Social Housing Reforms are a necessity not a choice

Does removing secured tenancy, from social housing tenants equate to removing security or allowing for flexibility?

The arguments – that there are people currently living in social housing who are able to rent privately but opt not to, there are also those who their housing needs have changed, but are still renting a larger accommodations than they need and of course there are those who need to move, due to better employment or family commitments, to a different Local Authority or City but can’t, because they are fearful of losing their accumulated housing entitlements, or worth having to restart in sheltered accommodations to re-qualify for a permanent dwelling – are genuine and serious.

The Big Society government, in my opinion, will never knowingly legislate adversely against the weakest and neediest in our country. It was Compassionate Conservatism and Thatcher who gave council housing tenants the right to buy in the first place, a system that saw hard working people in low and middle incomes own their homes and pass it on to their families.

Through the years social housing needs has increased and the demand has steadily out stripped supply – the previous government, to cope and curb demands, has reformed the entitlement and the allowances given – but still the needs kept on increasing.

There is no escaping that the current system needs to be reformed, but to do that, even in the fairest and most just manner some people will be affected unfavorably.

Change is not always easy, plus not everyone likes it – but also there are those with hidden agendas, and for them any talk of change is an opportunity to protest.