Redfern Housing Review

GreatApe

http://www.redfernreview.org/?page_id=18

Have not read it will do later.
My guess, housing ownership down, this is bad, how do we build more.
With no further digging into local/regional trends and demographic changes

westernpromise

It's funny because in the 1980s the Labour Party was dead set against private home ownership and bitterly opposed renters being allowed to buy their council houses. They thought the level of home ownership was far too high.

Now they think it's too low but they also think there should more sink estates (they'd argue otherwise but it's what results). It is very odd.

CLAPTON

GreatApe wrote: »

http://www.redfernreview.org/?page_id=18

Have not read it will do later.
My guess, housing ownership down, this is bad, how do we build more.
With no further digging into local/regional trends and demographic changes

one thing you can be absolutely sure of : it will not discuss the increase in population pressure in London and the SE:

it will of course talk about increase in prices as if they just magically happen all on their own and without any notion of supply and demand.

GreatApe

the problem is there are not enough council homes for people who cant pay for or don't want want to pay for their own homes. The primary reason is probably that people who were given council homes in the late 1970s to 1990s had children who are now grown up and need council homes themselves.

westernpromise

GreatApe wrote: »

the problem is there are not enough council homes for people who cant pay for or don't want want to pay for their own homes. The primary reason is probably that people who were given council homes in the late 1970s to 1990s had children who are now grown up and need council homes themselves.

But if the council had not sold the house the parents would still be living in it, so there still wouldn't be a council house.

How the house is owned is irrelevant. What has happened in practice is that an element of social renting has been privatised, so instead of renting off the council in gulags people rent off individual landlords in private houses and flats among other private houses and flats.

One can think that's a good thing or not but driving small landlords out of business while making no provision for how you'll replace them is not a well-thought-through plan.

GreatApe

I dont think there is much of a housing shortage maybe just in London or rather inner London and then not that great a number (maybe as few as 100k additional homes are needed in inner London and that is the extent of the UK shortage just 0.1m homes)

If the government or those people doing the housing review actually thought there was a shortgag of homes the they would look into occupancy rate and how they can lower that. But they don't talk of occupancy rates they talk of falling percentages ownership levels.

So its not about building more homes. The UK had sufficient homes and the current 190k per year built in England is spot on.

The actual aim is to return to a mix of 10% private rentals 30-35% social and 55-60% owners. The way to achieve this is for councils to buy up some 2 million homes off landlords buy up 1 million off owner occupiers and build about 2 million council homes over the next 10-15 years.


Personally I think 5% social 20% rental and 80% owner would be as ideal as is possible. But my above argument of 30-35% social 55-60% owner 15% rental is what I believe most the political parties and country would go for

GreatApe

Oh and western promise I think you misunderstood my post I wasn't talking about RTB

People who were given council homes to rent in the 1970s-1990s had children. They themselves are still in the council homes renting from the council but the kids are grown up and now need a council rental for themselves.

So what might have been 2 adults and 2 children in a council rental have become 4 adults in a council home and the council needs to build one more unit to allow the adultkids to move out into a council rental of their own.

In shirt only about 1.5 generation of council homes were built when 3 generations were needed to allow the poor to be 'self sufficient' in council homes.

GreatApe

It then follows if there is no overall acute shortage of homes it's the mix that's the problem. There are too many owners and too many private renters. The government can readdress this problem by increasing the stamp duty on second homes to 20% and having CGT paid on death and then death duties on what remains. This will rapidly shrink the private rental market and also shrink the owner market and the government should be on the other side buying up these properties for £100k or less a piece until the social sector is back to 30-35% of the stock.

35% of the people can then be greatful to the state for looking after them and another 5 million social homes will mean a good 100 thousand or thereabouts in secure council jobs to look after the stock. Win win

CLAPTON

GreatApe wrote: »

It then follows if there is no overall acute shortage of homes it's the mix that's the problem. There are too many owners and too many private renters. The government can readdress this problem by increasing the stamp duty on second homes to 20% and having CGT paid on death and then death duties on what remains. This will rapidly shrink the private rental market and also shrink the owner market and the government should be on the other side buying up these properties for £100k or less a piece until the social sector is back to 30-35% of the stock.

35% of the people can then be greatful to the state for looking after them and another 5 million social homes will mean a good 100 thousand or thereabouts in secure council jobs to look after the stock. Win win

wouldn't it be better if the government owned all houses and indeed the means of production too, and allocated them by need / party political affiliation

GreatApe

CLAPTON wrote: »

wouldn't it be better if the government owned all houses and indeed the means of production too, and allocated them by need / party political affiliation

So long as I am somewhere up near the top of the distribution chain

Mistermeaner

GreatApe wrote: »

I dont think there is much of a housing shortage maybe just in London or rather inner London and then not that great a number (maybe as few as 100k additional homes are needed in inner London and that is the extent of the UK shortage just 0.1m homes)

If the government or those people doing the housing review actually thought there was a shortgag of homes the they would look into occupancy rate and how they can lower that. But they don't talk of occupancy rates they talk of falling percentages ownership levels.

So its not about building more homes. The UK had sufficient homes and the current 190k per year built in England is spot on.

The actual aim is to return to a mix of 10% private rentals 30-35% social and 55-60% owners. The way to achieve this is for councils to buy up some 2 million homes off landlords buy up 1 million off owner occupiers and build about 2 million council homes over the next 10-15 years.


Personally I think 5% social 20% rental and 80% owner would be as ideal as is possible. But my above argument of 30-35% social 55-60% owner 15% rental is what I believe most the political parties and country would go for

Bang on 100k homes in inner London would sort it. That's how many people commute into London each day for work

You're also bang on re the housing mix: all those empty private homes waiting for buyers are the problem. If councils seized them everything would be sorted