to think that the government just needs to build masses of new council housing to solve the housing crisis

[fakenamefornow]

In the past those who could afford to buy a house did and those who couldn't afford to buy a house got council housing, either way people had a secure home to live their life and raise a family. Now it is much more difficult for young people to access either of these options, instead they live in private rented, paying a fortune and with no security.

PWC said recently that in 10 years time 40% of households will be in private rented. What is going to happen when these people retire? In the past home owners will have paid off their mortgages and live off their pensions, no ongoing housing costs for the state to pick up. Council tenants would still have rent to pay in retirement so would receive HB to do so, this money would be going back into the pocket of the council, so effectively, no ongoing cost for the state to pick up. Private renters are imo unlikely to have pensions big enough to pay rent on a house so will receive HB, this will go to private LL at massive cost to the state.

I heard that the Gov plans to make public institutions sell of land for housebuilding to private companies. Why don't they just build the housing themselves and use it for social housing thereby dodging the bullet coming our way and helping out our young people now. Social housing used to be for everyone, now it seems it's just for those up shit creek.

I know, I know very little about economics, I don't pretend I do so please don't be rude about my lack of knowledge, just explain why building lots of social housing isn't the best plan. The only reason I can see for the Gov not building social housing is ideology, but I think pursuing that ideology is just to expensive in the long run.

I agree we desperately need rent caps. I applied for a mortgage because I couldn't afford rent. Renting is tow to three times more than mortgages here now.

what small print should be explained please?

Achieve its a best guess, I dont want to get hung up on it unless you think it would costs more? £1k seems fair price on what a council might spend maintaining a property yearly

I'm just trying to put some numbers to the 'they cant build and maintain them' arguments as to wether they hold water or not and to me it doesn't.

Wow you're upset.
Ok. Not everyone is aware what they are taking on when they buy. My old mum wasn't.
My friends brother made no attempt to house himself and got into debt because " he was getting grannies hoos anyway so why bother?" Grannies house was sold when she developed dementia. He is on his arse. I think just shouting about home ownership being the dream is the wrong approach. Make it clearer to folk it's not a guarantee of middle class living and a solid start for your kids. It isn't always. I don't see why you're so irate at the suggestion that maybe not everyone buys their council house with their eyes wide open.

Furthermore, why do people think selling off council houses has reduced housing stock? It hasn't. it is still here. I'm sitting in an ex-council house right now. It has made it possible for millions more people to become home owners. Where would we be living if this stock had remained the prerogative of a very tiny, select proportion of society who is entitled to apply for council housing?

Ex council houses that are sold on (in London at least) mostly belong to private landlords now. So same housing stock, higher rents, higher HB costs. But there is only a very tiny, select* proportion of society who can buy them. Anyone can apply for council housing. Build more and the 'tiny' proportion who can have a council house will increase.

RTB would have been okish if the money from selling then was spent on building/buying more property but this was specifically forbidden because maggie wanted rid.

We need more housing and, IMO, the best, most efficient, cheapest way for govt/tax payers way to do this would be to increase the council housing stock.

Notasingle - not sure who you mean is upset, I just wondered what you meant, that's all. But no one seems upset on this thread?

Breaking, £1k seems reasonable but in London, if it was 1% of "value" the council would be paying a shocking amount of money to maintain each flat. I realise that's a very London-centric observation though - we do live on Planet Crazy at the moment.

Maybe you aren't upset. Just very....direct? I tend to be cuddly on mn

Not just right to buy that's to blame. When I rented from the council every couple of years we would have to vote on selling stock to a housing association, seems the councils just want rid as some one pointed out up thread, they can't afford the maintenance. Also, every new housing estate has a percentage of affordable homes, though a housing association, so they are being built.

Ex council houses that are sold on (in London at least) mostly belong to private landlords now.

Not in my experience, on this estate, about 25% are owned, and the owners live in them. The whole estate is better off for having people that committed to the area long term. many of the council tenants are short term occupant, although one or two families have been here decades, and are equally committed. It isn't actually the case either, that more ex council homes in this price bracket are owned by land lords than non ex council homes. That only holds true when you look at much higher value homes.

Anyone can apply for council housing but there would mostly be no point.

selling council housing has given millions of people the chance to become home owners, they would not otherwise have had.

To answer the other questions, our maintenance is roughly £1500 er year.

Not every new housing estate. It's only for developments over so many units and the developers seem to renege further along the line. Also 'affordable' isn't affordable to many, or even most people.

It's not a simple one issue problem. There are no easy answers and this govt aren't interested in solving it anyway.

This government doesn't give a shit about the housing crisis.

I do agree that we need more council housing but I don't think that there is an easy or affordable solution to providing it any time soon.

I don't agree that people should be forced to sell their homes to pay for care fees. It doesn't sit well with me that a person who has worked hard to pay for something and never had any housing benefit to assist them in doing so is then forced to sell the asset to receive care meanwhile the renter who might have received housing benefit for a good chunk of his life can receive his care for free (I am not including RTB homes in this as I totally don't agree with RTB).

We need more affordable rental homes but the govt seem hellbent on reducing the stock of affordable rental homes, particularly with their idea that they can force housing associations to sell under a RTB scheme.

The London House prices make me every time I look. Horrific!

Two new 'affordable' housing estates are in the final phase in my town. A quick look on right move shows many are up for rent. BTL LL's are snapping them up like hot cakes. They are pokey little 2 bed terraces and £50 cheaper than what I'm currently paying for a 5 bed Victorian semi detached.

And I love in wales, nowhere near the south east before anyone jumps on that band wagon...

*live

councils will be getting rent from the houses they build.

Many councils don't have housing stock anymore. They were transferred to Housing Associations and arms length management organisations amongst others.

One of the great things about the post-war council house building boom was that it was everywhere. Every village had its few council houses so there were affordable homes in every community.

I'm sure I read somewhere that social housing rents are to be made to match market rent of areas they are in, or did I dream it?

There are moves in that direction. I think I heard mentions of 80% round my way.

There should be a law instead saying landlords can only charge 110% of council rents instead!

YANBU. But there is no will to do this. The affordable housing con described above shows the motives of those in power. To those who have personally benefitted from the RTB scheme, no one can blame you. But on a wider level, the cost to society is evident.

They need to cap private rents

Oh sure. And the Rent Acts were a great success. And the moon is made of green cheese and the Yeti and the unicorn live there.

Break NIMBY - centralise planning permission if need be - and allow private building with a covenant against BTL on new build.

Offer downsizers a bond which will pay off without interest but in accordance with the house-price index when they die and will not be confiscated to pay nursing-home fees.

Some good comments there Andrew. That's interesting about BTL on new build land. Perhaps there should be no BTL on new build land for say 25 years and of categories of property - whether London or elsewhere - that are typical first time buyer homes and those with a A/B council tax band. I think that principle should be followed up by Government. Interesting.

Tory ideology is that everyone should own their own home, the state should not have to provide for people and that commercial capitalism, i.e private businesses making money is the best type of economy. There is no way that a right wing government will build council houses in this day and age.

YANBU. You might say you don't know much about economics but everything you say makes sense (or at least it does to me and I did undergrad economics). In terms of being able to afford it actually I'd say the economics is on your side. This is investment spending so very different to day to day government spending. It provides an asset for the future and an income (all be out below market rents) for the government. The analogy I would make is compare credit card debt to a mortgage - it's possible that a few thousands on a credit card is a bad idea but a hundred thousand mortgage makes sense. Similarly it's possible that we need to cut day to day government spending but investing in council housing is a sensible economic plan.