Social Housing - Creating a monster

That people recognise that council/social housing is not supposed to be your permanent home. It should be a temporary measure that allows you to get yourself sorted. Once you are able to, you should be moving on and supporting yourself.

Says who? Back it up with some facts, links, documents...anything, at this point, that says social housing is only supposed to be a temporary measure.
 
Says who? Back it up with some facts, links, documents...anything, at this point, that says social housing is only supposed to be a temporary measure.
This is a discussion forum where people give their opinion. The current pseudo-socialist policy of not allocating resources on an ongoing needs basis is the topic of this thread and many posters, including me, are offering their opinion that the current policy is wasteful, socially unjust and socially damaging. That's all.
 
This is a discussion forum where people give their opinion. The current pseudo-socialist policy of not allocating resources on an ongoing needs basis is the topic of this thread and many posters, including me, are offering their opinion that the current policy is wasteful, socially unjust and socially damaging. That's all.

As I said before;

You are of course entitled to that view


The point is, we can all argue the day and night as to what should or shouldn’t be – with a plethora of different issues. But at some point, when trying to figure out why things aren’t as they “should be” it might be worthwhile doing some background on the issue.

Housing is a complex issue. It would be wonderful if we could neatly pack up families and individuals move them around as required – but it is not realistic, and since housing policy dates back before the foundation of the state, that it is subject today to EU directives and policy

http://www.housingeurope.eu/

that there is a vast, vast amount of study and research and policy implementation, all subject to innumerable and variable factors, not least budgetary requirements, that the notion of simplifying by what “should be” and moving people on “ when they sort themselves out” goes nowhere to resolving the current housing crisis in Ireland.

If he State requires people to move, it should incentivise them not coerce or compel them. A tax rebate or tax credit to cover the costs of moving into more suitable accommodation might be a start?

A house building program, using borrowed funds if need be, might also help – it might be worth pointing out that given the high cost of private ownership and rental, that this acts as a barrier to foreign investment and talent setting up in this country. Borrowing today, to accommodate the future might be a worthwhile option.

Aside from that, it has already been shown to you that social housing tenants already pay a rent based on their income. They also pay tax on that income, which goes no more, no less, to the provision of that housing too.

It has also already been shown to you that in LA housing, the average incomes are not much above minimum wage (with some 60% of that made up of welfare benefits), so the reality of ‘sorting themselves out’ can be somewhat a challenge if the household consists of elderly or disabled, or people with poor education.

I could go on, but the magic cohort of high income earners “who could well afford to buy” but choose to continue living in social housing is simply not there. And of the rare incidences where it does happen, ‘moving on’ will make very little difference to the housing crisis which consists of FTB’s who also want to buy but are unable to get in on the market.
 
I'm certainly not proposing tearing the whole thing down, just tweaking it so that there is a greater actual and perceived fairness. That legitimises the system we pay into and many gain from. The statistics behind the stories we hear about homeless families are a tiny proportion of those in need of social housing; The State provides about 134,000 families with social housing, directly (107,000 units) of through the private rental sector(27,000 units). There are 1,700 homeless families. That means that we only need to make 1.27% of the current stock available in order to solve the immediate problem. If we can make 5% available then we will free up 6000 homes for first time buyers and the so-called hidden homeless.
There are too many housing associations with too few houses which leads to a duplication of services and waste. There are lots of issues and factors which contribute to the housing crisis and the efficient and fair management of the State's housing stock should be of concern to everyone who is concerned about this issue.
 
Back
Top