Truth about Immigration and Social Housing

Read a welcome account in “Inside Housing” about research by the “Equality & Human Rights Commission” into the British housing allocations system.

Unlike the nonsense and “Big lies” pedalled by the BNP, the commission reported categorically that there was “no evidence in the research of any abuse of the system including “queue jumping” to the significant detriment of any group including white families”.

The reality is that “new migrants made up less than 2 per cent of the total number of people in social housing throughout the UK. Around 90 per cent of those living in social housing are born in the UK”.

There is still of course the problem that the perception of “queue jumping” and unfairness still exists. This report will help tackle this mis-perception, although I doubt it has been widely covered in “The Sun” or the “Daily Mail”?

For decades we have also had a corrosive policy of allowing Council homes to be sold under the “right to buy” without these rented homes being replaced. This has led to not only rapidly changing communities but scarcity and perceived competition between communities for homes and shelter.

Thankfully we are now planning to build new homes in London (Ken willing).



Display: Sort:

Re: Truth about Immigration and Social Housing (#1)

Well, if Brown is tougher on CGT, then money raised on that tax rate should be directed to building on the 300,000 unused plots, for the 700,000 unused homes. Capital from receipts on sold council houses should also be redirected to spending on housing.

Labour have peddled this fallacy. When they came to power, they were trying to outbid the Tories, in terms of draconian powers against asylum seekers. They tried to make it impossible for asylum seekers to get in through legal means.

But more asylum seekers applied than ever. It seems that asylum seekers weren't coming here for the benefits at all. I don't know anyone who would rather live on under £40 a week, than earning a decent wage. Even earning the minimum wage, would get you more in an 8-hour day, than for asylum seekers benefits for one whole week. But the government was a willing co-operater in letting the Sun and Mail say that asylum seekers were benefit scroungers claiming over £110 a week (still an inadequate wage), and that they got special privelages ahead of Britons.


What would people's suggestions for immigration be, and why?

Re: Truth about Immigration and Social Housing (#2)

This report needs to be published more widely and the findings to be highlighted more prominantly, to counter the lies of the BNP and Tories.
Like the recent report on the benefits of Immigration, its has exposed the myths. The previous 'Report' of the HofL simply missed the point.  

Re: Truth about Immigration and Social Housing (#3)

"new migrants made up less than 2 per cent of the total number of people in social housing throughout the UK. Around 90 per cent of those living in social housing are born in the UK"

Typical statistics usage..

Now we know new immigrants account  for lesss than 1% of the population.
And they get 2% of social housing.
Some discrepancy?

Or New immigrants account for less than 5% of the population?


Absolutely useless report. Quoting statistics in isloation.
As such it has no credibility and does more harm than good.

I am sure the BNP - if competent - could show it up as a load of rubbish.


No-one believes any figures on immigration after the Government has repeatedly lied on the subject. FACT>

Re: Truth about Immigration and Social Housing (#5)

Hi Madrasfish

Not really sure what you are getting at?  Are you saying that new immigrants (note the figures were actually about migrants not immigrants – there is a difference) are less than 1% or 5%?

 

I am neither quite sure why you feel that the government (civil servants?) have repeatedly “lied”? Wrong and even maybe “incompetent” at times? But “lied”? Wrong “fact” I am afraid.

 

This information is potentially useful and probably I haven’t explained  it that well, but as someone who works in social housing and campaigns in East London for Labour, I am grateful for something to counter the real lies (and fairly widespread perception) that all new homes are being taken by migrants on benefits.

Re: Truth about Immigration and Social Housing (#6)

to grayee
Waht I am saying is the statistics as pressnted are meaningless.
For exapmle if immigranst represented less than 1% of the population but got 2% of the socila housing , that suggests favourbale treatment.
If on the other hand they represent 5%, it does not.

As for lying, the official government statistics on immigration have been revised many many times: in one direction only. And those wrong numbers have beebn used to justify policies on immigration. Anyone with any modicum of sense makes sure their numbers on such a sensitive issue are correct. We were told numbers as "facts" when it later vbecame clear they were NOT fcats but estimates and lowball ones at that.

If that is not lying, ...

I personally don't know what the real position is but your claim "I am grateful for something to counter the real lies (and fairly widespread perception) that all new homes are being taken by migrants on benefits" is wrong.
The statistics as presented are 100% meeningless.

And furthermore,.. they are general countrywide. Which is of course totally misleading.

After all, there may be zero immigrants in Aberdeen and 0% take up of social housing (example only) and 1,000 immigrants in Gravesend and 100% takeup of social housing.

The whole issue is shrouded in lies and half truths largely due to the Government not wishing to tell the truth.

This article reinforces my view that whoever wrote it has swlallowed Government statistics whole or does not understand them. Whatever is the truth, you can draw NO conclusions from them becuase they as presented are meaningless.

Re: Truth about Immigration and Social Housing (#9)

Hi Madrasfish
 

Nope – still have not a clue what you are complaining about? 
 

I don’t think it is right for you to accuse people of “lying” without producing evidence of “intent”.  That is not right in my view.  By all means criticise a decision you think is wrong but don’t call people liars unless you can back it up.
 

Also, how can you say that while you do not know what the real situation is, the “perception” is “wrong”?
 

This is what some (not that many) people claim on the doorstep?
 

Re: Truth about Immigration and Social Housing (#4)

Madasafish, nice one!

Re: Truth about Immigration and Social Housing (#7)

I have to agree we all statistics are rubbish.

Re: Truth about Immigration and Social Housing (#8)

I will say that again, We all know statics are rubbish.