Hodge on Housing

red flagger Sun May 20, 2007 at 06:30:31 PM GMT Print-friendly version Facebook

Margaret Hodge has appeared once again, making some comments regarding housing and immigration.



http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6673911.stm

Your thoughts on this?

tags: , , (all tags)

Display: Sort:
Hodge on Housing | 49 comments (49 topical)

Re: Hodge on Housing (#1)

by otware on Sun May 20, 2007 at 07:41:02 PM GMT

Whenever Margaret Hodge rears her head you know there's gonna be trouble. Look what she did in the local elections last year! She should be deselected. She's a useless airhead who constantly drones on and on about the BNP - but inadvertently ends up helping them.


Re: Hodge on Housing (#2)

by JR on Sun May 20, 2007 at 08:50:41 PM GMT

Can't stand Margaret Hodge. She's got this one wrong.


Re: Hodge on Housing (#3)

by red flagger on Sun May 20, 2007 at 09:07:44 PM GMT

Does anyone like Hodge? Speaking from my left-wing viewpoint, I take exception to her move from one-time 'leftist' class-warrior to all-out Blairite.


[ Parent ]

Re: Hodge on Housing (#5)

by otware on Sun May 20, 2007 at 09:47:06 PM GMT

Left and right united in disgust and horror at Margaret Hodge. What has the world come to? =)


[ Parent ]

Re: Hodge on Housing (#6)

by petercoe on Sun May 20, 2007 at 11:00:40 PM GMT

Sorry JR - you think she's got wanting to give greater priority to long-standing British families over economic migrants in our housing allocations system wrong? Seriously? I think she's right - but she's not going far enough.

The fact that Gordon Brown is claiming that affordable housing is a "new" challenge (the biggest gaffe his slick campaign has made, surely?) either shows how out of touch he/his government is or how negligent he has been for ten years on this particular subject.

Hodge can likewise be criticised for finally noticing that there's a problem here, but not for her (limited) suggestions for rectifying it.


[ Parent ]

Re: Hodge on Housing (#7)

by JR on Mon May 21, 2007 at 12:08:59 AM GMT

My logic is if immigrants have come here legally to work and the British government has accepted them and they will be paying British tax, then they should be entitled to the same benefits as British citizens.


[ Parent ]

Re: Hodge on Housing (#8)

by doctordunc on Mon May 21, 2007 at 12:24:21 AM GMT

Your logic is right, JR. Or I think so anyway. Peter - you say it's not going far enough: what would you do? I agree housing is a massive issue, but I disagree this is a helpful way of tackling it. I also fail to see how Hodge feels that people the people are going to be more tolerant just because the government is less so.


[ Parent ]

Re: Hodge on Housing (#11)

by Glass House on Mon May 21, 2007 at 11:36:59 AM GMT

I don't pretend to understand the minutia of Housing allocation, but I can tell you that on the whole people's tolerance is linked to their sense of 'fair play'.

People are willing to tolerate most things if they believe that the people they are tolerating are not getting special treatment.

I suggest we all read David Goodhart's Guardian article from a few years ago again. I remember reading it in the Student's Union at University and feeling that it was physically shaking me out of my leftish complacency.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/race/story/0,11374,1154684,00.html


[ Parent ]

Re: Hodge on Housing (#19)

by petercoe on Mon May 21, 2007 at 01:30:00 PM GMT

This is *exactly* the point: the rise of the BNP hasn't come about because people have suddenly become racist; but because all the evidence they see before them tells them that they are not on a level playing field when it comes to housing allocations and they're right.

What then happens is that parties like the BNP exploit that instinctive feeling of unfairness and blow the issue out of all proportion - there's no doubt they do that, but they can only succeed because it exists in the first place.

JR: your assertion that anyone who meets a basic qualification - in this case being a taxpayer - is absurd: that's not how the system works now. All sorts of discrimination (which I suspect you'll have no problem with) is inherent in the system: for example the requirement that existing tenants in rent arrears are ineligible for transfers until they're cleared. That's discriminatory but hardly unreasonable, is it?

Not everyone can get on the housing register - again, discriminatory but given the woeful shortfall in affordable housing a necessity.

But the reason there is such a problem is that in all council housing departments there is a housing register, ranked by priority. It is the means of assessing priority that is the problem: if the sole criterion was length of time in the queue then no matter how urgent an individual's housing need is, they'd at least feel that "waiting one's turn" is a fair way to go about allocating homes.

But that's not what happens. Other factors distort the queue - in many cases unjustifiably. Extra points are rarely allocated for length of time on the register, so all that happens is that families who wouldn't dream of complaining see people pushing in ahead of them and their chance of getting housed slipping further into the distance.

Of course there are legitimate other factors beyond length of time on the list that should afford priority, and part of the sense of injustice that has arisen over housing is the arrogant way housing departments don't feel any duty to explain how allocations work to the people awaiting homes. That, coupled with the fact that too many times what I would call illegitimate factors are awarded priority, has produced this situation.


[ Parent ]

Re: Hodge on Housing (#17)

by grimupnorth on Mon May 21, 2007 at 01:00:52 PM GMT

absolutely right, JR!


[ Parent ]

Re: Hodge on Housing (#18)

by Glass House on Mon May 21, 2007 at 01:11:21 PM GMT

There's a difference between being a citizen and being a taxpayer.


[ Parent ]

Re: Hodge on Housing (#10)

by grimupnorth on Mon May 21, 2007 at 10:44:36 AM GMT

Just had text from friend to say that she was given loads of gyp this morning on GMTV from John McDonnell. The woman is appalling and so is this policy.Will someone wake me up from this nightamre.......


[ Parent ]

Re: Hodge on Housing (#15)

by Curlew on Mon May 21, 2007 at 12:48:20 PM GMT

No. 10 are backing her JR. Now why doesn't that surprise me?


[ Parent ]

Re: Hodge on Housing (#20)

by petercoe on Mon May 21, 2007 at 01:31:12 PM GMT

Perhaps because the left is so used to stabbing each other in the back (as you've so evidently just demonstrated over the leadership election) that you find the government standing behind one of its ministers a subject for derision?


[ Parent ]

Re: Hodge on Housing (#26)

by Curlew on Mon May 21, 2007 at 03:19:17 PM GMT

"as you've so evidently just demonstrated over the leadership election" I don't think I have.


[ Parent ]

Re: Hodge on Housing (#33)

by JR on Mon May 21, 2007 at 08:00:03 PM GMT

Why is that relevant to me? I forgot that all lefties are saints and can do no wrong.


[ Parent ]

Re: Hodge on Housing (#4)

by jkitleft on Sun May 20, 2007 at 09:17:37 PM GMT

I can't stand Hodge either, paticuarly her comment about MG Rover workers.


Re: Hodge on Housing (#9)

by swatantra on Mon May 21, 2007 at 09:49:46 AM GMT

Oh dear! Hodge has dropped us in it again, in a futile effort to save her own skin. What did we spend all of March and April, if not trying to counter the claims of thr BNP about immigration and housing. And now Hodge is subscribing to those very same views. Hodge? Probably rhe best publicity material for the BNP going.


Re: Hodge on Housing (#12)

by LiamM on Mon May 21, 2007 at 11:50:14 AM GMT

Hodge's statement is totally disgusting and difficult to differentiate from those of the BNP. The answer is of course not to decide who gets housed on the basis of race, but to build more houses! However she even seemed to go as far as saying that 'local' residents should be housed before immigrants EVEN if the immigrants need was greater! Was she thinking 'how can I boost the BNP's vote?' or whaT?


[ Parent ]

Re: Hodge on Housing (#13)

by Glass House on Mon May 21, 2007 at 11:58:53 AM GMT

Hodge didn't say anything about allocating housing on the basis of race. To imply that she did is quite simply a lie.


[ Parent ]

Re: Hodge on Housing (#14)

by LiamM on Mon May 21, 2007 at 12:45:17 PM GMT

Apologies. Slip of the tongue. I was obviously thinking how similar to the BNP she sounded. She did say this though. Should we not be allocating on the basis of need rather than localism? Hodge: We prioritise the needs of an individual migrant family over the entitlement others feel they have. So a recently arrived family with four or five children living in a damp and overcrowded, privately rented flat with the children suffering from asthma will usually get priority over a family with less housing need who have lived in the area for three generations and are stuck at home with the grandparents. We should look at policies where the legitimate sense of entitlement felt by the indigenous family overrides the legitimate need demonstrated by the new migrants."


[ Parent ]

Re: Hodge on Housing (#16)

by Glass House on Mon May 21, 2007 at 12:59:06 PM GMT

Can we also be clear that we're talking about economic migrant families, not asylum seekers. They have created their own housing need by coming here - is it right that their decision to move to the UK should keep resident families (of any race) out of housing.

I know there's nuance to this - I'm only arguing Hodge's side because no one else here is - but if you move to another country, shouldn't you think about your needs before you get there, rather than expecting the state to do it for you.


[ Parent ]

Re: Hodge on Housing (#22)

by otware on Mon May 21, 2007 at 01:50:38 PM GMT

I see your point, but why should it matter where you come from? I don't see a problem with hosuing being allocated according to need. I do, however, see a problem if the local family can't get a home and the migrant family can. The problem is a lack of housing, not the way the housing is allocated. If we were to build more council houses then this wouldn't be such an issue in the first place.


[ Parent ]

Re: Hodge on Housing (#21)

by donpaskini on Mon May 21, 2007 at 01:45:44 PM GMT

First off, it is utter nonsense to argue as Hodge does that changing the housing allocations system will reduce resentment. In the area where I used to be a councillor, there were 5,000 families on the waiting list (that was after removing everyone who didn't have a hope of getting housed by the local authority - many of whom were also local) and about 100 properties per year which became available. Simple maths shows that even if everyone who is housed is from a local family, most people still won't be able to get the housing that they feel an entitlement to. So they will assume that the government and council are just lying. Tackling the housing crisis involves building more houses - it's not actually a very difficult area of policy. What Hodge is arguing would mean changing allocations policy to allow more white people to be housed at the expense of non-white people. If it didn't do that, then it wouldn't achieve the aims that she set out in her article, to increase the perceived fairness of the system. The only practical effect would be that people in the most desperate need have to take their chances with the worst private landlords or sleep rough. It is an absolutely repellent idea, and hopefully will help make sure she gets sacked when Brown takes over.


[ Parent ]

Re: Hodge on Housing (#23)

by Glass House on Mon May 21, 2007 at 02:07:39 PM GMT

Again, someone is trying to imply this is about race. Hodge is clearly not trying to say that white people should get preference.

This is about residency, not race.


[ Parent ]

Re: Hodge on Housing (#24)

by donpaskini on Mon May 21, 2007 at 02:17:00 PM GMT

It isn't really about residency if it is intended to respond to public concern. People in Barking and elsewhere complain about 'immigrants being given council houses', and use examples which turn out to be private houses (sold 20 years ago under right to buy) being bought by people who were born in the UK but who aren't white. She links it to the feelings of uncertainty caused by areas becoming multi-racial. Anyway, would you accept that changing allocations policies achieve nothing if there is a big shortage of social housing isn't built, and are irrelevant if we had enough social housing? That's kind of the point.


[ Parent ]

Re: Hodge on Housing (#25)

by Glass House on Mon May 21, 2007 at 02:30:33 PM GMT

Of course she links it the feelings of uncertainty caused by areas becoming multi-racial! It's all part of a wider issue.

Not everyone is cosmopolitan and feels naturally comfortable about the current fast pace of change. Some are scared - they need to be reassured that they are not being treated unfairly, not assumed to be ignorant or racist.


[ Parent ]

Re: Hodge on Housing (#27)

by doctordunc on Mon May 21, 2007 at 05:31:21 PM GMT

But these comments from Hodge do the opposite; they go some way to legitimising the feeling that they are being treated unfairly (because a government minister appears to say so) and does little or nothing in the way of reassurance.


[ Parent ]

Re: Hodge on Housing (#28)

by petercoe on Mon May 21, 2007 at 05:42:21 PM GMT

Except that the alternative: to dismiss peoples' grievances out of hand as misguided, prejudiced, racist and stupid (or worse, not even to engage with people who have these concerns) is precisely what enables the BNP to take root.

You may feel that all the above descriptions apply to (predominantly, but far from exclusively) white complainants about the lack of housing - but ignoring the problem does no good.

Of course part of the answer is to build new homes - the Thames Gateway is part of this and relevant to Hodge's constituency; but it's highly unlikely we're ever going to have a glut of affordable housing (at least in the south east) so it'll never be as simple as let's pile up a few more of the quite delightful concrete tower blocks that beautify London and which people are desperate to move into.

And to the earlier comment about whether a new family in urgent need of housing should take priority over a long-term family in bearable accommodation, the answer is yes they should BUT far greater weight should be given to length of time on the register as one of the criteria for awarding housing points than currently is. That way people can be fairly certain that they will eventually be housed - they just don't have that at present.


[ Parent ]

Re: Hodge on Housing (#29)

by Glass House on Mon May 21, 2007 at 05:43:53 PM GMT

Doesn't it actually show that the government acknowledges their concerns? And that it isn't "against them are for the immigrants" as the BNP would like to imply?


[ Parent ]

Re: Hodge on Housing (#30)

by Glass House on Mon May 21, 2007 at 05:44:19 PM GMT

that should have been... "against them and for the immigrants"


[ Parent ]

Re: Hodge on Housing (#31)

by doctordunc on Mon May 21, 2007 at 05:57:50 PM GMT

I think it suggests that 'even the government' accept that 'the system' is 'against them and for the immigrants' and that's a big concern. Yes, you have to take people's concerns seriously, but you don't have to agree with their analysis of their concerns. Most people don't know who is prioritised above them in housing lists, they just know that they haven't been housed and somebody else has, and it will always seem unfair. I agree it's a good idea for decisions to be as transparent as possible. Obviously there needs to be as much available housing as possible. But we shouldn't cede any ground to the BNP.


[ Parent ]

Re: Hodge on Housing (#32)

by Glass House on Mon May 21, 2007 at 06:12:01 PM GMT

I honestly don't think this is seeding ground to the BNP.

If the system as it stands does not give enough clout to the length of time people have spent on the list, then that should be changed in the interests of fairness. It would also have the benefit of encouraging people who have come here voluntarily to work to think about where they will live before arriving. Finally, it would result in fewer families being 'skipped ahead of' which, rightly or wrongly, is causing resentment of newly arrived people.


[ Parent ]

Re: Hodge on Housing (#34)

by JR on Mon May 21, 2007 at 08:03:47 PM GMT

I disagree GH - the reason why there is resentment is because the BNP stir up trouble - not because of being 'skipped ahead'. How can people who come to work here think about where they live beforehand when they probably haven't even been to this country before?


[ Parent ]

Re: Hodge on Housing (#35)

by Glass House on Mon May 21, 2007 at 08:11:06 PM GMT

I agree, the BNP twist people's fears, imply that immigrants are to blame and whip up hatred.

But the original fears are real, even before the BNP get their hands on them. The BNP just pray on them.

Ask yourself why you, I and most (hopefully all) of the people on this board would never be susceptable to BNP propaganda...It's because we don't have the fear that we're might be losing out because of immigration. We understand that it's a good thing.

Getting rid of things that imply otherwise is a way of heading off the fear that the BNP prays on.


[ Parent ]

Re: Hodge on Housing (#36)

by JR on Mon May 21, 2007 at 08:30:07 PM GMT

I still disagree and can't see the logic of that way of thinking. If anything, what Hodge is saying plays right into the hands of the BNP since they can say that even government ministers are backing up their point.


[ Parent ]

Re: Hodge on Housing (#37)

by Glass House on Mon May 21, 2007 at 08:52:18 PM GMT

That seems to me like saying that the government shouldn't do anything about, say, crime - because it'll just make people think that crime is bad and play into opposition parties hands.


[ Parent ]

Re: Hodge on Housing (#38)

by lastword on Mon May 21, 2007 at 11:50:51 PM GMT

The point it, Glass House, that it's one thing to start a debate, another to start it on totally false premises. As many have so correctly articulated since Hodge's current debacle the issue is one of housing supply and the fact that we are not building enough housing. Margaret Hodge presents no empirical evidence whatsoever to back up her crude and disgraceful assertions. Since last year, when the BNP gained 12 counil seats in her borough, racist attacks on non-white residents have shot up 50%. This woman is literally dangerous. I would be terrified to be an immigrant (of whatever generation) living in Barking tonight. Hodge has jyst guaranteed a rise in more racist attacks.


[ Parent ]

Re: Hodge on Housing (#39)

by Glass House on Mon May 21, 2007 at 11:59:26 PM GMT

Ridiculous


[ Parent ]

Re: Hodge on Housing (#40)

by lastword on Tue May 22, 2007 at 12:09:31 AM GMT

What's ridiculous, Glass House? That we're not building enough houses, that Margaret Hodge has no empirical evidence to back up her disgraceful assertions or that attacks on non-white people in Barking and Dagenham have risen by 50% since the election 12 BNP councillors last year?


Re: Hodge on Housing (#41)

by Glass House on Tue May 22, 2007 at 12:33:43 AM GMT

"Hodge has jyst guaranteed a rise in more racist attacks." The way to avoid racist attacks is to openly talk about issues - not hide them away.


[ Parent ]

Re: Hodge on Housing (#44)

by donpaskini on Tue May 22, 2007 at 11:11:19 AM GMT

I really don't think that you would be arguing Hodge's case if you met some of the people who would lose out from the changes, people in the greatest housing need. It would mean more people with mental health problems sleeping on the streets and families trapped in unsuitable and desperately overcrowded accommodation. It is important to know what you are talking about with issues like this. The BNP's argument is that changing the allocations policy so that it is not based on giving homes to the people who need them most would help local families looking for social housing to get it. For the overwhelming majority of families in Barking and elsewhere in the South East, this simply isn't true. They also argue that migrants are being given priority, which is another lie. Labour's argument is that the problem is not with the allocations policy, but with the shortage of social housing. This has the advantage of being true. For Labour ministers to say that the allocations policy is a problem and needs changing and that allocating housing on the basis of need is wrong undermines the Labour argument and strengthens the BNP's case.


[ Parent ]

Re: Hodge on Housing (#42)

by petercoe on Tue May 22, 2007 at 01:05:38 AM GMT

What's ridiculous is the premise underlying your contributions - which appears to be that Margaret Hodge is responsible for the fact that there are 12 BNP councillors in Barking & Dagenham.

She should probably be flattered you invest in her such power as to determine election results.

Your post is contradictory: on the one hand you claim she has no empirical evidence (presumably that white families feel aggrieved?) and then go on to note that there are 12 BNP councillors in her borough - as though you believe the two are completely unrelated?!

Well, you may be one of those who believes the people of Barking & Dagenham (and it's actually in the Dagenham half not represented by Hodge where most of the BNP councillors are) are racist scum who should shut up and be thankful for the wonders the Labour Government has delivered for them - but clearly they're unhappy about something, and ignoring the problem is not - repeat: IS NOT - the way to reverse the BNP advance in 2010.


[ Parent ]

Re: Hodge on Housing (#43)

by doctordunc on Tue May 22, 2007 at 08:36:17 AM GMT

He wasn't saying there was no empirical evidence that white families felt aggrieved. He was saying there was no empirical evidence that the system treated white families unfairly.


[ Parent ]

Re: Hodge on Housing (#45)

by donpaskini on Tue May 22, 2007 at 11:18:30 AM GMT

Just specifically on the electoral strategy, the way to beat the BNP is to campaign all year round and have effective local representatives who stay in touch. (And actually achieve something before the next election on housing, which means a big increase in the amount of social housing). I don't get the sense that this happened in Barking & Dagenham before 2006, it is much more now. The fact that you appear to think that accepting the lies that the BNP tell about the way to solve the housing crisis is the best way to win voters back suggests to me that you've never campaigned anywhere where this was a big issue. Am I right?


[ Parent ]

Re: Hodge on Housing (#46)

by Glass House on Tue May 22, 2007 at 02:13:34 PM GMT

I think we're coming at this from two different angles

You think that BNP lies are what creates white working class worry.

I think that the worry is already there and the BNP used lies to exploit that underlying worry to gain seats.

In the former, the worry and the lies are essentially the same thing - which is why you are not so keen to take measures to specifically tackle the causes of that worry (because you think that the only cause of the worry is BNP lies)

In the latter, the worry is what feeds the BNPs success. Yes, tackling the lies is important, but the worry is the root cause of the BNPs success - not the result of it.


[ Parent ]

Re: Hodge on Housing (#48)

by donpaskini on Tue May 22, 2007 at 03:24:55 PM GMT

Not at all, I know that there is worry, caused by the dramatic reduction in the amount of social housing available, and I think we should tackle it by building more homes. I am not keen to take measures which won't do anything to solve the problem but which send a message that the BNP's analysis is correct and will cause even greater misery. Where I used to be a councillor there are 5,000 people on the waiting list, thousands more who can't even get on the waiting list, and 450 properties per year which become available. It doesn't matter how you change the allocations policy, the vast majority of people will miss out.


[ Parent ]

Re: Hodge on Housing (#47)

by lastword on Tue May 22, 2007 at 02:26:47 PM GMT

May I draw everyone's attention to what Mayor ken Livingstone has to say here: http://www.24dash.com/socialhousing/20879.htm Margaret Hodge is dangerous for all those trying to improve community relations in neighbourhoods like Barking.


Re: Housing (#49)

by jkitleft on Tue May 22, 2007 at 10:04:23 PM GMT

Housing, like in 1983, is becoming a big electoral issue again. I think we need to change the Thatcher concencus on housing. The profits raised from capital receipts on buying council houses, should be spent on new housing, but only by using unused buildings (there are 700,000 of them) to build this new housing, and helping to provide this cheap housing towards single couples, and key workers like police, teachers, and nurses.


Hodge on Housing | 49 comments (49 topical)