Comments on immigrant benefits

Most housing association and council schemes operate on a points priority scheme. It’s no surprise therefore that asylum seekers or those with approval to stay have more points than local residents.
It’s a dilemma because my work experience was it became difficult to house vulnerable family members near family because they weren’t vulnerable enough points wise

Doodledog

I do see what you’re saying Lathyrus. I just think it’s part of a bigger picture, but I also understand that I am seeing it from the perspective of someone who is comfortably housed.

It shouldn’t come down to either/or - there should be housing for all who need it, but that can only happen if people can only have one each. I’m not really talking about residential rentals ;although I think that market should be strictly regulated), but houses that stay empty a lot of the time, and Air B&Bs.

Actually I agree with everything you’ve said there about housing. But it just adds to the feeling of nobody in Government is prepared to act to do anything about this. The build more homes that clearly isn’t working.

I read an article yesterday reflecting on Brexit which said that many people who voted leave did so because nobody would listen when they spoke of the problems they were experiencing.

I think the same thing is happening now and it’s this, if anything, that will bring Reform to power. Reform are very skilled in reflecting back what they hear people saying, rather than dismissing them as they f no account or virtuously lecturing them on what dreadful people they are

It’s a dilemma because my work experience was it became difficult to house vulnerable family members near family because they weren’t vulnerable enough points wise.

It is a huge predicament. No wonder it creates resentment because it doesn't take into account local people's past and present attachment to an area, both in emotional and in practical terms. Also their future longevity in the area is more guaranteed than passing migrants, equally vulnerable I do admit, who will no doubt be moved on.

But I guess on paper there's no room for sentiment, or even longterm sense.

Perhaps it’s the points system that needs revising then.

Why does a family newly arrived from overseas score higher and get the house, than a family who have been living in a one room B and B until a house becomes available?

Shouldn’t the B and B family get the house and the newly arrived get the BandB? Take their place on the list like everyone else?

It’s that kind of unfairness, the feeling that you don’t matter, that causes resentment.

Blaming the housing of a relatively small number of immigrants in a county like Cornwall is a good example of what Reform does extremely well. It finds a convenient and visable scapegoat which then takes the spotlight off what really lies at the heart of the housing problem. We have had decades of under investment in our housing stock, sold off council houses, failed to provide suitable employment in areas of deprivation and allowed the cost of housing people to spiral out of control because basically it suits the better off in society. With many people having most of their wealth invested in the home they live in, it suits them for house prices to stay high and inheritance tax to enable them to pass on most if not all of the value to their children, so let's blame immigrants instead!

It's years since I worked in "housing" in any way but local connection was always part of the decision, MartavTaurus
I'm sure it still is.

^ Shouldn’t the B and B family get the house and the newly arrived get the BandB? Take their place on the list like everyone else?^

I suspect that whichever way round it’s done it would be weaponised as ‘not fair’ by Reform and similar parties.

foxie48

Blaming the housing of a relatively small number of immigrants in a county like Cornwall is a good example of what Reform does extremely well. It finds a convenient and visable scapegoat which then takes the spotlight off what really lies at the heart of the housing problem. We have had decades of under investment in our housing stock, sold off council houses, failed to provide suitable employment in areas of deprivation and allowed the cost of housing people to spiral out of control because basically it suits the better off in society. With many people having most of their wealth invested in the home they live in, it suits them for house prices to stay high and inheritance tax to enable them to pass on most if not all of the value to their children, so let's blame immigrants instead!

Excellent post. Thanks, foxie 👏👏👏

Absolutely Foxie. It is what Reform does well. And listening to the concerns of people who living there is what the other Parties do very, very badly.

Dismissing those concerns doesn’t improve things for anyone. It just adds fuel to the flames.

"Feeling overlooked and angry?" - punish Cameron, vote for Brexit.

"Feeling overlooked and angry?" - punish Starmer, vote Reform.

Absolutely, foxie. Housing is a big issue in many areas, quite unrelated to immigration.
I live in a popular seaside town and a significant number of homes, small and large, are run as Airb&bs, which can be more profitable to the landlord than renting to a local person.
In addition, some of the new builds ( of which we have many) have been acquired by London boroughs to accommodate families on their waiting lists. Very few properties have been constructed for social housing for local people.
All of this has created a massive problem with housing which is unrelated to immigrants, but would require a long term strategy to solve. It's much easier to blame someone else for local, and national government shortcomings .

Foxie 09.05 hear, hear!

The inequality of some people owning two (or more) houses, when many folk don’t have a roof over their heads, is also part of the problem.

But let’s get everyone to look at immigrants rather than inequality!

I think it's an absolute mess and the rage is palpable and I can well comprehend it.

I do not think Reform are one bit interested in helping though.
People from GB news poking around a neglected ex mining village don't help one bit.

Doodledog

I agree that more homes need to be built, and that people should be ‘allowed’ to buy what they like - who is disallowing anyone?

What I am saying is that blaming immigrants for a housing shortage when existing citizens can have more than one home seems to me to be missing a very important contributing factor. I am not saying that from a position of envy - why would that be the conclusion anyone would jump to??

You said it was unjust that some should have second homes.

foxie 48....your post at 9.05 raises some good points....I don't agree with them all but this didn't all happen under a Reform government did it...

Yes in a nutshell notspaghetti.

That’s exactly what I’m afraid will happen.

And yet others who don’t want that either just aggravate things but dismissing people and their problems.

I see the green eyed monster has reared its head again! 🤣

If we can afford it, we can spend our hard earned money as we choose. If that means buying a second property to rent to local people then I think that’s a very positive move. They get a pristine property at a very reasonable rent in a nice, quiet area after long waits on the council list. Any problem in the property is dealt with in 24 hours and they get their own parking and a lovely walled garden for privacy. One couple stayed 13 years and in all that time we only put the rent up once by a few £. They were great tenants and we are great landlords. People like us are providing a valuable service to local people.

Meandrogrog

Doodledog

I agree that more homes need to be built, and that people should be ‘allowed’ to buy what they like - who is disallowing anyone?

What I am saying is that blaming immigrants for a housing shortage when existing citizens can have more than one home seems to me to be missing a very important contributing factor. I am not saying that from a position of envy - why would that be the conclusion anyone would jump to??

You said it was unjust that some should have second homes.

It is unjust, but it is also 'allowed'.

I think that rent should be strictly monitored, so people don't put up rent when mortgage rates rise. It is outrageous that renters have to pay the mortgages of others with profit on top, to the point where they can't afford to save for a deposit on a home of their own. So-called 'market rents' are very high because of a shortage of homes - in many cases because council houses were sold at huge discounts. In a just system rents would be fixed and would not take account of the cost of buying a property, as that remains an asset that can be sold at a profit.

I also think that Air B&Bs should be subject to high taxation. I'm not 100% certain of the council tax rules, but I think that if what was once a home becomes an Air B&B the owner pays business rates but not Council Tax, so although the house still has bins emptied and so on the residents (who do pay CT) have less to go around, and either their taxes rise or levels of services fall. Whether that is correct or not, every Air B&B is a house taken out of the market for families (or anyone) to buy, and that also pushes prices up.

I am not saying that people shouldn't be 'allowed' to buy anything, but I am saying that profiting from others' misery by reducing an already scarce commodity is unjust - of course it is.

Primrose53

I see the green eyed monster has reared its head again! 🤣

If we can afford it, we can spend our hard earned money as we choose. If that means buying a second property to rent to local people then I think that’s a very positive move. They get a pristine property at a very reasonable rent in a nice, quiet area after long waits on the council list. Any problem in the property is dealt with in 24 hours and they get their own parking and a lovely walled garden for privacy. One couple stayed 13 years and in all that time we only put the rent up once by a few £. They were great tenants and we are great landlords. People like us are providing a valuable service to local people.

Two questions?

Who is not 'allowing' anything? Of course people are 'allowed' to buy what they like. We are not in primary school with someone making rules about how we spend our pocket money.

Why do people assume that opinions that are not theirs are fuelled by envy? Is that the only motive they understand? It is perfectly possible to be able to have options based on a sense of justice, with envy having absolutely nothing to do with it.

Oh, and a third question if I may? Why the 🤣 (rolling on the floor laughing)? What is so hilarious about someone else having point of view from yours?

Crikey, will we be told next we can only own one car or cannot have a holiday caravan somewhere?

It’s far better to use a second property to house local people than have a property you only use for a few weeks a year in my opinion.

Dorisdodar

foxie 48....your post at 9.05 raises some good points....I don't agree with them all but this didn't all happen under a Reform government did it...

What do you think would happen under a Reform government?

Bearing in mind that when Reform won all those councils they went in proclaiming that they were gong to cut all that wastage and save lots of money (though what it was gong to be saved for didn't seem to be specified) and then found out that there wasn't anything to 'save', what do you think they will do to solve the social housing problem?

Because the 'market' solution of tacking a requirement for 'affordable housing' onto planning permission for private development is being

a) sidestepped by developers cutting the specified numbers claiming that they cannot afford to build their development if they have to sell x number of houses at an 'affordable' price (a price which is way out of the reach of a significant number of prospective buyers anyway)

b) Is not providing any social housing for rent.

Councils themselves cannot afford to finance the amount of social housing they need to provide because they don't have enough funding. Also, that utterly stupid
'right to buy', which takes social housing out of the council's stock at a price that doesn't necessarily cover replacement cost, hasn't been knocked on the head.

So, what are Reform promising to do about it? Even kicking out loads of non white immigrants won't solve it...

As usual, it all boils down to economics and our current economic system doesn't allow for solving the social and cheap housing deficit.

Plenty of second home owners in my rundown northern town...they then turn them into HMOs for immigrants...plenty of profiting from other people's misery going on there.

Well said Doodledog👏👏👏

Primrose53

Crikey, will we be told next we can only own one car or cannot have a holiday caravan somewhere?

It’s far better to use a second property to house local people than have a property you only use for a few weeks a year in my opinion.

No, I doubt it. Who is going to tell you what you can own?

I'm not following the 'not allowed' line of thought at all. People can, and may, own what they like, and long may that continue. All I am saying is that creating a housing shortage and then profiting from that shortage is unjust.

I don't know what will happen under a Reform government...all political parties change what they pledged when they are elected so it's impossible to predict what will happen if Reform are elected.
This government promised growth which would be a good start but we haven't grown really since the 2008 financial crisis.