Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

AIBU to question Reform's plan to prioritise married couples for social housing?

342 replies

QueenSophia · 24/08/2026 14:01

Reform have proposed to prioritise social housing for various groups : 'Rules would be changed to reserve at least half of all social homes in England for British-born workers aged under 35, with prioritisation also given to married couples, veterans, victims of domestic violence and care leavers.'

I agree with DV victims, those with children, care leavers : veterans are also at high risk of homelessness. But why prioritise married couples over single people? I'm not convinced that's fair. I assume it's to encourage marriage which is a good aim but I'm not convinced if this is the right decision.

OP posts:
Original poster
QueenSophia · 24/08/2026 21:14

pointythings · 24/08/2026 20:37

Well, they want to leave the ECHR. And the ECHR makes it illegal to fire women for being pregnant. Given the fact that Pregnant Then Screwed are still very much in business, anything that increases the risk of discrimination against pregnant women is not desirable.

Show quote history

Sorry, I'd forgotten that. No, don't like the sound of that...

OP posts:
ClarkeandNewman · 24/08/2026 21:14

Last month Electoral Calculus predicted Reform's chances of winning a majority at the next GE at 2%.

I don't think we need to worry about their stupid, unworkable, crypto-fascistic Farage wank fantasy "policies".

XenoBitch · 24/08/2026 21:14

Theworldsgonemadagain · 24/08/2026 21:08

I think they should scrap social housing fullstop. Everyone has to provide for themselves, no handouts. In other countries family's help each other out more. It's not down to taxpayers to subsidise poor choices and caring responsiblities should come down to the family. Here old people get chucked in a care home, kids have kids to get council houses and refugees come in and sponge off the state. It's a joke. I'd stop the whole lot.

Many people in social housing work and pay rent.

Theworldsgonemadagain · 24/08/2026 21:08

I think they should scrap social housing fullstop. Everyone has to provide for themselves, no handouts. In other countries family's help each other out more. It's not down to taxpayers to subsidise poor choices and caring responsiblities should come down to the family. Here old people get chucked in a care home, kids have kids to get council houses and refugees come in and sponge off the state. It's a joke. I'd stop the whole lot.

ClarkeandNewman · 24/08/2026 21:07

Midnightmoonface · 24/08/2026 17:37

So a disabled adult being housed by the council? Not sure how that’s disproving my point.
Disabled adults already receive additional appoints when trying to claim housing vs an able bodied single adult, and rightly so. That doesn’t mean an able bodied single adult “deserves” to be housed in a 2 bedroom at the expense of the council.

Show quote history

I don't think you understand how council/social housing works since you've described it as subsidised and at the expense of the council.

JesseDavisGonnaHangOnInThereNSoul · 24/08/2026 20:54

BermudaRhombus · 24/08/2026 20:33

Not dissimilar, but much more dangerous. Far more people are falling for it.

Show quote history

Back in the 90s their reach was small.
Po box numbers
Paper sales
Stickers
Now with internet that same message reaches a wider audience.
The methods change but the message remains the same

Plmnki · 24/08/2026 20:48

errrr it’s reform. They are basically racists and fascists.

but you think they should be fair?

are you mad? Look up the T4 programme, it’s their next step.

why are you giving them the time of day? They should be shunned like the nazis they are, not have their policies subjected to ernest debate. Jesus wept.

JenniferBooth · 24/08/2026 20:40

abracadabra1980 · 24/08/2026 20:27

I agree with you and don't think married couples should have priority either. I feel sorry for boys/men. Women rightly get priority if they have children; men-nothing.

@MrsTerryPratchett posted an example of men getting priority and why.

And its not what you mean @abracadabra1980 its the person WITH THE CHILDREN who gets priority. its nothing to do with gender.

There are plenty of single women without kids living in HMOs

TopPocketFind · 24/08/2026 20:39

pointythings · 24/08/2026 20:37

Well, they want to leave the ECHR. And the ECHR makes it illegal to fire women for being pregnant. Given the fact that Pregnant Then Screwed are still very much in business, anything that increases the risk of discrimination against pregnant women is not desirable.

Show quote history

And repeal the equalities act

pointythings · 24/08/2026 20:37

QueenSophia · 24/08/2026 20:17

Rolling back of maternity rights? What policies are these?

Edited
Show quote history

Well, they want to leave the ECHR. And the ECHR makes it illegal to fire women for being pregnant. Given the fact that Pregnant Then Screwed are still very much in business, anything that increases the risk of discrimination against pregnant women is not desirable.

BermudaRhombus · 24/08/2026 20:33

JesseDavisGonnaHangOnInThereNSoul · 24/08/2026 20:18

More piss spouting from the pish fountain.
Ain't going to happen
Not dissimilar to the BNP rhetoric of the 90s.

Not dissimilar, but much more dangerous. Far more people are falling for it.

abracadabra1980 · 24/08/2026 20:27

I agree with you and don't think married couples should have priority either. I feel sorry for boys/men. Women rightly get priority if they have children; men-nothing.

JesseDavisGonnaHangOnInThereNSoul · 24/08/2026 20:18

More piss spouting from the pish fountain.
Ain't going to happen
Not dissimilar to the BNP rhetoric of the 90s.

Original poster
QueenSophia · 24/08/2026 20:17

paddleboardingmum · 24/08/2026 20:13

It's both a way to demonise single mums, perhaps popular with the Daily Mail/GB News crowd, and a way to make women stay in marriages irrespective of how they are treated. Which fits in with their rolling back of maternity rights etc. plans too.

Rolling back of maternity rights? What policies are these?

OP posts:
paddleboardingmum · 24/08/2026 20:13

It's both a way to demonise single mums, perhaps popular with the Daily Mail/GB News crowd, and a way to make women stay in marriages irrespective of how they are treated. Which fits in with their rolling back of maternity rights etc. plans too.

allthiscarryon · 24/08/2026 19:58

QueenSophia · 24/08/2026 19:38

Surely legally it would need to unless Reform want to repeal gay marriage? I doubt that.

Show quote history

Given how homophobic they are I’m sure they would
love to if they thought they could get away with it x

Shedsqueek · 24/08/2026 19:51

Probably irrelevant as they will never get in.

BermudaRhombus · 24/08/2026 19:47

We’re years away from an election and Reform will have u-turned on many of these headline grabbing announcements by the time it comes around. Most of what they have announced recently falls apart at the slightest interrogation and, more importantly for Reform, is simply too divisive. They need to win over a much greater portion of the British electorate to have any chance at a majority.

Original poster
QueenSophia · 24/08/2026 19:42

allthiscarryon · 24/08/2026 19:02

It’s bullshit, like everything else they say.
let’s give the married 25 year olds a house, fuck the single parents with kids, the kids who get kicked out of the care system at 18 because they’re ‘adults’, the disabled, the elderly and their carers.
Oh and fuck the key workers on low wages.

Show quote history

I agree there's big issues with what they're saying but small correction : they do at least say care leavers would also be prioritised.

I suspect they will say they're going to cut the waiting lists and build more so no one will have to wait too long.

OP posts:
NoNewsisGood · 24/08/2026 19:41

Surely the only point of them saying any of this is to get more column inches, which they succeed with every day. If we stop giving them air time, the country will be less divisive.

Original poster
QueenSophia · 24/08/2026 19:38

pointythings · 24/08/2026 19:23

I wonder whether it also applies to same sex married couples with children.

Surely legally it would need to unless Reform want to repeal gay marriage? I doubt that.

OP posts:
Original poster
QueenSophia · 24/08/2026 19:38

Rubydobydo · 24/08/2026 17:59

I’m in my late 60s and when I was a child many people, especially widowed women, took in lodgers. Paid the bills, people had a cooked meal to come home too, and was company for all.
Now people often live alone. One space, one person.
I was in a smallish Wiltshire town today, which had a noticeable amount of above shop property empty. Imagine is there was some encouragement to make this housing.
There used to be police houses, nurses homes, hotel staff living in….
there world wouldn’t be so difficult to change.

Yes, my great-great-aunt did this with ex RAF men after she was widowed. Company and gave her some financial security.

More generally, there's a lot if ways housing stock could be improved. More control over overseas & UK owners using second homes as investment. AirBNB more tightly controlled. Etc etc

OP posts:
pointythings · 24/08/2026 19:23

I wonder whether it also applies to same sex married couples with children.

Backedoffhackedoff · 24/08/2026 19:15

Midnightmoonface · 24/08/2026 18:48

The vast majority of social housing provision is subsidising rent prices by the council paying a portion or all of the rent cost.
The rent is still being charged whether you agree with the concept or not, the council is subsidising the tenant in receipt of council benefits either by a portion or all of the cost, therefore making it cheaper or in some cases but probably less common, fully free.

Show quote history

“The vast majority of social housing provision is subsidising rent prices by the council paying a portion or all of the rent cost.”

where on earth did you get this idea?! This isn’t true at all. The residents pay their rent.

allthiscarryon · 24/08/2026 19:02

QueenSophia · 24/08/2026 14:01

Reform have proposed to prioritise social housing for various groups : 'Rules would be changed to reserve at least half of all social homes in England for British-born workers aged under 35, with prioritisation also given to married couples, veterans, victims of domestic violence and care leavers.'

I agree with DV victims, those with children, care leavers : veterans are also at high risk of homelessness. But why prioritise married couples over single people? I'm not convinced that's fair. I assume it's to encourage marriage which is a good aim but I'm not convinced if this is the right decision.

It’s bullshit, like everything else they say.
let’s give the married 25 year olds a house, fuck the single parents with kids, the kids who get kicked out of the care system at 18 because they’re ‘adults’, the disabled, the elderly and their carers.
Oh and fuck the key workers on low wages.

Swipe left for the next trending thread