So, Right to Buy 2. The tories' shark-jump election promise to force private companies to sell off their assets, on the principle that they should then use the money to build new flats under the sea, looks like it's about to come to a head. The proposed policy has been panned for being a disaster during our housing crisis, not to mention unworkable, by left and right alike. But in the media at large the "magic swap" principle (sell one, build one) has been reported uncritically. If housing associations were reclassified as being part of the public sector it's estimated that the taxpayer would take on £60bn of debt.
They quietly proposed a backroom deal with housing associations this week - basically "accept a slightly diluted version so we don't have to take it to Parliament" - which they have a few days to accept or reject. I know that London councils have got together to fight it this week too.
In this piece it's left to a housing consultant and blogger to say what matters:
Anyway, this is a thread to keep an eye on such fuckery.
They quietly proposed a backroom deal with housing associations this week - basically "accept a slightly diluted version so we don't have to take it to Parliament" - which they have a few days to accept or reject. I know that London councils have got together to fight it this week too.
In this piece it's left to a housing consultant and blogger to say what matters:
We all know that one for one replacement has been a dismal failure so far - the true figure is more like one built for eight sold. What’s more, a report from the Commons’ public accounts committee shows that the government has thoroughly mismanaged its sale of public land. And yet the National Housing Federation appears to be willing to accept the government’s commitment to one- for-one replacement without any second thoughts.
Comment