Latest news with #RighttoBuy
New Statesman
7 days ago
- Politics
- New Statesman
Letter of the week: Anti-social housing policy
Photo by Bettmann / Getty Images Harry Lambert (Cover Story) and Anoosh Chakelian (Bursting the Bubble, both 11 July) have written excellent pieces that have an unexpected link. Jenrick cites Charles de Gaulle and Singapore's Lee Kuan Yew as key influences. Both these iconic right-wingers (especially Lee) believed in and built high-quality, state-funded social housing. Indeed, 80 per cent of Singapore's residents still live in this public housing. Selling off more than a million of those flats and houses at a 40-60 per cent discount, and then forbidding local authorities to use the receipts to replace them, would have struck Lee as absurd. Yet that is what Right to Buy has done in the UK and, in the process, it has created much of today's housing and rental crisis. If Labour won't close this Right to Buy black hole and build public housing to help Britain's left-behind and Red Wall communities, perhaps Jenrick's reinvented right will? Robert Dear, London N14 Obstinate Bob Harry Lambert reports Robert Jenrick was 'furious' to not be made home secretary in November 2023, as 'he was the one who knew the department' (Cover Story, 11 July). A month earlier, he was forced to scrap a plan to take over a four-star hotel in Llanelli, Wales. He ploughed on despite opposition from the council; he wouldn't even meet the local MP to discuss residents' concerns. On police advice, the plan was reversed, but Jenrick's tin ear caused social division. Far from encouraging integration, his record is tough talk and divisive incompetence. Lee Waters, Member of the Senedd for Llanelli Frost bite I like the feisty new spirit of the magazine (Editor's Note, 11 July). The Labour go-to of watered-down Reform policy clearly isn't working, and the journalism has been brave. Upsetting Lord Frost and the Daily Mail should be worn as badges of honour. Rob Grew, Birmingham Behind the rebellion I have time a lot of time for Rachael Maskell (Diary, 11 July) so was very pleased to read the story behind the back-bench rebellion over the welfare reform bill. It was chaos, and she is correct to state that the notion of making life-changing decisions for sick and disabled people before the results of the Timms Review was unfathomable. You really couldn't make it up – but it appears the government was, until the last-minute concession. The bill has been passed, but the retribution will continue. You bypass back-bench Labour MPs at your peril. Judith A Daniels, Great Yarmouth, Norfolk Overcoming boundaries I was once fortunate enough to live on Britain's first social housing scheme, London's Boundary Estate (Bursting the Bubble, 11 July). The flat looked over the Arnold Circus bandstand, built on Arts and Crafts principles, incorporating craftsmanship in community spaces. The area's rich cultural diversity is evident in the nearby Georgian chapel on Brick Lane. Built in 1744 as French Huguenot place of worship, it became a Methodist chapel in 1819, a synagogue in 1897 and, in 1976, a mosque serving the Bangladeshi community. Small wonder the members of far-right groups are in a lather about such social cohesion. Tower Hamlets still retains ownership of two-thirds of the Boundary Estate. And yes, Brick Lane's Jamme Masjid is still a mosque. What's not to like? Austen Lynch, Garstang, Lancashire No rowing back Finn McRedmond's account of her recent experience of Henley Royal Regatta (Vanity Fair, 11 July) was amusing. However, her description sounds more like the bad old days of the late-20th century, when the Regatta was wholly male and the event largely social in nature. The Regatta has achieved an equal balance between men's and women's events, including at junior level, from local club crews to Olympians. The event is now livestreamed, free of charge, so the races can be watched from the comfort of one's own home without the tedium of following a dress code or packing a picnic. Rowing still has quite a way to go in terms of social and ethnic diversity, but over the past 20 years the Regatta has changed for the better, not only in sporting excellence but also in encouraging greater access. Alison Salvesen, Oxford Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe Doctor at large It's great to see that Phil Whitaker is already established in British Columbia and offering valuable advice to Wes Streeting from there (Health Matters, 11 July). People with their eyes open always have something to offer wherever they are in the world. Marina Marangos, Brisbane Write to letters@ We reserve the right to edit letters [See also: A question of intent] Related
The National
14-07-2025
- Business
- The National
No need to wait for UK. Scotland can launch own form of wealth tax
Wealth inequality is increasing at an unimaginable rate and is currently substantially higher than income inequality. The rich are taking from all of us far more than they need and are giving back far less than what they are able to. This is a self-reinforcing problem, such as where people who were able to buy houses when they were cheap (perhaps during Thatcher's Right to Buy demolition of the social housing sector) became able to rent them out at ever increasing rates to people who can't now afford to save a deposit to buy a house because prices are rising faster than they can save due to the amount they have to spend on rent. READ MORE: Richard Murphy: Why the UK will not see economic growth under Rachel Reeves Even the Office for Budget Responsibility is now warning (as I did several years ago in my book All Of Our Futures) of the fiscal risks looming due to the number of people still privately renting when they retire and who will simultaneously be unable to afford to keep paying those rents and won't have any capital saved in their house to subsidise their inadequate state pensions. It's not for no reason that the British public is increasingly demanding that the UK Government brings in a wealth tax to rebalance our increasingly unstable economy. I will say there are good reasons for the UK to not bring in 'a wealth tax' – by which I mean a single annual payment calculated as a certain percentage of the value of all of the assets and possessions that you own. Professor Richard Murphy has articulated many of them well. It's hard to value those possessions, and easy to hide them. And there are other taxes that the UK could use – such as reforms to taxes on stocks, shares, pensions and capital gains – that would achieve much of the same result. Not that the UK Government is going to do any of that either, unless the pressure escalates to the point that the impossible becomes inevitable. UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer (Image: PA) Let's say, however, that the Scottish Government wants to take the first step. Could we do it here instead of waiting for the UK? The patterns of wealth ownership in Scotland are substantially different than in the rest of the UK, particularly London and the south-east of England. We don't have quite as many billionaires floating about the place. We also don't have as much wealth in stocks and shares – mostly because we don't have a stock exchange in Scotland any more. And our generally lower rates of pay mean comparatively lower rates of wealth stored in pensions. There are, however, two sectors in Scotland where wealth is substantially stored and which could be taxed using devolved tax powers: land and buildings. Scotland already has its Land and Buildings Transaction Tax, but despite the Scottish Greens seeking to apply what they called a 'mansion tax' to it, this would remain merely a surcharge on the transfer of assets, not a wealth tax applied to the holding of them. If you never bought another mansion, you'd never pay the mansion tax. READ MORE: Lesley Riddoch: The SNP must take up zonal pricing fight – why aren't they? Meanwhile, Council Tax is the most outdated and badly broken tax Scotland still insists on inflicting on the poor. The Scottish Government has stated it is not even going to think about reforming it until the end of this decade. This is completely unacceptable, especially as the solution is obvious. We need to scrap Council Tax and replace it with a tax based on a percentage of the present market value of the property. Common Weal argued that a rate of 0.63% would have been revenue neutral compared to Council Tax at the time we published the paper. That number could be recalculated now, but we estimated then that a 'revenue neutral' rate would actually mean a tax cut for eight out of 10 households as the burden of paying the tax would be placed more fairly on those who lived in the most expensive houses. We calculated that the 'break even' point then would have been a house worth something like £400,000. This is based on a flat rate of tax, too. We would argue that councils should have the power to add progressive rates on extremely valuable properties, such as £1 million-plus mansions or, as is the case with the current Council Tax, additional multipliers for multiple home ownership. This would immediately act as a wealth tax both on the most expensive properties but also on multiple property ownership. Unlike Council Tax, which is paid by occupants, our Property Tax would be paid by property owners and they could only pass on to their tenants the basic rate of tax. Landlords would have to pay any multiple ownership surcharges themselves. The second wealth store in Scotland, land, is probably the greatest store of almost untaxed wealth in the country. Many countries tax the ownership of land as a distinct tax from properties built on it, sometimes because of local democracy – for example, you might pay a land tax to your municipal government and property tax to your regional government. In Scotland there may be good reason to not do that but to simply extend the Property Tax to cover not just the land under and around your mansion but also the broader estate you own with it. Given that the two are often sold together, this would be much easier to put a price on than trying to calculate a separate Land Value Tax. We've estimated that doing this at the same flat rate as the Property Tax would bring in around £450 million a year in revenue – though this could be adjusted down to account for subsidies for small farms or up to better tax the 422 people who own half of Scotland. One of the major advantages of both of these taxes – one that negates objections from both the UK and Scottish Government whenever taxes on the wealth have been suggested – is that they completely bypass the idea that the rich will simply leave the country. Recent studies have shown that the idea of 'millionaire flight' basically isn't a thing. READ MORE: Ruth Wishart: Welsh Labour can call out their UK boss. Why can't the Scottish branch? It's not just a huge logistical hassle for comparatively little financial gain to pack everything up to go and live in a tax haven, even millionaires have friends and family as do their kids and tearing up those social bonds to save a bit of money just isn't worth it. However, this hasn't stopped the media pushing that line anyway. Even if it was true, the wealth people have locked up in Scottish land and housing can't move with them. The tax still needs to be paid by whoever owns them regardless of where they live (and many of the largest landowners in Scotland don't live here, so the point is particularly moot there). One of the biggest sources of instability in our current society and economy is wealth inequality. It urgently needs to be reined in and reversed. If the UK Government persists in refusing to do it then there is at least something the Scottish Government can do without having to wait for them. And if the current Scottish Government doesn't want to do it either well, there are elections next year. Maybe politicians could suggest who we should vote for who will?
Scottish Sun
04-07-2025
- Business
- Scottish Sun
Major rule change for anyone living in a council house under new Labour crackdown
SMART MOVE? Major rule change for anyone living in a council house under new Labour crackdown A MAJOR rule change has been introduced for anyone living in a council house under a new Labour crackdown. Stringent restrictions will be placed on the government scheme going forward. 1 A major rule change has been introduced for anyone living in a council house under a new Labour crackdown The right-to-buy scheme Right to Buy was the policy of Margaret Thatcher in 1979, helping to propel her to her first general election victory. But discounts for council tenants seeking to buy their homes are now to be drastically cut by Angela Rayner. As a result of the move, which will impose stringent restrictions on the right-to-buy scheme, the Deputy Prime Minister was accused of an 'attack on aspiration'. Under the new scheme, the discount will be cut to between five and 15 per cent, which is drastically down from 35 per cent at present. Ms Rayner also announced that tenants must have lived in a council house for 10 years – which previously used to be only three – to be able to qualify. Plus, those people who have previously benefitted from the scheme will be barred from trying again Newly built council houses exempt Newly built council houses will be exempt from the right to buy for 35 years. Kevin Hollinrake, shadow housing secretary, called Ms Rayner a 'hypocrite' because she had benefitted from right to buy herself. Ms Rayner bought her former council house in Stockport, Greater Manchester, in 2017 for £79,000 after claiming a 25 per cent discount reports The Telegraph. She later sold the property for £48,500 more than she paid for it. You'd never know I live in a council house thanks to how good it looks - I shopped in IKEA & an Amazon tip saved me cash Mr Hollinrake said: 'Today, Labour has chosen to quietly bury bad news, slipping out a policy that slashes right-to-buy eligibility and discounts. 'This is nothing short of an attack on aspiration. Labour is turning its back on the very families who work hard and want a stake in their future.' The scheme has helped millions Mr Hollinrake explained that for decades, the right to buy has helped millions take their first step onto the housing ladder. He continued: "Now, this Government is making it harder than ever to own a home. "It is increasingly clear that the only guaranteed route to housing in this country is to arrive on a small boat. 'And the hypocrisy is staggering, Angela Rayner has personally benefitted from right to buy. "Yet under her party's watch, that opportunity is being stripped away from others. Labour's message to aspiring homeowners is clear.' Sir Keir Starmer promised wholesale reform to restrict access to the scheme, saying it had too dramatically reduced the number of social houses available to people who needed them. Ms Rayner's Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government department believe the move would allow councils to rebuild their stock. As well as better ensure that only tenants who have paid rent on their homes for many years are able to benefit from the scheme. The changes will prevent existing property owners, or those who have previously benefitted from the scheme, from exercising the right to buy unless there are exceptional circumstances, such as being the victim of domestic abuse. Newly built social and affordable housing will be exempt from the right to buy for 35 years, making it more financially viable for the council to build new homes.
Daily Mirror
04-07-2025
- Business
- Daily Mirror
Huge change for anyone living in council houses announced by Govt
The changes could make it much harder for people to buy their home - with new houses protected for 35 years People who live in a council house are set to see a big change if proposed legislation is adopted. This week Minister of State (Housing, Communities and Local Government) Matthew Pennycook made a written statement to Parliament where he laid out plans which will make it much harder for people to buy their homes. In a bid to try to keep social housing stock the plan will see a much longer period before people will be able to buy their homes - in fact tripling. Also any new homes will be exempt from right to buy for 35 years. Mr Pennycock said: ' To better protect much-needed social housing stock, boost councils' capacity, and enable them to once again build social homes at scale, we need to further reform Right to Buy. Following the reduction in maximum Right to Buy cash discounts announced at Autumn Budget 2024 and our decision to allow councils to keep 100% of Right to Buy receipts, we consulted late last year on reforms to deliver a fairer and more sustainable scheme.' Planned reforms to the Right to Buy: increasing the length of time someone needs to have been a public sector tenant to qualify for Right to Buy from 3 to 10 years; reforming discounts so they start at 5% of the property value, rising by 1% for every extra year an individual is a secure tenant up to the maximum of 15% of the property value or the cash discount cap (whichever is lower); and exempting newly built social homes from Right to Buy for 35 years, ensuring councils are not losing homes before they have recovered the costs of building them. Mr Pennycock added: ' We will legislate when parliamentary time allows to bring these reforms into force. More immediately, we will reform the receipts regime and extend existing flexibilities on spending Right to Buy receipts indefinitely. Councils will also continue to be able to retain the share of the receipts that was previously returned to HM Treasury. In addition, from 2026-27, we will permit councils to combine receipts with grant funding for affordable housing to accelerate council delivery of new homes.' He said a new Council Housebuilding Skills & Capacity Programme, by £12 million of funding in 2025/26 would encourage local authorities to train staff to build their own homes. He added: 'The Programme will enable the Local Government Association to provide centralised training and guidance to councils to upskill their existing workforces and to expand its successful Pathways to Planning programme to help recruit graduates ready to undertake training to become qualified surveyors and project managers. The Department will also work with Homes England to support councils to boost their engagement with the new Social and Affordable Homes Programme.' BBC Money Box presenter Paul Lewis said on X: 'Major reforms to the right to buy council housing planned by govt 'when parliamentary time allows', Housing Minister announces in a written statement to Parliament. It will reduce discounts, protect new builds for 35 years, and more freedom for councils to use sales receipts.' And his followers said it made sense for councils be able to hang onto the homes they build for longer. Joy Brookes said: 'No public sector housing shd ever have been sold off or be sold off now but doesn't this new proposal about new builds create a two tier system - a tenant can buy existing stock but not a new-build built after a certain date? Does it take 35 years to recover cost of building?' Peter added: 'Right to buy was the biggest mistake ever made. It reduced the council-owned housing stock significantly & this is why social housing has never recovered & is in the crisis it is at the moment because governments have failed to rebuild stock levels to meet the needs.'
Yahoo
11-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Rachel Reeves's £39bn housing promise will condemn us all to tents
On paper, £39bn sounds a lot. Until you realise how little you get for that amount of money. Now, it may have escaped people's attention, but in the Spring Statement, Labour announced a £2bn investment in social and affordable housing that would fund the delivery of 18,000 new homes. I'll do the maths for you – £2bn for 18,000 homes works out at £111,111.11 each. Using that yardstick, when you tot it all up, £39bn will buy precisely 351,000 new homes. But there is a proverbial fly in the ointment with these figures – they are spread over 10 years. That means unless that number is inflation adjusted, what you'll be buying with £39bn a decade from now, or even five years, will be considerably less than right now. The other rhino in the room is immigration. These paltry figures are far short of the 1.5 million homes (by the end of Parliament) Labour promised us a year ago. Lest we forget, in the last decade alone, the UK has seen a net gain of 2.2 million people. And over the next 10 years, between mid-2022 and mid-2032, the population of the UK is projected to increase by 4.9 million. I wish I could feel more optimistic about Labour's housing plan, but I'm really struggling. Not only will the money not be enough to buy an already inadequate number of homes for the existing population, but we're facing a skills crisis. We need tens of thousands of tradesmen to build these homes, and we don't have them. To make things worse, according to the latest S&P Purchasing Managers' Index monthly survey of leading firms, UK construction firms shed staff at the fastest rate in March since the pandemic. This is against the backdrop of high profile names such as ISG, a major construction firm at the time, folding last year. Amongst all this bad news, you also have the ongoing farce of the social housing sector which is in a state of what the Housing Ombudsman generously called 'managed decline'. With a five-fold increase in complaints about substandard living conditions between 2019-20 and 2024-25, I don't see the social sector as the solution. This doesn't even take into account the continued impact of the Right to Buy scheme and the fact homes are still being sold in England every year despite Labour's plan to ban sales, as has happened in Scotland and Wales. I hate to be quite so pessimistic about the state of housing in this country, but I can at least share one bright spark with you. Angela Rayner has announced it will no longer be a criminal offence to sleep on a pavement – hurrah! In preparedness, I've hauled myself a few patio slabs into a wheelbarrow (you can't be too presumptuous about the availability of paving), and I've got myself a stockpile of tents from Argos on order before the panic buying begins. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
