logo
Right to buy in England ‘fuelled housing crisis and cost taxpayers £200bn'

Right to buy in England ‘fuelled housing crisis and cost taxpayers £200bn'

The Guardiana day ago
Margaret Thatcher's right-to-buy scheme has cost UK taxpayers almost £200bn, according to a report into the policy's contribution to Britain's housing crisis.
In its report into the sale of millions of council homes to their tenants at steep discounts since 1980, the Common Wealth thinktank said the policy had fuelled vast shortages in social housing and turbocharged inequality.
Describing it as one of the 'largest giveaways in UK history', it said the sale of 1.9m council homes in England had contributed to a situation where one in six private tenants in England now rents a former local authority home.
Local authority tenants have been able to buy their homes since 1936, but changes made under the first Thatcher government in 1980 triggered a boom in sales at steep discounts to market value.
Calculating the 'opportunity cost' of the sales, Common Wealth said the former council homes were now worth an estimated £430bn after taking account of inflation and the surge in property prices since 1980.
Of this sum, the thinktank said £194bn represented the value that was effectively given away when the homes were sold at a discount. Between the years 1980-81 and 2023-24, the discount averaged 43% on the prevailing market price.
The report comes as Angela Rayner, the deputy prime minister, pushes to tackle Britain's housing crisis by making sweeping changes to right to buy, including making it harder for tenants in England to buy their council home.
Under the planned changes, eligibility for the scheme will be tightened. This will include extending the minimum time a council tenant must live in their home from three to 10 years before they can buy it at a discount.
Right to buy was launched by Thatcher as a pitch to older working-class voters to build a 'property-owning democracy'. Although it helped millions of families into home ownership, it also dramatically depleted Britain's affordable housing stock as the homes were not replaced.
After rising for decades, home ownership rates have fallen since 2004, and have collapsed among young adults. From a peak of more than half of 25- to 34-year-olds owning their own home in 1990, less than a quarter of young adults are now property owners,leading to a boom in private renting and many choosing to live with parents.
After decades of sharply rising property prices, Common Wealth said, local authorities have lost the use of housing assets that could have either been sold at higher market values or used for social housing.
Chris Hayes, the thinktank's chief economist, said: 'The severe financial straits facing councils should be seen in the context of a decades-long assault on local government, in which right to buy was a central pillar, denying councils discretion over how best to use assets that they had built.
'Now those assets are in dire shortage and councils still bear the heightened cost of seeing people through the housing crisis.'
Many of the properties are now rented out, often to tenants on housing benefit at a cost to local authorities of more than £20bn year, while councils have lacked funding to replace the homes sold.
The leftwing thinktank, which has links to senior Labour cabinet figures, said local government has been in 'net disinvestment' in every year but one since 1988-89 – meaning it sells more assets than it builds. A report earlier this year by the Centre for Cities found that returning the number of affordable homes back to 2010 levels would cost the government £50bn.
Labour has pledged a 'social rent revolution', allocating £39bn of social and affordable homes over the next 10 years, alongside slashing planning rules to support private sector housebuilding. However, critics have warned that the government could struggle to hit its target to build 1.5m new homes in total.
Kwajo Tweneboa, a social housing campaigner, said right to buy had 'gutted council housing and transferred public wealth into private hands'.
'We're in a housing emergency. Millions stuck on waiting lists. Tens of thousands living in temporary accommodation that's unfit and unsafe. All while homes that were once publicly owned are now profit-generating assets for private landlords,' he said.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

UK hedge fund Marshall Wace posted mixed returns for July, source says
UK hedge fund Marshall Wace posted mixed returns for July, source says

Reuters

time17 minutes ago

  • Reuters

UK hedge fund Marshall Wace posted mixed returns for July, source says

LONDON, Aug 4 (Reuters) - British hedge fund Marshall Wace returned mixed results in two of its funds in July, a source close to the matter told Reuters on Monday. Co-founded by British financier Paul Marshall, the $76.9 billion firm returned 1.6% in July culminating in a 6.1% performance for 2025 so far in its Eureka Fund, the source said. The hedge fund's Market Neutral Tops fund returned -0.22% for July and is up 10.99% year to date the source added. Systematic stock trading hedge funds, like Marshall Wace, are up roughly 10% for 2025 so far, said Goldman Sachs on Monday.

Reform's 19-year-old council leader risks contempt of court over rape case comments
Reform's 19-year-old council leader risks contempt of court over rape case comments

The Independent

time18 minutes ago

  • The Independent

Reform's 19-year-old council leader risks contempt of court over rape case comments

A Reform UK council leader risks being found in contempt of court after making a number of statements about the alleged rape of a 12-year-old girl during a press conference in London. It comes after Ahmad Mulakhil, 23, was charged with the rape of a girl in Nuneaton last week. Meanwhile, Mohammad Kabir, also 23, was charged with kidnap and strangulation. Warwickshire Police has not released the immigration status of the two suspects. George Finch - the 19-year-old Warwickshire county council leader - risks having broken the law with a comment he made about the case. Contempt of court refers to behaviour that interferes with the administration of justice or undermines the authority of the court. The Independent is not able to repeat a number of claims Mr Finch makes in the press conference without the newspaper risking contempt of court. At one point during the press conference, Mr Finch acknowledged the risks attached to talking about a live legal case, saying: 'I was told if I released this, I'd be in contempt of court.' The youngest council leader in the country claimed there has been a 'cover-up' of details about the case. It came as Nigel Farage suggested police forces should release information including immigration status about people who are charged with crimes. The Reform UK leader said that he 'absolutely' believes that information should be made available by police forces. In a statement, Warwickshire Police said that once someone is charged with an offence, they follow national guidance, which 'does not include sharing ethnicity or immigration status'. Mr Finch told Monday's press conference that he was 'begging' for information about the two to be released in the wake of the charges. He said he had emailed the council's chief executive to say that he wished to speak to the police force and urge them to release information about the men's immigration status. Mr Finch also said he had later written a letter to home secretary Yvette Cooper and the chief constable of Warwickshire Police calling for the immediate release of the immigration status of the two. Mr Finch also claimed that Reform UK needs to 'change things' and is 'the last line of defence against the blob, the cover-ups'.

Why has Kemi Badenoch fallen out with Liz Truss?
Why has Kemi Badenoch fallen out with Liz Truss?

The Independent

time18 minutes ago

  • The Independent

Why has Kemi Badenoch fallen out with Liz Truss?

Dearie me, they're at it again. Former Tory leader Liz Truss and current Tory leader Kemi Badenoch are involved in another nasty spat, mainly about the infamous mini-Budget introduced by then Prime Minister Truss in September 2022. Badenoch has invoked that calamitous – and deeply Conservative – fiscal event in an otherwise routine attack on the government. Truss, ever ready to defend her record, because no one else will, has hit back and told Badenoch she's wrong and needs to do some more thinking, a particularly hurtful jibe when Badenoch thinks herself one of the brainier kids in the Westminster playground. Amusing and mildly diverting as it may be, this minor row also tells us some much bigger things about the Tory dilemma. What did Badenoch say? That Labour is even more incompetent than Truss was: 'For all their mocking of Liz Truss, Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves have not learnt the lessons of the mini-Budget and are making even bigger mistakes. They continue to borrow more and more, unable and unwilling to make the spending cuts needed to balance the books.' Is that new? Not really. Only a few weeks ago, the shadow chancellor, Mel Stride, evicted from ministerial office by Liz Truss when she formed her short-lived government, laid into the mini-Budget and apologised for it. Badenoch, meanwhile, has said she doesn't know whether Truss is still in the Conservative Party, and implied she doesn't really care either way. She's long let it be known she'd prefer Truss to just go quiet for a while. Badenoch has also been disobliging about the Sunak administration 'talking right but acting left'. But Sunak, like Johnson, May and Cameron, has, so far, preferred to ignore the present controversies and policy shifts, such as Badenoch's 'net-zero sceptic' stance. What's the Truss defence? The usual – her supposedly brilliant plan to turbocharge the British economy was thwarted by a terrible econo-bureaucratic blob and those, to the visionary Truss, idiots at the Bank of England. But increasingly she is having to adapt her line because of attacks from her own party (if she is indeed still in it), which means slagging off the administrations that came before her – Cameron, May, Johnson – and after, Sunak and now Badenoch's performance as leader of the opposition: 'It is disappointing that instead of serious thinking like this, Kemi Badenoch is instead repeating spurious narratives. I suspect she is doing this to divert from the real failures of 14 years of Conservative government in which her supporters are particularly implicated.' Er... weren't they both members of these dreadful governments? Yes. Truss continuously from 2012 to her ousting in 2022, and Badenoch from 2019 to 2024. Indeed, it was Truss who promoted Badenoch to the cabinet as international trade secretary. Neither showed much dissent, publicly or privately. Why are they scrapping? Neither wants to take responsibility for their own failures as a party leader, and that can inevitably lead to blame throwing for their disastrous showing at the election, and subsequently. But all politicians in all parties who find themselves thrashed by the voters are faced with this excruciating dilemma as they enter the wilderness of life in opposition: Do they denounce the record and policies of the government they were apparently happy to be a part of? Or do they defend their record instead? Do they agree with the voters' verdict or not? And if they want to, or have to, admit 'mistakes', are they going to be big or smaller ones? How to play it? By ear – there are no hard rules. Back in the 1970s, Margaret Thatcher, as leader of the opposition, did well out of renouncing most of what the Heath government had done because it ended in such chaos, and Thatcher was (like Badenoch today) a relatively junior cabinet member who could claim some innocence. In due course, because public opinion had shifted during the Blair years, David Cameron found that he'd have to criticise Thatcher herself, so he declared that 'there is such a thing as society' and told his fractious party to 'stop banging on about Europe'. Ed Miliband, after Labour's defeat in 2010, never seemed able to make up his mind about whether the Brown administration (in which he served) had failed, and, if so, how and why. Try as he might, Nick Clegg could never grovel sufficiently for what he did on tuition fees in the coalition government, and the Lib Dems were so punished at the 2015 general election that they were left with eight MPs compared to the 56 elected in 2010. At the moment, the Conservative-led government of 2010 to 2024 has few friends and many critics, the most vociferous being some of its leading lights. In this respect, the party is behaving more like Labour traditionally does after a defeat. Thus, after the 1974-79 Labour government fell from power, it was attacked by the Bennites on the Labour left for being too right-wing, and by the social democrats on the right for being too left-wing. Eventually, the long passage of time made arguments about pay policy, union power and unilateralism irrelevant. One day, when people have forgotten who Truss and Badenoch were, they may be ready to give the Tories a hearing. But, with Farage on their right flank, with no qualms about slagging off the last government, the Conservatives may not have the luxury of time to settle their differences and focus their attacks on him.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store