As someone who has lived in a 'mixed block' in zone 1, I think it's delusional to characterise social housing tenants as 'teachers and nurses'. I suspect most teachers and nurses are already in private sector housing in London.
I think it could be OK to sell all social hosing in Zone 1/2 and use that money to pay higher wages for teachers and nurses plus state built replacement social housing in zone 4-6. There's probably some other space in the welfare system, look at the motability scandal or the increase in PIP claims.
ETA: there are possibly five hundred schools in Zone 2 alone. That is maybe 35,000 school staff you're saying should not be socially housed in about 35 square miles. They all have to commute in because, why?
Seriously social housing is not teachers and nurses, you'd know this if you'd lived in or amongst it.
Let's assume for a moment it is teachers and nurses. You think that they shouldn't be allowed a sallery that enables them to live in private accommodation? To choose from the whole market, get a mortgage with their partner wherever they chose? I think that's such a problematic view and builds a horrible society. I'd like teaching to be a well paid profession, why's that such a bad thing?
That's fine that should stay as social housing then. It's probably even better this way as it's still possible to place people who for example absolutely have to be in kensington or islington there.
Comments
As someone who has lived in a 'mixed block' in zone 1, I think it's delusional to characterise social housing tenants as 'teachers and nurses'. I suspect most teachers and nurses are already in private sector housing in London.
I think it could be OK to sell all social hosing in Zone 1/2 and use that money to pay higher wages for teachers and nurses plus state built replacement social housing in zone 4-6. There's probably some other space in the welfare system, look at the motability scandal or the increase in PIP claims.
Dame Shirley is that you? I thought you died last month.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2026/may/05/dame-shirley...
ETA: there are possibly five hundred schools in Zone 2 alone. That is maybe 35,000 school staff you're saying should not be socially housed in about 35 square miles. They all have to commute in because, why?
Seriously social housing is not teachers and nurses, you'd know this if you'd lived in or amongst it.
Let's assume for a moment it is teachers and nurses. You think that they shouldn't be allowed a sallery that enables them to live in private accommodation? To choose from the whole market, get a mortgage with their partner wherever they chose? I think that's such a problematic view and builds a horrible society. I'd like teaching to be a well paid profession, why's that such a bad thing?
You're putting a whole lot of words into my mouth that I didn't say. Offensively so, frankly. So I am not otherwise going to reply to this.
A lot of social housing in the UK (about 45%) isn't owned by councils so can't really be sold off by the state?
That's fine that should stay as social housing then. It's probably even better this way as it's still possible to place people who for example absolutely have to be in kensington or islington there.
Social housing is the council budget - I was referring to Housing Benefit.
Isn't it part of the problem that these are two sides of the same coin, yet owned by different people.
What would happen to the people who live in the houses?
I assume you would build the new social hosing, move folks over then you'll be able to sell the zone 1 houses they came out of and so on and so forth.