| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| n/a |
Posted - 30/05/2007 : 17:27:51
Social Housing Shows 40,000 Deficit Because of Record Asylum Numbers
The unprecedented number of asylum-seekers granted permission to stay in the UK in recent years has exceeded the number of new social houses built in the period by nearly 40,000, says a new report out today.
In a short summary of the position - following the comments from Dagenham MP and Government Minister, Margaret Hodge at the weekend - the paper, from think-tank Migrationwatch points out that new social housing has been lower even than the number of principal applicants granted asylum or other permission to stay in the UK over that period.
"It once again highlights the Government’s almost total lack of planning for the effects of the record asylum, and immigration levels, over the past 10 years which has had a major impact on the availability of social housing for the native population," said Migrationwatch chairman, Sir Andrew Green.
"This is not to imply that those in genuine fear of persecution should not be given refuge; it is to suggest that the government should have taken account of the very large numbers involved in making provision for new social housing,’ he said. ‘The evidence is clearly that they have failed."
Another reason for the high cost of housing. |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Daveb |
Posted - 24/06/2007 : 20:20:46
I was being SarCARstic |
| nightbird |
Posted - 24/06/2007 : 20:16:43
quote:
Originally posted by Daveb
Need to vote Labour then.
The peoples party.
Far from it, its under Labour the lists have gone out of control.
Labour can't seem to get to grips with any of these national problems, just hope Brown is going to be better...
|
| Daveb |
Posted - 24/06/2007 : 19:08:10
Need to vote Labour then.
The peoples party. |
| nightbird |
Posted - 24/06/2007 : 10:48:12
quote:
Originally posted by Miriam Binder
There is no problem with rental ... this whole idea of homeownership being the only way to go is ludicrous. However there is a case to be made for reasonable rents with a decent lease and accountable landlords.
Thats exactly what we want more properties to rent at reasonable prices rather than to buy,renting allows for a more flexible work force and social movements to where the work is.
Not everybody wants a millstone of a morgage around their necks fo 25 years or more......
|
| Miriam Binder |
Posted - 24/06/2007 : 10:10:36
There is no problem with rental ... this whole idea of homeownership being the only way to go is ludicrous. However there is a case to be made for reasonable rents with a decent lease and accountable landlords. |
| Vince Meegan |
Posted - 24/06/2007 : 09:57:29
One of the surprising things - to me at any rate - is the detachment from grass roots thinking that seems to affect people once they become MPs or ministers. Perhaps it is the demands of Westminster and the committee systems there, but in conversations with them one would often find they are on a different wavelength, oblivious to the day to day travails and concerns of 'ordinary folk'. One junior transport minister was quite incredulous when I told him of the misery of a four hour traffic jam and poor women having to clamber up a slippery embankment in the pouring rain to find privacy to go to the toilet. It had never occurred to him.
I genuinely believe the upper political classes don't understand how acute the housing problem is. The people at the bottom of the system are the last ones who will write to their MP. At the present time this crisis has only caught the attention of the broadsheets. Once the tabloid pitbulls get their teeth into it we'll see Government and Opposition scuttling around trying to offer their sticking plaster solutions.
There is an item in today's Independent that tries to identify homes that are within the reach of first time buyers.
http://money.independent.co.uk/property/mortgages/article2699103.ece
It clearly identifies the problem of buy to let sapping the available supply.
It is high time the Chancellor (the new one) slapped a massive stamp duty on property which is not for the sole purpose of owner occupation. The same amount to be ring fenced and transferred to local authorities for building new homes.
|
| nightbird |
Posted - 24/06/2007 : 01:31:42
http://news.bbc.co.uk/player/nol/newsid_6760000/newsid_6769500/6769589.stm?bw=bb&mp=wm
BBC NEWS REPORT. |
| long time no see |
Posted - 22/06/2007 : 17:33:26
Thats because
Stinking New Labour
are Neo Conservatives.
FACT. |
| A Gold |
Posted - 22/06/2007 : 15:57:06
If you're young in Brighton but don’t have a degree or a trade (or a kid) you might as well pack your bags now.
New Labour MPs dont give a stuff about you, they're only interested in the London Champagne Socialist Set and the cheap foreign labour who are moving in by the coach load & forcing you out.
Where are the young protesters of yesteryear? Are they happily sleep-walking into this nightmare scenario or too busy on their Nintendos & MSN or fighting each other in Churchill Square?
Its your future kids, do something about it now.
Get aware ffs |
| nightbird |
Posted - 22/06/2007 : 13:40:11
Labour have failed dismally again when it come to social housing in Brighton the waiting lists get longer.
In Brighton and Hove the figure has rocketed by 400 per cent since Labour took power in 1997, up from 1,611 households to 8,056, one of the highest rises in the South East,just no future for our youngsters if they stay in Brighton..... |
| thedelboy |
Posted - 22/06/2007 : 10:41:26
I do See your point Vince, |
| Vince Meegan |
Posted - 21/06/2007 : 20:54:45
Well yes, you are right, Delboy, but no policy or solution will please everyone no matter what you do. Any intervention in a free market will be described as unfair and distorting the market, but if we are sincere about addressing the problems of starting on the housing ladder then we have to start someplace.
My three kids have no hope of ever being able to afford a modest home in this city unless they win the lottery or something. There are thousands of parents like us who have kids in their twenties who show no sign of ever moving out. I've tried wrapping their sandwiches in road maps but they don't take the hint.
The intention of the Irish government is to reduce the outlay that a first time buyer would have to find.
It won't reduce the market price of a property or make it more 'affordable' - whatever that means. But it will mean that an investment purchaser would have an additional cost not faced by the first time buyer. Now, this is only a minor step in the right general direction. The only way I can think of giving a first time buyer a realistic chance of competing in the market is by increasing stamp duty multiple times for those not using the property as their main residence. So investors and those buying second homes and holiday residences would have to pay much more to buy a house than a first time buyer would. If the investor has to pay (for example £20,000) more than the market value than a first time buyer has to, he might decide that better investments lie elsewhere. It might also put the cheapest properties out of the reach of many casual 'buy to let' landlords. I would also propose that the multiplication factor diminishes at the higher end of the market.
It is not perfect, but what is? |
| thedelboy |
Posted - 21/06/2007 : 20:06:34
Vince no offence "but are you real?"high stamp duty means that the poorer person would not have the funds to buy"Ok there could be a deal for first time buyers to pay a "lower"stamp duty;that would be a sensible way of ddoing things(sorry if I come accros rude no offence meant) |
| Vince Meegan |
Posted - 21/06/2007 : 08:44:14
I see the Irish government has made a serious gesture towards helping first time buyers. Stamp duty is higher there than here, so it should give the first timers a slight advantage over the buy-to-let locusts.
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/firsttime-buyers-get-boost-as-stamp-duty-abolished-705984.html |
| nightbird |
Posted - 19/06/2007 : 01:09:22
http://www.theargus.co.uk/display.var.1479228.0.cheap_homes_crisis.php
So what is "affordable housing" then, affordable to who? |
| Miriam Binder |
Posted - 14/06/2007 : 21:29:33
They'll play it along Thedelboy and still won't do anything till they are good and ready. |
| thedelboy |
Posted - 14/06/2007 : 21:28:11
cannot have a stairlift due to health and safety!house was converted into flats,council know my predicament but do not give a toss!!I am now trying to get a solicitor to act on my behalf,to force them into some kind of action |
| Miriam Binder |
Posted - 14/06/2007 : 12:32:00
You know how it is ... when they cannot cut the cloth according to your needs they cut it according to their wants. |
| nightbird |
Posted - 14/06/2007 : 12:12:34
Thats what "care in the community" was really all about, hiding poverty, pain and suffering behind closed doors and saving money to boot. |
| Miriam Binder |
Posted - 14/06/2007 : 12:05:51
Well, yes I expect that extremely urgent cases are looked into first but the rest is done as a first come first served basis. |
| nightbird |
Posted - 14/06/2007 : 11:55:24
quote:
Originally posted by Miriam Binder
Assessments are being done on a first come first served basis. It is my understanding that they are currently dealing with requests for assessment made back in August September of last year.
Not quite right Miriam, its done by needs priority but no consolation when budget restrictions limit the amount that can be done each financial quarter.
Cut backs have severely damage these services,its so unjust when money is wasted elseware.
|
| Miriam Binder |
Posted - 14/06/2007 : 11:44:25
Assessments are being done on a first come first served basis. It is my understanding that they are currently dealing with requests for assessment made back in August September of last year. |
| nightbird |
Posted - 14/06/2007 : 11:42:57
quote:
Originally posted by thedelboy
last weeks home move magazine had the grand total of 16 properties,most of which were for over 50sand 60s(shelterd)I am getting pissed off with it as I have more amore trouble trying to get up my stairs!!and my fuck up nieghbours in the upstairs flat flooded my place monday night which in turn flooded the chap downstairs from me(my microwave is no longer working
Homemove is just crisis management at its worse, they put you in this hamster wheel and keep you going and going while they hope somebody in government will build new social housing at some point.
Its not going to happen is it for a long time.
thedelboy, why don't you ask for a stair lift ask for a assessment ? |
| thedelboy |
Posted - 14/06/2007 : 10:13:45
last weeks home move magazine had the grand total of 16 properties,most of which were for over 50sand 60s(shelterd)I am getting pissed off with it as I have more amore trouble trying to get up my stairs!!and my fuck up nieghbours in the upstairs flat flooded my place monday night which in turn flooded the chap downstairs from me(my microwave is no longer working |
| The Duke of Uranus |
Posted - 12/06/2007 : 10:00:17
Reading this thread makes me realise my wife and myself did the right thing moving out of Brighton. We now live in an area where 50% of new build housing has to be reserved for locals with prices capped at 100k for a 3 bedroom house and less for smaller properties. Our council also has a nice policy of charging higher council tax for holiday home owners in the area of which there are quite a few. |
| Martha Gunn |
Posted - 12/06/2007 : 09:16:16
In Bevendean, the Coombe Road area and increasingly Hollingdean, masses of family homes are now inhabited by students renting from landlords who have filled their boots through buy-to-let. Many of these houses are ex-council and now have many more adults crow-barred into them than was designed. |
| Vince Meegan |
Posted - 12/06/2007 : 08:31:10
If the local authorities had been able to build new houses with the revenue from the sell off of the old ones, it would have made no practical difference.
The houses were sold for a fraction of their true value. For the purposes of accelerating the sales, I suspect even that 'top line' value was heavily discounted. Had these homes been sold at their real market price, even then this would not necessarily have covered the cost of acquiring land and building more homes. And what stops those tenants of the new homes exercising their 'right to buy'? Ad infinitum.
One of the issues that really troubled me was the proposal that housing associations should take over the council's housing stock. If that were to happen would tenants still take the 'right to buy' with them, and if so, would that same 'right' be extended to an association's existing tenants? The answer I got was 'yes'.
It follows that over a period the social housing stock would inexorably diminish as better off tenants bought the (heavily discounted) properties.
Any why wouldn't they? Anyone can sell a fiver for two pounds, and only a fool would pass up the chance to buy a home at a similar rate.
Though the sell off of council houses has created a void at the bottom end of the housing supply, I remain of the view that the 'Buy to Let' phenomenon is responsible for the drought of starter homes for first time buyers. Interesting item in Saturday's Guardian on that topic :
http://money.guardian.co.uk/property/buyingtolet/story/0,,2098623,00.html
|
| thedelboy |
Posted - 12/06/2007 : 07:56:40
the right to buy was a good scheme,shame that local councils did not re-invest the money they made into building new properties!!if they had of done we would probably have an excess of empty properties,as building a house from scratch is cheaper than buying a property already built(FACT) |
| FUBAR |
Posted - 10/06/2007 : 18:31:03
they do by with council tax and the other myriad ways to get a pound out of your pocket..... |
| nightbird |
Posted - 09/06/2007 : 21:12:25
The right to buy at dicount prices was wrong, who wouldn't buy at such low prices.
Maggie used social housing as a political tool to gain votes,and for nothing else.
If these rules are moral and just why not apply them to the private sector housing? |
