The poll results for the first poll are in. Perhaps unsurprisingly those who voted did so overwhelmingly in rejection of Caroline Flints proposal to evict social housing tenants who fail to find work - 83% said no to the proposition.
The following comments were received in relation to the votes:
"It is not clear whether such pronouncements are grounded on an understanding of legislation and policy and practice. The proposal is likely to be practically impossible even if it achieved political support."
"The new Minister appears to be more interested in sound bites than serious policy development. There clearly are many issues relating to work & benefits, inter-generational transfers of underclass culture etc - but this recent suggestion is ludicrous. Why should such a suggestion apply only to social tenants? Has the Minister also thought about about unemployed HB recipients in private tenancies or residents in homeless hostels or rehab centres for alcoholics?"
"I can sympathise with the motivations- my flat mate is basically lazy and lacks all initiative. He manages to lounge round the house all day playing computer games and making virtually no effort to get work and collects his dole every week with a tip of the hat (a bit like Nick Frost in Shaun of the Dead). But, I fear, it is impossible to use bureaucracy to distinguish between legitimate and illegitimate slackers (is there a difference anyway?). Inany case, while the present system doesn't provide any incentive for the unemployed to upskill or change their behaviour the right wing political climate at the moment means any change would be ideologically motivated,and simply hurt those at the bottom of society."
"The speech by Caroline Flint was based on a number of assumptions and general policy goals. These included an assumption of the direction of the relationship between social housing and worklessness (i.e. that residing in social housing contributes to worklessness rather than the other way round) and also that most tenants were not receiving good quality Housing Plus services from landlords. The speech also raised the idea of 'earned citizenship' (which mirrors Margaret Hodge's contribution to housing allocation debates) and appeared to suggest that social housing should primarily be for those with mental or physical disabilities rather than providing affordable accommodation for those on low incomes. Each of these assumptions and longer term visions/goals require comprehensive scrutiny and criticism from the housing studies community."
It is clear both from the comments received by the HSA Blog to this poll and the general response from the Housing Community that the minister and her advisers have lacked thorough consideration and thought about the implications such a policy would have both on current statutory undertakings and about the wider role of housing and social housing in particular. If the aim of the speech was to spark debate it has clearly done so but has it necessarily begun in the informed and logical manner in which the Minister hopes it will carry on? The ominous silence from No. 10 probably suggest more about the future of the policy than anything else. But the underlying issues of poverty, worklessness and residualisation of social housing are those which have interested the housing community, be that policy makers, practitioner or researchers for over a quarter of a century and are unlikely to disappear in the immediate future.
Rob Rowlands
Editor
No comments:
Post a Comment