Scottish Government plan to scrap Right To Buy Scheme

hothothot_3

Scottish government right to buy laws unveiled


Ministers said they were building new affordable homes

The Scottish government has published planned new laws to abolish the right to buy for all new council and social housing tenants.
Ministers said the policy, introduced by Margaret Thatcher's government, had had its day, and action was needed to tackle shortages in rented housing.
The measure forms a key part of the proposed Housing Bill, being brought before parliament.
The Tories branded the move an act of "naked political vandalism".
The Scottish government said 500,000 homes had been sold in Scotland since the introduction of right to buy in the early 80s, but in recent years councils have been forced to suspend the policy as their stock of social housing to rent has dwindled.
Ministers said stopping all new tenants from buying their homes could see up to 18,000 properties retained over 10 years.
Jamie McIvor
Local government correspondent


Moves to end the right to buy for all new tenants - even those in older accommodation - undoubtedly ends a chapter.
Existing tenants will still be able to buy their homes in many areas.
But, increasingly, the distinction between social housing and private housing is likely to become clearer again, with those who aspire to stepping onto the property ladder once again having to move home.


Legacy of a Thatcher policy

At the same time, the government said its three-year, £1.5bn investment scheme would deliver about 2,000 new affordable homes.
Communities minister Alex Neil, said: "The Housing Bill is a major piece of legislation that will increase the supply of affordable housing and improve the quality of housing in all sectors."
But Conservative MSP David McLetchie said right to buy had done more to make housing affordable for working people in Scotland than any other policy.
He said of the government plans: "It is little short of naked political vandalism.
"Alex Salmond wants to deny the great benefits of right to buy to the next generation, who will have fewer chances to own their home because of the current limits on mortgage lending.
"It makes no sense to stop people buying their own homes at a modest discount whilst, at the same time, spending millions on other home ownership schemes."
Deputy Scottish Labour leader Johann Lamont said ministers should be providing enough cash to build more homes, rather than "tinkering" with right to buy.
"This legislation is also a massive missed opportunity to deal with the difficulties Scots face getting an appropriate home that is appropriate to their needs and close to family and friends," she said.
"It is time that the Scottish government started to deal with these very real problems."
The Housing Bill, which has been backed by the Liberal Democrats, also aims to beef up protection for tenants through a new housing regulator, and sets out measures for taking action against rogue landlords.
And the legislation would also allow former armed forces veterans to establish "local connections", to boost their chances of access to social housing in their area.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/8457681.stm


not up to speed with scottish politics - is this something that will only affect Scotland or will it be nationwide? Also, what do you think of the idea of scrapping the right to buy is a good idea?

[Deleted User]

I think 'right to buy' was a fantastic opportunity for lots of very deserving people. It also went some way to break down the separation between 'council estate' and 'private estate' that you get in most places.

However, I can see difficulties - for example, all the best property being sold and the rubish left. Or, as I've seen in areas near me, multiple blocks of council flats modernised inside and out, but just two or three blocks missing out because one tennent in those blocks has bought their flat and doesn't want to pay their share of the renavation costs.

In the villiage where I live a whole row of 'problem' properties were demolished a few years back and lovely new homes built in their place. They don't look like council houses. They're no different from what you'd see on a new housing estate. Half of these houses are council houses and the other half are half-own-half-rent.

Now the big benefit of this is that some of the houses will ALWAYS be council houses (if the right to buy is done away with). But half will eventually be privately owned. I always think it's better to avoid the 'council ghetto' type situation.

But having said that, what about the couple who've always worked hard but due to bad luck (unemployment) and raising a young family they could never quite afford the part-rent-part-buy properties. It would be nice if there was a way for them to buy if circumstances improve in later life. The normal route is no use to them as they're too old to get on the housing ladder.

On balance I think I'd like to see right to buy stay. Also this new half-rent-half-buy option. Lots of options for getting onto the housing ladder. You'd think there would be a way to make this financially viable for councils. Say for example the council got land cheaper than anyone else could (no idea if this is possible). This would allow them to build housing very cheaply so they'd still make profit when selling cheaply to long term tennants - which they could use to build more houses.

Shakethedisease

Ministers said the policy, introduced by Margaret Thatcher's government, had had its day, and action was needed to tackle shortages in rented housing.

I don't think there's much of a choice really. If people can't afford to buy, and there aren't enough houses around to rent due to folks buying up their council rentals.. then where do you go from there if there aren't enough houses being built ?

As for the modest 'discount' for deserving folks, mabye so.. however a quick look at my street sales in the last 7 years show that at least 3 of them have been bought for around 30k in 2004, and sold for 100k as soon as they were able 3 years later. Not bad eh ! I also know of at least 2 couples who've moved in with a very elderly grandparent and gotten the house under the right to buy scheme using the maximum discount. I don't know how that works at ALL. The couple across the road from my mum did this with his 90 year old gran whose lived there for nearly 60 years. The house was sold 4 years ago for 35k ( a 3 bed semi with huge garden ) and is worth at least 110k now. The female half of the couple is now trying to remortage to 'release equity' ( my mum's a bit of a gossip lol ).

I personally think right to buy has had it's day, at least for now. There are too many people out there who can't get social housing due to acute shortages AND can't get into private rentals due to not fuffilling the criteria ( newly unemployed, debt probs, no deposit, admin fees too high, rent to high, no kids in the rental etc etc )..then even if they did, their kids may be moved around from let to let every 6 months/yearly thus completely disrupting their schooling.

But there's definately a 'bottle-neck' forming of the above people.

And as for this

with those who aspire to stepping onto the property ladder once again having to move home.

.. Most of us have to do this anyway when we buy our first house.

And this

"Alex Salmond wants to deny the great benefits of right to buy to the next generation, who will have fewer chances to own their home because of the current limits on mortgage lending.

I don't think the current limits on mortage lending should have any relevance. It's tough for EVERYONE out there trying to buy their first home at the moment. I'm not convinced anyone lucky enough to have been allocated a council home, especially in the last few years, should have an advantage there. Rents are lower for a start. However, longer term council tenants I'm not so sure about.

Radiantsoul

The benefits to society of home ownership need to be weighed against the implied subsidy of selling houses at below market rate. I can't see that there is a strong argument at the moment.

sandiep

council/gvt build homes, sell them below cost, then have to go and build some more.

Don't make a lot of sense to me, but then i'm only the taxpayer, the only one that's losing out!

treliac

There seems to be the belief, by some, that anyone and everyone wants and should have the right to buy a house. I disagree that this is either practical, feasible or desired by everyone.

What seems to be of most importance to me, is that anyone and everyone should be able to find somewhere secure to rent and that rental stock should not be removed by people buying up that stock at a subsidised price (and later being able to sell privately at a considerable profit).

Social housing should remain as such and be available for others when vacated. There should be the investment to maintain housing stock in a decent condition for the benefit of people who don't want, aren't able or are going to get into financial problems if they are unwisely encouraged to buy on the open market.

hothothot_3

on the other hand......whilst it appears on the surface that there is a discount - fact is in order to get maximum discount you have to have substantial number of years paying rent (15 years). Where-as someone paying a mortgage instead of rent has had 15 years of payments made. I think the right to buy was a good idea, it also shifts the burden of home maintenance on the owner and not the state. The only error was for them to stop building social housing to accomodate population and migrant increases. Had they done this, there would be enough housing for everyone who needed it. I only have to go to a former council estate which has been bought up to see it is far better than when it was council owned, people take care of something they have made a financial stake in - owning property also (I think) helps people to build up more capital and rely on the state less for benefits.

chopperharris

had to laugh at scots labour and tory commentators later on the tv.

Tories - saying its out of order , then why didnt they allow the reintroduction of the money from right to buy back into council coffers for new council homes and instead siphoned it off.

Labour - we made it fairer and changed it , oh yeah but what about 20 years of labour powered council estates being raized rather than being sold off to private devs for a quid...simple low employment areas with population declines.

so lets draw attention away from us and start on snp.United parliament , aye reet unless you mean against the common enemy of alec the bruce.

themanbearpig

I never agreed with right to buy.

Its just rewards those that never bothered to work hard enough in life. Why should those that worked hard at school, got good qualifications and made something out of their lives pay for the idiots that didn't, to get on the property "ladder".

Everyone has the opportunity to better themselves at any age in the country, but government handouts like right to buy aren't productive.

Running_Horse

With the huge HB bill, isn't all rented property (private or council) now subsidised?

The whole housing question needs to be revisited and reformed with the aim of making buying affordable, and not using taxpayers money to support the BTL sector. And councils were often rubbish at providing decent housing. If the social sector is to expand, it should continue to be HAs doing so, not councils.

DaddyBear

themanbearpig wrote: »

I never agreed with right to buy.

Its just rewards those that never bothered to work hard enough in life. Why should those that worked hard at school, got good qualifications and made something out of their lives pay for the idiots that didn't, to get on the property "ladder".

Everyone has the opportunity to better themselves at any age in the country, but government handouts like right to buy aren't productive.

Post of the week. Sums up Britain though. The rich get richer, the lazy get subsidised and those in the middle have to bend over and take it. The incentive to work hard is slowly being removed from British culture.