Your browser is no longer supported

For the best possible experience using our website we recommend you upgrade to a newer version or another browser.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

This housing report belongs in the bin

  • Comment

Recently, my local newspaper carried an editorial noting how Sheffield is one of the most divided cities in the UK in terms of wealth, health and equality of opportunities. “Almost every indicator of life shows areas in the north and east of the city poorer than in the south and west,” it said.

It called on all the players - private, public and third sector - to “successfully tackle those divisions that blight people’s lives and place them at a disadvantage to others purely because of where they happen to live”.

I agree with both the analysis and the prescription that we need to address the inequalities between communities just a few miles apart. Most important, to build local sustainable communities will require positive action to ensure a variety and balance of tenures at a local level.

So, what then are we to do with the Policy Exchange report Ending Expensive Social Tenancies, which promotes the view that all homes valued above a regional median owned by social landlords should be sold off and the proceeds invested in new homes in areas with lower land values?

The simplest answer is - put it in the bin.

It was clearly written by those who know the current cost of everything, but know nothing about value.

It was a throwback to Margaret Thatcher’s, ‘There is no such thing as society’ comment in 1987.

Unsurprisingly, as the headlines played well to the tabloid media, David Cameron voiced his support. Clearly, he hadn’t thought through the implications.

For me, the whole thrust of the report immediately brought to mind Shirley Porter’s unlawful gerrymandering plans to socially cleanse Westminster.

Policy Exchange’s proposals would achieve the same result, not just for the whole of central London but for a wide range of communities throughout England.

For example, Harrogate would become devoid of all social housing, with the proceeds invested in Bradford, some 20 miles away.

I’m not convinced that the army of care assistants and cleaners who support the ageing population of Harrogate would be prepared to make the 80-minute each way bus journey from Bradford without a significant pay rise.

Or, are they just meant to get on their bikes?

Clive Betts (Lab), chair, communities and local government select committee

  • Comment

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions.

Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.