I agree with Peter Hitchens on this but he left out one major reason why the prices will not come down on houses. Property investors will buy all the stock of houses that are built and keep the prices high to get rent income.
And to push the lie your shit box is worth half a million not the reality 50k it’s all to fund banking and consumerism and money printing your ex council house isn’t worth half a million the half a million fiat money is toilet tissue the deposit is 60k the house should be 60k not the deposit
would PH live in social housing? would he heck, so he should not be promoting something he would never touch with a bargepole... hypocrisy of the highest order, I wonder sometimes if Peter is not still a commie
@@stephfoxwell4620 Of course. Its the inevitable result of paying people to borrow money since 2008. You just borrow money and park it in the property sector that is regulated in such a manner as to be a license to print money, and do precisely that.
Council houses creates council estates which create bad environments to live in. In this day and age council estates will effectively become foreign ghettos anyway.
The Obesity crisis is bankrupting the nhs and Dogs cost £40 a week and Cats £30 a week.The only way to help the less well off is to Nationalise the tattoo shops
@@OnlineEnglish-wl5rp They are facts facts facts.We used to have heating in one room coal fire.Nobody had a passport.We have come from poverty .Hitchens is just a contraire and a fool
@@OnlineEnglish-wl5rp Well why would anyone work if you can have a life on benefits ,tax free,no responsibility,rent subsidy.There are a million more job vacancies than unemployed.Min wage is £80 a day and you can work two days without losing any benefits
Under the current points based system, as shown in a recent example in Farnborough, those at the top of the housing list are typically asylum seekers/refugees and pregnant women. Whereas homeless British born males need not apply. For a council housing scheme to work the allocation system needs a complete overhaul. British homes for British people !
I'm with Peter . When thatcher sold off the housing stock it was on a promise that they would replace. But local authorities didn't do that they wasted the money. . Just as they with council tax . And not everyone can afford to buy a bloody house and private landlords are raking it in with housing benefit. And not everyone in council housing is claiming benefits. And a lot of housing associations are paying way over the top for rent and these are meant to be non profit organisations
Council's didn't waste the money because the receipts from house sales went directly to the government. It's nearly impossible for councils to find the money to build more council homes. Had they been permitted to use sale receipts to replace their stock - and Right-to-Buy not been permitted on new-builds - things could now be very different. The Housing Benefit bill might be a lot smaller for a start.
I studied this period (Housing) at university and your way of the mark, but the comments hit the nail on the head. Additionally Thatcher gave more money to housing associations though this got less and less.
Problem with social housing is it will go based on ‘protected characteristics’ . The indigenous will lose out. So I’m happy to not have it. Sick of giving *them* every advantage. Working people just get the shaft every time.
Agreed. House building for local people. Not houses for inner cities to palm out their issues for economic reasons and certainly not for freshly landed immigrants
I moved into a new house in 2003 and I agree that modern houses are dross and its best to buy an older property if possible while its still possible. Modern houses are just cheap and hollow built buildings and have no proper sound proofing in them and that's what my house is like because the whole building and all the walls are hollow.
He said housing benefit was scandalous and then said the government should subsidize housing. He says demand is what's raising prices but increased supply won't fix it. He'll obey one simple side of basic economics but will disagree with another. The man is all over the place. But I do agree that 1% mortgages are stupid.
@@MasalaMan Well what he's saying is the government should build social housing rather than funnel money to private landlords and, in the end, private banks
Council houses control the rent and stops councils having to pay extortionate private rents. Private rented houses are being payed for by hard working people and the more privileged end up with a house completely pay off and sell it right from under the tenants. Definitely more council houses should be build and not sold off.
There's no point in having a house building campaign if said houses are all snapped up by multi-property private landlords; or, as in my home town, they are build-to-rent (a truly dystopian phenomenon) and thus do not offer even a token relief to local house prices; instead sucking money out of the local populace into overseas-registered property companies. We can't build our way out of the housing crisis - we do need more properties, right, but there needs to be a serious look at how the ownership of those properties will look once they are built. I am with Peter here.
Never mind house building. Why are developers not forced to build schools, drs surgeries.and hospital in new developments. These being built before the houses, before they build the houses. 1000’s being built near me. No hospitals,drs or schools on any of the plans.
Agreed. Those planning loop-holes need to be closed. Developers find it too easy to get out of infrastructure commitments: they build, rake in the money and leave local councils with the problem of how to provide transport, health and education services for a greatly expanded population.
@@bridiesmith5110 developers are private and its not the place of the State to intervene in private matters. Regulations , policy and agenda need to be repealed and private enterprise, culture and business need to be allowed to get on with it. 750k migrants are a major housing problem and that is entirely the fault of Gov , not developers
Local Authorities take money (Section 106 & Infrastructure Levy) which is supposed to pay for these public facilities. The tendency is that money gets siphoned off
We have to stop paving over our country. An aspect of our country that makes us proud to be British is our beautiful countryside and landscapes and I think it a tragedy to be destroying it. Peter is right that the breakdown of the family unit and immigration is contributing to the problem.
Listening to Miller talking about building on the green belt makes me sick. I don't know about anyone else but I don't want to live in a sea of concrete and asphalt with no trees and rolling hills to be found. My ancestors didn't fight for and help build this country so that it could covered with shoddy housing for dinghy people to live in.
I grew up in a council house in the 70’s. I had a brilliant childhood and my parents couldn’t have afforded to buy a home. Selling off these houses and never replacing them was a huge mistake.
Not replacing the sold housing stock is the biggest problem the government/councils created. The estate I grew up on was built just after WW2, the house had 3 bedrooms, was very sturdily built and had a front and back garden. My grandparents raised 4 kids in it then my parents took the lease and raised 4 kids in it. Right to buy allowed my parents to buy the house and it was immediately worth 5x what they paid. That was an irresistible opportunity that millions of people cashed in on and I don't blame them but the result, as we all know, was that vast amounts of good quality, affordable housing was removed from the market in a short space of time.
@@ronnygibbonMargaret Thatcher helped thousands of people to get on the property ladder allowing them to buy their council homes instead of renting .Only way I could have bought my own home and am eternally grateful to her.👍👍👍
@@charlieemslie7708 It was the exact same for my parents and I think it was a great policy. Many people had already been paying rent on their homes for decades. However not replacing houses for the affordable rental market has caused unbelievable hardship for the generation that followed.
@ronnygibbon Did your parents and grandparents not stop to think that having large families would actually add to the housing problem eventually? My grandparents courted for 10 years whilst living apart (gran was in service) saved, married at age 30 years, mortgage-bought their own terraced house (2 up/ 3 down) outside loo, had 2 children and eventually passed away leaving a small terraced house for both offspring.@@ronnygibbon
@@James_36 fella it doesn't work like like that, companies have diversity quota's now, ive been more qualified for Jobs than other candidates and Lost out because I'm the wrong colour in my own country. If companies can't pay enough for people to have a mortgage, that's the very definition of slavery.
@@R3tr0v1ru5 we need a maximum wage in the UK, no one needs multiple millions a year to live on. Footballers are a prime example of the hypocrisy in the UK.
The guy who thinks that it is better for banks to own houses rather than the State actually makes no sense. People living in decent houses in good communities is what matters, not getting obsessed with the means of ownership as the primary issue. Thanks for bringing this up Peter.
People are not wanting to have kids in this messed up world, never mind buying a house at ridiculously high prices to stay in debt for the rest of their lives. The young are wanting to stay at home with their parents until they can save enough to move abroad as there is nothing for the young to do after university and the debt they are in, in this country.
Yes. As a single young person, I struggle to see what's keeping me here. I just don't know where I would go, that's the problem. Here I have a flat but a house is totally out of the question unless I want to have no disposable income left at the end of every month. It's ludicrous.
The Treasury told Thatcher that social housing provision was subsidised from the local rates. It wasn't , it was self financing through long term international loans. The Local Government and Housing Finance Act 1989 did for this mechanism. The large social housing sector underpinned the entire housing market.
Paying off my mortgage at 60,meant I could enjoy a decent retirement,despite the cost of living crisis. If you rent,you pay rent till the day you die. Your rent will increase over the years,but your pension won't,and millions now face poverty in their old age. We must clamp down on mass immigration,which has done nothing to help this country. It has caused endless problems in our housing market, NHS,etc.etc and why politicians,with one notable exception, didn't anticipate, this baffles me. We can't keep on trying to get a quart into a pint pot.
Governments of the last few decades, Labour and Tory, seem to have been scared of doing anything that could possibly lower house prices, because people feel more well off when their houses are worth more. It's like a kind of feel good factor for homeowners. So actually solving the problem by building enough affordable housing was seen as politically taboo, because it would drive down property prices. The only way they could get more people to own their own homes was by making it easier to borrow the money, which actually pushed up prices.
So great to hear him saying something that I've been saying for years. We should never have sold off council housing. We've gone from councils collecting affordable rents to them paying unaffordable housing benefit. And once upon a time if you changed your job you could easily move to the area your new job was in. Now people have to travel miles to get to work because they can't afford to move. It was a much better system
Where are you getting all the materials for building these so called 5 million houses and refurbishing the rest at the same time. Suppliers are struggling to get all the materials needed,the cost has rocketed and will go up more on demand.
Much of the material is crap and new houses only come with 15 to 25 year guarantee for a reason . Cheap tiles instead of slate , OSB instead of ply or wattle , breeze block instead of brick or stone Modern houses are made of crap and are to small and unfit for purpose.
The Uk doesnt have a housing problem it has a population growth problem If you didnt have the 10 million extra people living here that have moved here since 2001 none of these problems would exist Also all the NHS traffic water ,transport crime and school place problems wouldn't be so severe ...
The immigrants can't buy the houses either. So who are the landlords expecting will buy their houses? Who are they raising their prices for. It's rich people. They set the markets.
Hitchens is 100% correct. We're in a place now where its either a mortgage that will grind you into the dirt or sleep in a cardboard box. The right to buy was one of Thatchers worst policies. And that's saying something.
Right-to-buy wasn't a bad idea; just implemented badly. The council properties should've been sold at the market value, and the money raised, used to build more council housing.
Huge student debt. Huge rent/mortgage costs. Huge council tax. Learning to drive. The world ran through screens. People struggling to have basic conversations without looking at phones. No gardens. Greed encouraged everywhere. Lack of community. Your only 21. Off you go.
Peter Hitchens is a clever guy, I don't agree with him a lot but think he's always worth listening to. Why he debases himself by appearing on this tinpot channel I'll never understand.
Thatcher wanted social housing sold off as she wanted both parents to work around the clock. It also meant that workers couldn't strike if they had a mortgage. It was indeed a grave mistake, but she didn't care. Social housing is the answer to the housing problem, and Peter is indeed correct.
Absolutely correct. It was all part of Thatcher's plan. Home owners had something they would fear losing and it made them more likely to vote Conservative because they had bought into capitalism. The council houses were sold below market price which proves they were worms for the hook.
How many new builders are required to build 5M extra houses? Don't forget we need 40,000 new electrical engineers for net-zero, so it can't be those guys.
The state paying £15000 a year in housing benefits for a small house where the same house could be built for £100,000 and rented by the council . This would recover the r build cost in 7 years there after the council have an asset which can be rented or saving housing benefit. The government has paid out a 100 fold in housing benefit for the money received for sold houses.
This is true. Thatchers policies made it more obvious and both grievously and intentionally stopped the proceeds being made available to replace the stock.
@@Jack-fs2im Because of the period they were born in. House prices were not x10 times the average salary. You did not have 1 million a year new people entering the country to live (immigrants) 40% of all immigrants in the Uk have come in the last 10 years. They stopped building and sold off council stock.(thatcher) Houses were more realistically priced and you got more for your money, better built,more people were married with kids where as now more people are single with no kids so even more homes are needed. No financial crash or pandemic, Brexit or wars with Russia and mutiple Middle East country’s.
@@Viewer-discretion-is-advised7 Brexit is our saviour ,we got Vax 6mths before europe and Europe is in recession.7.6m EU citizens have paid to stay in uk with lowest unemployment.EU bail outs and rising membership fees are ruining europe
The problem wasn’t selling the council houses off it was the failure to build more! The current system is merely a means of getting a lot of the population into perpetual debt bondage to the financial services sector. Because that’s what really matters
A few things. Until the late 70s when the Labour party changed the rules, council housing was available to all, then they changed it to needs based and council estates went from working class people to doley scrotes fairly quick. My proposal would be council housing open to all even the guy on £80k so they are actually decent neighbourhoods. You have to have been a citizen for at least 20 years. Anti-social behaviour is a ban from all council housing.
I grew up in one of those areas in the 1980s and I can confirm that it would have benefited from some 'robust' policing. Social housing would help across the board as a low-cost alternative to keep slum landlords in check. And anyone that abuses it is welcome at the new workhouse I plan on opening. 👍
Massive transfer to many people, not just Private landlords. Councils and charities have ranked it in. Councils made their rental stock "temporary accomodation". Their monthly cost to tenant gets charged weekly and everyone else jumped on it. We got an entire charity industry built on public cash. Several homeless charities, women's aid etc, get a house and rent it back out and if lucky get a big house with multiple rooms for a big big payday. Possibilities of £thousands per month. Happened for decades so houses they used have been paid several times over
The fatal error was abandoning mortgage loans based on around 3x earnings, irrespective of low interest rates and monthly payments that created the short term illusion of affordability for properties that were ever increasing in price. Peter's point about the capital debt is spot on.
I wonder what the annual costs are for Councils funding Housing Benefit and just how quickly that amount would reduce Year on Year if Councils were mandated to shrink said cost by a certain percent each Year by building Council Houses which they would then have as an asset providing them an annual return on instead of the endless Liability of Housing Benefit payments to private landords?
Not everyone can afford to buy what about those on a low income, what about those who are single and live alone, what about those with disabilities who are unable to work?
@@James_36 ok two problems with your theory a single person working in a low paid unskilled position will earn in the region of 22k per year so even a 150k mortgage is out of reach, secondly there are so few places with housing available under 150k , even if you could find one you would most likely have to move a goid distance making your current employment untenable and then your back to square one, get out of your privileged bubble house prices in my area is an average of 450k even two bed terraced here is 280k
@@James_36 and just as a comparison I bought my first home, a two bed terrace 30 years ago for 14k young adults are struggling to be able to afford thier own homes we need more social housing its that simple
@@mycatspethooman5590 if you are on minimum wage the last thing you should be thinking about is buying a house, you should be building your skills to demand more pay in the market place... so it is not a problem, the problem is you think minimum wage should get you being an asset builder which is stupid and lacks sense
The basic law of supply and demand does still hold. It's just that we'd need millions of houses for it to make a difference. I think the government should do whatever it can to liberalise and incentivise house building and planning and building occupancy legislation in general. It has always been relatively inefficient to have offices empty at night and houses empty during the day and now that hybrid working is popular, the offices are even more under-utilised.
PH makes a good point. Council houses provided good, reasonably spacious accommodation with a garden about the size of an allotment (to feed a family of four). I grew up in one such in the 50/60s. Most tenants were ex WW 2 veterans, with a pride in the area - kids could be admonished by any adult if “out of line”. Green space was incorporated and the planning incorporated kerbside trees to rival any “suburban private street”. The greatest thing however was a community sense of pride - Lost after the great sell-off and private renting to many people with no community interest.
And local authorities ensured that council estate public areas were well maintained, and any tenant who could not maintain their gardens were also helped, those that would keep their gardens free of rubbish and were a nuisance to their neighbours were dealt with unlike housing associations and local authorities now.
I've lived in this property for 20 years. Worked through out through kidney failure, heart attacks , transplants, cancers. Worked through it all. Denied any support. I'm surrounded by council houses. Non one has Worked the past 20 yrs. All paid for by labour council. All have 2 to 3 cars parked outside. Many own 2 posh cars...yeah labour councils
The situation would've been good, if the council properties were sold at the market value, and the money raised used to build more. It was a good idea, but wrongly implemented.
Which is more likely? A politician doing what is right at the expense of how their viewed in the public eye or the general public learning basic economics.
Peter is right on this id say but the ones that did buy have done very well out of it they bought incredibly low and now the prices have gone through the roof a great investment for them but bad for anyone that needs a council home now there is barely none available
Just looked up some facts under right to buy just over 2 million houses sold, housing associations (RSl’s) in England and Wales alone have over 4 million homes on their books, where is the disaster?
Not always a fan of Peter Hitchens but bang on the money on this issue. And don’t forget, if you do manage to pay it off, you can’t pass it down to your family without a hefty tax.
Hitchens is right. We do need to build 5million homes, and they should be social housing stock, preferably council housing and protected from Right-to-Buy, which just fuels Buy-to-Let. British citizens should be given priority on lists. Housing Benefit needs reforming, too, in conjunction with rent controls to keep the benefits' bill in check. We have created a system (Thatcher presided over much of this) in which a huge amount of public money is required to support a bureaucracy that does little more than subsidise the private sector, and which keeps tenants trapped on welfare. When home-'owners' with 99% mortgages start to get repossessed as interest rates increase, the state will have to pick up the bill for that, as well, which without social housing stock will continue to inflate. The whole system is a mess, and Sunak's plan is only likely to make it worse.
Incidentally, I don't think it's unreasonable to believe that Thatcher's Right-to-Buy programme was anything more than a gerrymandering exercise: she believed that home-owners would vote Tory. That was a mistake as well. All she accomplished was to turn many council estates from settled, healthy, mixed-income communities into crime-ridden hell-holes populated by the unsettled, the very poor and disadvantaged. It was totally unnecessary and a national scandal; and the Tories had the gall to blame everybody but themselves for the conditions they helped to create.
Stop subsidising the poor and least productive in society at the expense of the more productive. So what if a £90k earner has a council house. I’m on £45k and my partner is on £30k we live in a council house. Why should a muppet on benefits or some loser Jeremy Kyle mum with 10 kids from 10 different dads get a council house. Poverty is highly contagious!!!
They were not talking about people on benefits. They were talking about normal hard working young people who are living in poverty because of current housing costs. Who is the muppet ?
@@autoclearanceuk7191 when they went after someone with a 90k salary, it means they’ll go after anyone with a high salary. Let’s face it. If they built more homes it’ll just go to the least productive in society. People on benefits, drug addicts, alcoholics, single mums, illegal immigrants.
I am elderly and I know how beautiful, yes, beautiful many of the council estates were at one time. I was fortunate enough to have parents who worked day and night to save up for a small house, taking on a mortgage in the fifties. They worked so hard, too hard, for years and years and were always tired. So, the first time I visited the home of a friend who lived in a council house, I was amazed at how spacious it was, how sturdy, how large and how well kept the gardens were, each with their own pathway and fencing. Private but personal. The pride with which they were maintained was very noticeable. There was a sense of real community and people I met were most proud of their homes. The public areas were regularly attended to and fresh plants grown in season. Happy days. I feel sorry for young folk today but everything needs a rethink.
Maybe we could afford energy if we’d bothered to put even an ounce of effort into renewable energy sources within the U.K. whether you believe in climate change or not, everyone knows that we’re going to run out of oil and gas so the longer we wait to build the wind farms we need the more expensive it is going to get. We should stop being reliant on other countries for energy but we can’t because no one wants to invest in renewable energy at home.
More and more houses to be built??? Property developer's paradise in my opinion! I agree with Peter on this. Also, this will need more infrastructure like hospitals and supermarkets, not to mention water supply, sewage, electric, gas etc etc.
I and my wife got a council home in the late 1970s, You had to be working to earn a certain amount. These days, if you are on benefits, homeless, or an immigrant, you go top of the housing list and this is why most social housing tennants dont work and live on benefits
You forgot "single parent" Top of the list. Banged my head off a wall with the council trying to get housed for too many years, never a hope I had without check marks in some boxes
@@misscoutts6193 Hasn't hanged much. Scotland that's where all the council stock goes, them and the ones that like needles. Single moms get a 2 bed with 1 kid, 3 bed as soon as one turns 12. 1 white good fridge/freezer and 2 rooms carpeted, decorating vouchers. Seen it 1st hand
Interest rates go up and down when ever they go up and reach a certain percentage people simply can't cope I've owned houses and it is.better than renting but you do worry a lot and the pressure if you lose your job or interest rates increase can b incredible
Buying houses to let is probably a major cause of the lack affordable houses in the UK today. It's probably not gonna happen but outlawing multiple house ownership or severely limiting the number of houses one person can own would make a massive difference to the availability and affordability of houses in the UK.
No she didn't She enabled thousands of Working Class families to become home owners , Why is she to blame for successive governments not building new housing ? The 80's was nearly 40 years ago ffs !
Read the " Black Report" from Torie MP Mr Black then became Lord Black. Thatcher requested him during the 80s to go and do research in what you are stating. Black did this and on completion of the report Thatcher did not like his findings did not agree with it so she shelved it not published. A few years down the line report was leaked. Now that report is more relevant today 2024 than was in the 80s. Yes over 40 years ago. What does that tell you ffuk sake.
@Prometheus7272 not to mention that the current pace of building houses in the U.K. isn't even enough to keep up with immigration, let alone increase the supply to push prices downwards.
The housing market is protected by the govt of the day from going bust and enables banks to make a lot of money risk-free. The banks, and their balance sheets, are the big winners from the housing market over the years and it is no coincidence the swinging door between careers in politics and careers in banking and the sanctity of the housing market.
At 1:03 Peter says the Thatcher government "got rid of council housing". It didn't. It just shrunk it to encourage people to buy instead. There are still council houses and social housing, but unfortunately it was targeted only towards those in greatest need (meaning refugees, mentally ill, terminally ill or those with young children) in 1977 by Labour. Before that it was available to everyone. If someone has social housing they can iccupy it for a lifetime and pass it in once through the rule of succession. That results in two tenants being able to occupy it for potentially over 100 years.
I agree that the selling of Council houses was a big mistake many are now owned by Landlords who rent them to people who would have been eligible for a Council house. Buy to let has taken many houses from first time buyers and then the tenants claim housing benefit meaning that the taxpayer is paying the mortgage of the private landlord. Immigration also has a big impact on housing
The sale of council houses was supposed to pay for more council houses to be built but this never happened. The village I lived in sold 3/4 of council houses under the right to buy and they have mostly been sold on at massive profits.
Where are all these 5 million houses going to be built, in 5 years you will need another 5 million houses, we need to stop so many people coming into the country and get rid of the ones that shouldn't be here, Peter Hitchens is right about the council houses.
Social housing was started post WW1. Everyone worked, no benefits no NHS. No single mothers. No independent living. People lived at home til they got married.
We can all see the effect. Scotland's has barely moved and has similar issues, just on a far lower scale. Scotland with stagnant population growth, yet pressure on housing. Highlights his point of family breakdown. 1 family home in the past requires 2 nowadays. With a 50%+ divorce rate, it's a large significant factor
Hitchens is correct in principle, but it's about 2 decades too late now. I'm born in 84 and in the 2000's the stock was going or gone, and everyone gorged themselves on Benefits cash. A £300/month council rent property became "temp accomodation" and charged £300 a week to benefits. Councils and HA's can charge Market Rent -10% now. Still unaffordable, but don't worry the govt will top it up 🤦. People bought them then when granny passed away, rent them back to the council £600 month and the council made them "temp accom" charge £1200, both profit. Council/HA's have been charging over £500 a month for well over a decade here. Local Govt is dependant on Central Govt Benefits claimants. Been this way now for a long time. Building council houses is gone as a solution. They're charging almost Private Rent prices. Limited to being 10% cheaper than market rent 🤦 The days of a house building blitz to solve it are well and truly gone.
I’m sure giving half our social housing and rising to people born abroad, is helping tremendously.
Diversity is our strength. 🤣😂
All on purpose,
Our country is so enriched
Not half.
England 44%
Wales 32%
Scotland 29%
And the kids they have had. How many are in social housing whose parents came here in the 60’s!
I agree with Peter Hitchens on this but he left out one major reason why the prices will not come down on houses. Property investors will buy all the stock of houses that are built and keep the prices high to get rent income.
SPOT ON! The day we moved from a model of owning a house to live in, to a model of buying a house to spin a profit, is where we went wrong
And to push the lie your shit box is worth half a million not the reality 50k it’s all to fund banking and consumerism and money printing your ex council house isn’t worth half a million the half a million fiat money is toilet tissue the deposit is 60k the house should be 60k not the deposit
would PH live in social housing? would he heck, so he should not be promoting something he would never touch with a bargepole... hypocrisy of the highest order, I wonder sometimes if Peter is not still a commie
London has 120,000 empty properties valued in excess of £1 million each.
@@stephfoxwell4620 Of course. Its the inevitable result of paying people to borrow money since 2008. You just borrow money and park it in the property sector that is regulated in such a manner as to be a license to print money, and do precisely that.
Over 70% in London and over 40% elswhere of our social housing stock is occupied by people who weren't even born in this country...absolute disgrace.
It makes me mad. Some of the new arrivals live in Milllion pound houses. All paid for by our taxes. The system is broken.
Actually in London that's more like 90%
You mean Boris Johnson
Squatter Sunak is occupying 10 Downing Street against the will of the British people.
The government front bench is a collection of immigrant's offspring.
Hitchens is quite right. The developer will tell you more private supply will solve this. It won’t.
Totally agree. Supply and demand there is only one set of winners. And that's the money people
Council houses creates council estates which create bad environments to live in. In this day and age council estates will effectively become foreign ghettos anyway.
@@stretfordender11 well the problem even new build estates privately owned will create the same problems. There is a no win situation
@@pemj7360 privately owned keeps the foreign ghettos in London and Birmingham high rise flats.
@@pemj7360 So falling prices isn't good for the buyer?
The building I grew up in was built in the 30s. And it will still be there when all the 300grand shoeboxes are dust.
What planet are they on, people can't afford food let alone buy a house.
The Obesity crisis is bankrupting the nhs and Dogs cost £40 a week and Cats £30 a week.The only way to help the less well off is to Nationalise the tattoo shops
@@Jack-fs2im These are just stupid spiteful comments which obfuscate the fact that we are ALL worse off not just people eating crap sugary food
@@OnlineEnglish-wl5rp They are facts facts facts.We used to have heating in one room coal fire.Nobody had a passport.We have come from poverty .Hitchens is just a contraire and a fool
@@Jack-fs2im JSA is £80 a week. UC £368 a month. These are the maximum rates. Try living on them. You had your family behind you
@@OnlineEnglish-wl5rp Well why would anyone work if you can have a life on benefits ,tax free,no responsibility,rent subsidy.There are a million more job vacancies than unemployed.Min wage is £80 a day and you can work two days without losing any benefits
Under the current points based system, as shown in a recent example in Farnborough, those at the top of the housing list are typically asylum seekers/refugees and pregnant women. Whereas homeless British born males need not apply. For a council housing scheme to work the allocation system needs a complete overhaul. British homes for British people !
This will never happen.
Well said Enoch your words have been proven to come TRUE!!
Thanks@@sharonwashington8150. Enoch Powell was right. No one can doubt that now.
I'm with Peter . When thatcher sold off the housing stock it was on a promise that they would replace. But local authorities didn't do that they wasted the money. . Just as they with council tax . And not everyone can afford to buy a bloody house and private landlords are raking it in with housing benefit. And not everyone in council housing is claiming benefits. And a lot of housing associations are paying way over the top for rent and these are meant to be non profit organisations
No. No promised replacement.
Thatcher expressly forbade any money from Council house sales to be used to build more.
Council's didn't waste the money because the receipts from house sales went directly to the government. It's nearly impossible for councils to find the money to build more council homes. Had they been permitted to use sale receipts to replace their stock - and Right-to-Buy not been permitted on new-builds - things could now be very different. The Housing Benefit bill might be a lot smaller for a start.
Margaret Thatcher was one of a long line of short sighted politicians. The consequences of which have been played out over many decades.
I studied this period (Housing) at university and your way of the mark, but the comments hit the nail on the head. Additionally Thatcher gave more money to housing associations though this got less and less.
@@simplesimon5739 how am I way off the mark . The fact developers are building shoddy over priced rabbit hutches.
Problem with social housing is it will go based on ‘protected characteristics’ .
The indigenous will lose out.
So I’m happy to not have it.
Sick of giving *them* every advantage.
Working people just get the shaft every time.
Agreed. House building for local people. Not houses for inner cities to palm out their issues for economic reasons and certainly not for freshly landed immigrants
Housing for indigenous Brits is fine with me!!
One could expect a very uneven allocation of council houses, dependent on the composition of the council.
Problem is 800 billion debt 2010 now 2570 trillion where the f has the money gone
Vote Reform for real change.
The day we moved from a model of owning a house to live in, to a model of buying a house to spin a profit, is where we went wrong
Buy to Let caused people who would never have thought of it to become landlords. Another one is AIR B & B.
Peter is 100% correct.
Secondly, modern house are absolute dross, dont buy one, buy an older one.
They are certainly overpriced for what they are.
I moved into a new house in 2003 and I agree that modern houses are dross and its best to buy an older property if possible while its still possible. Modern houses are just cheap and hollow built buildings and have no proper sound proofing in them and that's what my house is like because the whole building and all the walls are hollow.
Yep. My dad was a scaffolder and he told me 25 years ago the Barrett Homes he was working on were a con
He said housing benefit was scandalous and then said the government should subsidize housing. He says demand is what's raising prices but increased supply won't fix it. He'll obey one simple side of basic economics but will disagree with another. The man is all over the place. But I do agree that 1% mortgages are stupid.
@@MasalaMan Well what he's saying is the government should build social housing rather than funnel money to private landlords and, in the end, private banks
Peter Hitchins has it spot on.
@@MasalaMan you need to re-listen to what he is saying regards your first sentence; you've not understood.
Council houses control the rent and stops councils having to pay extortionate private rents. Private rented houses are being payed for by hard working people and the more privileged end up with a house completely pay off and sell it right from under the tenants. Definitely more council houses should be build and not sold off.
Totally agree.
Agree 💯
There's no point in having a house building campaign if said houses are all snapped up by multi-property private landlords; or, as in my home town, they are build-to-rent (a truly dystopian phenomenon) and thus do not offer even a token relief to local house prices; instead sucking money out of the local populace into overseas-registered property companies. We can't build our way out of the housing crisis - we do need more properties, right, but there needs to be a serious look at how the ownership of those properties will look once they are built. I am with Peter here.
Not how supply and demand works
parents have got the society they deserve.
Houses not tower blocks.
Never mind house building. Why are developers not forced to build schools, drs surgeries.and hospital in new developments. These being built before the houses, before they build the houses. 1000’s being built near me. No hospitals,drs or schools on any of the plans.
forced? jeeze i hope not.
Agreed. Those planning loop-holes need to be closed. Developers find it too easy to get out of infrastructure commitments: they build, rake in the money and leave local councils with the problem of how to provide transport, health and education services for a greatly expanded population.
@@zark0g why not. The developers agree to do many things but when the have built the house,they run out of money.
@@bridiesmith5110 developers are private and its not the place of the State to intervene in private matters. Regulations , policy and agenda need to be repealed and private enterprise, culture and business need to be allowed to get on with it. 750k migrants are a major housing problem and that is entirely the fault of Gov , not developers
Local Authorities take money (Section 106 & Infrastructure Levy) which is supposed to pay for these public facilities. The tendency is that money gets siphoned off
We have to stop paving over our country. An aspect of our country that makes us proud to be British is our beautiful countryside and landscapes and I think it a tragedy to be destroying it. Peter is right that the breakdown of the family unit and immigration is contributing to the problem.
Listening to Miller talking about building on the green belt makes me sick.
I don't know about anyone else but I don't want to live in a sea of concrete and asphalt with no trees and rolling hills to be found.
My ancestors didn't fight for and help build this country so that it could covered with shoddy housing for dinghy people to live in.
This is also some of the reason there’s horrific flooding
This is also some of the reason there’s horrific flooding
This is also some of the reason there’s horrific flooding
This is also some of the reason there’s horrific flooding
I grew up in a council house in the 70’s. I had a brilliant childhood and my parents couldn’t have afforded to buy a home. Selling off these houses and never replacing them was a huge mistake.
Not replacing the sold housing stock is the biggest problem the government/councils created. The estate I grew up on was built just after WW2, the house had 3 bedrooms, was very sturdily built and had a front and back garden. My grandparents raised 4 kids in it then my parents took the lease and raised 4 kids in it. Right to buy allowed my parents to buy the house and it was immediately worth 5x what they paid. That was an irresistible opportunity that millions of people cashed in on and I don't blame them but the result, as we all know, was that vast amounts of good quality, affordable housing was removed from the market in a short space of time.
But if your parents had been allowed to buy that council house, would they have bought it?
@@ronnygibbonMargaret Thatcher helped thousands of people to get on the property ladder allowing them to buy their council homes instead of renting .Only way I could have bought my own home and am eternally grateful to her.👍👍👍
@@charlieemslie7708 It was the exact same for my parents and I think it was a great policy. Many people had already been paying rent on their homes for decades. However not replacing houses for the affordable rental market has caused unbelievable hardship for the generation that followed.
@ronnygibbon Did your parents and grandparents not stop to think that having large families would actually add to the housing problem eventually? My grandparents courted for 10 years whilst living apart (gran was in service) saved, married at age 30 years, mortgage-bought their own terraced house (2 up/ 3 down) outside loo, had 2 children and eventually passed away leaving a small terraced house for both offspring.@@ronnygibbon
Minimum wage doesn't cover anything either ,
minimum wage earners have no business buying houses, their focus is gaining skills to get their income up
The real minimum wage is always zero.
@@James_36 fella it doesn't work like like that, companies have diversity quota's now, ive been more qualified for Jobs than other candidates and Lost out because I'm the wrong colour in my own country. If companies can't pay enough for people to have a mortgage, that's the very definition of slavery.
@@R3tr0v1ru5 we need a maximum wage in the UK, no one needs multiple millions a year to live on. Footballers are a prime example of the hypocrisy in the UK.
@@2handsandwiches it works exactly like that, plenty of jobs out there paying average money
The guy who thinks that it is better for banks to own houses rather than the State actually makes no sense. People living in decent houses in good communities is what matters, not getting obsessed with the means of ownership as the primary issue. Thanks for bringing this up Peter.
Wise words spoken wonderfully, thanks Peter
says the bot account only 4 months old.
@@rafezetter8003 I cannot compute your intelligence is too great….
No mistake, it was to undermine the working class.
was it? how come a lot of working class people got a lot richer as a result then
Today the cost of housing is out of reach even to rent.@@James_36
At the expense of people looking for housing in the future.@@James_36
@@James_36The working class as a whole certainly did NOT get richer as a result of stopping building council houses.
@@James_36 Because those already in council housing were gifted a vast electoral bribe and the generations that followed have paid for it ever since.
Maybe importing demand for housing from abroad is the problem.
People are not wanting to have kids in this messed up world, never mind buying a house at ridiculously high prices to stay in debt for the rest of their lives. The young are wanting to stay at home with their parents until they can save enough to move abroad as there is nothing for the young to do after university and the debt they are in, in this country.
Yes. As a single young person, I struggle to see what's keeping me here. I just don't know where I would go, that's the problem. Here I have a flat but a house is totally out of the question unless I want to have no disposable income left at the end of every month. It's ludicrous.
@@xman090909 you must earn next to nothing
You are part of the messed up world you created, to believe you are innocent in this is the worst kind of self delusion.
The Treasury told Thatcher that social housing provision was subsidised from the local rates. It wasn't , it was self financing through long term international loans. The Local Government and Housing Finance Act 1989 did for this mechanism. The large social housing sector underpinned the entire housing market.
100% mortgage is what caused the financial crash
Paying off my mortgage at 60,meant I could enjoy a decent retirement,despite the cost of living crisis. If you rent,you pay rent till the day you die. Your rent will increase over the years,but your pension won't,and millions now face poverty in their old age.
We must clamp down on mass immigration,which has done nothing to help this country. It has caused endless problems in our housing market, NHS,etc.etc and why politicians,with one notable exception, didn't anticipate, this baffles me.
We can't keep on trying to get a quart into a pint pot.
Governments of the last few decades, Labour and Tory, seem to have been scared of doing anything that could possibly lower house prices, because people feel more well off when their houses are worth more. It's like a kind of feel good factor for homeowners. So actually solving the problem by building enough affordable housing was seen as politically taboo, because it would drive down property prices. The only way they could get more people to own their own homes was by making it easier to borrow the money, which actually pushed up prices.
All one big b.s keep house prices up. My generation most never buying a house unless get inheritance.
@@PGHEngineer 9 kids a wife and mistress then I be better of sadly how it is now days.
@@PGHEngineer Got find mistress and big enough wallet for the mistress barley afford wife I got haha.
@@PGHEngineera lot of builders went bust in 2008 when people could not get mortgages.
@@alphacanine9641many peoples inheritance came from a council house bought for peanuts forty years ago. .
So great to hear him saying something that I've been saying for years. We should never have sold off council housing. We've gone from councils collecting affordable rents to them paying unaffordable housing benefit. And once upon a time if you changed your job you could easily move to the area your new job was in. Now people have to travel miles to get to work because they can't afford to move. It was a much better system
Everyone is forgetting the elephant in the room in regard to immigration...so where are the immigrants going to be housed.?...
So glad Peter H said this👍🏼
1% deposit will lead to higher prices.
Where are you getting all the materials for building these so called 5 million houses and refurbishing the rest at the same time.
Suppliers are struggling to get all the materials needed,the cost has rocketed and will go up more on demand.
Much of the material is crap and new houses only come with 15 to 25 year guarantee for a reason .
Cheap tiles instead of slate , OSB instead of ply or wattle , breeze block instead of brick or stone
Modern houses are made of crap and are to small and unfit for purpose.
@@pauls3204 where are you getting a 15-25 year warranty??
Try 10 if your lucky
OMG, Hitchens talks enormous sense!!!!!
He always does.
Hitchens just disagree with everything
he sounds like stalin
Hitchens v The Globalist.
@@petersavage5885 Hitchens vs Everyone and Everything .ps does he rent his home?
The Uk doesnt have a housing problem it has a population growth problem
If you didnt have the 10 million extra people living here that have moved here since 2001 none of these problems would exist
Also all the NHS traffic water ,transport crime and school place problems wouldn't be so severe ...
Yes exactly and everybody would be singing kumbaya
The immigrants can't buy the houses either. So who are the landlords expecting will buy their houses? Who are they raising their prices for. It's rich people. They set the markets.
Hitchens is 100% correct. We're in a place now where its either a mortgage that will grind you into the dirt or sleep in a cardboard box. The right to buy was one of Thatchers worst policies. And that's saying something.
Its all about destroying social housing. Councils houses get sold and Central Govt get the cash. then council has to buy back from the owner..
She was the most over-hyped politician after Churchill.
@@julianpetkov8320 Yeah, blame Thatcher for everything. And Churchill was a great man.
have you seen these council estates and social housing? jesus
Right-to-buy wasn't a bad idea; just implemented badly. The council properties should've been sold at the market value, and the money raised, used to build more council housing.
Huge student debt. Huge rent/mortgage costs. Huge council tax. Learning to drive. The world ran through screens. People struggling to have basic conversations without looking at phones. No gardens. Greed encouraged everywhere. Lack of community. Your only 21. Off you go.
It was the same 16 years ago. Actually, it was far worse with the economic crash. Nothing really got better in many repsects.
@@terranaxiomuk possibly true I some aspects. The world was definitely not ran through screens as much though!
Peter Hitchens is a clever guy, I don't agree with him a lot but think he's always worth listening to. Why he debases himself by appearing on this tinpot channel I'll never understand.
Thatcher wanted social housing sold off as she wanted both parents to work around the clock. It also meant that workers couldn't strike if they had a mortgage. It was indeed a grave mistake, but she didn't care. Social housing is the answer to the housing problem, and Peter is indeed correct.
Absolutely correct. It was all part of Thatcher's plan. Home owners had something they would fear losing and it made them more likely to vote Conservative because they had bought into capitalism. The council houses were sold below market price which proves they were worms for the hook.
have you seen social housing estates? christ me
@@James_36 I've always lived in one, so yes.
I think right to buy is ok providing more houses were built
But they weren't built@@joecarmody5544 - everything can work if its antecedent is in place, and in this case there was NO chance of that happening.
How many new builders are required to build 5M extra houses? Don't forget we need 40,000 new electrical engineers for net-zero, so it can't be those guys.
The state paying £15000 a year in housing benefits for a small house where the same house could be built for £100,000 and rented by the council . This would recover the r build cost in 7 years there after the council have an asset which can be rented or saving housing benefit. The government has paid out a 100 fold in housing benefit for the money received for sold houses.
Peter hitchens is a national hero who tells it as it is.
PH is basically right
Peter is a beacon of common sense.
Those houses on estates were not pleasant to live in Peter.. I could move house much easier getting a mortgage...
…this scheme was common during the 1970s’ including local council’s offering mortgages which many took advantage of.
This is true. Thatchers policies made it more obvious and both grievously and intentionally stopped the proceeds being made available to replace the stock.
Peter is spot on yet again
why 12m pensioners are mirtgage free and rich
@@Jack-fs2im Because of the period they were born in.
House prices were not x10 times the average salary.
You did not have 1 million a year new people entering the country to live (immigrants) 40% of all immigrants in the Uk have come in the last 10 years.
They stopped building and sold off council stock.(thatcher)
Houses were more realistically priced and you got more for your money, better built,more people were married with kids where as now more people are single with no kids so even more homes are needed.
No financial crash or pandemic, Brexit or wars with Russia and mutiple Middle East country’s.
@@Viewer-discretion-is-advised7 Interest rates 15% Oil crisis.Vietnam.Euro crash .We played in the street cos no cars and queued to use the phone.
@@Viewer-discretion-is-advised7 Brexit is our saviour ,we got Vax 6mths before europe and Europe is in recession.7.6m EU citizens have paid to stay in uk with lowest unemployment.EU bail outs and rising membership fees are ruining europe
The problem wasn’t selling the council houses off it was the failure to build more! The current system is merely a means of getting a lot of the population into perpetual debt bondage to the financial services sector. Because that’s what really matters
Not usually a fan of Hitchens but he is absolutely spot on here! 👏
A few things. Until the late 70s when the Labour party changed the rules, council housing was available to all, then they changed it to needs based and council estates went from working class people to doley scrotes fairly quick.
My proposal would be council housing open to all even the guy on £80k so they are actually decent neighbourhoods. You have to have been a citizen for at least 20 years. Anti-social behaviour is a ban from all council housing.
I grew up in one of those areas in the 1980s and I can confirm that it would have benefited from some 'robust' policing. Social housing would help across the board as a low-cost alternative to keep slum landlords in check. And anyone that abuses it is welcome at the new workhouse I plan on opening. 👍
exactyl, the answer is no longer social housing as it is filled with the literal underclass of society, very dangerous and unsafe places
Housing benefit is a massive transfer of public money to middle and upper class landlords. Yet only the working class get the blame for it
Massive transfer to many people, not just Private landlords.
Councils and charities have ranked it in.
Councils made their rental stock "temporary accomodation".
Their monthly cost to tenant gets charged weekly and everyone else jumped on it. We got an entire charity industry built on public cash. Several homeless charities, women's aid etc, get a house and rent it back out and if lucky get a big house with multiple rooms for a big big payday. Possibilities of £thousands per month.
Happened for decades so houses they used have been paid several times over
The fatal error was abandoning mortgage loans based on around 3x earnings, irrespective of low interest rates and monthly payments that created the short term illusion of affordability for properties that were ever increasing in price. Peter's point about the capital debt is spot on.
And now Thatcher is dead so we can,t hold her accountable, typical tory running away
HELLO DEAR
Cap the interest rates Banks can charge and invest outside of London. This is the best way to lower house prices.
I wonder what the annual costs are for Councils funding Housing Benefit and just how quickly that amount would reduce Year on Year if Councils were mandated to shrink said cost by a certain percent each Year by building Council Houses which they would then have as an asset providing them an annual return on instead of the endless Liability of Housing Benefit payments to private landords?
Not everyone can afford to buy what about those on a low income, what about those who are single and live alone, what about those with disabilities who are unable to work?
Good points.
if you earn average salary you can buy a 150k place easy, what you on about
@@James_36 ok two problems with your theory a single person working in a low paid unskilled position will earn in the region of 22k per year so even a 150k mortgage is out of reach, secondly there are so few places with housing available under 150k , even if you could find one you would most likely have to move a goid distance making your current employment untenable and then your back to square one, get out of your privileged bubble house prices in my area is an average of 450k even two bed terraced here is 280k
@@James_36 and just as a comparison I bought my first home, a two bed terrace 30 years ago for 14k young adults are struggling to be able to afford thier own homes we need more social housing its that simple
@@mycatspethooman5590 if you are on minimum wage the last thing you should be thinking about is buying a house, you should be building your skills to demand more pay in the market place... so it is not a problem, the problem is you think minimum wage should get you being an asset builder which is stupid and lacks sense
The basic law of supply and demand does still hold. It's just that we'd need millions of houses for it to make a difference. I think the government should do whatever it can to liberalise and incentivise house building and planning and building occupancy legislation in general. It has always been relatively inefficient to have offices empty at night and houses empty during the day and now that hybrid working is popular, the offices are even more under-utilised.
Well said Peter Hitchens about council housing..
1% equity in your home is a not a solution it’s a crisis wrapped up in the form of kicking the can down the road.
PH makes a good point. Council houses provided good, reasonably spacious accommodation with a garden about the size of an allotment (to feed a family of four). I grew up in one such in the 50/60s. Most tenants were ex WW 2 veterans, with a pride in the area - kids could be admonished by any adult if “out of line”. Green space was incorporated and the planning incorporated kerbside trees to rival any “suburban private street”. The greatest thing however was a community sense of pride - Lost after the great sell-off and private renting to many people with no community interest.
And local authorities ensured that council estate public areas were well maintained, and any tenant who could not maintain their gardens were also helped, those that would keep their gardens free of rubbish and were a nuisance to their neighbours were dealt with unlike housing associations and local authorities now.
What Thatcher did was grave but not a mistake. All part of the plan going forward.
Maybe part of it good intentions but it doesn't work in practice.
The population has grown by 10 million in the last 30 years. Do you think that’s maybe possibly a reason for the pressure on the housing market?
I've lived in this property for 20 years. Worked through out through kidney failure, heart attacks , transplants, cancers. Worked through it all. Denied any support. I'm surrounded by council houses. Non one has Worked the past 20 yrs. All paid for by labour council.
All have 2 to 3 cars parked outside. Many own 2 posh cars...yeah labour councils
Thatcher didnt want government council housing so dumped it all.
She created the base for the current housing mess
People bought them then moved out.
The situation would've been good, if the council properties were sold at the market value, and the money raised used to build more. It was a good idea, but wrongly implemented.
We need more houses built and less immigration, surely?
Hitchens talks so much sense
Which is more likely? A politician doing what is right at the expense of how their viewed in the public eye or the general public learning basic economics.
Peter is right on this id say but the ones that did buy have done very well out of it they bought incredibly low and now the prices have gone through the roof a great investment for them but bad for anyone that needs a council home now there is barely none available
You are right people are getting a virtual Pools win.
This will just drive prices up more
Just looked up some facts under right to buy just over 2 million houses sold, housing associations (RSl’s) in England and Wales alone have over 4 million homes on their books, where is the disaster?
A big problem is usually also that people want to live in the same place (location). It is impossible.
Not always a fan of Peter Hitchens but bang on the money on this issue.
And don’t forget, if you do manage to pay it off, you can’t pass it down to your family without a hefty tax.
Hitchens is right. We do need to build 5million homes, and they should be social housing stock, preferably council housing and protected from Right-to-Buy, which just fuels Buy-to-Let. British citizens should be given priority on lists. Housing Benefit needs reforming, too, in conjunction with rent controls to keep the benefits' bill in check. We have created a system (Thatcher presided over much of this) in which a huge amount of public money is required to support a bureaucracy that does little more than subsidise the private sector, and which keeps tenants trapped on welfare. When home-'owners' with 99% mortgages start to get repossessed as interest rates increase, the state will have to pick up the bill for that, as well, which without social housing stock will continue to inflate. The whole system is a mess, and Sunak's plan is only likely to make it worse.
Incidentally, I don't think it's unreasonable to believe that Thatcher's Right-to-Buy programme was anything more than a gerrymandering exercise: she believed that home-owners would vote Tory. That was a mistake as well. All she accomplished was to turn many council estates from settled, healthy, mixed-income communities into crime-ridden hell-holes populated by the unsettled, the very poor and disadvantaged. It was totally unnecessary and a national scandal; and the Tories had the gall to blame everybody but themselves for the conditions they helped to create.
Even council housing is open to abuse as Grenfell Tower showed when tenants sublet the apartments.
Stop subsidising the poor and least productive in society at the expense of the more productive. So what if a £90k earner has a council house. I’m on £45k and my partner is on £30k we live in a council house. Why should a muppet on benefits or some loser Jeremy Kyle mum with 10 kids from 10 different dads get a council house. Poverty is highly contagious!!!
They were not talking about people on benefits. They were talking about normal hard working young people who are living in poverty because of current housing costs.
Who is the muppet ?
@@autoclearanceuk7191but when they targeted the MP on 90k that means they’ll target anyone who earns a higher income.
@@autoclearanceuk7191 when they went after someone with a 90k salary, it means they’ll go after anyone with a high salary. Let’s face it. If they built more homes it’ll just go to the least productive in society. People on benefits, drug addicts, alcoholics, single mums, illegal immigrants.
It was well known what was going to happen. Massive defaults allowing the super rich to buy up those properties and put them on the rental market..
Spot on.
who's fault is it for default?
Peter is spot on...we're still suffering from the Thatcher days
I am elderly and I know how beautiful, yes, beautiful many of the council estates were at one time. I was fortunate enough to have parents who worked day and night to save up for a small house, taking on a mortgage in the fifties. They worked so hard, too hard, for years and years and were always tired. So, the first time I visited the home of a friend who lived in a council house, I was amazed at how spacious it was, how sturdy, how large and how well kept the gardens were, each with their own pathway and fencing. Private but personal. The pride with which they were maintained was very noticeable. There was a sense of real community and people I met were most proud of their homes. The public areas were regularly attended to and fresh plants grown in season. Happy days. I feel sorry for young folk today but everything needs a rethink.
Peter couldn't be more wrong, sorry but no matter how much you complain about it, you cannot stop the law of supply and demand
He was eluding to that, no?
It’s ok buying but what happens when you can’t afford to run it because the energy rates are through the roof.
Maybe we could afford energy if we’d bothered to put even an ounce of effort into renewable energy sources within the U.K. whether you believe in climate change or not, everyone knows that we’re going to run out of oil and gas so the longer we wait to build the wind farms we need the more expensive it is going to get. We should stop being reliant on other countries for energy but we can’t because no one wants to invest in renewable energy at home.
@@asahdo the world is flooded with oil stop talking rubbish
"The money will have to come from somewhere".
Borrow a bit and then we can start clawing back money from the colossal housing benefit budget.
Correct my thoughts exactly when that guy spouted that nonsense
More and more houses to be built??? Property developer's paradise in my opinion! I agree with Peter on this. Also, this will need more infrastructure like hospitals and supermarkets, not to mention water supply, sewage, electric, gas etc etc.
there needs to be more social houses to create more ghetto style neighbourhoods and crime? wonderful idea
If the price of houses goes down, the economy will go down with it.
- therefore the price of houses won't/can't go down
TRUE
She sold the country's silver.
And Gordon Brown our gold
And Gordon brown sold our gold.
@@Daydreamer-o1m
😂 Didn't see your reply
and got savile knighted
Brown sold £3 billion of Gold.
£65 for each adult
Peter Hitchens the voice of reason as ever!
I and my wife got a council home in the late 1970s, You had to be working to earn a certain amount. These days, if you are on benefits, homeless, or an immigrant, you go top of the housing list and this is why most social housing tennants dont work and live on benefits
Not true at all. That is the Torie propaganda. The facts are out there and it is not your perception of reality.
You forgot "single parent"
Top of the list.
Banged my head off a wall with the council trying to get housed for too many years, never a hope I had without check marks in some boxes
Young Single mothers used to be allocated a 3 bedroom property automatic with a free washing machine and fridge. That has now changed, however.
@@misscoutts6193
Hasn't hanged much.
Scotland that's where all the council stock goes, them and the ones that like needles.
Single moms get a 2 bed with 1 kid, 3 bed as soon as one turns 12.
1 white good fridge/freezer and 2 rooms carpeted, decorating vouchers. Seen it 1st hand
Interest rates go up and down when ever they go up and reach a certain percentage people simply can't cope I've owned houses and it is.better than renting but you do worry a lot and the pressure if you lose your job or interest rates increase can b incredible
The problem with Capitalism is that Capitalists own all the Capital
It's Zionists spoiling things for everyone else.
@@johnkitching2248 it's the Zionists spoiling things for everyone else.
It isn't a problem if you're a capitalist.
Exactly the same in communist USSR
Buying houses to let is probably a major cause of the lack affordable houses in the UK today. It's probably not gonna happen but outlawing multiple house ownership or severely limiting the number of houses one person can own would make a massive difference to the availability and affordability of houses in the UK.
No she didn't She enabled thousands of Working Class families to become home owners , Why is she to blame for successive governments not building new housing ? The 80's was nearly 40 years ago ffs !
Because her government wouldn’t allow more social housing to be built with the receipts from the sales.
Thatcher was luring people into home ownership to make them Conservative voters. She was assuring her own future not ours.
Read the " Black Report" from Torie MP Mr Black then became Lord Black.
Thatcher requested him during the 80s to go and do research in what you are stating.
Black did this and on completion of the report Thatcher did not like his findings did not agree with it so she shelved it not published.
A few years down the line report was leaked.
Now that report is more relevant today 2024 than was in the 80s. Yes over 40 years ago. What does that tell you ffuk sake.
PH sounds like his younger commie self here...this guy is so mixed up in his beliefs it is impossible to have him as a leader of anything
Because the Plan was to get rid of the council estates.
Damn, first time in a long while I am agreeing with Peter Hitchens.
Christ is the lord ✝️⚔️
And lives in a mansion of many rooms. Nice work for a carpenter!
The state paying the deposit only pushes up prices, we've already seen it happen with previous government housing schemes
Your correct it doesn't change the supply only the demand and I pushes it upwards.
@Prometheus7272 not to mention that the current pace of building houses in the U.K. isn't even enough to keep up with immigration, let alone increase the supply to push prices downwards.
Isn't life strange when some people can find mistakes made by others however, they can never find their own mistakes.
Yes Peter Hitchens does not have a good word to say about anyone.
yeah and im sure this allowed mass immigration amd illligala allowed by labour and the touries , has no effect /s
The housing market is protected by the govt of the day from going bust and enables banks to make a lot of money risk-free. The banks, and their balance sheets, are the big winners from the housing market over the years and it is no coincidence the swinging door between careers in politics and careers in banking and the sanctity of the housing market.
At 1:03 Peter says the Thatcher government "got rid of council housing". It didn't. It just shrunk it to encourage people to buy instead. There are still council houses and social housing, but unfortunately it was targeted only towards those in greatest need (meaning refugees, mentally ill, terminally ill or those with young children) in 1977 by Labour. Before that it was available to everyone. If someone has social housing they can iccupy it for a lifetime and pass it in once through the rule of succession. That results in two tenants being able to occupy it for potentially over 100 years.
I agree that the selling of Council houses was a big mistake many are now owned by Landlords who rent them to people who would have been eligible for a Council house. Buy to let has taken many houses from first time buyers and then the tenants claim housing benefit meaning that the taxpayer is paying the mortgage of the private landlord. Immigration also has a big impact on housing
Spot on.
The sale of council houses was supposed to pay for more council houses to be built but this never happened. The village I lived in sold 3/4 of council houses under the right to buy and they have mostly been sold on at massive profits.
ANGELA RAYNER IS ONE
Where are all these 5 million houses going to be built, in 5 years you will need another 5 million houses, we need to stop so many people coming into the country and get rid of the ones that shouldn't be here, Peter Hitchens is right about the council houses.
Social housing was started post WW1. Everyone worked, no benefits no NHS. No single mothers. No independent living. People lived at home til they got married.
England (not UK, just England) population 1980 was 47 million. In 2020 it was 57 million. What effect has this had?
We can all see the effect.
Scotland's has barely moved and has similar issues, just on a far lower scale.
Scotland with stagnant population growth, yet pressure on housing.
Highlights his point of family breakdown.
1 family home in the past requires 2 nowadays.
With a 50%+ divorce rate, it's a large significant factor
Hitchens is correct in principle, but it's about 2 decades too late now.
I'm born in 84 and in the 2000's the stock was going or gone, and everyone gorged themselves on Benefits cash.
A £300/month council rent property became "temp accomodation" and charged £300 a week to benefits.
Councils and HA's can charge Market Rent -10% now.
Still unaffordable, but don't worry the govt will top it up 🤦.
People bought them then when granny passed away, rent them back to the council £600 month and the council made them "temp accom" charge £1200, both profit.
Council/HA's have been charging over £500 a month for well over a decade here.
Local Govt is dependant on Central Govt Benefits claimants.
Been this way now for a long time.
Building council houses is gone as a solution.
They're charging almost Private Rent prices. Limited to being 10% cheaper than market rent 🤦
The days of a house building blitz to solve it are well and truly gone.