London Mayor Boris Johnson has made changes to his London Plan, which means that any borough wanting City Hall money to build homes for ‘affordable rent’ must abide by London-wide rent caps of no more than 80% of market rate and maintain an average across the city of 65% of market rate. This has been criticised by the Planning Inspector and prompted an impassioned debate by councils of all political colours and some London Assembly members, because:
- councils want to be able to set their own rents to reflect their local housing situation
- even 65% of market rate in some boroughs is ridiculously high
Labour opposed these measures in a Plenary Session of the greater London Authority but failed to get TWO-THIRDS majority required to overturn it.
London Boroughs opposed the move (what about the City of London?) and cite the National Planning Policy Framework 2012
London Boroughs opposed the move (what about the City of London?) and cite the National Planning Policy Framework 2012
Joint boroughs REMA response
To which I would only add - who pays these rents anyway? Where households are on low incomes (and 16% of working Londoners earn below a Living Wage) or are unemployed, then taxpayers pick up the tab through Housing Benefit
Housing Benefit cuts already mean that people are going hungry to pay for housing http://www.london.gov.uk/sites/default/files/A%20Zero%20Hunger%20City.doc.pdf . So the mayors policy would appear to attack taxpayers by making them pay more housing benefits whilst attacking the poor - because their benefits are too low to pay for housing -- and all to benefit landlords who are increasing absentee and live abroad (75% of new-build London homes are sold to oversees investors). Thereby, he will suck money out of those least able to pay - to fling it at any foreign speculator.
The upshot is a profound change in the nature of an already "overheated" capital economy, with the poor exiled to a "cursed earth" penumbra of marginalised "poor areas" -- similar to the ring of poor suburbs around Paris that have proven to be so hard to police. Not a landscape of human values
To which I would only add - who pays these rents anyway? Where households are on low incomes (and 16% of working Londoners earn below a Living Wage) or are unemployed, then taxpayers pick up the tab through Housing Benefit
Housing Benefit cuts already mean that people are going hungry to pay for housing http://www.london.gov.uk/sites/default/files/A%20Zero%20Hunger%20City.doc.pdf . So the mayors policy would appear to attack taxpayers by making them pay more housing benefits whilst attacking the poor - because their benefits are too low to pay for housing -- and all to benefit landlords who are increasing absentee and live abroad (75% of new-build London homes are sold to oversees investors). Thereby, he will suck money out of those least able to pay - to fling it at any foreign speculator.
The upshot is a profound change in the nature of an already "overheated" capital economy, with the poor exiled to a "cursed earth" penumbra of marginalised "poor areas" -- similar to the ring of poor suburbs around Paris that have proven to be so hard to police. Not a landscape of human values
i dont agree with the mayor's idea. this is nuts!
ReplyDeleteGuaranteed Rent London