Social Housing

[Robin Orton]

What I'd like to know is where Eagle etc think people on benefit should live, if they are not to be given places in social housing?

[JoeP]

My comment wasn't aimed at people on benefits. Just anti social people similar to those described by Mike. If they can't behave in a civilized manner towards society then they shouldn't expect to reap the benefits of living in it.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[stuart]

No. I also never said that Section 106's specifying those things existed. My point was that although these planning gain agreements specify " education places" " parks " etc etc; no one ever actually knows where that moneys goes once paid.

But you were quite specific where it went. Be careful of Theresa's Cat. It can bite back

Stuart

[Dorian]

But you were quite specific where it went. Be careful of Teresa's Cat. It can bite back

I said

the reality is the cash ends up being swallowed up by the likes of

How can that statement be called " specific" ? And I dont know any one called Teresa !

[stuart]

I said

the reality is the cash ends up being swallowed up by the likes of

How can that statement be called " specific" ? And I dont know any one called Teresa !

Interesting you edited your own stuff out. You specifically listed "Diversity Directorates, Climate Change Policy units and Somalian Advocacy Services". That is. I guess, a list of your particular betes noire. Yet you cannot show money has been diverted to any of these or anybody 'like' them or that anyone can. You are just making it up

Like Theresa: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-15160326

Stuart

[Dorian]

No, I can not prove it. Much the same as Councils can not prove that the money paid as " Planning Gain" by Developers is spent on what the S.106 specifies and is "relevant" to the development. That was my point

[Eagle]

Robin
That is not the council's problem. If they abuse the free/ subsidised housing then they should be evicted.
Hopefully if there was a real threat of that most people would become better behaved and appreciate they need to contribute to society for their gifts.
People like Mike are paying twice . Once for the terrible neighbours and secondly in his taxes to fund the.

[Dorian]

What I'd like to know is where Eagle etc think people on benefit should live, if they are not to be given places in social housing?

Early on in this thread I said " Social Housing should be welcomed", and I have no issue with genuine benefit claimants being housed by the state.

[stuart]

Just two problems Dorian:

a) It is your suspicion that money is being diverted (and no more than that?). Where is the Audit Commission on this - as it should be their responsibility to unearth any financial fiddling?

b) If there were indeed 'creative accounting' why would you think it went to organisations in your list rather than disabled pre-school playgroups, care of the elderly, keeping our streets clean or where the Sydenham Assembly votes for discretionary spend in the community?

In other words were you not deliberately using emotive examples of something we do not know has happened to suggest it had and is bad?

I'm not a politician Dorian and my wish to try and stick to the facts will ensure I will never become one. Forgive me if I try and shoot down political claptrap when I see it. I leave it up to others to decide whether I need new glasses.

Stuart

[Dorian]

a) It is your suspicion that money is being diverted (and no more than that?). Where is the Audit Commission on this - as it should be their responsibility to unearth any financial fiddling?

A S.106 agreement is a legal contract between the developer and Local Authority and clearly specifies what the contributions are for. Does it not follow then that those payments should be used as described in the contract, local to the devlopemnt project and not at the Councils whim.

b) If there were indeed 'creative accounting' why would you think it went to organisations in your list rather than disabled pre-school playgroups, care of the elderly, keeping our streets clean or where the Sydenham Assembly votes for discretionary spend in the community?

Im not saying that it went solely to organisations on my list and accept they were meant as emotive suggestions of council funded waste. I reiterate that the payments should benefit the local community in the areas specified by the S. 106 and there is no onus on Councils to prove it has been? Perhaps for example part of the £80,000 payment the Greyhound development provided could have gone to the work Melissa does with the SFHYF and not to Borough wide , never to be witnessed initiatives.

The circular on s.106 states that the payments should be

• Necessary
• Relevant to Planning
• Directly related to the proposed development
• Fairly and reasonably related to scale and kind to the proposed development
• Reasonable in all other respects

My point overall is that conributions made by devleopers should be used for what they were intended and benefit the local commnunity and not be used for anything else. Stuart I accept your view and I guess we are both saying the same thing. My use as examples of Council waste was probably what got your goat .

[Annie]

@Annie - you might want to consider the concept of irony.


@ digime2007

I think you misunderstood my post, but thats your choice,

My point being that it should be instilled into each and everyone of us as a child to respect each other,it can cause untold misery when you are in a situation where your quality of life is dependent upon other people.It has nothing to do with money,housing,education,or what you have or have not got, while you have got people allowing this behavior to carry on, and even encouraging it to a certain extent by throwing money and free housing at them etc etc it will never end, they will want more and more.and the liberals in society will give it to them because they think that will solve all their problems, well, wakey wakey! it won't.

[Lisa]

gggrrrrrrr! ive got so much to sy but dont make fun of my spellings

i grew up on sydenham hill estate in the late sventies and it was so much diferent to what it is today! everyone worked for there living and there was hardley any crime. all us kids played out when the wether was nice or stayed in and played bored games when it rained. not evryone was perfect but everyone got on. but more imprtantley if you were nauty you were given a thick ear lol.

i used to live on the estate on porthcaw rd in lower sydenham but theres just to much crime now. my husbands a scaffolder and a big fella but one day in 2000 when our first child was born he said hed had enuff of the horrible naybours and that we were movingg. we moved into a private flat latter that year. it was ssooooo much better than where we'd lived before. we are hard working parents who come from the working class but we care only about the future of our kids and how well they behave, not drugs pitbulls and benefits. before we moved out of porthcaw rd we noticed in the morning that my hisband and a few others were the only ones going to work in the morning everyone else was sleeping or smoking drugs , you could always smell weed i hated living in porthcaw rd but love living in a cleaner safer road in upper sydenham where theres no chavvy losers riuning it for everyone else
stop giving benefits to fat shitty parents at the drop of a hat , and bring back the cane lol

[Robin Orton]

Eagle said:

Hopefully these flats reserved for families with at least one earner and not the benefit classes. [...] Just heard Housing Minsiter Grant Chaps on wireless and hopefully his policy will mean all new council places being given to people in work

.

I asked:

What I'd like to know is where Eagle etc think people on benefit should live, if they are not to be given places in social housing?

Eagle replied:

That is not the council's problem. If they abuse the free/ subsidised housing then they should be evicted.

So, Eagle, are you implying that anyone who is not working and seeks social housing is ipso facto abusing the system?

My general point is that the 'undeserving poor' have got to live somewhere. I don't want to live in a society where poor families are left to die of exposure on the streets - even families headed by feckless, drunken, fat, idle, stupid, immoral etc (add your own adjectives) parents. If that happened, I would expect the council to treat it as indeed its problem.

[stuart]

Lisa, Annie - I agree with much of what you say. I came from the same generation.

I would argue that the fundamental difference between then and now was the government (of either hue) prime objective of full employment. We do not have that now and economists will argue there are benefits in having mobility of labour (immigration) and a pool of labour (unemployment).

Full employment has it downsides, more strikes and less competitiveness. But it had enormous social benefit. It meant anyone could get a job (in my case my dad had three) and slowly and surely improve their conditions. To be in the system was much preferable than being outside it. As a kid I respected them for it and eager to join the labour market and do even better. Work and responsibility did not really have to be instilled. They were just absorbed.

Today is different. I have people close to me who are eager to work but find any employment (let alone interesting and remunerative work) extremely difficult to find. It takes more guts than many have to ignore the 100s of rejections and not feel cut off from society. Is that why so many give up and lie around - who feel no responsibility towards people who they perceive as having no responsibility to them. Being a pain to us all.

I'm not defending them. However I have to wonder if my generation would have been so different in these circumstances. indeed did we not have similar problems in those fewer pockets of unemployment? Is it possible/desirable to return to full employment? And can you ever make the unemployable employable? At school we had engineering workshops so people could pass seamlessly from school into apprenticeships to become skilled (and reasonably well paid) workers.

That doesn't happen anymore. And I see some of those old skilled workers filling shelves at B&Q

Stuart

[Eagle]

Robin
I certainly did not say all people in social housing are abusing the system.

I was refering to the anti social element and those that turn down jobs

[CaptainCarCrash]

Robin
I certainly did not say all people in social housing are abusing the system.

I was refering to the anti social element and those that turn down jobs

It's a double edged sword, consider this scenario.

A young lad leaves school with zero qualifications, his options are limited. He joins a drug dealers gang as a spotter. At age 19 he's stabbed a few fellow hoodies, mugged a few mobiles, commited a string of burglaries. and spent a total of two years in prison.

He meets Stacey and they have a son together, what are his options?

Claim benefits and live in social housing?

There are thousands of people like this, they are in every town and city.

[Annie]

gggrrrrrrr! ive got so much to sy but dont make fun of my spellings

i grew up on sydenham hill estate in the late sventies and it was so much diferent to what it is today! everyone worked for there living and there was hardley any crime. all us kids played out when the wether was nice or stayed in and played bored games when it rained. not evryone was perfect but everyone got on. but more imprtantley if you were nauty you were given a thick ear lol.

stop giving benefits to fat shitty parents at the drop of a hat , and bring back the cane lol

Well said Lisa,
You and your husband have the right idea,the same as myself and mine, it was important to us that our children should do well at school, get a good education, be a credit to us and society, and also of course themselves.they excelled at school ( more than can be said about me) got all the A levels , degrees, they needed through hard work and dedication, they now have very good careers in town,
They have not ever been in trouble with the police, nor ever been in receipt of benefits of any kind,I feel I have done a good job as a parent, thats where i'm coming from, A very poor family as you can imagine with 10 children, we loved jumble sales, they kept us going in clothing,hand me downs from siblings, cousins,or anyone else, but we still had pride and still do.

[Lisa]

thanks annie

the problm is that so many trashy families think that concil flats are for life. they arent they are a saftey net for the por. all the decnt people we know cant wait to getout. when we left we could only just aford the rent which was just ovr 1000 pouns a month for a 2 bdroom flat. but anything was better than living next dor to nasty scum in tracksuits lol. we can affod it beter now. and if my kids a bad they get a good smack on the bum witth no tv. and thy eat what get put in frnt of them. no greasy junk food because my husband wont allow it. he works hard for his family too and always takes work on sites even if they are on the othr side of the country. its not that there are no jobs out there people are to lazy or to go to where they are or think th jobs beneeth them. tuff. they should cut there benfits if they arent looking for work and when they sighn on they should be more thorogh to see if they are not lying when they say they are looking for work because i no that alot of the parents who lived in the flats always lied at the jobcenter whe they sighned on

[Annie]

[quote="Lisa"]thanks annie

the problm is that so many trashy families think that concil flats are for life. they arent they are a saftey net for the por.


This should be stopped for those who are not trying to do anything for themselves,
I have seen many council houses that have been abused, crap in the front garden,curtains if they have them hanging in pieces where no one gives a damn,screamimg, swearing parents, barking pitbulls at all hours etc etc, wheres their pride in living like that?

Its easy when its free!

[Eagle]

Annie well said but who has got the guts to disipline these people and get them to show responsibility.

It is beyond me that people who get something for nothing should not show eternal gratitude to society.

How can they afford pit bulls? Benefit must be too high.