It's never a good idea when staff needed to work in schools, hospitals, GP surgeries, emergency services etc are priced out of the housing market or are highly-paid, as many of the most senior staff are, but prefer to take their money and buy a house in a part of the country where they get more house for their money, access to better state schools, less-crowded GPs, dentists, an easier and cheaper commute etc.
That impoverishes rich cities in many ways
We could solve that with regional pay in the NHS, which something else this govt is proposing. That makes me uneasy, but if someone wants to make an argument for it that shows that it doesn't result in impoverished public services, I'm happy to listen.
Or we could just take the view that if people are rich enough to live in Westminster, for instance, they won't need public services so it doesn't matter.
Some people don't. They can afford to flit between their houses in chi-chi areas of cities around the world. Even in that case, in some of those cities it's very dangerous to step outside areas without private security patrols.
But for most people living in the rich parts of the country it's a fantasy.
And I don't want that to happen to London even if I was super rich.
Or we could build carry on building affordable homes for key workers and tie them more tightly to their jobs if lots of people were shown to be egregiously abusing the system.