Ted Heath dead

[House of Usher]

So you're saying every silver lining has a cloud, then?

I can't argue with that.

:-)

[Funt Solo]

:: "the right to buy"

I can't see that as a positive, I'm afraid.  It was an economic bubble that has since burst.  With everyone and their dog buying council houses at vastly reduced prices, we are now in a situation where councils don't have enough council housing (and remember, councils are legally bound to guarantee housing to n% of the citizenry).

So, what do they do?  Well, they either build more houses or they buy them.  They buy them from the people who bought them, but the people who bought them at a vastly reduced price can (& do) now sell them back to the council at the going rate.

So, what you see as a positive thing, has crippled the councils housing pool, which directly effects people who need housing, whilst also ensuring that the councils need to reap more money from everyone in order to buy back those houses Thatcher let go on the cheap in a shallow publicity drive for her party.


:: "the EU rebate"

I have no idea what that is.


:: "her conduct of the Falklands"

The General Belgrano, sunk despite the fact that it was outside of the British exclusion zone.
 
This was a conflict that should have had more diplomacy thrown at it before committing the troops.  Thatcher was reckless with the lives of British troops in order to flex her political muscles.  There was no attempt to use the threat of force before force itself.

The government, under Thatcher, was Orwellian in it's subjugation of the media during the Falklands War, ensuring that what we saw on the news was heavily filtered down.

If those are the things you think she did well at, I'd be interested to see what you thought her mistakes were.

[Matt Timson]

There's good and bad in everything for everybody- I guess it just depends on your point of view.  That said, most of my silver linings do tend to have big black clouds hanging just behind them.  

The glass is definately half empty in this house!

;)

[Matt Timson]

Selling council houses on the cheap to the people that had previously been paying rent on them seems fair enough to me- and sounds like exactly the kind of redistribution of wealth that people keep banging on about.  As for the 'bubble bursting', nobody has a crystal ball.  Why shouldn't the people who bought their houses be able to sell them on at market value- whoever the buyer is?  Can you imagine the outrage if the government bought them back at a reduced rate?

The EU rebate saves us about 3billion in tax, annually- which is why the French want rid of it- despite the fact that their own subsidies are far higher.

I won't bother with my opinion on the Belgrano- or the Falklands in general- I can guarantee you wouldn't like it...

;)

[Funt Solo]

Oh come off it:  I'm not suggesting that the lucky people who can now sell their x-council house on for a massive profit shouldn't be able to do so.  I was simply stating that is one of the results of Thatcher's policy, and pointing out the negative effects of that result on the council housing market and on the level of council tax increase required to cover the extra housing cost.

If the scheme had not been implemented in the first place, the problem would not exist.  As for a crystal ball, you don't need one to know that if council housing was necessary in 1985 then it'll probably be necessary in 2005:  so letting it all be bought up privately is a short-sighted populist notion disguised as a redistributive favour to the nation.

The very fact that there's no easy way out of the conundrum is the main reason I see it as one of Thatcher's great failings.

[House of Usher]

"Selling council houses on the cheap to the people that had previously been paying rent on them seems fair enough to me- and sounds like exactly the kind of redistribution of wealth that people keep banging on about."

Well, there's nothing intrinsically wrong with selling council houses if the local authority needs the money and has housing to spare. Before the 'Right to Buy', councils were allowed (not forced) to sell their housing stock by discretionary sales, including discounts for long-term tenants.

The Right to Buy policy was wrong in many ways, not least because it harmed councils' ability to plan for their towns' housing needs.

1. It disposed of council housing assets whether the councils had spare housing or not, thus creating a shortage of affordable rental housing.

2. Councils were not allowed to spend the money raised by the Right to Buy on building or buying new houses, because Thatcher thought councils shouldn't be in the business of being landlords at all.

3. It created hundreds of thousands of very desperate and marginal home owners in those former tenants who could not have afforded to pay the mortgage on a home not bought without a discount, who would subsequently lose their homes by repossession when the recession hit. Having helped to put a public asset into the private sector without realising any material gain themselves, those householders would then end up as private tenants on housing benefit, costing taxpayers more than if they had still been renting straight from the council.

4. Council housing is publicly owned, therefore if the Right to Buy was a redistribution of wealth at all, it was more a concentration of wealth into fewer hands, and not spreading it out. When someone in your borough buys their council house, they are taking away the share that belongs to you by virtue of the rates or council tax you pay.

[Matt Timson]

You've just pointed out the negative- I'm pointing out the positive- which is what you asked for.  Lots of people who might never have owned their own property now do.

There's a shortage of housing in general, not just council homes.  There are 150,000 people a year coming into the country, as well as the people already here that require housing and we need to build around 120,000 houses per year to keep up with that.  Now I don't know how many houses we *are* building, but it's a lot less than that.

Incidently, do you know how many council houses were actually sold off?

[Matt Timson]

Never mind- I've already found it- as well as the argument against:

"When it was introduced there were 5.5 million affordable homes in England, now there are only 4.2 million. The number of new affordable homes built each year can't keep pace with the amount sold. In 2000-01, 53,000 homes were sold under the right-to-buy, but only 18,000 new affordable homes were completed. The accumulative effect of this net loss of affordable housing is now being felt with a housing crisis in the south-east and record numbers of people in temporary housing."

[House of Usher]

"Lots of people who might never have owned their own property now do."

Well, one might say "so what?" Everyone who bought a home under the right to buy already had a home before they bought it.

Apparently, it was 2.1 million houmes that were sold under the Right to Buy.

Link: http://www.politics.co.uk/issues/right-buy-$3277298.htm" target="_blank">A reasonably good summary here

[Matt Timson]

"so what"?

Rent money is money down the drain, that's what.

[Oddboy]

Rent money is money down the drain, that's what. - from a personal point of view, yes - but it is/was an extra revenue for the council, without which council tax will be higher...

On yet another hand... selling council houses or not, people are still living in them.
There's not a set number of people who need council homes, which have been sold off to create a deficit. The number of people who need homes went down by the same number of houses that were sold. They'd still need more council homes today even if they hadn't sold off loads. It's not as if they're empty, is it? (or is it - please tell me they're not empty!)

[Dudley]

Homelessness has soared since 1979.

Rooflessness (practically unheard of in the late 1970's) is now back under control, but the number of people neither owning nor renting their own property is much much bigger than it used to be.

The number of empty properties has also soared, topping 100,000.

[Oddboy]

The number of empty properties has also soared, topping 100,000.

Grr! That's just dumb.
Council should be able to reclaim empty properties.