Brexit

[geraldrobins]

This may be true but what

Its off at a tangent but some of the biggest and most expensive problems local authorities have is with tenants, it costs us the tax payers a lot of money.
The simple way to deal with poor landlords is as with any other poor supplier, don't give them any money, leave.
Landlords are fairly easy to find and prosecute.

This may be true but what about areas where affordable housing is in short supply.

 

[malcolm E53 AMG]

When it comes to housing there is one indisputable fact net immigration was 250,000 in 2016 (50% from the EU), so this requires the construction in housing terms of a city the size of Derby to be built every year just to stand still to house those coming into the country.

National statistics show that approx 120,000 new homes are constructed per annum in the U.K. so the maths speak for themselves

With UK birth rates running at approx 650,000 and deaths averaging just under 500,000 p a it's easy to see a why there is a perfect storm brewing on housing

And this is just one factor in the Brexit debate on pressures to infrastructure and services

 

[LostKiwi]

When it comes to housing there is one indisputable fact net immigration was 250,000 in 2016 (50% from the EU), so this requires the construction in housing terms of a city the size of Derby to be built every year just to stand still to house those coming into the country.

National statistics show that approx 120,000 new homes are constructed per annum in the U.K. so the maths speak for themselves

With UK birth rates running at approx 650,000 and deaths averaging just under 500,000 p a it's easy to see a why there is a perfect storm brewing on housing

And this is just one factor in the Brexit debate on pressures to infrastructure and services

So instead of clamping down on the non-EU immigrants (who we can control and of whom 61% on average are in employment) we ditch the EU and try to get rid of the EU immigrants (of whom 81% on average are in employment)....

Theresa may promised to clamp down on immigration for year after year when she was home secretary and spectacularly failed...
Why will she succeed in dealing with immigration any better as PM of a non-EU UK?

 

[Craiglxviii]

When it comes to housing there is one indisputable fact net immigration was 250,000 in 2016 (50% from the EU), so this requires the construction in housing terms of a city the size of Derby to be built every year just to stand still to house those coming into the country.

National statistics show that approx 120,000 new homes are constructed per annum in the U.K. so the maths speak for themselves

With UK birth rates running at approx 650,000 and deaths averaging just under 500,000 p a it's easy to see a why there is a perfect storm brewing on housing

And this is just one factor in the Brexit debate on pressures to infrastructure and services

Ah but how many families can those 120k new homes house? If it's one, and there are 2 or more people per family, then that suggests that the numbers stack up for meeting nett immigration. They don't for meeting the social housing issue as stands now, but that's a matter that could be solved by a single large building programme as it suggests the issue is not ever ongoing.

However, with a nett birth rate of 150k per annum and a nett immigration rate of 250k per annum it's easy to see why there's a perfect storm brewing- Britons are being displaced by immigrants at the rate of 100k per annum.

 

[Headhurts]

One of the problems being virtually all who turn up from other countries whether EU or the rest of the world don't have the funds to buy a home so go to the top of any housing lists particularly when children are involved.

This can upset many of our own UK residents who also cannot afford homes but are already in accommodation many with their parents.

It is also very difficult to get homes built even with the relaxed rules.

How many of us would truthfully think excellent if a housing estate was planned opposite to our own homes?

Not in my back yard.

I'm not sticking up for TM but I was speaking to a friend of mine who is a LibDem MP regarding this and it was always extremely difficult to expel anyone from the country as the first thing they did was find a solicitor who did legal aid and then began the long and expensive road through the courts.

The rules have changed now re legal aid I believe.

We need migration but we do need breathing space with 200.000 or so a year coming in it's never going to ease up.

And I would fight tooth and nail if a housing estate was planned opposite my home.

How many on here would truthfully say fine I like housing estates and welcome it and yet we do need homes.

I also love the countryside so would rather this was not spoilt.

Maybe Scotland should step up loads of space there.

Only kidding I love the scots and envy their beautiful land.

I'm not against immigration but it must be managed, had this been done Brexit I suspect would not have happened.

Robin


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[geraldrobins]

It ma

One of the problems being virtually all who turn up from other countries whether EU or the rest of the world don't have the funds to buy a home so go to the top of any housing lists particularly when children are involved.

This can upset many of our own UK residents who also cannot afford homes but are already in accommodation many with their parents.

It is also very difficult to get homes built even with the relaxed rules.

How many of us would truthfully think excellent if a housing estate was planned opposite to our own homes?

Not in my back yard.

I'm not sticking up for TM but I was speaking to a friend of mine who is a LibDem MP regarding this and it was always extremely difficult to expel anyone from the country as the first thing they did was find a solicitor who did legal aid and then began the long and expensive road through the courts.

The rules have changed now re legal aid I believe.

We need migration but we do need breathing space with 200.000 or so a year coming in it's never going to ease up.

And I would fight tooth and nail if a housing estate was planned opposite my home.

How many on here would truthfully say fine I like housing estates and welcome it and yet we do need homes.

I also love the countryside so would rather this was not spoilt.

Maybe Scotland should step up loads of space there.

Only kidding I love the scots and envy their beautiful land.

I'm not against immigration but it must be managed, had this been done Brexit I suspect would not have happened.

Robin


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk[/QU

It may surprise you but a lot of us live on housing estates.

 

[LostKiwi]

One of the problems being virtually all who turn up from other countries whether EU or the rest of the world don't have the funds to buy a home so go to the top of any housing lists particularly when children are involved.

This can upset many of our own UK residents who also cannot afford homes but are already in accommodation many with their parents.

It is also very difficult to get homes built even with the relaxed rules.

How many of us would truthfully think excellent if a housing estate was planned opposite to our own homes?

Not in my back yard.

I'm not sticking up for TM but I was speaking to a friend of mine who is a LibDem MP regarding this and it was always extremely difficult to expel anyone from the country as the first thing they did was find a solicitor who did legal aid and then began the long and expensive road through the courts.

The rules have changed now re legal aid I believe.

We need migration but we do need breathing space with 200.000 or so a year coming in it's never going to ease up.

And I would fight tooth and nail if a housing estate was planned opposite my home.

How many on here would truthfully say fine I like housing estates and welcome it and yet we do need homes.

I also love the countryside so would rather this was not spoilt.

Maybe Scotland should step up loads of space there.

Only kidding I love the scots and envy their beautiful land.

I'm not against immigration but it must be managed, had this been done Brexit I suspect would not have happened.

Robin


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

The point remains the government couldn't control the non EU immigration before Brexit. Why should we believe they'll be any better after Brexit with the whole world out there?

 

[Frontstep]

This may be true but what

This may be true but what about areas where affordable housing is in short supply.

The same applies stopping the money is the only way.
People will have to live elsewhere.
Some Landlords will offer a shed if they can get money for it.
Either that or let people live where they like and pay what they like and the state withdraws entirely.

 

[malcolm E53 AMG]

The point remains the government couldn't control the non EU immigration before Brexit. Why should we believe they'll be any better after Brexit with the whole world out there?

Politics or politicians you may have noticed never move quickly and it takes time to manoeuvre the labiyithan in the right direction. Post Brexit our laws on who is eligible for what regarding immigration will be refined to stop immigrants entering the UK without a job, stopping immediate benefits immigrants are currently entitled to and health tourism. The goal is that only those with the right skills or fill a need in the job market will be allowed in against the free for all we have with the EU at the moment.

Our immigration policy with the rest of the world has never been a problem in so far that we can if we wish turn the tap on or off.

The people have spoken and the government have a mandate to achieve the above which won't be easy but necessary

 

[Headhurts]

The point remains the government couldn't control the non EU immigration before Brexit. Why should we believe they'll be any better after Brexit with the whole world out there?

You are correct but of course from now onwards we can vote them out so it's in their interest to follow the wishes of the electorate.

Robin


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Xtractorfan]

Please expand your comment that it was mostly landlords, which you refer to as unscrupulous, that benefited from council house sales. As I understand it only council house tenants could buy council houses at a discount. Those that then sold them on, sold them at market prices. And why do you refer to landlords as unscrupulous.

I know of many investors who became landlords and bought up Council houses...The way to do it was to find a Family who needed a few quid, or more frequently, a live alone, unemployed, dole dependant, drink loving, 3day giro lasting, party loving individual.
They would be in pubs or the off licence on pay day...put to them a proposition. I will buy your house and give you £200.... £50 when you apply to buy the house, £50 when you are accepted and I will get you the mortgage.... The other 100 when its all done and dusted...
The lure of money has a fantastic way of bringing lowlifes to the surface but only so they can grab as much as they can for themselves.
The safeguards put in place were never meant to protect the housing stock, but only to ally the fears of the Great British public.
If there were to be an investigation into council house sales, It would amazing to find out how many former councillors became overnight landlords when Maggie announced her amazing sell off.

 

[geraldrobins]

I know of many investors who became landlords and bought up Council houses...The way to do it was to find a Family who needed a few quid, or more frequently, a live alone, unemployed, dole dependant, drink loving, 3day giro lasting, party loving individual.
They would be in pubs or the off licence on pay day...put to them a proposition. I will buy your house and give you £200.... £50 when you apply to buy the house, £50 when you are accepted and I will get you the mortgage.... The other 100 when its all done and dusted...
The lure of money has a fantastic way of bringing lowlifes to the surface but only so they can grab as much as they can for themselves.
The safeguards put in place were never meant to protect the housing stock, but only to ally the fears of the Great British public.
If there were to be an investigation into council house sales, It would amazing to find out how many former councillors became overnight landlords when Maggie announced her amazing sell off.

Thanks for your opinion.

 

[Headhurts]

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[LostKiwi]

Politics or politicians you may have noticed never move quickly and it takes time to manoeuvre the labiyithan in the right direction. Post Brexit our laws on who is eligible for what regarding immigration will be refined to stop immigrants entering the UK without a job, stopping immediate benefits immigrants are currently entitled to and health tourism. The goal is that only those with the right skills or fill a need in the job market will be allowed in against the free for all we have with the EU at the moment.

Our immigration policy with the rest of the world has never been a problem in so far that we can if we wish turn the tap on or off.

The people have spoken and the government have a mandate to achieve the above which won't be easy but necessary

I refer to earlier posts.
1. 81% of EU immigrants have jobs
2. Only 61% of non EU immigrants have jobs.

We have always been able to make our own rules on non EU immigrants yet we allow more in without jobs than we do those we 'have to accept' from the EU.
If we were serious about reducing those immigrants dependent on the state why did we not do it years ago by restricting non-EU immigrants more?

 

[LostKiwi]

You are correct but of course from now onwards we can vote them out so it's in their interest to follow the wishes of the electorate.

Robin


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

We always could vote them out....

 

[Yugguy]

Could we? I can vote my toothless MEP out, and if I lived in May"s constituency I could vote her out. Can't do much about Juncker.

 

[Craiglxviii]

I refer to earlier posts.
1. 81% of EU immigrants have jobs
2. Only 61% of non EU immigrants have jobs.

We have always been able to make our own rules on non EU immigrants yet we allow more in without jobs than we do those we 'have to accept' from the EU.
If we were serious about reducing those immigrants dependent on the state why did we not do it years ago by restricting non-EU immigrants more?

This is quite the peccant part of the argument (bold). We have always been able to make our own rules (and interpret those rules imposed by the EU in a fairly broad "range")- yet we choose to make our rules seemingly unattractive to the electorate, and interpret the imposed rules in as strict a sense as can be imagined. These points were all made, mainly by EU officials- in the run-up to the referendum.

What can be done about it? Well, firstly, making our own rules and implementing them. It is my understanding that the government shies away from what would be a "courageous" decision (made-up examples btw)- e.g. removing the right to vote for those existing solely on state benefits, requiring those on state benefits to contribute n hours per week to some form of community aid work, etc. They shy away from them because they are instant vote losers, and/or/also because there are enough hand-wringing liberals with enough of a voice in the media to make the collective population feel horrendously guilty about such a draconian measure- as a country we do espouse the whole fairness meme. So, one thing that we as a nation need to do is instill, or have instilled into our hearts some measure of steely resolve to go ahead with policies that are to the clear benefit of the U.K. before, over and above any other nation. We used to do this, we have become soft.

Secondly, the interpretation of policies imposed on us. I forget which particular agricultural policy it was now, but there was one- the labeling of cheese it might have been- which HMG required very strict adherence to- all cheeses produced and sold within the UK required very close labeling for all sorts of data. The French chose to interpret that policy with significantly more... latitude, shall we say. As a result, UK dairy farmers & cheesemakers bore in some cases a significantly increased administrative overhead just to ensure that the data was captured and labels applied correctly. Only ourselves to blame. What can we do about this? Simple, we interpret and apply policies that benefit the U.K. before, over and above any other nation.

 

[LostKiwi]

Could we? I can vote my toothless MEP out, and if I lived in May"s constituency I could vote her out. Can't do much about Juncker.

2/3rds of the legislative houses in the EU have members who were voted for in one way or another by the UK population and the final 1/3 was appointed for a fixed term by those we voted in. In many ways this is not much different to the way the PM is selected from the MPs (or the way senior officials in the Civil Service are selected or indeed the House of Lords and more democratic than the Queen!).

We had the ability to remove any of those we voted for directly. Not much we could do about the others but we always knew their term would end and could put pressure on those who appointed not to repeat the mistake.

How many of us here even knew who our MEP was? The greatest danger to democracy is apathy and when it came to the EU elections the population were very apathetic. You only need to look at the turnouts compared to other EU members.

http://www.ukpolitical.info/european-parliament-election-turnout.htm

And yes IF you lived in May's constituency you could vote her out. Not much help to the rest of the country that doesn't.

 

[PovertySpec]

"we interpret and apply policies that benefit the U.K. before, over and above any other nation"

The EU isn't a nation.

Now I've gone and ruined my no politics, no religion policy

 

[Craiglxviii]

"we interpret and apply policies that benefit the U.K. before, over and above any other nation"

The EU isn't a nation.

Now I've gone and ruined my no politics, no religion policy

...... yet.