Trattare l’edilizia sociale come infrastruttura Lcritica per sbloccare miliardi, afferma Peabody Boss
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2025/may/31/treat-social-housing-as-critical-infrastructure-to-unlock-billions-says-peabody-boss?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
di topotaul
8 commenti
It’s so obvious
Gov buys land for cheap, gives itself planning permission, bypass all blocks, builds, and then rents for profit (increase social housing rents) or sell them for huge profit to fund the next run around of it.
Any law that makes this impossible should be abolished.
We need to regulate the shit out of private landlords to the point that they pack it in and sell up.
These parasites contribute nothing, all they do is make the housing market worse for everyone else.
Sure. Because we have invested so well in all other types of critical infrastructure /s
If people spend stupid %ages of their income on rent, they have no money to buy services/goods from companies.
This kills growth.
Because we are so great in investing in critical infrastructure
Why isn’t there a national building service where tradesman work in the public sector building houses etc…
Treat _housing_ as critical infrastructure and get councils to stop obstructing construction of it. All housing is good housing.
Social was treated as critical infrastructure after the world wars. The use of local labour directly employed by councils, trained in local tech colleges, council architects and surveyors and so on was a feature of both these periods. The money to build was borrowed at PWLB rates which meant negligible interest was due over 60 years which tenants paid back in rents.
The thing to note though is tenants were the skilled working class working in big industries located at the bottom of the road. There was a uniform community with similar aspirations. Contrast that with today on all respects.
The reason all this came to an end was the cost. Efforts were made to keep costs down leading to the ill thought out tower blocks and untried system builds. Rents were kept low but not at a high enough level to maintain the stock. As it deteriorated tenants looked for better options which Thatcher gave them via the RtoB, albeit heavily skewed in their favour. Plenty of evidence also emerged that mono tenure estates are not good for social mobility.
We do need new council housing but not on the scale advocated here. In order to pay for borrowed funding, decent estate management, and a good quality repairs service the chargeable tents will be much higher than the residual used council stock we have today.
The government is going to have it’s work cut out.