Bid To Create Property Rung For Manx Workers Fails

[bluemonday]

Clicky

 

The proposal was rejected after 14 MHKs voted against it.

 

Only five MHKs voted in favour of the bill – Mr Karran, Bill Malarkey (Douglas South), Quintin Gill (Rushen), Brenda Cannell (Douglas East) and Speaker Steve Rodan.

[keyboarder]

Sounds like a stupid idea to me - much better to concentrate on Corporation housing by building more of it, charging realistic rents to those who can afford to pay it, and not giving it to people who own property or buy some whilst living in social housing.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

Sounds like a stupid idea to me - much better to concentrate on Corporation housing by building more of it, charging realistic rents to those who can afford to pay it, and not giving it to people who own property or buy some whilst living in social housing.

 

Not too keen on the rent idea at all. For a number of reasons, I think it is better that people own their home rather than rent it.

[buggane]

Beggars belief, I wonder how many of those 14 MHKs had the 'standard proposal for election to please everybody' paragraph that went on about affordable housing for young manx residents, promises, promises, get elected, forget the promises. As far as I'm concerned if the MHKs vote against something that directly conflicts with the policies they proposed to get elected they should be taken to task, can only be explained in two ways either they blatently lied to get elected, or, once elected their policies completely changed in which case they should do the moral thing and stand down on the basis they are not representing the electorate who voted them in, yet again its proven to be one big very bad joke

[Cambon]

I suppose it depends on the details in the proposal.

 

I think they should stop knocking down old commissioners properties and sell them on for a knock down price, and then build new ones with the proceeds. Over time that would cure the problem by massively increasing the supply of private dwellings, which on it's own will control the price.

[Dave Hedgehog]

Whatever happened to people saving up until they could afford a house?

 

Why should they be handed a cheap one on a plate?

[scarbunny]

I suppose it depends on the details in the proposal.

 

I think they should stop knocking down old commissioners properties and sell them on for a knock down price, and then build new ones with the proceeds. Over time that would cure the problem by massively increasing the supply of private dwellings, which on it's own will control the price.

 

Although the majority of the properties they are knocking down are crap, thats why they are knocking them down. Also if they go and sell all the old housing stock off at a knock down price where will they build the replacements? If they can sell the properties why not just renovate them along with building new therefore doubling their housing stock?

 

The fact is the majority of people in corpy housing could afford to buy their own house, there really should be annual means testing brought in to ensure the housing is going to those who need it rather than those who don't. They should also re-home all the couples and singles who are living in 3 and 4 bedroom houses even though their families have left.

 

As for every one should own their own houses, while a great suggestion on the surface house ownership doesn’t suit some people. I like renting as it give me freedom, if I don’t like my neighbours I just wait 6 months and I can move, if I decide that living in Douglas would better suite my life style I wait for my contract to expire and move on. I can also get a significantly better spec of house for less money than if I was to buy, a property worse than the one I currently rent would cost around £300 more a month in mortgage repayments at current interest rates.

[Slim]

I think they should stop knocking down old commissioners properties and sell them on for a knock down price, and then build new ones with the proceeds. Over time that would cure the problem by massively increasing the supply of private dwellings, which on it's own will control the price.

 

Agreed.

[jimbms]

Sounds like a stupid idea to me - much better to concentrate on Corporation housing by building more of it, charging realistic rents to those who can afford to pay it, and not giving it to people who own property or buy some whilst living in social housing.

 

Not too keen on the rent idea at all. For a number of reasons, I think it is better that people own their home rather than rent it.

LDV I cannot believe what you just written, for months you have been saying property is theft and people shouldn't own it, now you have just said it is better to own your own property. Make your mind up for fucks sake

[bluemonday]

Why should they be handed a cheap one on a plate?

 

Beacause houses won't fit on saucers.

[Stu Peters]

Thing about housing is that the quality of a dwelling is sometimes more about the people who live in it than the bricks and mortar.

 

I remember a couple of blocks of flats in Salford years ago - built in the 60's (IIRC) they were old-fashioned and semi-derelict, and the remaining corpy tenants had all sorts of action groups decrying the state of the place.

 

A big developer (Barratts I think) bought the whole estate, did fairly minor improvements (windows and doors mainly) and sold them. Now a fairly nice place to live (for Salford), cheap as chips, and no complaints.

[Cambon]

Although the majority of the properties they are knocking down are crap, thats why they are knocking them down. Also if they go and sell all the old housing stock off at a knock down price where will they build the replacements? If they can sell the properties why not just renovate them along with building new therefore doubling their housing stock?

 

The fact is the majority of people in corpy housing could afford to buy their own house, there really should be annual means testing brought in to ensure the housing is going to those who need it rather than those who don't. They should also re-home all the couples and singles who are living in 3 and 4 bedroom houses even though their families have left.

 

As for every one should own their own houses, while a great suggestion on the surface house ownership doesn’t suit some people. I like renting as it give me freedom, if I don’t like my neighbours I just wait 6 months and I can move, if I decide that living in Douglas would better suite my life style I wait for my contract to expire and move on. I can also get a significantly better spec of house for less money than if I was to buy, a property worse than the one I currently rent would cost around £300 more a month in mortgage repayments at current interest rates.

 

I agree with part 2 of your post, and part 3 is personal choice.

 

However, in answer to part 1, yes, the houses they are knocking down are crap, but most are structurally sound. Most first time buyers would love the idea of getting one of them for "half price" and then spending £10k in renovations. If it was controlled properly it would work.

 

As for land for new properties, the government has loads of land that could be assigned for this, even down to the site of the old Nobles, if necessary.

 

Your renovate and build idea is good, but how are they going to finance it? There is nothing in the budget for it so it would take years to get off the ground. The selling and new build idea could get off the ground immediately, which is a good idea as the problem is now.

[pongo]

The fact is the majority of people in corpy housing could afford to buy their own house, there really should be annual means testing brought in to ensure the housing is going to those who need it rather than those who don't.

 

You could easily make exactly the same point about Middle Class Welfare (child allowance, tax relief etc). It could easily be argued that there should be annual means testing to ensure that it is going to those who need it rather than those who don't.

[matty]

Andy developers building houses should build one commissioners house for every two other houses.

 

Bring in a law so no-one can own more than two homes on the Island.

 

That should bring a few more properties into the market, and bring the prices to a more realistic level.

[scarbunny]

Although the majority of the properties they are knocking down are crap, thats why they are knocking them down. Also if they go and sell all the old housing stock off at a knock down price where will they build the replacements? If they can sell the properties why not just renovate them along with building new therefore doubling their housing stock?

 

The fact is the majority of people in corpy housing could afford to buy their own house, there really should be annual means testing brought in to ensure the housing is going to those who need it rather than those who don't. They should also re-home all the couples and singles who are living in 3 and 4 bedroom houses even though their families have left.

 

As for every one should own their own houses, while a great suggestion on the surface house ownership doesn’t suit some people. I like renting as it give me freedom, if I don’t like my neighbours I just wait 6 months and I can move, if I decide that living in Douglas would better suite my life style I wait for my contract to expire and move on. I can also get a significantly better spec of house for less money than if I was to buy, a property worse than the one I currently rent would cost around £300 more a month in mortgage repayments at current interest rates.

 

I agree with part 2 of your post, and part 3 is personal choice.

 

However, in answer to part 1, yes, the houses they are knocking down are crap, but most are structurally sound. Most first time buyers would love the idea of getting one of them for "half price" and then spending £10k in renovations. If it was controlled properly it would work.

 

As for land for new properties, the government has loads of land that could be assigned for this, even down to the site of the old Nobles, if necessary.

 

Your renovate and build idea is good, but how are they going to finance it? There is nothing in the budget for it so it would take years to get off the ground. The selling and new build idea could get off the ground immediately, which is a good idea as the problem is now.

 

My renovate and build idea is more of a best case, although the £300million the IOMG has in the bank would be more than enough. The government has some land yes, however there is very few large plots zoned for residential use.

 

If we look at Pulrose, they could have sold all of them houses on the private market for a low price, the majority would have gone to developers who would have either done a quick paint job an let them out, while only a few would have gone to first time buyers, a large proportion would just live in them as they are. Meaning there are still hundreds of substandard houses being lived in with crap heating and little to no insulation. So may be the Government put down rules that only first time buyers can buy them and only to live in, chances of selling all of the properties? What do you do with the people who use to live in the houses in the mean time?

 

Then assuming that all the houses are kept where in Douglas do you build new housing to replace them? The only sites large enough would be open land, meaning eating into the country side and green space around Douglas.

 

Renting over buying is a complete personal choice I agree I was more commenting on LDV’s ideal that everyone should own.