Proposals for council housing reforms announced this week have received a mixed reception among members of our panel.
Housing Minister Grant Shapps’s proposals hope to address perceived problems with the current council housing system. His announcement, made on Wednesday, introduced the concept of the ‘Freedom Pass’ which will increase housing mobility, by allowing council tenants to ‘swap’ houses with someone from a different local authority. Prime Minister David Cameron has also proposed an end to council houses ‘for life’, suggesting that those whose circumstances have changed should be moved to more suitable housing, and that those who are earning enough to enter the private rented sector should be asked to leave the council housing system altogether.
And some respondents have welcomed the proposals, with comments such as ‘council houses should not be for life’ and ’it makes sense... to make room for families who need more space’ coming to light. Another agreed that ‘those in council housing should be encouraged to move on and out’. Some took the proposal further, suggesting that it should be extended to ‘all council tenants, not just new ones’ as Cameron had previously suggested.
Insecurity?
However, others see the proposals as likely to create insecurity for tenants. One said ‘it would worry many people’ and another hoped that ‘it [won’t] lead to people feeling stressed and insecure’. Concerns were also raised about the impact the changes would have on Jobseekers, stating that ‘it would make people better off on the dole. Why do a minimum wage job if it means you’re going to be kicked out of your home?’
The specific ‘Freedom Pass’ proposal, however, has received many positive comments, with many believing that ‘the ability to move property to follow jobs is the best part of the plan’ and feeling that it ‘seems a sensible option if it allows for the empowerment of tenants’.
Respondents were also keen to share their ideas on how to improve council housing, with one arguing that ‘they’d be better off building more social housing’ and another simply claiming that ‘they should build more homes’.
Whatever the Government’s eventual solution to the many housing problems, the range of responses suggests that the divisive situation will require regular attention. Indeed, one respondent diplomatically felt that ‘[the situation] should be reviewed on a regular basis’.
