Cameron and Co, you silly....silly boys

Graham_Devon

David Cameron is to pledge to boost the "right to buy" scheme established by Margaret Thatcher in the 1980s.

He will announce proposals to increase discounts offered to tenants in England who want to buy their council house.

The original scheme was criticised for cutting the stock of social housing but the PM, who is in Manchester for the Tory conference, will say a new home should be built for every one sold.
The changes are expected to be included in a housing strategy later this year.

Now, before I go too far slamming this policy, it could work.

However, the liklihood of it working? Close to zero.

Just cannot believe the coalition (lib dems are behind this too) think it's a good idea to extend this. The council tenants are unlikely to be able to afford to buy the houses now anyway.

Should be building 2 hours for everyone sold to make up for past mistakes. Not one, which will probably be heavily controlled by the private sector.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-15140573

Running_Horse

Haven't most decent mortgageable council houses been sold?

How about a right to buy from your BTL landlord? It would reintroduce a sense of pride to rental neighbourhoods, and could be be a step to home ownership for those currently priced out.

FATBALLZ

Well this government are on a roll with stupid policies, 80mph motorways, £250m on unneccessary weekly bin collections and now this.

Is there anyone in the country outside government who actually wanted right to buy extended? We have a massive shortage of social housing so decreasing the supply further is supposed to achieve what exactly?

And as for:

The original scheme was criticised for cutting the stock of social housing but the PM, who is in Manchester for the Tory conference, will say a new home should be built for every one sold.

I've underlined the important word. It is already the case that a house sold off on RTB should be replaced. It's just that it never happens. We can therefore assume the same policy will continue.

Turnbull2000

Suspected well before the election that the Tories would be no different. Looks like I was right. The property industry actually has the ears of the government - and they listen at that.

Aren't the Tories also looking at a scheme offering free grants (well, in lieu of rent paid) to social housing tenants so they can buy on the open market?

We just need a much bigger push for shared-ownership (the Tories favoured solution for FTBs) and government guarantees of 95-100% mortgages and we're on our way.

vivatifosi

This is one of those policies where the devil really is in the detail. If it works, it strikes me as a good idea as it will lead to more housing, if it fails (in terms of getting other houses built) it will be a disaster.

I see two subtexts with this:
1) The worried families of elderly people in larger houses will buy their houses for them at a knockdown price. This will avoid their having to be removed for under-occupying in the future, which would be a PR disaster.
2) Tories do not like owning housing at a council level, so I would bet that the new ones built would go to housing authorities rather than the councils themselves. Thus a way of reapportioning the liability of ownership away from LAs.

Cleaver

Running_Horse wrote: »

How about a right to buy from your BTL landlord? It would reintroduce a sense of pride to rental neighbourhoods

What is a 'rental neighbourhood'? I've never really had any idea whether my neighbours own or rent their house.

ILW

In my road of around 40 homes, one is BTL and it is bloody obvious which one it is.

Cleaver

ILW wrote: »

In my road of around 40 homes, one is BTL and it is bloody obvious which one it is.

How on earth do you know the status of 40 houses down your road? Do you ring the bell and ask each person whether they own or rent the house?

Anyway, I'll somehow accept that you've understood the ownership status of each house down your street. How is it obvious that one is BTL? I'm going for the roof being bad, general mess, noisy tenants, comng and going of people, possibly a meth lab on the front lawn, maybe illegal sex trafficking going on? Would I be correct?

geneer

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Now, before I go too far slamming this policy, it could work.

However, the liklihood of it working? Close to zero.

Just cannot believe the coalition (lib dems are behind this too) think it's a good idea to extend this. The council tenants are unlikely to be able to afford to buy the houses now anyway.

Should be building 2 hours for everyone sold to make up for past mistakes. Not one, which will probably be heavily controlled by the private sector.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-15140573

Yep. Saw it on the Andrew Mar show.
What a fool.

Turnbull2000

We'll probably get the RTB scheme, but you can forget about these 100,000 houses as a consequence of this policy. Just won't happen. Heck, even if they did build them, it barely covers a single year of immigration.

ILW

Cleaver wrote: »

How on earth do you know the status of 40 houses down your road? Do you ring the bell and ask each person whether they own or rent the house?

Anyway, I'll somehow accept that you've understood the ownership status of each house down your street. How is it obvious that one is BTL? I'm going for the roof being bad, general mess, noisy tenants, comng and going of people, possibly a meth lab on the front lawn, maybe illegal sex trafficking going on? Would I be correct?

Overgrown front and back gardens, new people living there every six months or so. It is also the only house in the road that has been converted into flats. landlord couldn't give a toss as long as he gets his rents, tenants do not expect to be there for long so why spend money on keeping the outside nice. Tenants are currently 3 youngsters living in a studio flat.