Comments on immigrant benefits

I see the green eyed monster has reared its head again! 🤣

If we can afford it, we can spend our hard earned money as we choose. If that means buying a second property to rent to local people then I think that’s a very positive move. They get a pristine property at a very reasonable rent in a nice, quiet area after long waits on the council list. Any problem in the property is dealt with in 24 hours and they get their own parking and a lovely walled garden for privacy. One couple stayed 13 years and in all that time we only put the rent up once by a few £. They were great tenants and we are great landlords. People like us are providing a valuable service to local people.

Yes in a nutshell notspaghetti.

That’s exactly what I’m afraid will happen.

And yet others who don’t want that either just aggravate things but dismissing people and their problems.

foxie 48....your post at 9.05 raises some good points....I don't agree with them all but this didn't all happen under a Reform government did it...

Doodledog

I agree that more homes need to be built, and that people should be ‘allowed’ to buy what they like - who is disallowing anyone?

What I am saying is that blaming immigrants for a housing shortage when existing citizens can have more than one home seems to me to be missing a very important contributing factor. I am not saying that from a position of envy - why would that be the conclusion anyone would jump to??

You said it was unjust that some should have second homes.

I think it's an absolute mess and the rage is palpable and I can well comprehend it.

I do not think Reform are one bit interested in helping though.
People from GB news poking around a neglected ex mining village don't help one bit.

Foxie 09.05 hear, hear!

The inequality of some people owning two (or more) houses, when many folk don’t have a roof over their heads, is also part of the problem.

But let’s get everyone to look at immigrants rather than inequality!

Absolutely, foxie. Housing is a big issue in many areas, quite unrelated to immigration.
I live in a popular seaside town and a significant number of homes, small and large, are run as Airb&bs, which can be more profitable to the landlord than renting to a local person.
In addition, some of the new builds ( of which we have many) have been acquired by London boroughs to accommodate families on their waiting lists. Very few properties have been constructed for social housing for local people.
All of this has created a massive problem with housing which is unrelated to immigrants, but would require a long term strategy to solve. It's much easier to blame someone else for local, and national government shortcomings .

"Feeling overlooked and angry?" - punish Cameron, vote for Brexit.

"Feeling overlooked and angry?" - punish Starmer, vote Reform.

Absolutely Foxie. It is what Reform does well. And listening to the concerns of people who living there is what the other Parties do very, very badly.

Dismissing those concerns doesn’t improve things for anyone. It just adds fuel to the flames.

foxie48

Blaming the housing of a relatively small number of immigrants in a county like Cornwall is a good example of what Reform does extremely well. It finds a convenient and visable scapegoat which then takes the spotlight off what really lies at the heart of the housing problem. We have had decades of under investment in our housing stock, sold off council houses, failed to provide suitable employment in areas of deprivation and allowed the cost of housing people to spiral out of control because basically it suits the better off in society. With many people having most of their wealth invested in the home they live in, it suits them for house prices to stay high and inheritance tax to enable them to pass on most if not all of the value to their children, so let's blame immigrants instead!

Excellent post. Thanks, foxie 👏👏👏

^ Shouldn’t the B and B family get the house and the newly arrived get the BandB? Take their place on the list like everyone else?^

I suspect that whichever way round it’s done it would be weaponised as ‘not fair’ by Reform and similar parties.

It's years since I worked in "housing" in any way but local connection was always part of the decision, MartavTaurus
I'm sure it still is.

Blaming the housing of a relatively small number of immigrants in a county like Cornwall is a good example of what Reform does extremely well. It finds a convenient and visable scapegoat which then takes the spotlight off what really lies at the heart of the housing problem. We have had decades of under investment in our housing stock, sold off council houses, failed to provide suitable employment in areas of deprivation and allowed the cost of housing people to spiral out of control because basically it suits the better off in society. With many people having most of their wealth invested in the home they live in, it suits them for house prices to stay high and inheritance tax to enable them to pass on most if not all of the value to their children, so let's blame immigrants instead!

Perhaps it’s the points system that needs revising then.

Why does a family newly arrived from overseas score higher and get the house, than a family who have been living in a one room B and B until a house becomes available?

Shouldn’t the B and B family get the house and the newly arrived get the BandB? Take their place on the list like everyone else?

It’s that kind of unfairness, the feeling that you don’t matter, that causes resentment.

It’s a dilemma because my work experience was it became difficult to house vulnerable family members near family because they weren’t vulnerable enough points wise.

It is a huge predicament. No wonder it creates resentment because it doesn't take into account local people's past and present attachment to an area, both in emotional and in practical terms. Also their future longevity in the area is more guaranteed than passing migrants, equally vulnerable I do admit, who will no doubt be moved on.

But I guess on paper there's no room for sentiment, or even longterm sense.

Doodledog

I do see what you’re saying Lathyrus. I just think it’s part of a bigger picture, but I also understand that I am seeing it from the perspective of someone who is comfortably housed.

It shouldn’t come down to either/or - there should be housing for all who need it, but that can only happen if people can only have one each. I’m not really talking about residential rentals ;although I think that market should be strictly regulated), but houses that stay empty a lot of the time, and Air B&Bs.

Actually I agree with everything you’ve said there about housing. But it just adds to the feeling of nobody in Government is prepared to act to do anything about this. The build more homes that clearly isn’t working.

I read an article yesterday reflecting on Brexit which said that many people who voted leave did so because nobody would listen when they spoke of the problems they were experiencing.

I think the same thing is happening now and it’s this, if anything, that will bring Reform to power. Reform are very skilled in reflecting back what they hear people saying, rather than dismissing them as they f no account or virtuously lecturing them on what dreadful people they are

Most housing association and council schemes operate on a points priority scheme. It’s no surprise therefore that asylum seekers or those with approval to stay have more points than local residents.
It’s a dilemma because my work experience was it became difficult to house vulnerable family members near family because they weren’t vulnerable enough points wise

There's actually a lot more than 46 houses in Cornwall lying empty and boarded up on new building estates. They could be made readily available for locals as a priority instead of buying up other properties in which to house migrants.

These new estates have been left in limbo due mainly to spiralling costs and rows over planning. Surely the best thing would be to step in and finance their completion in order to use them as social housing for local people? If the money is available to buy 46 houses, then be creative and use it to help deal with the needs of the community first and foremost.

Put simply the needs of local people should be prioritised in order to reduce poverty in the area. This would then have a knock on effect in other ways, whereas 46 x however many migrants per house won't create activity and growth within the community.

Immigration is not the issue for them said someone of the article discussed - but it is obviously an additional problem as the Nigerian families who moved in have been pelted with eggs and so on.

Horden remains one of the least ethnically diverse areas in the UK, 98.1% White (predominantly White British).

I do see what you’re saying Lathyrus. I just think it’s part of a bigger picture, but I also understand that I am seeing it from the perspective of someone who is comfortably housed.

It shouldn’t come down to either/or - there should be housing for all who need it, but that can only happen if people can only have one each. I’m not really talking about residential rentals ;although I think that market should be strictly regulated), but houses that stay empty a lot of the time, and Air B&Bs.

I guess the bottom line is that they are more in need than local residents.
The 46 houses in Cornwall will be handed back for social housing when no longer needed, (whenever that might be?!). Surely that makes the locals feel even more overlooked and like the lowest priority in their own community?

I don’t think it’s blaming immigrants for the housing shortage. The question is why when there is a shortage should newly arrived immigrants be given priority over residents who have waited for years.

I couldn’t justify that to anyone so I like to hear why anyone thinks that should be so.

Back to the original post.

The OP and a number if those who followed was concerned by anti immigration rhetoric and the possibility of Reform being the next government.

I share her concern.

She made reference to Hitler and the scapegoating of sections of the community.

He was able to do that because the ordinary people of his country were struggling with the necessities of their everyday lives and perceived a basic unfairness in the way they were treated.

If we don’t want something similar to happen, that basic injustice that people are feeling has to be tackled.

People mostly operate in a personal level. 46 new homes for migrants doesn’t sound like much, but it feels unfair when you have been waiting for five years and have been told there is no money to build a home for you, but there is for someone who has just arrived.

Must people vote on the basis of the quality of their own life.

MartavTaurus

On second homes in Cornwall, (I own one), there is a 2nd home owners scheme where we can make a direct, voluntary contribution to support those locals with housing needs in Cornwall. I believe several millions have been collected, in addition to the higher second home tax now charged.

I recognise that I am very lucky to own a second home in Cornwall, when for others daily life in the county can be a challenge. However, my understanding is that locals feel resentment on both counts, but they feel that at least 2nd home owners are providing them with some support, beyond the welcome drawing in of tourists, unlike the homeless migrants who bring nothing to the community.

We have a small second property which we have owned for about 18 years. We rent it out to locals who stand no chance on council housing lists. Between tenants we did holiday lets for 3 years.

There is no way on this earth I would rent it to immigrants even though I could get much more money from the council. The neighbours are all lovely and would not be happy.

I agree that more homes need to be built, and that people should be ‘allowed’ to buy what they like - who is disallowing anyone?

What I am saying is that blaming immigrants for a housing shortage when existing citizens can have more than one home seems to me to be missing a very important contributing factor. I am not saying that from a position of envy - why would that be the conclusion anyone would jump to??