Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

S14 - Statement of Intent from the Home Department - Housing Watch

    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by Tommy1boy)
    I just think we could find the money elsewhere :P
    We did look down the back of the proverbial sofa, trust me. That's why this is so late coming out.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Saracen's Fez)
    We did look down the back of the proverbial sofa, trust me. That's why this is so late coming out.
    Before the budget was the time to look down the back of the sofa, you know, so you could put these things in the budget.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Aye
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    All I am saying is if this was not a rush job, the money would have been found elsewhere and it would have been in the budget.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Tommy1boy)
    All I am saying is if this was not a rush job, the money would have been found elsewhere and it would have been in the budget.
    I agree but your comment rests on the assumption the government is competent; the government is financially illiterate.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nigel Farage MEP)
    I agree but your comment rests on the assumption the government is competent; the government is financially illiterate.
    Well yes maybe I should have taken that in to account.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by PetrosAC)
    I've honestly been trying to work out a way of raising the money otherwise but I couldn't.
    Could have sold them all to housing associations for say, half what you paid, meaning that the cost is only £50bn and people still benefit from cheap rents and more housing stock. However, that would mean the revenues going to the housing associations rather than being used to pay off the interest repayments on the GILTS
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Quamquam123)
    I recognise the need for housing but I simply do not think building as many houses as possible is the solution. Building on flood-prone land and building so many houses that two towns are joined up is just wrong. I'm afraid I am against this statement.
    Net immigration is higher than 100,000 per year, are you suggesting that we have an infinite supply of housing?
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Lime-man)
    Net immigration is higher than 100,000 per year, are you suggesting that we have an infinite supply of housing?
    Housing is not on a 1 inhabitant per house basis

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Lime-man)
    Net immigration is higher than 100,000 per year, are you suggesting that we have an infinite supply of housing?
    No, I'm just saying that I don't think constantly building houses is the solution to the problem.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Housing is not on a 1 inhabitant per house basis

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I wasn't suggesting it was, however, if we look at how many people are currently homeless, how many people are paying exhorbitant rents, how many people who are still living with their parents well into their twenties, then we look at 300,000+ people coming here from around the world, 100,000 council homes per year should be the absolute minimum and I welcome Rakas21's plans to have 1m by 2025.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Quamquam123)
    No, I'm just saying that I don't think constantly building houses is the solution to the problem.
    It's either that, limit immigration or begin culling parts of the population (which I don't mind, as long as it's parts of the population north of Hertfordshire).
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Lime-man)
    It's either that, limit immigration or begin culling parts of the population (which I don't mind, as long as it's parts of the population north of Hertfordshire).
    I think that we should limit immigration, not by too much, but enough to make sure the housing crisis does not spiral out of control. If we leave the EU, we would have to accept fewer immigrants.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lime-man)
    I wasn't suggesting it was, however, if we look at how many people are currently homeless, how many people are paying exhorbitant rents, how many people who are still living with their parents well into their twenties, then we look at 300,000+ people coming here from around the world, 100,000 council homes per year should be the absolute minimum and I welcome Rakas21's plans to have 1m by 2025.
    It's probably worth noting that most of the homeless could already be housed with a more pro-active government that moved them elsewhere (their main barrier is a combination of lifestyle and lack of address outside London) but yeah, we need about 300,000 homes built per year and the private sector struggles to build more than about 200,000 given current planning constraints and NIMBY power.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Quamquam123)
    I think that we should limit immigration, not by too much, but enough to make sure the housing crisis does not spiral out of control. If we leave the EU, we would have to accept fewer immigrants.
    Not actually true.

    Even if we limit immigration to say 100,000 (a reasonable amount), with population growth, house prices inflating and wages not growing fast enough 100,000 homes a year is still the bare minimum.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Quamquam123)
    I think that we should limit immigration, not by too much, but enough to make sure the housing crisis does not spiral out of control. If we leave the EU, we would have to accept fewer immigrants.
    We would be able to accept fewer, but we probably wouldn't

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Community Assistant
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    • PS Reviewer
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    Wiki Support Team
    Political Ambassador
    PS Reviewer
    Since the last post in this debate was four days ago, I am closing the debate early. As not enough time remains for division, this item has been automatically withdrawn and so the measures within this SOI should be considered passed by the House.
 
 
 
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: April 9, 2016
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you rather give up salt or pepper?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.