Council Houses

[ReformCreweandNantwich]

I grew up on a Council Estate in W Sussex in the 1960s. They were decent houses for decent people. My father had served in the Fleet Air Arm from 1939-45 and after a post war nervous breakdown became a postman.

They were part of the social contract back then. Unfortunately today the "Shameless" generations have no idea what that means and no intention of contributing to the state by working honestly and paying tax.

Nonetheless I would like to continue to see Council Houses built for decent working families.

It’s 22 years since Shameless first aired on TV and it was inspired by Paul Abbott’s past growing up in 70s/80s, so I don’t think your ideas of the ‘the Shameless generation’ today stand up to much scrutiny. There’s always been decent people in council houses and always been some Shameless sorts, and the whole spectrum in between. To make misty-eyed proclamations about milkmen of yore and sigh about it all going to hell in a handcart is another thing that’s always gone on I guess.

There absolutely should be more council housing available to anyone who applies, but it should belong to 'the taxpayer' and there should be no right to buy. Anyone should be able to apply for one with a good chance of getting one, and the rent should be a set percentage of average income for the area, maybe with discounts for some groups (eg those who have children with SEN). Simply 'not working' should not be enough to push someone up the list, and nor should parenthood, unless there are special circumstances. Basically they should be paid for and used by taxpayers and those who are unable (rather than unwilling) to pay tax, and it should be up to us/them whether they are used as an insurance against falling on hard times, a stepping stone to ownership or as a lifestyle choice for ever, with an assured tenancy.

They should be well-built and well maintained, and have zero stigma attached. Anti-social tenants should be evicted with no right to return, so estates are good places to live, to bring up children and to grow older.

This can only be even a remote possibility if social care is taken out of council by a ring-fenced tax/insurance paid by everyone capable of work, though. As it is, paying for care homes takes so much out of council budgets that anything more is pie in the sky. Care homes are obviously essential, but we have to be prepared to pay for them via higher taxes, too. Unless there is a seismic shift in attitude to tax there will be a housing crisis and people paying fair rates for care in old age.

Right to buy worked well for my parents. They bought there four bedroom house for £19000 and it allowed them to then work hard but live comfortably.
A two bedroom house now costs £220000 in my area. These houses are not even good quality.
But the government can't fix anything so these awful houses will continue to be thrown up all over the place

Council housing is a scarce resource now, and needs to go to the most vulnerable and in need. That can be non-working but "decent" people too... whatever it is you are alluding too with that.

But yes, we do need more social housing.

Wages need to go up. So all those with a job feel like they’re being remunerated properly and can afford to live a decent quality of life from their full time work wage. It encourages people into work and people to stay in work. The price of everything is out of control. Even council house rents these days can be a lot.
Good quality and well maintained council housing is so important. Far too many families in temporary accommodation for too long. People also need to take some responsibility for their own lives though. I totally agreed with the cutting child benefit for more than 2 kids (with warning) and the extra bedroom tax. Help should be for those who are deserving and people shouldn’t get more than they need.

''@Keirawr · Yesterday 20:05

Homes don’t grow on trees. They cost to build. Everything that everyone deserves has to be paid for by someone. Making sweeping statements like ‘everyone deserves……’ is financially illiterate. It has to be backed by who are those people that should pay to provide it.''

With your logic I assume you are happy to see vulnerable, old or disabled people ending up homeless and dying in the streets? is that what you are saying?

Thankfully there is such a thing as a decent society and we all have a responsibility to contribute to the welfare of the most vulnerable.

You could lose your job tomorrow or be run over by a bus and become disabled and unable to work. I bet you would be happy that there is a safety to support you then...

If wages go up, then everything goes up. And then the increase in wages counts for nothing.
The trouble is, if you pay the people in what is considered the menial jobs more, the people in skilled and graduate jobs then moan that they may as well leave and do the menial jobs (less stress and same/more pay), so they ask for a pay rise etc
Not everyone is employed by some multimillion £ company with directors on £100k salaries. A lot of people are employed by small businesses where the person at the top is on not much more than the people they employ at the bottom. Think of a family run cafe. If they increase pay, they increase costs and that runs the danger of losing customers.

Yep, people are in temp accommodation for too long. I know someone who has been in a hotel for months and has only just been offered a place in a hostel. They feel like they have hit a jackpot. They could be in the hostel for several years before they even get a social housing place. There is just not enough social housing.

Anyone whose user name is supportive of the nearest party this country has to fascim, having a go at an entire group of people without presenting evidence, yet presenting it as fact, is being unreasonable and can fuck right off in my opinion.

Is there a question?

I also grew up on a council estate when they existed. I don’t think anyone living on my estate from back in the 80’s would be eligible for social housing now. I also don’t think they would be able to afford private rent relative to today’s prices. The only people eligible for social housing were I live are the really vulnerable, people with severe mental health problems, disabilities and addictions. The only people I know who are working in social housing are those who got in there years ago.

Putting wages up isn't helping the country at all.
They need to slash taxes and force the big companies to bring down energy and fuel prices. It is getting to the point where more and more people would be better off not working and claiming benefits.
I'm surprised that there hasn't been some kind of national strike where all working class people bring the country to a standstill until the government listens and makes changes.

So where would you house those who aren’t working? Are you thinking we should go back to Victorian poor houses for the feckless and those unfortunate enough to be unable to work, whether through illness or having lost their jobs?

They should be for emergencies not people who keep on having children in them and don't do anything to help themselves, if no one ever does this fine

They should never be a long term for anyone not disabled

Why not? Isn’t a situation where people can have secure tenancies in decent houses with affordable rents a good thing to aim for? If you make council houses for emergencies only (what counts as an emergency?) they become ghettos, and it’s in nobody’s interest to leave and join the high-rent world of insecurity and greedy landlords.

The population is too big now to offer all WC people a council house.

I live in one. Pay over well £500 s month rent for a small 3 bed. My area is an anomaly though, with a high portion of council houses. They scrapped right to buy years ago. A lot of the people living in them are full time workers. It's very rural though, not a rough inner city area. The middle of nowhere with little high paid work. Council houses definitely are needed here and not just for the work shy or disabled.

The alternative is to have large numbers of people working to pay the mortgages of others and living with insecurity. Not fair on them, and not conducive to a stable society. We've already seen a swing to the Right, and that's likely to get worse if people can't see how (even when working full-time) they are going to be able to have a place to call home.

Some of those 10 million will have taken early retirement and be paying tax on their private/employer pensions. Some who retire early will also have paid much more tax than other people who work for more years. I pay about £50k tax and NI per year. Someone on minimum wage pays about £3500k. It’s not as black and white as you are making out.

@Youagain2025 the housing have now introduced the system that you can only live in a property that you need. So there are lots of people living in three bedroom houses when there is only one person living there as they deem it their "family home" the bedroom tax didn't work the way they wanted, people are taking the financial hit and still under occupying houses. So when one child moves out I will have to downsize, and the same again when my second child moves out.

We live in social housing, it's a housing association property. We have no chance of ever being able to buy a house, and knew that our choice would be having a family or buying a house. We chose a family, because that's all we ever wanted from life. We moved finally after living in overcrowded conditions for over 4 years,and it's the first time in my adult life that we have had secure housing without the constant worry of eviction at the whim of a landlord. Everyone should be able to feel secure and safe in a home.
On a rent note, it's 'affordable' but not cheap really at £940 per month for a smallish three bed in the West of England (town thats considered a dump by many).
I don't agree with Right to Buy but the boat has been missed on that one really, the damage was done in the 80s and 90s.

I hate the constant hating on people who are claiming any kind of benefits, it's media manipulation to stop people looking at the multi billionaires who have almost all the world's wealth and don't want to pay their way- they're then problem ,not people working vital low paid jobs who cannot live without government support. UC and benefits support billionaires lavish lifestyles by allowing them to underpay their staff and make obscene profits.

Ah that makes sense sorry I misunderstood.

I am not alone, there are other supporters here but we mostly listen to conversations and learn from them. I chose to identify myself.

I strongly disagree with this. If people qualify for one they should get one. It’s far too expensive to buy and private landlords are royally taking the piss with rents.

I was responding to someone who was implying that working people are more worthy
Housing is allocated based on need.