses to £25k and below? lol

then does it only go to single mums and less than £20k?

where does it end? its clearly not a solution to the housing shortage...the solution is to build more houses!

 

---------- Post added 09-02-2016 at 18:45 ----------

 

 

Council housing is subsidised by having rents unrealistically low.

If they get cheap rent why shouldn't I?

Because I wasn't skint enough to qualify?

 

well because you rent in the private sector (me too). Thats the way it goes in a free market.

But we are both being mugged off by the failure year on year to build houses.

 

there already exists priority scheme in the council housing system...all the gov is doing is building layers on top of this to cover up the fact they (and labour before) have systematically failed to address the housing crisis.

 

[the_bloke]

Is this your way of avoiding answering my question? Typical

 

I repeat:

 

'Give me one example where I suggested people should be committing fraud to massage their income figures?'

 

a) We've proved that someone on full time earning 20k wouldn't get HB

 

You then shifted the goalposts to narrow it down to the self employed or people from Mumsnet who deliberately engineer their hours worked to play the system. By juxtaposing both you are presenting the idea that self employed people have more control over the earnings they declare in order to receive the maximum of benefits.

 

Perhaps you'd like to explain it further?

 

We could do this all night, it still doesn't give your claim in your initial post any weight whatsoever. All we are doing is arguing about the wording of an already poor argument.

[Cyclone]

throw it back at you - why should you suddenly pay more if you are earning £30k?

if you cant answer that beyond doubt then council housing should be available to all people.

 

Why should someone earning more, pay more in social housing rent than someone earning less... Because it exists for those in need, easy.

I really can't imagine how you think the country could ensure that council housing was available to everyone in the country... It's a ludicrous idea.

 

---------- Post added 09-02-2016 at 22:55 ----------

 

So, your turn now.

 

Why should it?

 

And how could it be?

[El Cid]

Why should someone earning more, pay more in social housing rent than someone earning less... Because it exists for those in need, easy.

 

A few months ago I was a single parent living in a 2 bedroom council house, I am now a single person living in a 2 bedroom council house.

The council do not even house single people; they will be making me pay more next.

 

The vast majority of council homes were built decades ago, and the cost of building them has long since been recouped many times over by tenants paying rent to the council. There is no ‘subsidy’ – far from it, council housing is in fact a public asset that brings in more money for councils in rent than it costs in management and maintenance.

 

Until last year the government was also taking a slice of the surplus cash – £200 million a year.

[Cyclone]

I'm not sure what your point is. There is a subsidy, because that house could be let out at full market rate.

And the point of that housing, being in limited supply, is to house those who most need it, not those who most want it.

So if you start earning 60k/annum then it's right that you should either pay more, or leave.

[herbalharry]

Why should someone earning more, pay more in social housing rent than someone earning less... Because it exists for those in need, easy.

I really can't imagine how you think the country could ensure that council housing was available to everyone in the country... It's a ludicrous idea.

 

---------- Post added 09-02-2016 at 22:55 ----------

 

So, your turn now.

 

Why should it?

 

And how could it be?

 

Ive just explained why in a long and detailed post. Short answer is build more housing.

 

---------- Post added 10-02-2016 at 09:30 ----------

 

I'm not sure what your point is. There is a subsidy, because that house could be let out at full market rate.

And the point of that housing, being in limited supply, is to house those who most need it, not those who most want it.

So if you start earning 60k/annum then it's right that you should either pay more, or leave.

 

And priority system exists already. Everybody needs housing. Even 'rich' people on 30k upwards lol Im not sure what your point is?

Hardly anyone has a secure job. Earnings rollercoaster and the private rental market is both precarious & inflated. Council housing worked when there was enough coucil houses so it does work in principle...you could turn it another way and ask why should I pay a premium just because I happen to have a professional job? Why should an unemployed person have more rights to housing than me?

 

Here is a novel idea. Build more and stop selling off council houses into private market.

That solves your problem.

[Cyclone]

How could the country afford to build enough housing for everyone to be able to have social housing (and why would we want to)?