HOUSING Minister Caroline Flint said empty apartments and flats across Greater Manchester could be bought up from property developers.
Ms Flint, who was speaking exclusively to the M.E.N, gave the strongest hint yet that properties across the city could provide social housing for thousands of Mancunian families desperate to get a first foot on the property ladder.
She explained: "There's not only a great shortage of housing across Greater Manchester, but also across the north west.
"I would rather we weren't in this situation of a housing downturn, but a responsible government sees what it can do. And it's why we have agreed that if builders have properties of the right size and the right location we can look to buying them through the Housing Corporation, which will act as a clearing house."
Ms Flint said local authorities across Greater Manchester were often meeting their government targets to build social housing, but the devil was in the detail.
"In Stockport for instance, there are over more than 8,000 people on Stockport Homes' waiting list for social housing, and while the authority is meeting its targets, it is mainly one and two-bedroomed apartments, which are unsuited to families' needs."
Ms Flint said the onus, under new government targets, would insist on local authorities building more three and four-bedroomed houses if they were to qualify for grant funding.
Ms Flint will visit an Equity Housing project, in Brinnington, Stockport, on Wednesday morning, accompanied by Stockport MP Ann Coffey.
Click
here
for all the latest from the Labour Party Conference.
Conference interactive 2008
Tweet
City centre flats could provide social housing
September 21, 2008
Showing comments 1 to 25 and replies | View All
Rt Hon Dr Rev MC Spanner MP QC FCA FRICS JP OK (21/09/2008 at 19:54)
thaitanium (21/09/2008 at 23:44)
That should buy a few votes from people who have lost out on the buy to let market going down the tubes.
Just how much are they going to pay for these properties the "market rate" or what the original owners paid plus a substntial profit just to be fair?
Labours swan song it seems to me same as Stringer et al make a complete mess of things and leave it for someone else to clean up.
MPs gravy train, UK (22/09/2008 at 09:47)
With service fees of £3000-£4000 a year per apartment, I can see the problems now if they start taking one off apartments.
The local labour council gave planning permission for these apartments when they knew that supply had exceeded demand 4 years ago. They caused the problem as they greedily tried to get more council tax and now the govt is to bail them out.
Jay B, oldham (22/09/2008 at 10:39)
loads of areas in greater manchester have seen street after street of houses demolished in these housing market renewal projects but not one brick has been laid yet.
and the people who where turfed out of their homes to make way for these where not paid the market price.
and anyway if people worked for a living and not scrounging off the state then there wouldnt be the need for social housing.
scrap benefits for people who do nothing!
make it so if they worked then they're entitled.
but if they're not willing to work then they're not eligable for help.
Robert Tocker (22/09/2008 at 10:41)
Ace Shakepseare, manchester (22/09/2008 at 12:05)
Donna. Harpurhey (22/09/2008 at 12:14)
How are these councils going to raise the money for this social housing which the Labour government has ordered them to find without raising rates to an astronomical level.
These politicians know income tax and rates rises are a vote loser at the polls so they try to bring them in through disgraceful backdoor taxes like this congestion fiasco.
Redtooth, Manchester (22/09/2008 at 13:03)
S P In exile, Tameside (22/09/2008 at 13:04)
Black Flag (22/09/2008 at 13:36)
Ok, so you are saying that we should just use the unemployed to build housing, irrespective of whether or not they've got any building expertise. I can't really see that producing quality housing.
Fortunately, for your idea, the building trade is taking a downward turn, so there are likely to be plenty of builders out of work, which will allow you to force them to work for below minimum wage. By turning construction into an activity which is carried out at slave rates, you would discourage anybody from entering the industry and completely destroy the skills base.
You really are a genius.
Bean B4, manchester (22/09/2008 at 13:45)
chris2k8, Manchester (22/09/2008 at 14:45)
Jay B, oldham (22/09/2008 at 17:23)
thats already happened, with the current influx of polish, indian and other migrant workers that are now prominent in the construction industry.
i'd say for every one british construction worker there are now 5 migrant workers. i see this day in day out.
and Ace is actually a genius with that sort of comment. i've come up with similar ones in the past.
as then the need for migrant workers is reduced. more money would be in circulation in this country instead of being sent off abroad never to be seen again.
Chris Green, Chorlton-cum-Hardy (22/09/2008 at 18:10)
Black Flag (22/09/2008 at 19:50)
I know. You are very similar; lots of self-righteous indignation but little knowledge to back it up with.
"as then the need for migrant workers is reduced. more money would be in circulation in this country instead of being sent off abroad never to be seen again."
Aside from the fact that nobody would bother getting into the building trade if it only paid the same as benefit levels, if money leaves the country and never comes back, that is a perfect situation, because it means somebody has done some work, but taken nothing in return.
Bean B4, manchester (23/09/2008 at 08:30)
Yes, you can criticise Ace and others for their emotional outbursts but they are actually repeating what a lot of people are saying - albeit uninformed. On the other hand, your patronising approach, where you manage to disagree with everyone about everything, supposedly because you are cleverer, is very irritating. Do you not notice the comments posters are starting to make.
Jay B, oldham (23/09/2008 at 09:16)
being in the construction industry i see first hand what is going on. no one in this country wants to work. as these foreign migrants have lowered the rates of pay in this industry just like labour said it wouldnt.
so now we hardly attract people into skilled trades which we an now finding with the lack of plumbers, decorators and other skilled workers.
so its seen as much easier to do nothing and claim benefit in todays society. this is what needs to be sorted.
and having watched northwest tonight yesterday i have never seen such labour propoganda on why they need to sort out child poverty. sort out the parents first and you'll sort out the children. just dont had it to them on a plate.
we go on and on about poverty and it is soley the responsibility of the person involved. if they want to get out help them get out and not just had them the money. they wont want to get out then just stick with scrounging off the state.
disagree all you want, patronise me all you want. it just spurs me on some more to show you up on how far off from the real world you actually are.
i'd like to see how many others agree with what i say and how this alone would sort out a great deal.
Black Flag (23/09/2008 at 09:46)
Money is like an IOU. A pound, as legal tender, gives you the right to settle debt in the UK.
So, imagine you do some work for me and I give you an IOU for £100 and you take it out of the country and it never comes back. Would that be a bad thing for me? Obviously not, because I've got something worth £100 and I'll never have to give you anything in return.
It works the same way with money. If it goes out of the country but never comes back, then we've imported something and never sent anything back out (other than a bit of paper that costs almost nothing to produce), which would be a great situation for the county.
If the money does come back in, it means we have to export some goods or services in return, which creates jobs, so even that isn't terrible.
Bean B4, manchester (23/09/2008 at 10:06)
"It works the same way with money. If it goes out of the country but never comes back, then we've imported something and never sent anything back out (other than a bit of paper that costs almost nothing to produce), which would be a great situation for the county"
I though we were a trading nation. How does importing labour to do work (to the exclusion of residents) who then send money abroad help our economy? Surley, the perfect situation is British labour producing British goods to sell all over the world and us getting currency (actually an IOU for gold) from everybody else.
Black Flag (23/09/2008 at 11:09)
But what would you do with that foreign currency once you've got it? You either sit on it, which is pointless, as you would be exchanging goods for something you are never going to use, or you spend it, which means you would be importing goods and services, which was what you wanted to avoid.
In simple terms, in the long run, the value of imports equals the value of exports. You can't export without importing in return, unless you are giving something away, which would be foreign aid. I'd guess that isn't what you're suggesting.
Ace Shakepseare, manchester (23/09/2008 at 11:47)
BillyJ (23/09/2008 at 13:18)
Peter Devine, Manchester. (23/09/2008 at 13:44)
As author of this article I would welcome any further feedback and debate at the link below:
http://blogs.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/eurovision/2008/09/labour_conference_exclusive_ho.html
Mr Angry, Bury (23/09/2008 at 13:51)
Bean B4, manchester (23/09/2008 at 14:06)