Councils spent £3.5bn on temporary housing in last five years

Yey more playing fields turned into housing estates. The answer might be to build more and more houses, but the UK is going to be a horrible place to live once we're all packed in like sardines. Glad where I live it's surrounded by greenbelt.
 
Mark A said:
Yey more playing fields turned into housing estates. The answer might be to build more and more houses, but the UK is going to be a horrible place to live once we're all packed in like sardines. Glad where I live it's surrounded by greenbelt.
Click to expand...

And this guy is part of the problem.

Acknowledges we need more houses but doesnt want them any where near him.
 
Concrete said:
They don't need to build more houses, people just need to move to areas where there is oversupply rather than under supply (ie: the North).

People don't want to do that though, when the council will just stump up the cash regardless.
Click to expand...

People in living where jobs are shocker
 
Mark A said:
Yey more playing fields turned into housing estates. The answer might be to build more and more houses, but the UK is going to be a horrible place to live once we're all packed in like sardines. Glad where I live it's surrounded by greenbelt.
Click to expand...
Why don't you read the facts before perpetuating popular myths. We are no way near packed in, 2.27% of Britain is built on :rolleyes: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18623096
 
I work in the industry and local planning policy and Local Authorities are the biggest hinderence to more housing - you would not believe how much effort Local Authorities put in to stopping new estates which are then allowed on appeal by the Goverment wasting money and several months. The Local Authority then have a vendetta and try all the way through the process to slow it down. Happens everywhere and it's a disgrace.
 
nick.lidgett said:
The way your post reads suggests you have a rather lopsided view of the world and/ or a lower than average IQ. To be honest this deterred me from engaging in debate with you but then I thought, what the heck, this guy deserves a chance.

What I am saying is, out of the 5 million benefit claimants in the UK only around 350,000 of them are from outside the UK. That is less that 10%.

To blame the UK housing crisis i.e lack of housing and expensive rent on 350,000 people is ridiculous. Don't forget, some of these people are asylum seekers from outside the EU and some of the ones that come from within the EU may well of come here to work, paid taxes and subsequently lost their jobs.

Now here's where my point of not being discriminated comes in to the equation, currently, because we are in the EU and we have freedom of movement I can go to any of the other member states and claim benefits.

At least 30,000 UK citizens are doing the same, while not a huge number it works both ways.

If we were to put nationality first that would be discriminate and I wouldn't want that treatment if was to try and claim in an EU country.

Migrants, whether they are refugees, economic or not can come to the UK and start a life and claim government help when they fall on hard times, we can leave for another EU state and do the same.

I am glad the UK councils give out housing based on need and not nationality.

People should listen to the "Government give £500k house to ex Somalian pirate and his 11 children" headlines.

This country, like many others was founded on immigration and has relied heavily on it through out history. All of a sudden we are surrounded by entitled imbeciles who don't want to share.
Click to expand...

Sadly all this is true hence I have to see the awful sight of many Romanians etc... wandering around my local town centre living a free life at the expense of others. Showing no intentions of working because as a nation we are a bunch of soft *****.

Don't worry I won't discriminate I'll chuck in the white trash mums who knock kids out without little thought knowing someone else will pay for them.

TBH attitudes like yours is why the country is like it is. It's a joke.

There is a reason the immigration levels are so one sided. What is it around 10% immigrate from here compared to what come here. Must be for the smoke job opportunities and good weather.

A Romanian woman comes over with 3 kids and is given a house, plenty of benefits and has no intention of working. Freedom of movement at its finest.

Hopefully we can leave the EU and grow a pair of balls again, instead of living up.
 
Also makes me laugh how you think 350k immigrants living on benefits is ok. What benefit are they to us? Why should I go to work and earn everything I have while these pond life come and have it all for free.

The fact a good portion of them manage to lower the living standards speaks volumes of what they're like.

Don't get me wrong there is enough that are born here that should be shot for the lack of attitude to not ever wanting to work.
 
StriderX said:
People still congregate, you cant expect people to live exactly x amount apart.

So if 5 million people live in a tiny circle, then people tend towards it regardless.
Click to expand...
True, urban areas will always exist but here's no reason to stop building on brownfield and Greenfield where ever possibly because people insist we are "concreting over our countryside". It's simply not true.

I truly believe our terrible railways have a lot to answer for. People wouldn't be so desperate to live in London if it didn't cost them £5k a year to be crammed in like cattle to a journey to work that takes over an hour where it should take 20mins in another world.
 
Caged said:
Build. Council. Homes.
Click to expand...

Councils don't build new homes because:

a) Austerity means they don't have the money to do so.

b) more importantly, Right To Buy means that they would soon have to sell them, at a price that means the council would make a huge loss. It is not the job of councils to aid people onto the housing ladder.
 
Well yeah, but fix those things as well. End right to buy but still permit councils to sell off old stock once it's been replaced by new, and let them borrow to fund it.
 
Concrete said:
They don't need to build more houses, people just need to move to areas where there is oversupply rather than under supply (ie: the North).

People don't want to do that though, when the council will just stump up the cash regardless.
Click to expand...

Caged said:
People in living where jobs are shocker
Click to expand...

I wonder how much (if anything) could be saved from the bill by shipping the perpetually unemployed up north :p

Sure, they still won't get a job, but a bloke on benefits in London is costing the taxpayer much more than a bloke on benefits in Bradford :p

The true craziness is when we hearing of families being put up in swanky London hotels, or posh London boroughs. Get them the heck up north asap.
 
Meridian said:
Councils don't build new homes because:

a) Austerity means they don't have the money to do so.

b) more importantly, Right To Buy means that they would soon have to sell them, at a price that means the council would make a huge loss. It is not the job of councils to aid people onto the housing ladder.
Click to expand...

The alternative is playing out in front of our eyes, year after year.

The nation's housing (and wealth) is being corralled into a tiny section of society, whilst the poor are getting poorer and the middle classes are being squeezed too.

This problem is bigger than building houses or getting re-elected. It will lead to major civil unrest in the longer term unless reversed. A number of economists are coming to this conclusion (ie, I haven't made it up). Do we want to shrug our shoulders and watch as we slide back to Victorian era class warfare?
 
nick.lidgett said:
The way your post reads suggests you have a rather lopsided view of the world and/ or a lower than average IQ. To be honest this deterred me from engaging in debate with you but then I thought, what the heck, this guy deserves a chance.

What I am saying is, out of the 5 million benefit claimants in the UK only around 350,000 of them are from outside the UK. That is less that 10%.

To blame the UK housing crisis i.e lack of housing and expensive rent on 350,000 people is ridiculous. Don't forget, some of these people are asylum seekers from outside the EU and some of the ones that come from within the EU may well of come here to work, paid taxes and subsequently lost their jobs.

Now here's where my point of not being discriminated comes in to the equation, currently, because we are in the EU and we have freedom of movement I can go to any of the other member states and claim benefits.

At least 30,000 UK citizens are doing the same, while not a huge number it works both ways.

If we were to put nationality first that would be discriminate and I wouldn't want that treatment if was to try and claim in an EU country.

Migrants, whether they are refugees, economic or not can come to the UK and start a life and claim government help when they fall on hard times, we can leave for another EU state and do the same.

I am glad the UK councils give out housing based on need and not nationality.

People should listen to the "Government give £500k house to ex Somalian pirate and his 11 children" headlines.

This country, like many others was founded on immigration and has relied heavily on it through out history. All of a sudden we are surrounded by entitled imbeciles who don't want to share.
Click to expand...


Thank you your post made me LOL so much

Good luck turning up in Rome or Berlin or Paris or any other Euro city and expecting to get housing and benefits because we have ''free movement of people''

I could do a long boring post about what benefits you would get in each country {or lack of }

But since you already consider other forum members here to have a lower than average IQ compared to you { your own word not mine } i wont bother.

You also need to look up a term called supply and demand try googling it your awesome powerful IQ should be able to cope with that
 
FoxEye said:
I wonder how much (if anything) could be saved from the bill by shipping the perpetually unemployed up north :p

Sure, they still won't get a job, but a bloke on benefits in London is costing the taxpayer much more than a bloke on benefits in Bradford :p

The true craziness is when we hearing of families being put up in swanky London hotels, or posh London boroughs. Get them the heck up north asap.
Click to expand...

They already do ''ship people oop north'' there was a program on not so long ago forget the name of it but it was talking about homeless families and single mums.

One particular woman lived in Essex or somewhere and was offered a council house up in bradford had to take it or she got nothing else.
 
Jono said:
Well, why should he? I don't want any more round me. Plenty of brownfield to build on.
Click to expand...

Brownfield sites are often not suitable for housing, local council zoning rules many sites out as they will fall in commercial or industrial areas.

Secondly, if zoning was changed to accommodate housing, other things come in to play that will often make a site unusable i.e ground contaminants from previous industry on the site and or existing infrastructure around the site like roads and sewers.

Both of these will have a dramatic effect on the prices of any potential houses.
 
Fantastic, but there are not enough suitable brownfield sites for the number of new houses thats said to be required.

I can understand people kicking off about developing on our national parks and other places of natural beauty but not run of the mill fields/ pastures.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom