Too poor to eat properly

What people in social housing want is stability. It should be possible to give tenants long term tenancies tied to age or family circumstances. for example. while there are children under 25 or dependent relatives still living at home, or until the age of 60 or similar, with discussions on alternative accommodation in the run up to that.

Another point about the N/S divide - the cost of houses.
You can buy a nice little Tyneside flat for 40-50k. But probably income is lower here.

I think it would be very hard for an elderly couple who had raised their children in a three or four bed home to have to move into a one bed home. However i agree when faced with that choice or a family with three or four children living in B&B then the family with children should be given the larger home. That way both families do have a home. Also elderly couple might be reminded that when they had small children they were given a home and chance to raise their family so they should not deny another family the same security.

I really feel strongly that if your income is above X you should not be allowed to remain in SH. It is just unfair.

Paddyann The attitude in the south has only been different since the numbers of people in the south unable to afford to rent any property has become so critical. The housing situation in the northeast, northwest and parts of the midlands is far less critical than in the south east.

I am well aware of how hard times in the past were for many, but the world has changed. Obviously contemporary expectations are rather different from those of our grandparents' times, but day-to-day life has also changed dramatically since we were young. Look at the increases over the years in water rates, fuel bills, rents, house prices, fares, petrol prices (some people cannot function without a car because of the cuts in public transport) and so on, then think about the increases in what people earn – not the top of the scale people but those who do low- and middle-paid jobs and have to stretch every penny to survive. The differential between the haves and have-nots, which has always been unfair in the UK (and many other countries), is now so disproportionate it is ridiculous.

In the past, among the poorest both mother and father had to work to make ends meet, but otherwise it was very common for mums to be homemaker and for dad's wages/salary to be enough to support the family – not necessarily in luxury, but adequately. Nowadays, few families can function without both parents being in full-time paid work. That is the reason why granny duty is so widespread now, but wasn't when we were kids.

The economics of managing a family, even a small one, are complex. Yes, it would have helped if traditional cookery lessons hadn't been abandoned in schools. Yes, if you work a night shift, you might well have time to do some careful frugal shopping during the day, if only your body clock wasn't all over the place.

It is easy to sit back and make judgements about other people – as if we don't all have failings and weaknesses. I'm not sure that we can walk in someone else's shoes until we have to wear the same shoes, but I think we need – and our media needs – to bite tongues a bit more often.

there has never been the same attitude to council houses here as there appears to be down south.Its quite normal for a couple to have had the same house since they married ,bring up their families in it and stay in it when their families move out.Nobody looks down on them or thinks they are taking something that someone more "worthy" should have.
Council housing ISN'T subsidised,it should pay its way and give the councils something to raise loans on when needed .The people who rent them are as deserving of a home for life as anyone who buys ....lots of folk dont want the noose of a mortgage round their neck for 25 years and are happy to upgrade the council house they live in.
When I got married in 1975 we were allocated a brand new two bedroom and boxroom house with a kitchen /diner sitting room and back and front gardens .It was "normal" in this area for newly weds to get these new homes.We stayed in ours for 8 years until we had our business established and then bought a flat
.I'm still freinds with many of my neighbours from then who still live in their first homes, a lot who didn't buy them ,most of the ones who did made a killing on selling them on and depriving young families like them from the council houses thay were so pleased to get.

I agree Newnanny. People should be told that once your income reaches a certain level you have x number of years to save a deposit and buy. I understand the difficulties with shortages and downsizing but it seems very harsh to make older folk leave their home. The problem wouldn't exist if we had adequate social housing. It is self financing and eould provide jobs so whats the problem.

What he could have done was bought it at a good discount and made a huge profit.

I wonder why the last chapter of 'Animal Farm' comes to mind?

It was Bob Crow, leader of Rail, Maritime and Transport Union, who died a few years ago who was doing that.

In 2013 he was quoted as saying 'I have no moral duty to move out of council house', despite receiving six-figure salary as RMT boss

Lily I think there has been more than one because I know of one, long time dead, who lived in the centre of London in a council flat.

I don't know if it is still true but there was a very highly paid union leader who was still living in a council house

I don't know if it is true but there was a very rich politician subletting his home to make money.

There is something of a two class system in people in social housing should downsize, not from choice, those who can’t afford to buy shouldn’t have roots, shouldn’t have grandchildren to stay, they have a house not a home

newnany prepare to duck! When I said that a few years ago I received a lot of flack. I don't know if it is still true but there was a very highly paid union leader who was still living in a council house. Imo that was wrong, he should have given it up to a family who needed it more than him.

In NL you can qualify for SH if you have lived long enough in the particular place. A friend has sold her house because she needed to when she retired and has been given a SH flat. The good thing is that her rent is based on her income. I know it is an unpopular idea but if SH rents were based on income those who could afford to buy their own homes would choose to either do so or pay a higher rent which could be used to subsidise those who earned less.

It must be hard if you have lived in your home for many years to have to move to a smaller home but if it is a choice between that or a family living in a b&b I think the family should have it. If we had more smaller SHs it would help.

I don't actually agree that social housing should be for life. Some people with SH become very wealthy and should no longer be entitled to SH. It should be assessed on need every 3-4 years. In jersey that is what they do. A friend lived in SH and when their DD left for uni they had to move from a 3 bed to 2 bed. 2 years later when her son left for uni they had to move into 1 bed. Otherwise you get families with 4 children in 2 bed house.

I appreciate I could sell at any time but i tell my tenants when they move in I won't be selling until X (date mortgage is repaid on interest only or until Z won't be selling in my lifetime as repayment. So every tenant knows where they stand and I do allow them to paint rooms themselves and put pictures up etc. if they wish provided if they move out they repaint it back to Magnolia. I know a lot of other LL and we all think/do the same to be honest. I have only refused to repay deposit once in 17 years and that was when a couple had smashed the mirrored robes and I deducted the amount it cost to be replaced. I know a lot of LL and the ones i know are all fair to tenants and keep the properties well maintained. Apart form anything else it does not make good financial sense to buy a property and not keep it maintained. I do see the rogue LL programmes on TV though so they must be about. There should be a certain standard to meet certified by council. I would welcome that as the few bad LL gives the good LL a bad name.

I get your point newnanny. I know there arw good LLs. But many aren't and its a huge problem. And the thhing is you can sell your property at any stage. Social housing provides ( or used to and still should) a home for life that the tenant can improve and make theirs with the security and good mental health etc that brings.

Pamela maybe she was just feeling a bit 'needing mum'? Or perhaps had been in a discussion with someone else about it. Some do seem to think there is a mystique about cooking and get quite a surprise when they find out there isn't!

I refer to a few earlier threads that explained that you didn't have to be as thick as a brick if you din't understand how to cook.
My DD rang me up from uni. to ask me how long you had to boil a potato. I'd never given it a thought-rather depends doesn't it? Until it's soft?

Much easier face to face to express what we mean than in posting on here.

I hope not! ..hurl abuse I mean.. but yes we would probably agree to disagree. I cannot think of anyone I agree with 100% on everything!

I'm sure we would be fine PECS. I suspect there would be things we would agree to disagree about but we wouldn't hurl abuse at each other.

I buy a weekly magazine, it has a separate food section.
One lady wrote that she tries to give her children balanced meals, including some protein. Her teenage daughter said "But Mom, nobody eats protein these days!"
It's an american magazine btw.

Nonnie ..and what we would do if we were talking face to face!

Thanks PECS, I think you did misunderstand but that is what we do when we have other things on our minds. I always appreciate it when someone does that, so many just ignore it when their mistake is mentioned. I always say when it happens to me. Only polite.