Jan/100
The darker side of right-to-buy
Right to buy was introduced almost 30 years ago, hailed as a social revolution that would transform council estates. The reality shows a less rosier picture of fractured communities, exploitative landlordism and a severe lack of affordable housing. Most of the housing exists as the remains of the “homes for heroes” scheme initiated during the twenties by Prime Minister Lloyd George. Yet it is another historical piece of government policy that has influenced the shape of Britain’s streets. In December 1979 the Conservative government published the housing bill that allowed council tenants’ right to buy their homes. The idea was that those who bought their homes would take pride in their property, looking after them more because they had a personal investment in it. Ken Collins like many others bought his house, through right to buy and has expanded his home into a valuable asset. Ken not only benefited financially, he believes that residents who bought their homes became more responsible for them which in turn improved the quality of the entire neighbourhood.
In the long-term the financial benefit to right-to-buy owners is apparent, however the long lasting social effects are clear to be seen in what were previously council estates like Dagenham. Critics of the right to buy scheme argue that right to buy has pushed ‘social housing’ out of affordable areas and replaced it with private sector leasing. Landlords rent these properties out on short term leases to large families, often vulnerable in desperate situation which has an overall negative effect on social cohesion. Furthermore there is evidence to suggest a more under hand practice lurking in London’s council estates. Those reluctant to give up their council tenancies unofficially sub-let properties for cash-in-hand, selling their front door keys, further eroding communities making them increasingly unstable.
It is unsurprising that council tenants choose a less savoury route when we consider the problems taking the official route. This is particularly noticeable in situations were the tenant becomes a leaseholder on buying their ex-council flat. Some councils charge the leaseholders for building improvements, this can lead to demands for vast sums and leave people with no option to sell up rather than remain in their homes. The problem is that the right to buy scheme ignores the fact that many of the council tenants are low income families and rather than handing them an opportunity to secure a home for their future it places them in impossible financial situations leading to debt or worse with no home. Ironically, it is the council that offers an opportunity for those leaseholders struggling to pay back their mortgage a way out, they offer to buy the property back for council housing, some skeptics go so far as to say that the service charges are a way of emptying housing that is desperately needed in popular areas.
The biggest fear is that the reluctance from government to decrease right to buy is taking away the right to rent from people who can not afford to buy. A balance needs to be maintained between those who wish to rent and those who want to become homeowners and the only way forward is to build more affordable housing.
Related posts:
No comments yet.
Leave a comment
No trackbacks yet.
 |
 |
