Social Housing Tenants should be paid to move,

Today, I am going to jump on the ‘social housing’ bandwagon – and here are my thoughts – they come form what I saw, felt and heard form people who live in social housing properties’.

Owning property is a British institution, it is what every Briton aspires to achieve and what every parent encourages their child to save towards. It is one of our proudest and biggest achievements as adults; a feature of our society and culture. Right or wrong that’s who we are!

When Margaret Thatcher introduced the ‘Right to Buy’ – she wanted to give council tenants, those at the bottom of the affluence ladder, the opportunity to achieve the ultimate British dream, own their property, become a proud home owner and be able to pass it on to their children. It was Compassionate Common Sense at its best.

The problem is not with the ‘Right to Buy’ itself but with consecutive governments failing to forecast the need and replenish the social stock adequately. Regardless of the reasons for why need has consistently outstripped demand, the previous housing ministers, should not have left a 13 years government with 5,000,000 on the housing register’s waiting list!

But going forward, the following might help systematically ease the pressure; 1) every new development should allow for a percentage to be used for key workers [that percentage should depends on the levels of need in that area] and it should be flexible and agreed on by both sides. This will also de-ghettoize council estates and built aspiration – nothing better than a role model on your door step – plus destigmatizes social housing. Moreover, shared management [private companies always work better in managing and controlling tents and buildings] will do wonders to the by the book current management style. This has been tried with Housing Associations stock in some parts of the country and is successful.

2) To incentivize those who want and can give up their current properties, [and not just ask or tell them to move], many older people want to move near family or out of the city; and some young couples might need to move away for work or to a larger dwelling. What ever the reasons people might want or need to move, they should be paid to give out of their current homes.

Moves are costly, plus many housing units deemed habitable by authorities are simply leak prove, fire prove, ghastly things on the inside, while what people might be giving up is something they worked at for years to make homey, warm and welcoming. Even current Right to Buy tenants can be incentified, if the property is in a strategic location [school, hospital, Fire House…etc].

But the attitude of something for nothing does not make sense, even if that something is owned by the state; it breads resentment and contempt, not to mention it is neither compassionate nor makes common sense!

3) Converting unused properties that belong to the state and local authorise and buying up repossessed properties at auction is another way to increase stock.

All that will not instantly satisfy the current numbers – but it’s a start and once the focus shifts from ONLY repossessing the existing current stock, new ideas will come to light. As for the money part – all these measures will ultimately cost less, financially, and physiologically.