I agree completely C'mon Sense - but the 30-year onslaught that has more than halved the supply of social housing and manipulated central and local government finance in favour of what is after all a very small group of housing providers, and against alternatives, is going too far and beyond what the taxpayer can afford in terms of housing benefit taking the strain.
Yes, if those with exceptional means require temporary accomodation at a price, then the private sector is ideal; but for long term housing of the low paid such a high cost option is not good for the nation compared to available social renting.
Or is it your intention to support a policy whereby such a large proportion of the incomes is through income and housing benefits that every worker is effectively a State Employee contracted out to employers who can then pay the minimum wage. The problem with that model will be found in the question - who pays the taxes for the ever higher benefits bill if nobody is earning a living wage? Especially when our leaders tell us that it is a cardinal crime to expect companies to pay a penny in tax as they would be disincentivised from employing anyone at all.