Archives for posts with tag: Housing benefit

A Bournville reader has drawn attention to the research findings revealed in a BBC programme.

The BBC’s Shared Data Unit, used freedom of information requests and Land Registry data to obtain information on 92,000 Right to Buy sales across England, Scotland and Wales recording an average of £69,000 each from the scheme since 2000, according to the Times. The biggest profits were in London, with buyers in Islington making almost £100,000 each on average.

From the data gathered, it was calculated that 140 tenants bought and resold their council homes within a month, generating a collective profit of £3 million or £21,000 each.

In one case, a former council tenant in Solihull purchased his/her council home for £8,000 and sold it for £285,000 nine days later. Did s/he and others pay back some or all of the discount they received – as those who sell within five years of purchasing are required to?

State of play until 2013: source, Ampp3d, a data-journalism website for Trinity Mirror 

In January 2017, Right to Buy was halted in Wales, as it was in Scotland in 2016 after 37 years.

The devolved administrations argued that its cost to the social housing supply has been too great. Despite central government pledges to replace homes sold through Right to Buy, most receipts have been returned to the Treasury rather than reinvested in affordable housing.

The Financial Times noted that some 40% of right-to-buy homes pass into the private rented sector, where they may continue to absorb government funds through housing benefit.

The Chartered Institute of Housing once again repeated its call for Right to Buy to be suspended in England.

*

Our reader commented that George Cadbury encountered similar profiteering in the early days of Bournville and set up the Bournville Village Trust to administer the project. See Bournville, Model Village to Garden Suburb, Harrison pp 44 Publisher Phillimore, ISBN 1 86077 117 3.

Extract from Management and Organisational Behaviour by Laurie J. Mullins 

 

 

 

o

Advertisements

Steve Walker blogs:

In spite of Labour’s General Election surge and its continued polling strength – not to mention more than thirty u-turns Labour under Corbyn had already forced from the Conservatives before the election – the line persists in some quarters that Labour is not an effective opposition.

That line tends to be spouted either by those who think defeating Brexit is the only important task for the opposition – or by those who talk like it for factional purposes – ignoring the fact that Corbyn’s handling of the issue has been intelligent, nuanced and politically skilful.

So, as it’s the time of year for round-ups, here is a non-exhaustive list of sixteen u-turns that the Conservatives have been forced to make because there is an opposition party willing and able to stand for something different.

And for those who think Brexit is the only vital issue, the first three are Brexit-related:

  1. Brexit deal vote u-turn
  2. Brexit impact assessment u-turn
  3. European Court of Human Rights u-turn
  4. Dementia Tax u-turn (unprecedentedly dropped from the manifesto before the GE)
  5. Pensions triple lock u-turn
  6. Housing benefit cap for supported housing u-turn
  7. Self-employed National Insurance increase u-turn
  8. School meals cost u-turn
  9. NHS Professionals sell-off u-turn
  10. Police funding u-turn
  11. Fire safety in schools u-turn
  12. Grammar schools u-turn
  13. Abortion for Northern Irish women u-turn
  14. Winter fuel payments u-turn
  15. Universal Credit 7-day waiting period u-turn
  16. Universal Credit freephone u-turn
  17. Fox-hunting u-turn
  18. Diesel tax u-turn
  19. Manchester terror attack costs u-turn
  20. Prisoner vote u-turn

The government has been weakened by Corbyn’s Labour taking a clear, firm stand – and the Labour surge resulting from the party presenting a genuine alternative.

2017 has been a historic year for Labour and much of that can be attributed to Corbyn’s vision, leadership and his strength in standing firm against an unprecedented media onslaught – and it’s been a better year for millions of UK people as a result of Labour’s effective opposition.

 

 

o

Many who are aware of the impending cuts to housing benefit (aka ‘reform the funding of supported housing’) and fearing these will lead to even more evictions are contributing to the government consultation, which closes on 13th February 2017.

Two off-beat non-political strategies have recently been reported:

A proposal by Peter Cave, a Londoner, in the FT:

flats-empty-k-ed-wharf-sheepcote-street

“Look down, late at night or early in the morning, as you wander within major towns and cities — and not just in the south-east — and you will see numerous people sleeping on the streets. They have hit unlucky. Look up at the large blocks of apartments; many are unoccupied, owned by those who have hit lucky in wealth and who treat property as investments.

“Here is a straight and frank solution. Initiate legislation, as an emergency, to allow the homeless to live in those empty apartments.

“The wealthy property owners and their friends in government would magically suddenly find the funds to build some good social housing for the homeless — and, indeed, for those suffering life in grim and expensive private rentals”.

Ajay Munot of Aurangabad acts

The Deccan Herald has reported that instead of holding a hugely lavish traditional wedding for his daughter, Mr Ajay Munot of Aurangabad decided to spend the money on helping the poorly-housed in his region.

ajay-munot-houses-600x369

He constructed 90 terraced houses on two acres of land and selected residents using three criteria: they needed to be poor, live in a slum and not suffer from an addiction.

Meanwhile in Britain, evictions continue to rise.

 

 

 

 

A Financial Times article opens: “David Cameron, prime minister, this month put forward what could be one of the worst policy ideas ever: extending “Right to Buy” to allow housing association tenants to purchase their homes for less than they are worth. It would make the housing supply crisis worse, by removing housing associations capacity to build more homes. It would push up rents, by creating a buy-to-let bonanza.

“Unfair and shameful . . .”

bournville social housing

Peter Roach, chief executive of Bournville Village Trust – a housing treasure trove – described the plan as “unfair and shameful . . .”. He said: “We understand people’s home ownership aspirations, but the concept of giving huge amounts of taxpayers’ money to provide discounts for people already enjoying the comfort of good quality affordable homes whilst at the same time watching waiting lists soar is unfair and shameful.”

Points made in the FT by Peabody Trust’s CE include:

  • One in three of the homes bought under Right to Buy, has been privately rented often to recipients of housing benefit.
  • A continuation of this would mean higher rents, with the taxpayer funding housing benefit payments.
  • This would be a compulsory transfer of social and charitable assets, at a discount, to people who have already benefited from sub-market rents and security of tenure.
  • A social asset would be lost.
  • Only one in 10 social homes sold under this scheme has so far been replaced.

MEP Keith Taylor has issued a new report on the UK housing crisis which demonstrates that the current system, with its unaffordable prices and rents and a depleted stock of social housing, is directly linked to Margaret Thatcher’s Right to Buy policy, and the failures of successive governments to ensure that those in greatest need are provided for.

Its summarised recommendations:

  • Rent control and tenant protection.
  • Investment in social housing as the best way of ensuring an availability of genuinely affordable housing.
  • New taxation frameworks to ensure those who have benefited from the property boom are contributing a fair share and disincentivise speculation and land banking.
  • New powers for local authorities to deal with empty properties, and the decriminalisation of squatting.
  • Structures to support and promote housing co-operatives.
  • Improved standards for construction and maintenance of all homes, to improve quality of life for residents and tackle domestic emissions.

Mr Taylor concludes that, though the current housing system is failing people, this doesn’t have to be the case. His report demonstrates that housing has become unsustainably expensive, and that fresh political will and innovative mechanisms are needed to make housing work for people again.

Keith Taylor sits on the Environment Committee and the Transport and Tourism Committee within the European Parliament. He also sits on the delegation for relations with the Palestinian Legislative Council.

.

Vested interest in Politics editor heard much of Adrian Goldberg’s discussion and posted a question today, adding an illustration by Birmingham against the Cuts:

Are we really all in this together?

Title: Government rules out a ‘mansion tax’ – working in China – but inflicts a tax on thousands of social housing tenants

Mansion tax

The SNP, Plaid Cymru and Greens will use an opposition day motion to call on the government to abolish its “unjust and unworkable” housing under-occupancy policy.

This docks housing benefit from families who are not using every bedroom in their home – ostensibly hoping they will move somewhere smaller.

As there are no such properties readily available this will act as a tax on the poor.

 Birmingham against the Cuts designed this poster and explore the outworking of the measure here:

bedroom tax

WEASEL WORDS IN PRIME MINISTER’S QUESTIONS PROGRAMME TODAY:

1. The expression is now ‘spare room subsidy

2. Disabled residents will not be affected- Cameron; later it was explained that many WILL: only those requiring round the clock care will be exempted.