Grenfell ex-residents should get a 3-bed house with a garden if that's what they want

[pingodolcepo]

Daily mail outrage that some of the residents are asking for a 3-bed house with a garden. But honestly, they have been through a living hell that was caused by someone else's very bad choices.

There are plenty of people in London that have a 3 bed council house, why can't these people that have dealt with horrors get one also?

I know someone that got a council house in Highgate in the 80s, was a cabbie with a good wage, bought it when offered and sold it a few years ago for over a million and now lives in a fab place with loads of land and a pool in the south of France. If plenty of normal people got houses why can't these poor residents get one? They won't ever be able to afford to buy it due to the high cost of london houses now.

YANBU. The families aren’t getting adequate compensation from the council/ anyone else for the hell they endured any other way, so I’d be thrilled to see it in the form of housing. Not at the cost of evicting established residents, maybe, but I’m fine with some queue jumping.

To be brutally frank, losing a relative but gaining an unexpected ILR and a subsidised new flat would not be such a tough choice for some of the survivors, esp. if you come from a country where life is cheap.

That is one of the most shockingly racist things I have ever read on here and I hope MN does something about it.

I still think this thread will be pulled, although I am amazed it has survived so long.
The problem is that, in real life, people do think like some of the opinions on here, me included.
If you refuse to accept this and just don't listen, the opinions don't go away.
That's why we ended up with Brexit and the US ended up with Trump.
People need to voice their thoughts - no matter how unpalatable - or they feel they are not being listened to.
Hoping that MAN will do something about it because you personally find it unpleasant will not make the 'horrible people' go away

MN not MAN!

The OP is a dimwit leftie, and is an example of everything that is wrong with this country today. Give me strength.........

I think this thread books down to idealism versus pragmatism in the end.

The problem is that, in real life, people do think like some of the opinions on here, me included.
If you refuse to accept this and just don't listen, the opinions don't go away.
That's why we ended up with Brexit and the US ended up with Trump.

Well this has taken a turn.

So in essence, if thinking people object to someone implying that these victims happily traded their loved ones for subsidised housing, because "their lives are cheap" - then they will end up with Donald Trump?

pragmatism

I think building more social housing is absolutely pragmatic.

As long as it is going to people who have been on the housing list for a long time and no subletting otherwise it is pointless.

No Makeourfuture, that's not what I said at all.
I said as long as people like Violet try to shut down debate if they don't like what's being said, people with an opinion that goes against the 'hive' will feel they are not being listened to.
Which is why they felt their only option was to vote for an alternative, hence Trump/Brexit.

I've recently located from London, in no small part because it is just too full and busy to get anywhere.

And we've been rather shocked to find that the lovely country village I grew up in is now a really busy town, where you can't get anywhere for the traffic - a journey that took just 20 mins a few years ago now takes well over an hour - and the train is so packed it's standing room only from about 6.45am. Cannot get a space in a nursery anywhere and the GP isn't sure they can fit us in. This is because the council has basically ringed the outskirts of the village with identikit "executive estates", where hundreds of depressing identical houses all rub shoulders with one another because the builders think profit is more important than gardens.

And yet people like make want to build unlimited social housing - without a thought for who should pay for it, other than that it should be higher earners - which will only make all these issues worse. And if we stop and do the roads and the trains first and THEN build lots of housing estates, what will be left of the uk? The green spaces and villages are why it's so nice to live here. We simply don't have that much room!

There has to be a better answer than "just build millions of houses right now" on green belt.

Hopsalong - are YOU on the waiting list in RBKC?

Otherwise you being happy for people to skip the queue when you have no idea of the situations of others in the queue is a bit odd.

I thought that would give you the vapours, VioletDaze! Firstly, you do not know my ethnicity because you view the world only from your perspective. Nor do you know the countries I have travelled through and seen attitudes and behaviours that are truly shocking. If only people like you could see - it would at least clear that notion out of your head that: the different peoples of the world view matters, hold principles & attitudes just like you. They do not.

There has to be a better answer than "just build millions of houses right now" on green belt.

The answer is to limit immigration to skilled workers and until house building and infrastructure have caught up with the huge rise in population since 1997. Otherwise what is the point in building more houses/schools/hospitals if there is neverending demand (a lot of which is low skilled and benefit dependent economic migration).

ChakraLines
what has your ethnicity or where you have traveled got to do with it?

Your post is awful.

Thankfully K&C are now doing the right thing & buying local property’s for the victims,

This may offend some of you on here, GOOD!

Hi Applebee! Got those links I asked for several pages ago? I'd love to read them!

An elderly lady I know who is originally from Sheffield told me that when she was about 12 the family were offered a council flat but first the parents had to go through an intensive assessment interview to see that they were upstanding citizens. Presumably if they had come across as yaboos they would have been declined or sent to a less 'nice' development. Now, it could be said that it's the yaboos who are looked after.

Do you remember that experiment some councils did 20+ years ago. They believed that if they gave flats in a, quiet orderly block to a handful of antisocial, troublesome tenants that the latter would take note of and learn from the families who conducted themselves properly, and thus would adjust their behaviour.

Instead the newly-arrived antisocials began to cause havoc. Of course they would, they loved the idea that they could inflict even more mental anguish on people who did not use their fists or throw chairs from balconies.

What hairbrained idiot thought of that? Based on what? My cat could have told them putting them there would be like giving them their own playground to have fun in. In fact, next door's cat could have told them as well. This was Faulty Thinking, and it runs through every organisation and individual because too many people feel that their perspective and fair attitude is in everyone.

Applebee - Did you not read those excellent posts from kittensinmydinner about the widespread deceit in council housing applications? There was a TV doc recently which followed various council investigators. Families purportedly "desperate" for a council flat were subletting it to another family and living elsewhere with a relative.

Well, I was partly raised out of the UK, I’ve lived in seven different countries and some of my family came to the west as refugees. So please tell me more about how we aren’t like British people and don’t have the same feelings.

And yes. That is racist. I don’t see why I should pretend it isn’t.

I think building more social housing is absolutely pragmatic.

I assume most people would agree with you, fundamentally. I do, although I have views that you no doubt wouldn't agree with on how it should be allocated and whether tenancies for life are remotely sensible. I also generically agree with the 'bedroom tax', with reviews in place for special cases, which will probably give you the vapours (to borrow a great phrase from upthread).

However, this obviously can't be done at the wave of a wand in already densely populated areas of London, so people surely need to be open to moving elsewhere.

Surely one of the biggest issues this country faces these days is the continuing centralisation around a small amount of major cities and London in particular, from the point of jobs, housing and so much more? It baffles me why this continues, particularly now that so many people are able to work remotely. At the risk of an arrogant 'we know what's best for you', I can't help thinking that many of these people who are so determined to stay in crowded London boroughs could have a much better quality of life elsewhere, if they were incentivised to move.

The answer is to limit immigration to skilled workers and until house building and infrastructure have caught up with the huge rise in population since 1997. Otherwise what is the point in building more houses/schools/hospitals if there is neverending demand (a lot of which is low skilled and benefit dependent economic migration).

Absolutely this (and no, I didn't vote for Brexit!).

I'm pleased they're buying new properties for those affected. Imo the government knew it wasn't safe, chose to do fuck all about it, thought they would save money due to the deaths of poorer people but instead has end up costing them. They absolutely should be sorting it out for the victims. I'm nowhere near London but found the images of that burning building, the videos of people inside praying for their families to be saved, people jumping out the windows or throwing their children out will absolutely stay with me forever. I can't imagine the trauma the victims have gone through. Even the fire fighters were traumatised by it.

Rebeccaslicker - what links ???? Why are you commenting on a subject that you obviously have know knowledge of ,

Maybe go away do some research & come back !

I’ve not said anything that hasn’t already been published since the inquiry started .

Hahaha and you claim to run a business? How are you not insolvent???!

YOU made massive claims about the council giving away land - but the one example you gave was utter bollocks - then you made sweeping statements about their accounts. All based on "local knowledge".

Now your answer is "do your own research".

Unless/until you can justify your comments, they remain utter bullshit, sorry.

RedForFilth

Imo the government knew it wasn't safe, chose to do fuck all about it, thought they would save money due to the deaths of poorer people but instead has end up costing them.

Are you able to provide any evidence, or even train of decisions or events, which lead to your conclusion?

a) How do you know the government knew it wasn't safe? Why the government? Which government department? Which safety standard are you referring to which the government apparently ignored?

b) How was the government involved in the refurbishment of Grenfell at all?

c) If it's all about poor people and the government, could you explain why the same cladding system is currently on thousands of private towers and buildings throughout the world that has nothing to do with social housing?

d) If the government is behind all of this and thought they could save money because of the deaths of poor people, what do you think the government would think about the deaths of non social housing professionals who are living in the same conditions?

I can't imagine the trauma the victims have gone through.
The same trauma that thousands of victims of home fires have gone through for generations, you mean?

It's quite simple really. All council/HA property should be tenanted only to British-born people in need of it. Globalist imperialism has taken the opportunity to muddy the waters, and central govt and councils are treating every overseas person as if they have the same housing rights as Brits on the waiting list. These newcomers may be economic migrants, asylum seekers or refugees.

In any other situation, to give precedence to others would be seen as not only unfair but abnormal. You would not pull out all the stops to ensure that the children down the road had enough food and a school place before your own, surely. It would be viewed as odd.

My parents were refugees after WW2 and they were happy and relieved to be in a safe country, not clamouring for and expecting to be housed before anyone else - in a town of their choice, in a neighbourhood of their choice. It wasn't available anyway. Those EUs who were knowingly renting a subletted flat in order to work in London should not be rehoused. And those EUs who had the tenancy to a council flat ...... my question is Why were they given a council flat in the first place, before Brits who are also working in London and living in private rented accommodation?

If a society begins to interfere with fairness and to use forced globalisation, it will be the ruin of that society. The 9 to 5 PAYE group of taxpayers is getting smaller every few years; few people will be able to qualify for a State Pension because there just is not enough work available for 35 years without significant gaps of unemployment.

I have read that our govt has chosen not to implement the 3 month rule with regard to EU people who travel to UK and have not found paid work in that time. This is at every member state's discretion and we are not using it. The talk was to deport them after 3 months, but I am told that govt has relented. This means they will be taking housing space that someone else could have had and their existence here will be fully subsidised by the taxpayer. Afterall, if there's no £ coming in how else will they live. The taxpayer is paying for non-contributors the opportunity to live in Britain at our largesse.
What's the rationale behind this?