Mr Sajid Javid is the Conservative government minister responsible for housing. He's got no hair on his head, and, to judge from some of his latest remarks, he hasn't got much between his ears either. I don't really follow his logic about "baby boomers" but it's clear that he's singling out a group of people as scapegoats for the housing crisis. 40/50 years ago, many people in his party singled out another group of people for the housing crisis - immigrants. That idea's now gone out of fashion, but it seems SJ feels it's necessary to find another scapegoat. Mr Javid, the people responsible for the housing crisis are politicians like you, mate. Over the years, successive governments have incompetently mismanaged housing as a policy matter. Now the chickens have come home to roost. If Mr Javid's logic is representative of his approach to solving the crisis, then the homeless and the poorly-housed are in for an even rougher ride than they've got now.
Out of fashion it maybe,but uncontrolled immigration is the reason for this housing crisis as I have said before round up the illegals and deport them plus the gangsters that are trafficking people that would free up at least half a million dwellings,that might save unnecessary building on the green belt.
No mate that was a proper housing shortage after Hitler bombed the crap out of our major cities.There was 3 families in our house,no running hot water no bath and an outside loo.We got on with it worked our nuts off to get our own places.
We were a lot happier too.
It was great living 17people at times in a three bed house that had been war damaged and leaked when it rained. In winter it frosted over inside and we slept dressed. We shared our toilet with three other families. I used to go to the swimming pool once a week for a bath more water in number 3. I did not see my father until I was five he was in the Navy watching nuclear explosions on tropical islands. My mother worked nights in the local hospital. For the first five years we were rationed no sweets little electricity. I was bought up by my Victorian grandmother who had had 10 live births and several dead. She was steel no getting away with anything. I left school and moved 300 miles away the day after so my father had one less mouth to feed. Late 60s found me living in a hostel working in a factory one day at college and three nights evening classes got me an HNC. I married and by saving in a building society for 3 years was allowed a 90% mortgage but that was at 8% then up to 15% so I paid nearly four times the cost of my house by the time I finished paying. Oh yes it was easy in those days no foreign holidays until the children left home company car but long hours. eeeh we had it easy.
As I said our generation just got on with what was in front of them,which is why I get pissed off with illegals falling out the backs of lorry’s and getting housing and handouts in front of our youngsters.
Councils to spend £1bn on commercial property amid housing shortage
Exclusive: Expert estimate suggests figure local authorities are on course to lay out this year could instead be used to fund 8,000 council homes
Coombe Abbey hotel was bought by Coventry city council, a deal that prompted protests. Photograph: David Sillitoe for the Guardian
Friday 17 November 2017 18.00 GMT
Last modified on Friday 17 November 2017 18.20 GMT
Councils are on course to spend more than £1bn on commercial property this year, investing more in shopping centres, country clubs, hotels, offices and other assets than in building council houses, figures show.
Town halls in England and Wales spent £758m buying up commercial property in the first eight months of this year, according to property market data from Savills, but are only building 1,730 council houses a year, government figures for 2016-17 show.
The £1bn councils are on track to spend could produce more than 8,000 new council homes, an expert estimate suggests. Earlier this year, Downing Street indicated that amount could deliver 12,500 homes.
While no nationwide figure is available for the total cost to the taxpayer of council houses built in 2016-17, expert estimates putting the cost per property at up to £125,000 would suggest local authorities spent in the region of £250m.
About 77,000 households in England and Wales are living in temporary accommodation and 1.2 million are on council waiting lists.
Council leaders are demanding that the government lifts the cap on borrowing for housing in the budget next week.
John Healey, the shadow housing minister, said: “It is absurd that out-of-date rules let councils borrow to build or buy commercial property, but not to invest in affordable housing.
“Conservative ministers are about the only people left who don’t think councils should be free to build new, low-cost homes to benefit their areas. It’s a budget no-brainer for Philip Hammond to lift this cap and get councils building tens of thousands of affordable homes.”
Coventry city council decided last month to buy Coombe Abbey hotel in a multimillion-pound deal, prompting protests from locals that it was doing so while making wider cuts. The local authority has no council housing despite rising homelessness, with more than 600 households in priority need. The council believes it can earn a 10% annual return on the investment.
Kingston council in Surrey spent £54m buying two office buildings and a business park in the last year, but only invested in one new council house, a former school caretaker’s cottage. Demand for social housing far exceeds supply and the borough has 9,524 households on an ever-lengthening waiting list.
The boom in commercial property investment dwarfs the amount spent on homes partly because central government restricts how much councils can borrow against their existing housing assets. However, the Treasury offers cheap loans that can be spent on commercial property. Councils have been using them in an attempt to create new income streams to fill budget holes left by Whitehall cuts.
Other councils’ recent commercial investments include a solar farm, and a shopping centre, cinema and bowling alley complex due for completion in 2020, in which Barnsley council invested £70m this year.
Spelthorne council in Surrey has spent more than £400m in the past 14 months on office buildings including the Sunbury-on-Thames campus of BP, and the headquarters of the contactless payment software company Verifone, located outside the borough.
The council said it made the latest purchase because “the withdrawal of funding for local authorities means that many councils are having to find new ways to fund services”. There is no council housing in the borough and it has warned of “very long” waiting times for housing, and said many people will not be housed.
Earlier this year, the Liberal Democrat peer Lord Oakeshott, who chairs a property management company, described the trend as “a gigantic game of Monopoly with taxpayers’ cash”.
Last week, the government warned that some councils were becoming overly dependent on commercial income to fund statutory services and could be left “financially exposed”. It is considering insisting that councils no longer borrow only to generate investment returns and requiring them to show councillors “understand the risks as well as the opportunities of investment decisions”.
The Department for Communities and Local Government would not comment on whether local authorities would be allowed to borrow more for council housebuilding.
“We want local authorities to deliver a new generation of council homes, that’s why just last month, we announced a £2bn boost to deliver more affordable properties at social rent in areas where they are most needed. We’re seeing progress, with twice as many council homes built in England in the past five years than between 1997 to 2010,” a spokesman said.
Martin Tett, the Local Government Association housing spokesman, said it was vital that the government lifted the cap on council borrowing to build homes.
“As a nation, we need to build more than 300,000 homes a year, and we’re currently building roughly half that,” he said. “The last time this country hit that number, in the 1970s, councils built more than 40% of new homes.”
So the latest money making scam can now be introduced. Where does a homeless person find the £1,000 pounds to pay the fine?
Backlash over plans to fine homeless people £1,000 to put up tents
4 hours ago
The Evening Standard
The plans have been criticised by a leading homeless charity Getty Images/EyeEm
ES News Email
Charity bosses have slammed new plans to fine homeless people £1,000 for putting up tents on public property.
Stoke-on-Trent council is considering new penalties to fine homeless people for drinking alcohol in public places, persistent begging, hanging around in public toilets, and erecting tents.
Offenders would be charged £100 on the spot with the threat of a £1,000 fine in court if they fail to pay.
While local businesses have welcomed the move, the head of charity Help for the Homeless has said it will only make matters worse.
Founder Jeanette Jackson, 51, said: "At least if they have a tent they can hide away safely and get out of the winter elements. They are human beings and have bad enough lives already."
The proposed Public Space Protection Order (PSPO) will cover the city centre, Hanley Park, Festival Park and the Octagon Retail Park.
Despite the criticism, indoor market trader Mike Bailey told The Mirror: "These powers cannot come quickly enough.
"We rolled up this morning and had to get the council to put disinfectant at the top of the stairs because the place is just being used as a public toilet and it absolutely stinks.
"These things put people off coming to the city centre. It scares the elderly, in particular, and they don't want to be verbally bashed by these people hanging around."
A spokesman for the council said: "The order will give police and the council's anti-social behaviour officers an extra tool to help deal with problems which are caused by a small minority of people.
"Rough sleepers are not being directly targeted and we have a range of services in place for homeless people across the city. We work hard with our partners to help homeless people turn their lives around.
"We invite the public to let us know what they think about our plans and tell us about any alternative conditions they think need to be imposed."
A widely-held view, fred, which is marginalised and patronised by many politicians who respond simply by calling the view "racist" rather than examining (1) why the view is held or (2) their own part in generating that view.
Politicians - What a What a dishonest bunch of self serving parasites they are but what infuriates me the most is the way they treat us as fools.
Sajid Javid is blaming my generation for the housing crisis (baby boomers) rather than blaming the real culprits, government. Who sold all the social housing, who stopped councils from building social housing. Who agreed to free movement of people and allowed 4 million to walk unfettered into this country. Developers are sitting on massive land banks ready to build houses but no government will change planning regulation as it will result in one thing, defeat at the next election. Politicians have a time frame of 4 years, their only consideration is re-election - Solving the countries ill's is irrelevant.
How insulting of Javed, does he not realise it is our children and grandchildren that are suffering because of the housing crisis.
We haven't inherited the earth from our parents, we have borrowed it from our children.
Excellent post, Phil. I doubt whether SJ gives a monkey's. Back in June, he couldn't even bring himself to criticise K&C council after their slumbering and uncaring response to Grenfell Tower. Loathsome man.
Well according to our totally useless head of neighbourhoods Steve (robber) Moore the ones out begging on Romford streets are locals in need of homes and are a public menace.
No more of a public menace than those so called chuggers from double glazing firms sky tv and all kinds of charities all over shoppers like a does of the clap.
Dervish promised to do something about them and get them off the streets harassing shoppers but as usual another hollow statement.
This has all the hallmarks of the neo fascist Chris Grayling.
When he was injustice secretary he tried to charge anyone appearing at the beaks court innocent or guilty £150 for the service.
Typical Tory shitbag who hits those the ones who can least afford it.