The 2019 General Election - Campaign Debate and Discussion

[edwin_m]

Please don't insult my intelligence. I haven't been fooled into anything.

I've got absolutely nothing against anyone from any country, but as a tenant in the private rented sector controlled immigration and less competition for housing would benefit me and many millions like me (including many existing immigrants and many children of immigrants.).

House prices, and therefore rents, depend on a whole raft of policies designed to make homeowners feel good by keeping prices high. in particular there are restrictions on building, and mortgages are cheap so people who already have money can borrow more. All of this has very little to do with immigration - in the absence of those restrictions the market would provide enough housing at affordable prices.

 

[Comstock]

In summary, for time immemorial the Tories have advocated that the housing rental market is dictated by supply and demand. The 'supply and demand' approach has now led to rocketing rents and increased homelessness. You perceive yourself to be disadvantaged by this, but blame immigration and (presumably) countenance voting Tory to carry Brexit through in an attempt to curb it ... and you 'haven't been fooled into anything'.

Of course rents are controlled by supply and demand.....rents are rocketing because demand exceeds supply!!

 

[radamfi]

In most of the country house prices have gone down in real terms over the last 10 years, despite mortgage rates being practically zero.

 

[Puffing Devil]

Of course rents are controlled by supply and demand.....rents are rocketing because demand exceeds supply!!

Had the housing stock been retained by councils, or replaced after right to buy sales, we would have a pool of affordable rent-controlled housing. Instead, a chunk of affordable rented housing has been gifted to the private sector who now charge "market rents" for what should be affordable housing.

We're now paying more, through housing benefit, to have people live in houses which used to be owned by the council, while private landlords are raking in a nice profit as they were in the position to "invest" in a public asset at a knock down rate.

There a good report on the whole fiasco here.

 

[Comstock]

Had the housing stock been retained by councils, or replaced after right to buy sales, we would have a pool of affordable rent-controlled housing. Instead, a chunk of affordable rented housing has been gifted to the private sector who now charge "market rents" for what should be affordable housing.

I agree. I couldn't agree more. But we are where we are.

and yes, I'm aware it was a Tory government that did the sell off. Which sticks in my craw when voting for them. But I am going to vote for them.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Had the housing stock been retained by councils, or replaced after right to buy sales, we would have a pool of affordable rent-controlled housing. Instead, a chunk of affordable rented housing has been gifted to the private sector who now charge "market rents" for what should be affordable housing.

Do you have any statistics that state the percentages of council house stock that were sold to sitting residents under the right-to-buy scheme, which were then resold by the original purchasers?

 

[433N]

I agree. I couldn't agree more. But we are where we are.

and yes, I'm aware it was a Tory government that did the sell off. Which sticks in my craw when voting for them. But I am going to vote for them.

So why vote for them when they clearly are not acting in your best interest (they do seem to be good at grooming people to do this) ?

and 'we are where we are' because of Tory policies.

 

[Comstock]

So why vote for them when they clearly are not acting in your best interest (they do seem to be good at grooming people to do this) ?

and 'we are where we are' because of Tory policies.

I remember similar arguments in the run up to the 1992 election 'don't vote Labour because of their mistakes in the 1970s'. Remember the 'double whammy' billboards? They were arguably the reason Neil Kinnock never became PM.

Thing is, both main parties have made mistakes in government. I certainly think Maggie's council house sell off was one. But so was Blair allowing unlimited numbers of economic migrants to come to the UK....

 

[DarloRich]

I certainly think Maggie's council house sell off was one. But so was Blair allowing unlimited numbers of economic migrants to come to the UK....

the first was a massive success as a concept. it allowed people to own their own home. What it missed was a plan to reinvest in council housing stocks.

The second is untrue imo.

There a good report on the whole fiasco

I will keep saying this: right to buy is not and was not a fiasco as a concept. It allowed people to own their own home who would never have been able to do so. My family is one that benefited.

I find it odd that people, especially Coirbyn fan boys, want to keep people dependent rather than independent. Labour wasn't always like this.

 

[433N]

I certainly think Maggie's council house sell off was one. But so was Blair allowing unlimited numbers of economic migrants to come to the UK....

The second is untrue imo.

... and mine but we don't want to let facts get in the way of a tabloid headline.

 

[Comstock]

It's totally true. There was and still aren't any limits on migration from the EU.

 

[DarloRich]

It's totally true. There was and still aren't any limits on migration from the EU.

no it wasn't. You also don't seem to be clear what you are complaining about. Is it:

• Migration
• Migration of non European people
• Migration of Asian people
• Migration of African people
• migration of Europeans
• migration of eastern Europeans
• economic migration

 

[ainsworth74]

I will keep saying this: right to buy is not and was not a fiasco as a concept. It allowed people to own their own home who would never have been able to do so. My family is one that benefited.

I find it odd that people, especially Coirbyn fan boys, want to keep people dependent rather than independent. Labour wasn't always like this.

Exactly. I think Right to Buy is an excellent idea and something which should be applauded as an idea and continued (and maybe even expanded to cover the private rented sector ). It falls over, of course, on the basis of the implementation which meant that you sold off all these houses but then didn't replace the stock at all. Which leads us in part to the present housing crisis...

 

[433N]

Exactly. I think Right to Buy is an excellent idea and something which should be applauded as an idea and continued (and maybe even expanded to cover the private rented sector ). It falls over, of course, on the basis of the implementation which meant that you sold off all these houses but then didn't replace the stock at all. Which leads us in part to the present housing crisis...

... and can we try to remember that Right to Buy was originally a Labour Party manifesto pledge (1959 , if wiki remembers correctly).

 

[edwin_m]

It's totally true. There was and still aren't any limits on migration from the EU.

The EU allows countries to impose controls on migration such as requiring migrants to register and to leave if they don't find a job, so we could too without having to leave the EU to do it.

 

[Comstock]

no it wasn't. You also don't seem to be clear what you are complaining about. Is it:

• Migration
• Migration of non European people
• Migration of Asian people
• Migration of African people
• migration of Europeans
• migration of eastern Europeans
• economic migration

The first and the last.

and I resent the non-too-subtle attempt to brand me a racist.

 

[Comstock]

The EU allows countries to impose controls on migration such as requiring migrants to register and to leave if they don't find a job, so we could too without having to leave the EU to do it.

Maybe we could. But we *are* going to leave the EU and people need to get over it.

 

[433N]

The EU allows countries to impose controls on migration such as requiring migrants to register and to leave if they don't find a job, so we could too without having to leave the EU to do it.

Maybe we could. But we *are* going to leave the EU and people need to get over it.

Ah, how refreshing.

The 'stick your fingers in your ears and say "la-la-la" very loudly' approach.

You do know that upthread you complained that your intelligence was being insulted.

Why should 'people need to get over it' when there is good evidence suggesting that people's decision to leave the EU was based upon misunderstanding and/or misinformation ? It is the duty of citizens in so-called democracies to make sure that they are well-informed otherwise 'democracy' is of no value whatsoever.

 

[Mojo]

The EU allows countries to impose controls on migration such as requiring migrants to register and to leave if they don't find a job, so we could too without having to leave the EU to do it.

Maybe it's a problem with our own laws then. In 2017 the High Court ruled that the Home Office was breaking the law when it deported vagrants. Those working or travelling in London will be aware of the huge number of vagrants and other undesirables on the streets and disturbing customers of public transport. The police seem to have no powers.

 

[Bantamzen]

The first and the last.

and I resent the non-too-subtle attempt to brand me a racist.

Leaving the EU will not resolve either. EU citizens will continue to want to work in this country, this country will continue to want EU citizens to work in this country. What may change is that countries that we are renegotiating trade deals with may want greater access to our work & education markets as part of a new deal. India for example has already inferred that they would like just this.

 

[DarloRich]

The first and the last.

I therefore stand by my initial statement: Your view is wrong.

and I resent the non-too-subtle attempt to brand me a racist.

I have said nothing of the sort.

Maybe it's a problem with our own laws then. In 2017 the High Court ruled that the Home Office was breaking the law when it deported vagrants. Those working or travelling in London will be aware of the huge number of vagrants and other undesirables on the streets and disturbing customers of public transport. The police seem to have no powers.

Looking at the Guardian ( I know, I know, terribly liberal) the court said it was unlawful, discriminatory & country to UK & EU law for the home office to act as it was and that the court upheld a well-established definition of an abuse of rights under EU law.

What the court actually did was uphold human rights legislation. You know, the same legislation that protects us all from abuse and imprisonment without trial and protects our fundamental rights..............

 

[Arglwydd Golau]

. It falls over, of course, on the basis of the implementation which meant that you sold off all these houses but then didn't replace the stock at all. Which leads us in part to the present housing crisis...

Well, exactly that! Whilst it did give one generation the option of owning their own homes, it has left the next generation bereft of decent housing and reliant on the private sector. It was a short term fix by Thatcher's Government which secured many votes, I'm sure.
I wonder how many ex-council houses and flats are now rented out to Airbnb customers, was horrified some years ago when we stayed in such a flat in London.

 

[Comstock]

I have said nothing of the sort.

then why give a list of different races, asking which I objected to?

Your implication was clear, and I resent it.

 

[Mojo]

Looking at the Guardian ( I know, I know, terribly liberal) the court said it was unlawful, discriminatory & country to UK & EU law for the home office to act as it was and that the court upheld a well-established definition of an abuse of rights under EU law.

What the court actually did was uphold human rights legislation. You know, the same legislation that protects us all from abuse and imprisonment without trial and protects our fundamental rights..............

So basically, the UK _can't_ force people to leave in these circumstances?

 

[Pyreneenguy]

Maybe we could. But we *are* going to leave the EU and people need to get over it.

That's not a certainty ! I still think ( and hope) that a hung Parliament is on the cards.

If we do leave, people are not going to get over it easily and I don't see the E.U giving the UK a free-trade deal without something very solid in exchange.

I would also suggest that the millions of "working people" who voted for Brexit would be better served by Labours programme than any theoretical benefits following
the withdrawal from the E.U. The end to Zero Hour Contracts and the possibility for adults to return to study through-out their working lives, just to name two, appear more enticing than keeping Johnny Foreigner out of the country, taking our jobs and housing.

 

[DarloRich]

So basically, the UK _can't_ force people to leave in these circumstances?

In those particular circumstances. The Government can and does remove people. They cant just round them up off the streets and lob them out of the country.

then why give a list of different races, asking which I objected to?

Your implication was clear, and I resent it.

Resent what you like. If I thought you were being racist I would say.

I asked because rules are different for each class. Your statement MIGHT be closer to the truth if it related to migration by eastern European people. It would still be wrong but it might be closer to the truth.

Your statement was that Tony Blair allowed unlimited numbers of economic migrants to come to the UK. This is incorrect.

 

[Mojo]

In those particular circumstances. The Government can and does remove people. They cant just round them up off the streets and lob them out of the country.

According to a BBC News article from last Spring, the Home Office claims that they will no longer deport such citizens who are vagrants. How does this mean that we have control of the situation and do what is the right thing to do?

 

[Starmill]

Politics isn’t rational, as you displayed when immediately assuming - without asking - my personal background, and de facto treating all descendants of “Empire victims” as a political monolith.

I was accusing you of ignoring the actual objectives of the policy in favour of a sound-bite.

Identity politics is poison to society and true liberalism.

... rather like this one.

 

[DarloRich]

According to a BBC News article from last Spring, the Home Office claims that they will no longer deport such citizens who are vagrants. How does this mean that we have control of the situation and do what is the right thing to do?

because being homeless isnt a crime in this country and being homeless isnt a breach of EU rights. You actually have to do something wrong to be deported. Being poor isnt wrong enough.

The court also said that it was discriminatory because it only targeted foreign homeless. They weren't rounding up British homeless and sending them back to their home town.

I am happy to lob people out of the country IF they have done something wrong.

 

[Starmill]

Maybe it's a problem with our own laws then. In 2017 the High Court ruled that the Home Office was breaking the law when it deported vagrants. Those working or travelling in London will be aware of the huge number of vagrants and other undesirables on the streets and disturbing customers of public transport. The police seem to have no powers.

There is a growing plurality of support for the repeal of the Vagrancy Act, so if that happens they will no longer even be considered "vagrants".