Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Simon calls for more public money for private landlords
Options
Comments
-
Suggested solution to housing crisis.
Provide social housing. Ensure adequate standards but people that want housing for free will have to accept that they can't pick and choose where they want to live and have the best houses.
Change tax on rental income to give landlords a few hundred million more in profits to compensate for fall in rent levels.0 -
Eric Cartman wrote: »....
bingo. Social housing should be on a constant fit for requirement basis. If you need to be in Dublin because you work there - grand , if you don't then off to rural Ireland it is with you.
..wasn't this was done before under a different regime...0 -
Suggested solution to housing crisis.
Provide social housing. Ensure adequate standards but people that want housing for free will have to accept that they can't pick and choose where they want to live and have the best houses.
Change tax on rental income to give landlords a few hundred million more in profits to compensate for fall in rent levels.
Why not allow landlords to refuse the cash cow of social housing...0 -
Eric Cartman wrote: »....
bingo. Social housing should be on a constant fit for requirement basis. If you need to be in Dublin because you work there - grand , if you don't then off to rural Ireland it is with you.
..wasn't this was done before under a different regime...
...."to hell or to Connaught"?
(even though i tend to agree, the headlines are too easy and too emotive)0 -
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/02/19/how-to-make-expensive-cities-affordable-for-everyone-again/?utm_term=.73b04c2c4440
The solution has always been build more stock. That the govt has dragged their heels on this, and that it's been favoring large funds. Suggests it's a deliberate economic policy, to drive money into the economy at the expense of its own population.
Is that unavoidable or could that have done a more balanced but slower growth policy.0 -
Advertisement
-
The_Conductor wrote: »That said- the fact that 450m a year is spent by the government on private sector accommodation- rather than using either a carrot or a stick on the local authorities- to persuade them to construct suitable social housing units in locations where it is most needed- is deplorable.
The argument that it doesn't pay to build social housing units in Dublin- shouldn't feature. If workers can't afford to live in Dublin- why should social housing recipients expect to?
We are going about all of this arseways. When Simon and Threshold are arguing that the government needs to copperfasten their funding of the sector-. they have a different pound of flesh in the argument than the landlords have- but are fighting the same ironic battle.
The whole setup is nuts- its completely and utterly bonkers. It is clearly unsustainable- yet the only refrain and chorus from everyone- is chuck more money at it.
It is indeed. And while I fully understand the landlords on this thread defending the system which is a cash cow for them what is utterly bizarre is that organisations that are supposed to be representing the under privileged like Simon and Threshold are instead fighting to increase financial transfers from the state to landlords.The Student wrote: »To deal with the problem we need to build social housing full stop. But we need to change our mindset to housing. if somebody is in need of housing then house them, if its not in their preferred area than tough.
If social housing tenants (or private tenants) don't pay rent then evict them. We have this bizarre belief that everybody should be housed no matter what and where they want to be.
My personal opinion is if you need accommodation then offer it where its available.
.
Those in need of free social housing should not be allowed to be too choosy as to where they live. But a consequence of the current policy of financial transfers to landlords is that they often are whereas those who are paying themselves without state support have to rent in less desirable areas. The whole system is corrupt and the massive housing support payments are responsible for the housing crisis. It is severely restricting rental supply and increasing rents to an unattainable level.
Simon wants to give hundreds of millions more to private landlords. That is not the answer
The answer to the housing crisis is very simple. BUILD SOCIAL HOUSING
Simon are asking for more to be paid as there is disparity between open market rent and what social welfare will pay0 -
Join Date:Posts: 30620
handlemaster wrote: »Simon are asking for more to be paid as there is disparity between open market rent and what social welfare will pay
However- when social welfare recipients make up such a staggering percentage of the total market- bumping up what local authorities will pay simply has a knock-on effect for everyone else.
Other than social welfare tenants- who are happy with the quid-pro-quo, most everyone else would simply rather that the local authorities were forced to build and maintain social housing themselves- rather than relying on the private sector.0 -
That's why there is a disparity and a rent cap. They thought they could control the market by forcing rents low and putting a rent control on it.
Now they see, as they were told at the time, the only solution is supply.0 -
the only solution is supply.
If the solution is supply then why is Simon demanding that more money be given to landlords which will do nothing to affect total supply.
The malign influence of the landlord lobby can be equated to that of the NRA in the US and they have Simon in their back pocket. How bad does it have to get before someone stands up to them.0 -
If the solution is supply then why is Simon demanding that more money be given to landlords which will do nothing to affect total supply.
The malign influence of the landlord lobby can be equated to that of the NRA in the US and they have Simon in their back pocket. How bad does it have to get before someone stands up to them.
Because social welfare payments set the bottom cap of the market and the bottom of the market will always have questionable supply. From what I have seen, every time they increase those payments there is a small uptake by some landlords, before private tenants up what they are willing to pay again pricing social welfare tenants back out. Its a zero sum game for the government and the tenants, it goes nowhere. I'd say the government knows this.
In recent years, they have been upping payments without publicly announcing it. I usually get told it, then 2-3 months later see it in a news report.0 -
Advertisement
-
...If the solution is supply then why is Simon demanding that more money be given to landlords which will do nothing to affect total supply...
Because its quick (temp) fix, and the govt doesn't want to build houses.
This about the nth time you've been told this...The malign influence of the landlord lobby can be equated to that of the NRA in the US and they have Simon in their back pocket. How bad does it have to get before someone stands up to them.
For the past 10yrs or so all the rights of Landlords have effectively been removed. Even thing Landlords have asked for has been ignored, everything they asked the Govt not to do they have done. Everything the tenants and threshold and similar have asked for they have got. The vast majority of LL are single property small landlords. Not big business. They are slowly leaving the market. Some moving to AirBNB or selling up.
Nothing you've said thus far has any basis in reality.0 -
The malign influence of the landlord lobby can be equated to that of the NRA in the US and they have Simon in their back pocket. How bad does it have to get before someone stands up to them.
Im on boards 9 years and without doubt thats the most ridiculous thing I have ever seen posted.
How to you expect to be taken seriously coming out with a post like that?0 -
Suggested solution to housing crisis.
Provide social housing. Ensure adequate standards but people that want housing for free will have to accept that they can't pick and choose where they want to live and have the best houses.
Change tax on rental income to give landlords a few hundred million more in profits to compensate for fall in rent levels.
Solution:
Scrap Forever Social Housing
Build short-term emergency housing that is means tested. These are for limited stays only until people find there feet and then off you go.
These should be unavailable for people who are career welfare recipients and come with 3 strike rules on anti -social behaviour.0 -
You have to consider that to stabilize areas allowing people to buy their social housing, did achieve that.
But it cleared all that stock which wasn't replaced.
However, they should be buying it back, and starting the cycle over when they can.0 -
The malign influence of the landlord lobby can be equated to that of the NRA in the US and they have Simon in their back pocket.mitresize5 wrote: »Im on boards 9 years and without doubt thats the most ridiculous thing I have ever seen posted.
I stand by it. By the way the entitled "amateur" landlord is very much an irish phenomenon. You don't really get it elsewhere as it is uneconomic. You could argue that those that need massive social welfare payments to make being a landlord pay should not be in the business in the first place.
https://www.thesun.ie/news/1195621/new-housing-minister-eoghan-murphy-must-prioritise-tenants-over-landlords/
The rate of social housing construction remains dismally low. Rent restrictions introduced in December have not prevented massive price increases for tenants in pressure zones and house prices continue to go up at a rate that prices working families out of the market.
The housing crisis is getting worse despite all the talk of recovery and optimism about the economy.
The main issue continues to be the Government’s insistence on waiting for the private sector to solve the problem and refusing to acknowledge how it all began.
Global property funds and large landlord firms are influencing the State’s housing policy, rather than a desire to meet the needs of tenants being fleeced or evicted and young families trying to purchase.
The crisis is not an aftershock of the global economic crash in 2008, but the direct result of the measures taken in response. Successive governments since then have tried to impress the markets by speeding up Nama’s dispersal of taxpayer-owned assets for quick gains
Michael Noonan’s property policy was simply to attract global property firms with low prices for assets they could either flip quickly at large profits, or hold onto for mass-scale renting to take advantage of, and contribute to, rising rents.
The housing crisis just happens to benefit too many powerful groups with easy access to Government — banks, investment funds, estate agents and developers.
Charities and tenants groups don’t stand a chance when pitted against lobbyists working for wealthy firms earning huge profits from the crisis, and so the problem has festered.
Fairer laws to curb rents and protect tenants are also hampered by the Dail register that shows a fifth of TDs are landlords themselves.
Housing expert Dr Rory Hearne has argued for “not-for-profit, de-commodified, affordable mixed-income housing provision — from social to cost rental to shared ownership and cooperative housing”.
None of these solutions are even under consideration in the State’s strategy and nor is the suggestion that Nama be turned from a bad bank into a housing development agency itself, using its vast vacant lots.
The crisis is compounded by the Government’s refusal to acknowledge the policies that caused it and its continued refusal to act on the plethora of solutions being suggested.0 -
So despite all the failure of all previous interventions. Indeed they made it worse. You want to ignore all those lessons and facts and repeat those failures and make it even worse.
Good luck with that.0 -
The_Conductor wrote: »However- when social welfare recipients make up such a staggering percentage of the total market- bumping up what local authorities will pay simply has a knock-on effect for everyone else.Cuddlesworth wrote: »Because social welfare payments set the bottom cap of the market and the bottom of the market will always have questionable supply. From what I have seen, every time they increase those payments there is a small uptake by some landlords, before private tenants up what they are willing to pay again pricing social welfare tenants back out. Its a zero sum game for the government and the tenants, it goes nowhere. I'd say the government knows this.
Of course they do. Social welfare payments to landlords set the floor for rent levels. Which is why the Simon Community's call to increase rents paid to landlords which will lead to increased rents for everyone is so bizarre and incomprehensible. Even the government is beginning to realise that they can't push rents much higher using this method.0 -
So despite all the failure of all previous interventions. Indeed they made it worse. You want to ignore all those lessons and facts and repeat those failures and make it even worse.
Good luck with that.
You could argue that the interventions have not failed if their purpose was to create and maintain a housing crisis, increase rents and transfer massive sums of money to private investment funds and institutional landlords. The interventions have been an enormous success.
Does the hotel that got €4 million last year for "homeless" families think that the intervention was a failure. Of course not. They are delighted with it.0 -
Lets humour the flat earth society..
How about you make the social payments so low, private rental just isn't an option and all the private stock is filled by private tenants.
Where do the social tenants go....0 -
Did you miss the part where landlords used to say rental allowance not accepted, ...
What do you think they did that ..0 -
Advertisement
-
I stand by it. By the way the entitled "amateur" landlord is very much an irish phenomenon. You don't really get it elsewhere as it is uneconomic. You could argue that those that need massive social welfare payments to make being a landlord pay should not be in the business in the first place.
https://www.thesun.ie/news/1195621/new-housing-minister-eoghan-murphy-must-prioritise-tenants-over-landlords/
The rate of social housing construction remains dismally low. Rent restrictions introduced in December have not prevented massive price increases for tenants in pressure zones and house prices continue to go up at a rate that prices working families out of the market.
The housing crisis is getting worse despite all the talk of recovery and optimism about the economy.
The main issue continues to be the Government’s insistence on waiting for the private sector to solve the problem and refusing to acknowledge how it all began.
Global property funds and large landlord firms are influencing the State’s housing policy, rather than a desire to meet the needs of tenants being fleeced or evicted and young families trying to purchase.
The crisis is not an aftershock of the global economic crash in 2008, but the direct result of the measures taken in response. Successive governments since then have tried to impress the markets by speeding up Nama’s dispersal of taxpayer-owned assets for quick gains
Michael Noonan’s property policy was simply to attract global property firms with low prices for assets they could either flip quickly at large profits, or hold onto for mass-scale renting to take advantage of, and contribute to, rising rents.
The housing crisis just happens to benefit too many powerful groups with easy access to Government — banks, investment funds, estate agents and developers.
Charities and tenants groups don’t stand a chance when pitted against lobbyists working for wealthy firms earning huge profits from the crisis, and so the problem has festered.
Fairer laws to curb rents and protect tenants are also hampered by the Dail register that shows a fifth of TDs are landlords themselves.
Housing expert Dr Rory Hearne has argued for “not-for-profit, de-commodified, affordable mixed-income housing provision — from social to cost rental to shared ownership and cooperative housing”.
None of these solutions are even under consideration in the State’s strategy and nor is the suggestion that Nama be turned from a bad bank into a housing development agency itself, using its vast vacant lots.
The crisis is compounded by the Government’s refusal to acknowledge the policies that caused it and its continued refusal to act on the plethora of solutions being suggested.
Maybe you ignored or forgot the bit about anyone taking you seriously if you genuinely compare the NRA to irish land lords.
I'm not sure if you have a valid point or not as I didn't bother reading that novel you wrote
I suggest you say that NRA comparison out loud to yourself a few times and see if the penny drops.
Anyway I'm out, I've no intention of debating with you as you'll drag me to your level and beat me with experience
Edit: Jesus Christ I just noticed you quote the Sun to back up your argument... hilarious0 -
Lets humour the flat earth society..
How about you make the social payments so low, private rental just isn't an option and all the private stock is filled by private tenants.
Where do the social tenants go....
To Connaught?
Kidding. You would have to provide social housing in the general region. Might take a bit of time as it has been staunchly resisted till now but not that difficult.
Build social housing where needed or get stock from NAMA if they have any left that they haven't sold for half nothing to institutional investors.
Force those in need of housing to take the social housing available even if it is not in the right area for their children or do without.
Do the exact opposite of what Simon wants. Reduce social rent payments by 10% and cap them. End the use of hotels for "homeless"0 -
https://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/3000-social-housing-offers-turned-down-in-past-two-years-450651.html
More than 3,000 offers of social housing properties were turned down over the past two years, with figures showing the rate of refusal has increased in some of the country’s largest local authorities.
Most refusals were for reasons such as the size of the property offered, or unsuitable location, although there were some distinctive reasons provided in other cases.
Two offers made in Wicklow were refused because the applicant wanted “a cottage on its own”.
In Wexford, the fact that only a street view was on offer was cited in one case. In South Dublin four applicants would not take up an offer because they said they were feuding with other families in the area; one person said they did not like the external aspect of the apartment building; and another person said there was “too many steps outside to front door”.
While the local authority area with the highest number of refusals was Dublin City, at 615 for both years combined, there were 247 refusals in the same period in Co Donegal.
Cork City Council, in addition to a total of 468 refusals of an offer of social housing across both years, also highlighted the large proportion of “unreasonable” refusals.0 -
Join Date:Posts: 30620
I stand by it. By the way the entitled "amateur" landlord is very much an irish phenomenon. You don't really get it elsewhere as it is uneconomic. You could argue that those that need massive social welfare payments to make being a landlord pay should not be in the business in the first place.
https://www.thesun.ie/news/1195621/new-housing-minister-eoghan-murphy-must-prioritise-tenants-over-landlords/
Honestly- I think most landlords would rather the government took proper care of tenants who are in need of massive subsidisation of their rent. Most tenants who pay for their own rent- would throw a party if they weren't competing with these folk too. Its completely and utterly nuts that the government is relying on landlords in the private sector to do the heavy lifting and house those who are incapable (for whatever reason) of housing themselves.
I don't think this means we necessarily should agree with the Sun newspaper though- who are advocating a socialist revolution to their readership- and suggesting the Minister should prioritise tenants rights at all costs- and landlords bedamned. Have a look at the loans that Irish Permanent were selling- of the non-performing loans for non-owner-occupied PPRs- 87% related to BTL properties in which the tenants were delinquint with their rent (and a slight minority of which- where they refused to communicate with either the landlord, the RTB or receivers appointed to the property).
There are a subset of tenants out there- who expect to have accommodation handed to them on a plate- without any intervention whatsoever on their part.
The Sun is complicit in an agenda to demonise landlords- who make damn convenient scapegoats for the politicians- when the real villains in all of this- are the self-same politicians who refuse- despite irrefutable evidence- to countenance taking whatever action is necessary to kick the local authorities in the gonads- and make them replenish their stocks of social housing- and manage them as social housing should be managed.The rate of social housing construction remains dismally low. Rent restrictions introduced in December have not prevented massive price increases for tenants in pressure zones and house prices continue to go up at a rate that prices working families out of the market.
Dismal isn't a strong enough emotion. Its staggeringly and appalling low. That the politicians are allowed to deflect attention from their shortcomings in this area- is bewildering and strange. The RPZs are working in the main for those who are renewing leases- and new tenancies- however, for others- such as the new units the REITs are bringing online- and properties which are undergoing renovations- the going rate is up to 100% higher (in Galway and much of Dublin) than it is for comparable properties.
If you look at renewal of leases- contrary to the message in the media- it is in fact working- its the REITs- and entire blocks getting renovated (such as the infamous evictions in Cork to fix firedoors and install retardent to secure a non-existent fire cert)- that subsequently result in a 100% increase in rent- that are making a mockery of the situation.
Strip the REITs out of the equation- and Dublin, as a whole, meets the requirements to be delisted from the RPZ legislation.The housing crisis is getting worse despite all the talk of recovery and optimism about the economy.
The main issue continues to be the Government’s insistence on waiting for the private sector to solve the problem and refusing to acknowledge how it all began.
The economy is growing- rapidly (apparently it grew at a rate of just under 8% in 2017- which was the highest in the EU). However- headline employment related taxes, excise and duties- are all coming in below profile. So- while its obvious some people are doing remarkably well- the average person hasn't seen any difference in their situation. Trying to suggest the growth in the economy equals some sort of a blank cheque to spend-spend-spend- unfortunately- is a fail in Economics 101.
The private sector has no interest in fixing the housing problem- at any price- because of the regulatory environment. Hell- the French and UK companies who offered landlord insurance in Ireland- withdrew at the end of last year- as business in Ireland was seen as too risky to insure. The fact that specific landlord insurance you can buy in any other country- is not available in Ireland any longer- should speak volumes- however, it doesn't.Global property funds and large landlord firms are influencing the State’s housing policy, rather than a desire to meet the needs of tenants being fleeced or evicted and young families trying to purchase.
The crisis is not an aftershock of the global economic crash in 2008, but the direct result of the measures taken in response. Successive governments since then have tried to impress the markets by speeding up Nama’s dispersal of taxpayer-owned assets for quick gains
I'm not sure that the influence that you're inferring actually exists. The bigger issue- is tax policy has allowed the likes of the REITs operate here in a tax free capacity (hell- the Ontario Teachers Pension Fund were allowed lend a local subsidiary the funds they used to buy the national lottery at a rate of 15% to ensure it couldn't make a profit- and wouldn't have to pay any tax). These international companies- are running rings around the Revenue Commissioners- and abusing tax law in a legal but unethical manner- to make the average Joe and Jane in this country- carry an unfair tax burden. Hell- even Bono from U2- is playing the same game- upping sticks and moving his operations to The Netherlands- to avoid paying tax in Ireland.
The average person in Ireland- is being taken for a ride- and the Revenue Commissioners need to do something about it.Michael Noonan’s property policy was simply to attract global property firms with low prices for assets they could either flip quickly at large profits, or hold onto for mass-scale renting to take advantage of, and contribute to, rising rents.
The housing crisis just happens to benefit too many powerful groups with easy access to Government — banks, investment funds, estate agents and developers.
It wasn't necessarily his property policy in all fairness- keep in mind- the majority of NAMAs assets weren't in Ireland at all (they were in the UK). Did they get the best possible price- maybe, maybe not- however, its damn hard not to make a profit, when you only pay 43c on the Euro for loans.........
NAMA got dealt an incredibly easy hand of cards- and are being applauded for turning a profit- when a profit was assured from the outset- the only question was how much of a profit was reasonable and could be accounted for.
As for banks, investment funds, estate agents, developers and everyone else- the one thing the government has ensured- is they follow guidelines to the letter. There is no more of this brown envelope crap that happened in the past. Anything that happened- was justifiable. We might not like it- looking back retrospectively at it- but the ability to look back on things- is a valuable commodity.
Yes- there were many indefensible mistakes made- will anyone take responsibility for them- probably not- but they were made by people who made decisions, albeit bad ones, when other people weren't willing to make decisions, period.Charities and tenants groups don’t stand a chance when pitted against lobbyists working for wealthy firms earning huge profits from the crisis, and so the problem has festered.
I'm not entirely sure that the lobbyists that you are depicting actually exist.
Anyone- you for example- can make a representation to a Minister, or a local authority- about any issue that is near and dear to your heart. Its part of our democratic process. The Minister can of course tell you politely to take a flying leap- which is what happens in a majority of cases. However- you are entitled to make those representations- as sure as Deloitte or another consultancy are- and the civil servants on whose desk your missive land- will give it the same due dilligence that they give the missive from Deloitte (or whoever).
We are a small backwater- in comparison to most other EU countries- and in the global context- don't feature. Its a bit of a stretch to imagine that there are international organisations investing time and expense in lobbying our politicians.Fairer laws to curb rents and protect tenants are also hampered by the Dail register that shows a fifth of TDs are landlords themselves.
I'm not sure if you've followed the evolution of tenancy law in Ireland? The RTA- and the Residential Tenancies Board- are probably the most tenant orientated organisations and legislation- that is enacted anywhere in Europe- Eastern Europe notwithstanding.
The current regulatory regime in Ireland- is very close to being as tenant-centric as it possibly could- without enacting law to strip landlords of their property and either putting them into public ownership- or simply awarding them to the tenants.Housing expert Dr Rory Hearne has argued for “not-for-profit, de-commodified, affordable mixed-income housing provision — from social to cost rental to shared ownership and cooperative housing”.
I don't see that anyone can argue with Dr. Hearne. His proposal- is the gold standard- that should apply. However- it involves a seachange- and an acceptance that local authorities have to get back into building and managing social housing- and indeed- the various housing organisations- which have been deemed public organisations by the EU Commission as they are publicly funded (which also means their debts have to feature in the headline national debt)- should be formally brought under the control of the respective local authorities under whose jurisdictions they fall.None of these solutions are even under consideration in the State’s strategy and nor is the suggestion that Nama be turned from a bad bank into a housing development agency itself, using its vast vacant lots.
The crisis is compounded by the Government’s refusal to acknowledge the policies that caused it and its continued refusal to act on the plethora of solutions being suggested.
NAMA's supply of houses- was never what the public thought it was- they had over 16 times more residential housing units in the UK than they had in this jurisdiction. They had a number of units in this jurisdiction- including over 300 ghost estates nationally. They have completed over 8,000 properties- and either handed them over as social housing units- or sold them on the open market. However- they have almost 3,000 units nationally, fully complete, that they can't find owners or tenants for. This is a reflection of the fact that every Tom, Dick and Harry- wants to live in Dublin, Cork or Galway. Well, sorry- thats simply not possible- no matter what we do. So we have 3,000 units vacant nationally- that social housing tenants- who can't afford to house themselves, don't want to live in- and no-one wants to buy. Whats the answer to that one? Make another Oliver Cromwell- 'To Hell or to Connaught' statement? If someone can't house themselves- they should not have a right to turn down reasonable offers of accommodation.
We have an incredible acceptance of mediocracy in Ireland- and an inescapable acceptance, without question- of scapegoats.
We need more supply. We need to hold those who fail to deliver this supply accountable for their lack of action. We need to set reasonable expectations on the part of tenants and landlords- and we need to bring this country under control.0 -
Very well put. Just to note however that the above points were made by the Sun as I copy and pasted their article although I would agree with many in principle.0
-
The missus' aunty lives in a 3 bed council semi in South Dublin. Kids have flown the nest and hubby died a few years ago. She's probably 60-65 tops. Does she get to keep that gaff til she pops her clogs? I'd be cleaning up on air bnb if I was her!
A mate of mine moved in with the woman 5 years ago. She's had a council gaff 15-20 years now. They are buying it off the council, independent valuer came out and valued at 150k, due to rent paid over the years they are getting it for 60k! Council provide the mortgage and no need for solicitor for conveyancing.
Absolutely bananas stuff, housing lists will just grow and grow, sure u'd be mad not to stick the name down!0 -
...
Answer the question. You've taken private rental of the table, and hotels etc. So where do people go. You can't use social housing that's not built yet...0 -
...Answer the question. You've taken private rental of the table, and hotels etc. So where do people go. You can't use social housing that's not built yet...0
-
Are you suggesting put them out on the street...0
-
Advertisement
-
.
Some other points. Providing a house is largely a one off cost. Thereafter rent is paid to the state even if it is small. Paying landlords or hotels in a continuous cost that is never ending.
Providing a house is not a one-off cost. It costs a lot of money to maintain a property, especially where homes have to be completely renovated and provided with brand new fit-out where tenancies change (because of litigious social tenants - you don't find private landlords being sued because the tenant slipped in the wet porch, at least, not yet). Rents for council owned properties are way too low and not viable, which is why councils were happy to sell off houses at a big discount and get an ongoing drain on funds off their books. And it is another disincentive for local authorities to build, even when allocated funds to provide housing.0
Advertisement