Government plans could cut short lifetime tenancies

Existing social housing tenants could lose their homes for life despite Government assurances, according to a consultation published this week

by René Lavanchy
Thursday, November 25th, 2010

Existing social housing tenants could lose their homes for life despite Government assurances, according to a consultation published this week.

Housing Minister Grant Shapps has promised to protect the rights of existing tenants in his plans to reform social housing, which would see new tenants given fixed-term tenancies as short as two years by councils or private registered social landlords.

However, the paper published by the Department for Communities and Local Government asks respondents for their views on whether existing tenants should be forced to accept a fixed-term tenancy if they move to another social home.

The Government’s current position is to preserve secure tenancies for moving households.
Housing Minister Grant Shapps told the BBC this week: “There’s no reason why a home in future should always be the home for life. You don’t get that in the private sector”, adding: “The new system will ensure that people have their home for as long as they need it.”

Under the plans, each social landlord will have to set out policies for how they assign tenancies.
Labour Shadow Housing Minister Alison Seabeck commented: “I’m hoping we get lots of tenants to respond. This is very weighted towards the landlord, in my view.”

The only place you can read all of Tribune's articles as soon as they are published is in the magazine. To find out more about subscribing from as little as £19, click here.

About The Author

René Lavanchy is staff reporter for Tribune
  • Trevor

    The Tories are hell-bent on destroying council housing, and removing virtually the only bit of security the poorest have – a roof over their heads – will facilitate precisely that. They won’t be satisfied with shoving social tenants into the hands of grasping private landlords either – it’ll be back to the workhouse before this odious bunch of upper class spivs are finished.

  • swatantra

    There should be a provision for good tenants to remain in their council house as long as their income and means remain under a set threshold. Each tenants application to remain would be reviewd every 3 (or 5 years). But the idea of tenants to remain indefinitely when their income is hig or their right to buy their council houses, is basically unfair. If they can afford to move out into the private sector and release their council house to a needy tenant, then they should.

  • treborc

    better then building new social houses then Swat or do you think we are in this bloody mess because people who can afford to buy a home did so when in fact in reality they could not.

    In America the banking sold mortgages to people who could not afford them hence we ended up with a trillion quid in debt. In the UK I know my self disabled people with an income of £96 a week were allowed to have a mortgage with was ridiculous and yet they got in, people claiming the dole were allowed to have a mortgage on the ground if they did not work they could claim the interest payments from the government.

    The fact is of course how low does the wage have to be before a person is allowed to stay in his home.

    the right to buy in Wales has ended and the welsh Assembly and the Scottish Parliament have all rejected this type of interference, so it for England only.

  • Trevor

    Swatantra: restricting council housing to the poorest in society will simply result in US-style welfare ghettos making the inhabitants even more susceptible to right-wing demonization as scroungers, workshy, etc. I live on a relatively pleasant council estate with a mixture of tenants, some quite well-off; why should they be forced to move out if they don’t want to? As for “needy” tenants, a drug addict has been moved in not far from me and has caused nothing but mayhem for myself and my neighbours. These are the sort of low-lifes estates will overflow with if these proposals come to pass.

    The solution is simple: build more (lots more) social homes!

blog comments powered by Disqus