BOB CROWE

I agree, I think there is a case for council housing to be limited to people whose combined income is below a certain level (not sure what that level should be though). if he doesn't want to buy a property then he is well able to rent privately leaving the house free for a low income family. Isn't this what council housing was originally meant to do.

I'm sure it could be arranged for him to die in a council house.

anno!

As he earns that sort of money, he should not be allowed to live in a council house when there are more deserving people on the waiting list.

anno

I wasn't actually advocating assassination!

Allegedly there are some ex Labour MPs in the same position. I know of one, FD, am I allowed to mention his full name here?

It is disgraceful that Bob C is allowed to stay in subsidised housing.

I would much prefer people like Bob Crowe etc to be in their own houses for political reasons really but we shouldn't conflate that with a much more complex discussion. First of all, council housing isn't subsidised , it's just that the private rented sector makes an obscene profit generally speaking. Public money through housing benefit goes to very wealthy property owners ( I'm talking about the big firms not the one off landlords). Secondly, the main reason that there is such a shortage of social housing is the right to buy and no subsequent proper sustainable building programme and thirdly, just think about the real difficulties of an income limit for living in a council house - one year you have a job and overtime, the next year, no overtime but by the you've been thrown onto the tender mercies of the private sector with limited security of tenure and high rents but the you claim housing benefit which goes to a property company and would never get back into council/social housing. Etc etc. I know a lot of people dislike BC - mainly because he's done really well for his members but I don't think a personal dislike of a union leader should stop people thinking through the complexities if the issues raised

He is quoted as saying he is being 'victimised' . It's a very posh council house. Perhaps he could be down sized to more suitable council accommodation in a less salubrious area so one of 'is bruvvers could take advantage of leafy North London

Just get him out and let a young family have the place. The man is a complete disgrace - Socialist? - he doesn't know what the word means!

bluebell I have no problem with his politics (although I do disagree with him) but if this was the managing director of a company living in social housing BC would be one of the first to demand he be put out. I'm afraid a lot of union leaders (not all) have become like politicians - out to line their own pockets.

There is no greater hypocrite than a Union leader on a whopping great salary, parading his working class credentials - council house and only ever dining out Union expenses.

The issue is simple, should someone on £145,000 per year, possibly more, occupy social housing when they could afford to buy or privately rent and thereby allow someone who does not have those options to occupy that property?

Bob Crowe, may have done well for his members, particularly when demanding extra money for working their normal shifts during the Olympics. However, he has a complete disregard for the general commuting public, some I have spoken to would like to string him up "Mussolini" style form a lamp post and possibly understandably as they already suffer from being stuffed sardine like in over packed trains. I know someone who does a 40 minute commute into London and her annual season ticket is in the region of £4,000 per annum, which rises year on year above the rate of inflation. Many hapless commuters pay this sort of money 'cause unlike Mr Crowe, they don't have a London pad which they could possibly afford!

I bet he is so glad he is not a Tory MP or else he would be hounded out of his home.

Perhaps 'Unite' could send their 'hit squad' to his home and show him the error of his ways. Hypocrite, you bet ya. How do people like Bob Crow stand on a platform at the various conferences etc., and be hailed as Heroes of the Working Classes and a true Socialist.

The man is obviously a very limited thinker with no ambition. He began life in a council house, can't see beyond that, and lacks any urge to improve his situation.

He is also a total hypocrite because he could go live in any other council house in any deprived area, as per his alleged principles rather than living on the cheap in a prestigious area.

Added to which he has an arrogant disregard for all those deserving people whose lives would be changed for the better by the opportunity to live in that house.

Finally, no doubt he will take advantage of the discount scheme and buy said council house, and maybe rent it out at an extortionate rate.

Yes I agree Bob Crowe is a loud hypocrite who bends his principles to suit his needs. I have no doubt if he had right wing tendencies a crowd would certainly have protested outside his front door.Thank goodness his comrade Arthur Scargill is finally paying rent for his union flat in London. The NUM were already paying the mortgage for his house in Yorkshire. With only 2,000 members now each member of the NUM were giving £20 a year for the retired Mr Scargill to live free in the heart of London.
It's a shame when good honest workers find themselves led by leaders who once elected follow their own agenda.

Before having a go at Bob Crowe, I think something should be done about people with council tenancies who sub-let at extortionate rates (particularly in London) and live in cheaper areas, thus making a nice profit and depriving people who need it the chance to obtain social housing.

It's no more hypocritical of BC to live in a council house than it is for IDS to live in a large, expensive house courtesy of his father-in-law at the same time as introducing policies that make it impossible for some people to remain in their homes.

Can't we have a go at all of them?

I certainly wouldn't let Bob Crowe off the hook just because others are exploiting the system/taking advantage of their position/behaving hypocritically, regardless of their political allegiance.

On the surface it looks as if BC is not walking the talk! Council/social housing is aimed at those who would find it difficult or impossible to raise a deposit to purchase a property through a mortgage or to afford high private rental. I have to agree it does not look good but guess he is damned either way.

I bet many who have slated him for living in a council property would say something similar if he lived in a privately owned house ... 'call himself a man of the people living in a house like that' I can just hear it!

Also to the poster who talked about crowded trains...at least that is not his fault but the fault of the management! or can you swing that one at him too?

Surely we should expect those that claim to represent those who are disadvantaged - assuming union members are disadvantaged, to live relatively modest lives. I do not mean average wage and council house. But £145,000 seems a lot. I would expect a salary nearer to £100,000 and at that price I would expect them to be buying or renting a home in the private sector. If their previous work meant their own home was a long way from London I can understand them being provide with a pied a terre in London, say a small one bedroomed flat in a modest area

Bob Crowe has been associated with accusations of lavish wining and dining, perhaps I should say beering and dining on Union expenses.

I can't understand why he would want to stay in a council house. My sister was in dire straits many years ago and was given a maisonette. Her main aim was to get herself and her children into a place of their own and she succeeded. My DD is in rented accommodation (subsidised) but unfortunately the way the system is now worked she will never be able to buy a place of her own because she would be penalised for saving towards a deposit.

Yes, I think Bob Crowe should be kicked out of the council house to give others a chance when they need it most.

I read a lot about Bob Crowe yesterday. He is quoted as saying he has had the opportunity to buy his council house, but does not believe in this practice. I don't think he can do right for doing wrong, as if he buys a house elsewhere he'll be criticised for that, too. We had a thread discussing the bedroom tax, and many supported the right of tenants to keep the homes where they raised their families and had put down roots in the community, with schools, friends, work and neighbours.

Yes, he gets an inflated salary - that should be reviewed and not increased, in line with everyone else who is feeling the pinch. But this is the man's, and his family's, home.

Presumably he's been on a large salary for many years, therefore could have afforded to buy on the open market and not be living in a house which was intended for people on low incomes.

He also gets free transport which is worth a fortune in London. I am not sure if he has a car and driver as part of his job.

I would not care what size of house he bought provided he could maintain it without any outside help. If I can on my pension, he could on his inflated salary.

Seems this was the house he and his wife were allocated 30 years ago, when he was in his early 20s and on a low income. They have raised their family there, and do not intend to move away from their friends and neighbours, but don't believe in buying council homes so pay full rent. It's the family home. All they want is to exercise their choice to stay in their home, as do we.

If it's good for the royals, ok for MPs to live where they choose, and ok for me to stay in my house with spare bedroom............

Why are people being attacked for putting down roots and staying in the community where they raised their families? There's a lack of housing, but you don't solve it by forcing people out of their homes. All Bob Crowe's situation does is highlight what damage Thatcher did by allowing council homes to be sold but not letting us keep the profits to build more social housing.