Impact of the riots on housing

09/08/2011 2:37 pm

How about 200 lashes of the birch for home owners and 100 for those who are tenants?  After all such thuggery is the presever of tenants and we need to set an example to all non-tenants!!

09/08/2011 4:24 pm

"social landlords are responsible in no small part for tenants taking part in riots"

Absolute and utter rot!

09/08/2011 5:26 pm

Social landlords have an excellent opportunity here (unfortunately) to take advantage of the current situation and demand more powers from Government, in order to stem the gradual tide of anarchy sweeping parts of our nation. 

The Government must realise that to tackle the underlying causes of the current riots, affordable landlords must be given greater powers to intervene into the lives of their residents through improved joint  communication and enforcement over anti social matters.

Rather than having social adult / child care functions operating within the confines of local government, positive steps must be taken to enable the 'branching out' of these functions, to local housing providers who can work with housing staff to manage their shared case loads which are pro actively revewed on a regular basis and quality assured by a third party.

There have been examples of ALMOs farming in social service based resources to jointly tackle their issues with their respective local authorities. However, more needs to be done on this front by enabling similar strategic partnerships to become more operationally present by way of investment in (human) resources. 

10/08/2011 2:12 pm

In the Metro this morning a young lady was quoted as finding it all a bit of a laugh and that the shop keepers deserved the loss because they are rich.

Whilst she is obviously way off with her views, they do indicate at least part of the thinking behind those who took part in the rioting.

Firstly, when you have nothing there can be envy of those you see you have more than you.

Secondly, that if I'm OK then nothing else matters.

This over self-centred world view is a huge barrier to making the change needed so that these riots are not repeated, and I'm sure that the total reasons are further complicated, but just considering this young lady's opinion some 'old-pc' terms come to mind, such as social-inclusion and stakeholding.

Having a value gives a person something to lose. Having something to lose is a break upon extreme behavour. Obviously then giving all people in our society a worth is something we must do. As an immediate step then the demonistation campaign of this government and the gutter press must be reversed. Longer term the equalisation of people's value - a single minimum wage, equality of benefits, equality of access to housing, regardless of age, is crucial. A clear future of worthwhile employment needs to be something all feel that they can achieve, not just an aspiration of the favoured few. Removing the Million youth unemployed into real career progression is then another essential.

The other area that needs to be worked on is harmonisation and communication. That anyone thinks a shopkeeper is 'rich' shows the level of segregation that now exists in our communities. Inclusion rather than exclusion, communication rather than victimisation, enablement rather than pillory would all help repair this ill.

If Housing Associations put themselves forward to fulfil these needs then they will only achieve the perpetuation of the falsehood that it is all the fault of social housing. The best gain that housing can get from this situation is leave resolution to society, of which housing is a part but not the lead member.

10/08/2011 8:33 pm

True Joe - but the young lady, I believe, offers an insight that the intelligent can perceive. The hope is that if shared that insight may even dawn on the dedicated DM Readers so that they too can see that this problem is their problem too, and if it is not resolved by engagement, enablement, and inclusion then it will not be resolved.

13/08/2011 12:46 pm

Elizabeth Spring: are you renting from a social landlord? With respect, you shouldn't be if you earn £38k a year.

Re. the riots, there are two related issues that on this occasion need to be considered at the same time, yet dealt with differently.

1. The rioters, the looters, the violent need to be found and prosecuted appropriately.

2. The wider social/economic reasons, whether they truly did or didn't lead t riots, need to be addressed.

I'd love the government to re-establish the UK's manufacturing base, and create enough jobs to ensure that every adult in the country has the opportunity to be educated/trained; and earn an honest living for a fair wage, under a proportionate tax regime.

Then everyone would have hope; there would be no reason/excuse to commit crime and/or riot.

Of course some people will still commit crime, because for a small minority of society it's easier and quicker to earn money through illegal activities than doing an honest day's work, no matter how good wages are or how fair the tax system is.

14/08/2011 4:22 pm

"If I were searching for materialistic thugs I'm not sure it would be people on minimum wage I'd be looking at, but those whose fat pockets, pension pots and bank accounts bulge with money taken directly from the poor"

More left wing propaganda?

Some facts - 20% of households on lowest incomes are subsidised via redistribution of earnings to the tune of £10k per household. The next 20% are subsidised to the extent of £10.3k per household. The next 20% are subsidised by £4.5k per household. This costs the next 20% £4.8k per household, and the top 20% £20k per household, on average.

There are approximately 26.2m households in the UK, making the average household size 2.29. Based on this, the fact is that redistribution of income from the wealthiest 40% of households costs those households collectively £130bn per year. This £130bn predominantly goes to the poorest 40%.

The idea of the poor having their money stolen from them by the rich, on the basis of evidence that the rich enjoy higher earnings is complete baloney. Each of the top 20% households, who are having £20k redistributed to the poorest 20%, are covering the subsidy of two households - equivalent to 4-5 men, women and children from families on low income - in the form of housing, benefits and welfare, social inclusion and a raft of other (misguided?) attempts by the Government and its friends, to fix the system.

However, the real value offered by high earners is something else - the investment in economic progress. If you don't want to accept my judgement, listen to Milton Friedman, the nobel prize winning economist (up to 2mins 20, then from 3mins 10):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wi-D24oCa10

Just as true now, for the UK.

14/08/2011 9:24 pm

I think to avoid future riots the govenrment should provide good jobs for everyone.  By good I mean jobs in which you can afford to buy a home witha 15 year long mortgage.  I do not mean a luxury home, but an average home.  When people will be able to do so with thier jobs, then you won't see anymore riots...

However as I am slightly skeptical that our governemnt will ever put in pace policies to provide anything like that to its people I am afraid there'll be more unrest to come... Jailing people now for rioting might make the more hysterical section of the nation happy, but it will only spread criminality.  It seems that the greatest majority of people do not realise that criminality is expensive and far from making people afraid of the law they will be even more ready to defy it.     

15/08/2011 9:19 am

One impact once the evictions kick in is that there will be more housing available for law abiding citizens.