Scottish legislation to end right to buy
The Scottish Government has unveiled plans for a Housing Bill that would end the right to buy for new social housing.
The bill, to be introduced to parliament in early 2010, also proposes to separate the setting of standards from the regulation of social housing and to give the regulator the power to promote the interests of current and future tenants.
The Scottish Government is also proposing a new law to stop bankrupt people losing their homes unnecessarily.
A review of possible solutions, as part of the Debt and Family Homes Bill, will look at whether legislation could prevent creditors from taking the homes of people in debt to them.
Graeme Brown, director of housing charity Shelter Scotland, said: ‘We welcome the Scottish Government’s announcement today that they plan to introduce a Housing Bill which aims to safeguard social housing for future generations.
‘Planned measures to help protect those facing repossession are also good news. Repossession is a living nightmare for families faced with it, and must be prevented wherever possible.’
View results 10 per page | 20 per page
Have your say
You must sign in to make a comment
Readers' comments (12)
kass | 04/09/2009 12:55 pm
At last, light at the end of the tunnel, at least for Scotland... First Stirling Council bans evictions on arrears, now the end of the RIGHT TO BUY... It makes the rest of UK social housing looks like stuck in the dark ages... You want to REALLY REALLY REALLY restore English tenants faith in their landlords?... Sack the lot of them and let the Scots run social housing in England.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
davido | 04/09/2009 4:00 pm
Looks like someone doesn't understand the working ways of the housing sector.
The issue around RTB was not the fact that those aspiring to own their own property took stock out of the system, it was the fact that that money was not re-invested in the provision of replacment affordable housing.
However, we could banish RTB, maintain single tenure estates, promote ghettos of an 'underclass' and revert back to the 1950s. Oh, and when residents fall into arrears we'll let them live in the properties forever and a day, whilst those honest resident subsidise them by paying rent which includes and element for arrears within their rent payment.
Perfect. As for the final comment with regards English social housing it is so immature it doesn't warrant a response.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
St Alban | 04/09/2009 4:26 pm
Please remind us all why the receipts from RTB were not put into generating new homes? At the same time you may wish to include why transferrable discounts were banished?
While I'm in a questioning mood - what was extent of housing shortage in the 1950's?
As a quarter Scot I congratulate our neighbours north of the border for continuing to show the innovation and sense that has made them a justly proud people.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
kass | 04/09/2009 5:10 pm
davido | Fri, 4 Sep 2009 16:00 GMT....
Excuse me, what's wrong with giving incentives to tenants to buy OUTSIDE social housing stock? Or giving the private sector inducements to build affordable private homes?... Why do you need to despoil a social housing which is national asset and resource - and which as we have seen, for forseenable or unforseenable reasons - the nation might never ever get back or get up in it entirety?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
kass | 05/09/2009 0:40 am
"davido | Fri, 4 Sep 2009 16:00 GMT....
Looks like someone doesn't understand the working ways of the housing sector..."
Are you and expert or a professional of some sort in the social housing sector to have such a profound insight and comprehensive authority on it? I you are I would really like to know in what role.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Andrew Boff | 05/09/2009 11:25 am
Social assistance should be for people, not buildings.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Norman Adams | 05/09/2009 12:17 pm
Is ‘Right to Buy’ a big issue at this time?
Northampton sales last year was nine
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Joe Halewood | 05/09/2009 5:34 pm
I strongly disagree with Davido's point - the issue WAS taking stock out of the subsidised social housing system. And the entire sector and country is paying for this folly.
A million plus homes sold that took 1 million homes out of the sector that now has a massive shortage of supply. That took the best and most desirable homes out of the sector.
More than that why should a select type of renter have the right to buy or acquire when other renters dont. If the principles right then all private renters - who perversely pay much more in rent - should have the same right to buy. Anyone care to make an argument for PSL RtB - i dont think so?
Kass is correct - social housing was and is a national resource that all subsidise in this country without any say in the matter. How offensive it is that an asset we all subsidise in the national interest can be sold to profiteers in the main. Yet RTB is always viewed as some sort of right for paying (heavily subsidised) rent for years - what a complete and utter nonsensical premise
and falsehood. Its just vulnerable people playing an im allright jack attitude to deprive other more vulnerable (by definition) people of the chance to have social and financial stability through the subsidised social housing model.
I strongly applaud the Scottish decision and wish it was implemented in England yesterday.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Fingers | 06/09/2009 12:40 pm
Surely if the HRA is to be reformed, this to allow ALMOs and local authorities to borrow to build and develop new homes, does it not make sense to eliminate the Right To Buy. After all are you going to continue building new homes that after five years could be sold to the tenant with a discount. If that was to be allowed unchecked it would have a detrimental impact on revenue streams long term.
After all it was the relatively new housing stock that was sold of first when RtB first came into the legislation.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
stephen west | 07/09/2009 12:53 pm
Before we all go gaga over the Right To Buy consider this,under the demised Housing Corporation tens of millions of pounds was awarded to Housing Associations and RSL's to build and provide so called affordable housing to key workers up and down the country. The problem was with most new builds they were not affordable to anyone in a key worker profession as how many nurses have a disposable income of £35k per year which is what most would need to buy a 50% share in a flat worth on average £150K in London not forgetting the key worker, would have to pay rent and service charges equal to that of the mortgage and Council Rates on top. Is it any wonder that many RSL's and Housing Associations after three months of not being able to shift many of these homes applied to the Housing Corporation to sell them to anyone on the open market and in many cases were allowed by the Housing Corporation to keep the grant which is after all tax payers monies.
Housing Associations and RSL 's must make profits despite what they claim and all under a Labour Government. It was a Labour Government which killed off Right to Buy by reducing the maximum discount from £38k to £16k and throwing estates back to the dark old days before mixed tenure to ones where no one is allowed to buy their homes or renovate them and letting estates fall in to disrepair.
Good old Socialist policies in Scotland should see all their Housing Estates become crime ridden Sink Estates in no time at all. If tenants were allowed to buy under RTB the capital receipts should be reinvested in providing new social housing not channeled elsewhere and therefore keeping the social housing levels up to par.
Stephen West
Acting Chair Orbit Bexley Housing Association Independent Leaseholders Group
Well done Scotland the Brave.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment