主播大秀

No we don't need more.
The 主播大秀 will (surprise, surprise) conclude that we do need more of it.
Whatever type of state spending (taxes), the 主播大秀 is for it - more money spent on civil servants - yes please, more money spent on criminals, social workers, youth "intervention" teams, youth psychologists, television licences to ensure the "objective" (read Labour - tax and spend) delivery of news to the public and so on ....
There is absolutely no way in which increasing taxes in order to hire yet more public sector employees that 主播大秀 will say it's a waste.
Now let's have more council housing so that the yobs can mug, beat up and kill people from varied social backgrounds, so that violence is no longer poor on poor but poor on everybody.
Single mothers who have never done a day's work in their lives (and are unlikely to do so) will live in the same 拢250,000 house that the next door person has to work 8 hours a day to manage to pay the mortgage.
That's absolutely fine if it eradicates child poverty and does not make the yobs feel disadvantaged.
Thank you 主播大秀 for opening our eyes and caring for a better society (25% work in the public sector, 15% on welfare churning out babies, the rest have to actually work like slaves to sustain the standard of living of the previous 2 categories).
Now 主播大秀 please make sure you help Gordon Brown get reelected so that he renews the TV licence for another 50 years and you continue to fill your pockets. Of course the metropolitan elite (主播大秀) for whom the countryside is irrelevant, once they get their fat pensions will retire in the country away from the council estates and the yobs they helped create.

No we don't need more.
The 主播大秀 will (surprise, surprise) conclude that we do need more of it.
Whatever type of state spending (taxes), the 主播大秀 is for it - more money spent on civil servants - yes please, more money spent on criminals, social workers, youth "intervention" teams, youth psychologists, television licences to ensure the "objective" (read Labour - tax and spend) delivery of news to the public and so on ....
There is absolutely no way in which increasing taxes in order to hire yet more public sector employees that 主播大秀 will say it's a waste.
Now let's have more council housing so that the yobs can mug, beat up and kill people from varied social backgrounds, so that violence is no longer poor on poor but poor on everybody.
Single mothers who have never done a day's work in their lives (and are unlikely to do so) will live in the same 拢250,000 house that the next door person has to work 8 hours a day to manage to pay the mortgage.
That's absolutely fine if it eradicates child poverty and does not make the yobs feel disadvantaged.
Thank you 主播大秀 for opening our eyes and caring for a better society (25% work in the public sector, 15% on welfare churning out babies, the rest have to actually work like slaves to sustain the standard of living of the previous 2 categories).
Now 主播大秀 please make sure you help Gordon Brown get reelected so that he renews the TV licence for another 50 years and you continue to fill your pockets. Of course the metropolitan elite (主播大秀) for whom the countryside is irrelevant, once they get their fat pensions will retire in the country away from the council estates and the yobs they helped create.

No we don't need more.
The 主播大秀 will (surprise, surprise) conclude that we do need more of it.
Whatever type of state spending (taxes), the 主播大秀 is for it - more money spent on civil servants - yes please, more money spent on criminals, social workers, youth "intervention" teams, youth psychologists, television licences to ensure the "objective" (read Labour - tax and spend) delivery of news to the public and so on ....
There is absolutely no way in which increasing taxes in order to hire yet more public sector employees that 主播大秀 will say it's a waste.
Now let's have more council housing so that the yobs can mug, beat up and kill people from varied social backgrounds, so that violence is no longer poor on poor but poor on everybody.
Single mothers who have never done a day's work in their lives (and are unlikely to do so) will live in the same 拢250,000 house that the next door person has to work 8 hours a day to manage to pay the mortgage.
That's absolutely fine if it eradicates child poverty and does not make the yobs feel disadvantaged.
Thank you 主播大秀 for opening our eyes and caring for a better society (25% work in the public sector, 15% on welfare churning out babies, the rest have to actually work like slaves to sustain the standard of living of the previous 2 categories).
Now 主播大秀 please make sure you help Gordon Brown get reelected so that he renews the TV licence for another 50 years and you continue to fill your pockets. Of course the metropolitan elite (主播大秀) for whom the countryside is irrelevant, once they get their fat pensions will retire in the country away from the council estates and the yobs they helped create.

No we don't need more.
The 主播大秀 will (surprise, surprise) conclude that we do need more of it.
Whatever type of state spending (taxes), the 主播大秀 is for it - more money spent on civil servants - yes please, more money spent on criminals, social workers, youth "intervention" teams, youth psychologists, television licences to ensure the "objective" (read Labour - tax and spend) delivery of news to the public and so on ....
There is absolutely no way in which increasing taxes in order to hire yet more public sector employees that 主播大秀 will say it's a waste.
Now let's have more council housing so that the yobs can mug, beat up and kill people from varied social backgrounds, so that violence is no longer poor on poor but poor on everybody.
Single mothers who have never done a day's work in their lives (and are unlikely to do so) will live in the same 拢250,000 house that the next door person has to work 8 hours a day to manage to pay the mortgage.
That's absolutely fine if it eradicates child poverty and does not make the yobs feel disadvantaged.
Thank you 主播大秀 for opening our eyes and caring for a better society (25% work in the public sector, 15% on welfare churning out babies, the rest have to actually work like slaves to sustain the standard of living of the previous 2 categories).
Now 主播大秀 please make sure you help Gordon Brown get reelected so that he renews the TV licence for another 50 years and you continue to fill your pockets. Of course the metropolitan elite (主播大秀) for whom the countryside is irrelevant, once they get their fat pensions will retire in the country away from the council estates and the yobs they helped create.

"Do we need more social housing? Ruth Kelly thinks so and wants a national debate on the subject."

The problem with this is that to understand the word social means that you have to be a socialist and Ruth Kelly and New Labour are not socialists.Indeed one would have to say that socialism is an alien concept to them so how can they talk about it?.Example:There is no one that does not know that there are many that cannot afford to buy a house so they NEED social housing in order to live.Well everyone but Ruth Kelly and New Labour they ask the question "Do we need more social housing".The only word that comes to my mind is they are CLUELESS but there again tell me something that I did not already know.

I did not see in the e-petitions terms and conditions a box to tick giving them permission to use my personal data to email me with the PM's views. So he is misusing my data for purposes I did not provide it. This is called spamming. I hear that a number of spam filters are already picking the number 10 email up as spam.

yes we need social housing provided for the less fortunate in society. the problem it seems to me is the form of hgousing. putting families in blocks of multi-storey flats which was the method used in the 60-70s has caused a lot of the social problems we have today.

i have been moved 10 time since my first son was born in 2003 and i have 3 weeks to get out of my property and all letting agents say is they dont eccecpt dhss and the council havent got enough propetys so yes we do need more social housing so pleople can have settled lives

We need to invest lots of money into exsisting estates, not build more.

There are three types of people living in social housing.

1. Those who's families moved onto the estates in the 60's or 70's, work and have strong family values. These people are saddened by the poor state they now see around them, people and buildings. They had always been happy there before.

2. Those who jumped on the band wagon and saw social housing as a good way to get a house, handout or whatever, by whatever means. These are the families that those in number 1 shake their heads at, feel intimidated by and cause most disruption. These sadly are the majority.

3. Those who's choice was taken away from them and they have no choice but to live in social housing, no matter how much they detest it and cannot find any way out. These people live with the stigma of the 'estate' every day and want better for themselves and for their children. They blame the people in number 2.

ALL of these groups consist of single families, a range of ethnic backgrounds and varying ecconomic type.

It seems that the way forward is to try to create areas with a rich social mix, more like society as a whole. Create legislation which requires developers to have a small proportion of social housing and some affordable housing in new developments. Middle class teritorialism and the council house system seems to have created ghettos filled with people in a vicious circle of social exclusion in every city and town in the UK. The Dutch and Scandanavian models seem to put much more effort into creating 'sustainable' communities than the UK system, which only seems to legislate for putting a roof over ones head somewhere. We desperately need to get this corrected if we are going to make any kind of a difference to the large numbers of underpriveleged in the UK. I have seen a couple of decent 'mixed tenure' schemes which have attempted this. The Peabody Trust have completed one in Nile street, and another in the Netherlands by S333 architects. This type of thinking needs to be repeated and refined on a large scale. As I have been looking at this for a University dissertation, I would be interested to know if anyone has seen any developments of this nature that are worth looking at, and any opinions on the schemes mentioned.

The housing sector is in crisis due to mis-management, poor funding etc. I was brought up on a council estate in salford by a lone parent who could not work due to child care etc but worked full time voluntary at our school. As soon as we were old enough to care for ourselves my mother returned to work. I myself am a lone parent and live in a housing association property and although i currently don't work due to caring for my son who has various difficulties and a disability i spend most of my time working with parents to support choices for themselves and their children with disabilities to promote independance, support for people with disabilities to work if they can and to enjoy a fuller life. What i see is poor areas full of generation upon generation of families on benefit. Some of these -not all!! are lazy, why should people work if they don't have to? We live in a culture of hand outs people claiming disability benefits because they are an alcoholic - i rarely sleep due to my sons difficulties yet still get up and do my best to try and make lifes better and take part in changing the system. People who can work, should work, and those who cant should be supported. We all hold our hands up when cancer drugs are withheld due to funding, that parents kill themselves due to lack of support for their children with various disabilities and this is because vast amounts of money is being wasted on those who do not need it. Education is the way forward remove this choice give people ambition and put a stop to this continuing through families. We need to get more community workers, youth workers, only by doing all this will anything change. Put a stop to vast numbers of imigrants, as a society we have to ask ourselves why has the uk got so many more than most other countries? why people cross through many countries to get to here? why? because we are a soft touch we don't look after the ones who need help, and i find it hard to believe that in this our current society disability is far behind progress in other areas sucha as equal pay for women,race disability is far behind and this needs to change. I know of people who with the right support would love to work. The thought of them being able to earn their own money such a delight for them. Yet they can't why? Because they need support to get going, support that could mean one to one to begin with but result in independance and dignity but no as far as our government is concerned its just not worth the investment.
Nice to know everyone matters-Blair!!

It seems that the way forward is to try to create areas with a rich social mix, more like society as a whole. Create legislation which requires developers to have a small proportion of social housing and some affordable housing in new developments. Middle class teritorialism and the council house system seems to have created ghettos filled with people in a vicious circle of social exclusion in every city and town in the UK. The Dutch and Scandanavian models seem to put much more effort into creating 'sustainable' communities than the UK system, which only seems to legislate for putting a roof over ones head somewhere. We desperately need to get this corrected if we are going to make any kind of a difference to the large numbers of underpriveleged in the UK. I have seen a couple of decent 'mixed tenure' schemes which have attempted this. The Peabody Trust have completed one in Nile street, and another in the Netherlands by S333 architects. This type of thinking needs to be repeated and refined on a large scale. As I have been looking at this for a University dissertation, I would be interested to know if anyone has seen any developments of this nature that are worth looking at, and any opinions on the schemes mentioned.

The housing sector is in crisis due to mis-management, poor funding etc. I was brought up on a council estate in salford by a lone parent who could not work due to child care etc but worked full time voluntary at our school. As soon as we were old enough to care for ourselves my mother returned to work. I myself am a lone parent and live in a housing association property and although i currently don't work due to caring for my son who has various difficulties and a disability i spend most of my time working with parents to support choices for themselves and their children with disabilities to promote independance, support for people with disabilities to work if they can and to enjoy a fuller life. What i see is poor areas full of generation upon generation of families on benefit. Some of these -not all!! are lazy, why should people work if they don't have to? We live in a culture of hand outs people claiming disability benefits because they are an alcoholic - i rarely sleep due to my sons difficulties yet still get up and do my best to try and make lifes better and take part in changing the system. People who can work, should work, and those who cant should be supported. We all hold our hands up when cancer drugs are withheld due to funding, that parents kill themselves due to lack of support for their children with various disabilities and this is because vast amounts of money is being wasted on those who do not need it. Education is the way forward remove this choice give people ambition and put a stop to this continuing through families. We need to get more community workers, youth workers, only by doing all this will anything change. Put a stop to vast numbers of imigrants, as a society we have to ask ourselves why has the uk got so many more than most other countries? why people cross through many countries to get to here? why? because we are a soft touch we don't look after the ones who need help, and i find it hard to believe that in this our current society disability is far behind progress in other areas sucha as equal pay for women,race disability is far behind and this needs to change. I know of people who with the right support would love to work. The thought of them being able to earn their own money such a delight for them. Yet they can't why? Because they need support to get going, support that could mean one to one to begin with but result in independance and dignity but no as far as our government is concerned its just not worth the investment.
Nice to know everyone matters-Blair!!

There is simply no question that we do need more 'socialhousing', very much more in fact. There is no argument which will convince me that we do not. Unless that is we are happy to envisage a truly miserable future for the larger part of the population, (and that includes those who own their own homes) which I believe it is the job of government to avoid!

Much of the opposition to social housing is based I beleive on a fear of reduced housing demand reducing prices, and hence leading to negative equity etc, but it should be realised by any intelligent person that allowing house prices to rise at a rate much faster than prices in general will inevitably lead to an economic correction of some sort. This will cause even greater problems than being forced to pay more for your home than it is curently worth.

(It is after all just the same situation as everthing else we buy, why should houses be any different? They do deteriorate with age as any property developer knows, and gains profit from.)

The fact is, the problems asscociated with 'social housing' are manufactured problems. That is to say not inherrent in the type of housing, or who lives in it.

The lack of proper investment in terms not only of quantity but of quality in the public housing sector is directly responsible for the poor state of many properties in the sector. During the sixties conservative governments claimed that they could 'build more for less'. Inevitably building more housing for less money means, as with many things, poorer quality, and property which at a later date falls below decent standards and becomes expensive to maintain. I have to say, that once the (illogical) notion that one can somehow get more for less became ingrained sucessive governments seemds at least to continue with this tradition, until of course eventually the situation came about where it became obvious that there was something terribly wrong!

Therefore it is incorrect to describe social housing as a failed experiment. It would be fairer to describe it as an experiment which was conducted so poorly, even improperly, as to make any results completely worthless.

It is however a fact the housing in many estates was extemely well built. At least in the early days. I am sure that this was because that in the people building the houses could expect to live in those houses, or at least thier relatives and friends. That is a very good incentive to do the job properly, and many of those directly involved in the work were proud to do so. Certainly those who I have known who built many of were proud of their achievments, and knew what it meant to strive for decent housing for all.

The fact that a large fraction of what is left is of comparatively poor quality is almost exclusively due to the fact that the best stock has been sold, and much of the remaining poor stock has been pulled down, and in many cases the land has been sold!

It is important to reflect on the state of housing for the majority of the population previous to the intriduction of large public housing projects, before making a judgement on social housing as a whole. Before WW2 a huge fraction of the population was forced to live in conditions that now we don't expect to see in many third-world countries. Private accomadation was often of extremely poor quality, with only one or two properties ownwed by each landlord or landlady, who were often very poorly off themselves, and unable to pay for maintennance. Anyone who doubts the state of pre-war housing need only read George Orwell's 'The Road to Wigan Pier' to obtain a first hand account of Orwell's admitted middle-class observations of 'the working class' and the contitions in which most of them live. I can personally vouch for his observations, as much of the housing he wrote about was still standing in the 1960's!

If we are to avoid sliding down the slippery slope to such poor housing as existed not so long ago, we need to recognise that it is only by building puplic housing that we can establish a reasonable minimum standard of living. It is very unlikely that any landlord will be able to obtain rent for poor housing if there is an alternative. Forcing the general standard of housing up, and the cost of housing in general down.

Of course this will not help those with stil a lot to repay on their mortgage, but frankly there are solutions to that provided there is a will. It is very important to realise that the high cost of housing in the UK fuels inflation, and it is only because people are currently willing (Or more truthfully, feel compelled.) to skimp in other areas which maintains the current situation.

We have already in fact gone past the point where the situation is not truly sustainable, we are now beginning to recognise serious social 'side effects', and it is only a matter of time before such effects are felt throughout society as a whole, and not just those unfortunate to find themselves unable to afford decent housing.

I could go on about the social problems, in terms of crime, etc engendered by the large pool of young people who realise that it no longer matters how hard they try, or work they will not ever be able to afford a decent home. I will assume that any readers that have been so polite as to have read this far, are at least intelligent enough to make that connection for themselves.

Social housing is an essential part of any civilised society. That is why of course it is called 'social' housing.

It is essential for a number of reasons, ony one of which is to ensure that a decent standard of living is maintained for the vast majority of decent hard working people who might not otherwise be able to afford it.

To say that people who have to rely on such housing are, 'yobs', or 'muggers', or jus plain lazy, is at best insulting and far from the mark. Hard work itself is rarely a guarantee of wealth, and no guarantee at all of a decent living standard. The contributions to the common good of persons who work for instance as bus drivers, or dustmen are just as important as those who generate the wealth required to fund these services. The work such people do is of benifit to everyone. (There is another argument there, but I do not want to stray off topic!)

Arguments based on the quality of person that such housing is provided for is there fore invalidated by that simple fact, and should be immediately and safely discounted. No amount of repetition of such an argument will change that! (I daresay such comment are placed by internet trolls!)

An intelligent reader will realise of course, that it is not only those who live, or wish to live in social housing who benefit. Aside from any other consideration, it reduces the value of property currently quite high simply due to it's potential use as rented studio flats, many of which are in fact themselves of very poor quality.

That will (all else being equal) lead to a reduction at least in the rapid rate of house price rise, which is causing even the sons and daughters of the reasonably well-off problems, which of course has implications for the parental pensions!

Ideally a reduction in the real cost of housing will be of the most benefit. I know many would be worried about 'negative equity', but provided it is still possible to repay the original mortgage that should not be a huge problem. With such an arrangement, at least the buyer won't pay more than originally agreed. There will of course be those who bought a home expecting to make a profit, but I have to say that any buyer should be aware that housing like any 'investment' cannot be guaranteed to increase in price. Besides which, by the time you actually own the property you will already have paid a lot more than the 'ticket price' in interest charges. So nything which would tend to reduce interest, (Which falling prices would!) could in many cases more than compensate for the loss of equity in the first instance. (It is even possible in theory at any rate, that this would result in a bigger saving than the loss in equity!)

(Try doing the calculations yourself! Mortgage payments fall into the class of computational problems known as 'ill conditioned', essentially meaning that very small differences (in this case) in the mortgage rate, can make a very large difference in the final amount paid. Something which motgage vendors are more than aware!)

There are also the benefits to be gained by reductions in the costs of things we consider essential to life, such as the already mentioned hygeine and transport. The cost of such services would I undoubtedly be reduced in real terms, simply because it would not be necesary to pay those workers quite so much. (This is an inevitable consequence of market forces, which always ways seek to erode tha wages of those on already low incomes. It's practically a natural law!) Also of course the cost of other public works would be reduced. One can hardly expect that those engaged im maintainig or city's parks, an other amenities are high earners, and yet without these amenities life would be a poor thing indeed!

Not to mention that the rents usually obtained from such properties does in time reperesent an income far in excess of maintennace costs. In many cases almost two thirds of the rental income generated from social housing is used for other projects. While I personally think that unfair, considering that these properties still attract council tax, it is easy to see how it is of financial benefit to council tax payers as a whole. So social housing really ought to appeal to the intelligent greedy!

With house prices averaging 200K nationally, there us a risk of homelessness for the large groups of working people in low paid jobs who need somewhere to live.

Plus the shortage of houses for families living off income support and similar benefits.

Government must create policies that allow a transition from the bottom of the property ladder to the higher steps. For example, if a social welfare family living in council estates are offered a low paid job, the system enccurages him to decline the job, as he faces a loss of home. Such a family shoule be offered a chance to buy a shared ownership home. As the family develops, a greater proportion of the ownership is assumed. With this strategy, he would then aspire to go for ownership with mortgage of a normal house.

Thus strategy will depopulate council estates for the waiting list to occupy, encourage people from welfare to work and instil a sense of the pride that comes with ownership in the occupants.

Dear Newsnight

For a few months now I have being developing what is quite an alarming feeling. As I watch Newsnight and read the blogs I have started to wonder if anyone is really interested in listening to anyone else?

Discussions frequently involves guests trying to interrupt each other. Has anyone ever changed their mind about an issue after 'listening' to the views of another quest? Or are they actually listening at all?

If they are not, what is the point of it all? We can all go through life with megaphones trying to shout everyone else down. Personally I dont want people to agree with everything I say and would be frightened if they did. What if you got to the point that everyone agreed with you. Would you feel better? So in the brave new world where we all agree what then? Is newsnight just a cathartic experience to make us feel better but not change anything?

Is everyone just talking at everyone else?

Reminds me of what a corby steelworker said in a film I made at art school. 'makes me wonder what the *** point of it all is, in reference to my art. But I'm starting to wonder, listening to the programmes and reading the blogs where we are going with all this.

And i pose the question again. is anyone really listening to anyone else? And if not how can any of us make progress.

Doesnt it occur to anyone that they might be wrong and if so it is important to keep listening and not close their ears to counter arguments.

And if people will not allow their views to be challenged... what then?

Best wishes
Bob Goodall

Housing

I remember back in the 60鈥檚 when I lived in Toxteth, Liverpool. The County/City council in their infinite wisdom enforced a great number of people to move from their homes both rented and owner occupier for a so called inner city ring road which never came about and many residents were uprooted and sent to places like Netherly,Winsford,Knowlesly,Runcorn & Widnes
The homes that we lived in were not perfect but with a little refurbishment they would had been sufficient for a continued occupancy. The smaller terraced and 3 storied houses were demolished in that area of Toxteth whilst the prime Georgian terraced buildings were also compulsory purchased by the John Moores group on behalf of the University of Liverpool. The houses that were built on the land were my original house stood did not stand for 20 years, what a waste of money.
Now we have another compulsory purchase of all the prime city centre area of Liverpool by the richest landlord of this country, certain people of this land can take your home/land due to the consequence of their birth or family connections. Another farce in Liverpool was the so-called Kirkby to Liverpool tramway which ended up being shelved which reminds me all of the steel tracks that were purchased are still rusting away to the tune of over 拢6000 p/w as they could not persuade anyone to buy them.
But it is O.K because they have us fools to soak up their debts as always don鈥檛 they?
It is high time that there was a political party for the people run by the people and not the cronies that think they know better as in my opinion they are all corrupt no matter what party flag colour they appear to fly if you see them after the sessions of the day they are all chummy with each other propping the many commons bars, and what a waste of those restaurants in that building too many to mention.
The people of this country are just seen as a never ending cash machine but when they have their way we will be a cashless society when they manage to implement the RFID chips to replace every prior form of Identification. Supposedly to prevent financial crime, this is just a ploy as if you do not comply with the state they will just switch your chip off effectively switching you off so that you have to comply, the excuses to be made for these chips will also be irrefutable evidence that you are who you are as they will have a unique ID number also to prevent terrorism or personae non gratis from having freedom of movement and to track individuals on where they travel and what they purchase, it鈥檚 the Bankers and taxman鈥檚 dream come true as all the banking Families have been pushing for this to be made law for years, then there is the darker side of these chips as they will in some cases be used to eliminate certain individuals by means of microwave electrocution and poisoning due to a time released toxin implanted into some chips which will be used for ethnic cleansing as one of the reasons GM crops were originally conceived for as certain ethnic groups are susceptible to certain toxins while some are resistant and if you think that I am kidding you this was mentioned way back in the 70鈥檚, a funny thing is the persistence of memory but that is another issue that they are trying to tackle by putting fluoride and aluminium oxide into your water supply, the fluoride is not law yet but soon will be. The fluoride is a bi-product of aluminium production slightly higher toxicity than lead and can reduce the ability to think straight as tests have shown just check your toothpaste for the other toxins as well, if you are not aware that you can only produce aluminium due to an eletro type of smelting then take heed as the water companies will tell you that aluminium deposits naturally in soil. That is a total lie. If any soil tested comes up with aluminium deposits it is for one reason only and that is due to Chem spraying as this is where we get a lot of our new strains of illness from to keep the drug companies in business a percentage of people with asthma in the Northeast may had developed more frequent bouts of complaints due to a yellow deposit that was mystery to the powers that be, but do not be surprised as B鈥橪IAR sold air traffic control to the United states government did he not?
I am telling you this as it is down to what the American government call PROBLEM REACTION SOLUTION this will keep the drug companies in business Bird manufactured by man MMR is not as safe as they say there is a world record amount of kids born with autism, enforced medication will also be on the way or prosecution or jail sentence will be in effect, what the powers be actually do is cause a problem they have their solution but wait for your reaction. Overcrowded jails is one example and oops what about all of those criminals that have disappeared? Oh I know let us build more jails after all the ones we have know are overcrowded this world is run by the Problem Reaction Solution idea and is the driving force behind the NEW WORLD ORDER as Rumsfeld would say we are just doing business and he made his cash out of Iraq. Weapons of Mass destruction which takes me to鈥︹�︹�︹�︹�uns
In my opinion the new gun laws are being put in place due to youth assassinations by secret service people made to look like gang warfare, only certain people have the ability to kill youngsters in cold blood and if I remember correctly that last boy who was shot in London was murdered by adults, the reason why I state this is that the growing number worldwide of the infamous MS13 gang has already infiltrated Europe and to quash any infiltration on UK soil the powers that be are going to put in place very soon new laws to put at least an 80% totally armed police force bringing in new laws just like the U.S patriot acts 1&2 both acts have not even been read by congress as they were all ordered to go out and vote for it at the time of it's rigged vote, this policy is what is know as problem, solution, reaction. It is just like the 911 farce, make a problem cause unnecessary fear and there you have it the public will back you all the way to infringement of their own civil rights and liberties. Cause a problem to get a reaction then enact a solution. Hey kids welcome to enforced Ritalin it鈥檚 already happening in the States.
We will have more stop and search and the re-introduction of the SUS laws, and the fact that B鈥橪IAR is so unwilling to go is proof that once he has enacted total chaos in the UK he will stay on indefinitely after declaring a state of emergency. It is very easy to point the finger at someone who is a Muslim and accuses them of being involved in a terror plot, as how can they disprove that they are not? After all they go to the Mosque and listen to the Imam so they must be terrorists, is that not so? Not my view of course. But I have been brought to this conclusion due to the dirty tricks played by MI5 & MI6 revealed by the whistle blowers who were consequently sacked after the revelation of which I do know is true as far as the Northern Ireland problem is concerned, I got to know some of the facts about
N. Ireland in my teens when a guy who started work in the factory where I was employed picked on me for no good reason, you have to realise that I had never met or seen him before and I was actually eating my lunch when this guy slammed his plate down in front of mine and said to me if there is ever a war with a certain country that he would come looking for me and do me and my family in, they were his actual words, he was built like an outhouse but I was so enraged it did not stop my 5 foot 7 rage smash the table over him. He was never reprimanded over the matter after I had made my complaint,
Weeks later I overheard him go into great detail about what he and his buddies got up to in Belfast abducting so called I.R.A suspects and taking them away in what they called the cooler.
The cooler was an armoured vehicle which contained at least 6 soldier鈥檚 and a barrel with water and big blocks of ice, after rendering the suspect unconscious they would continually smash an arm sometimes 2 until they broke, once this was achieved they would return the arm into the iced water until the suspect awoke and on awakening they would dump him and let him experience the pain from the thaw, this guy was a Sergeant for Christ鈥檚 sake, can you imagine what the higher ranks were like?
So now you know what to expect will happen when our own troops and police are turned on us and turn on us they will. Remember the Miners strikes in the 70鈥檚? Or when they sent gunboats up the Mersey during the biggest general strike in Britain, how easily people forget about how the police and troops were let loose to attack a peaceful protest, I wonder how many kids in the British armed forces are willing to see members of their own families as combatants? If you would really like to shake this government up then the only way is to remove any savings, investments, insurance policies and shares
Etc as this is the false economy that this government relies upon as your money is used to make more money for them and not you. Maybe you will receive a poultry 1-3% interest on your savings and if you borrow from them you will have to pay at least 6% interest on that loan, a win win situation for them while you loose loose.
Your government loves you really and on that note I will close but don鈥檛 forget that the word government from the Greek govern (魏蠀尾蔚蟻谓峋段�) (kybernan), = control (Latin) Mente =Mind
Yes Mind control, anyone remember the failed operation hearts and minds? Hmmm plant bomb blame the Shia, plant bomb blame the Sunni and now they are killing each other.
Filthy hegemonic politics, we are to blame as we voted them in.
鈥淎wake from Unconsciousness鈥� in the meantime sleep well.

Hi. Great programme, with the black guy from London talking the most sense.
I want to get in touch with him to give him a hand in his work re neighbours' activities.
How can I get hold of him?
Thanks

Lot of interesting stuff here. I think we can ignore the comments of GeorgeN as the ravings of a troll. (Ie, intended to offend in the hope of starting a flame war on this blog!)

I notice however that even some of those in generaal support of the notion are of the opinion that a large number of those living in council estates etc are lazy!

Now I don't intend to try and claim that there are no lazy people living on council estates, or in any other kind of accomodation. That would be obvious nonesense, if for no other reason that it is perfectly obvious that laziness is a condition which crosses all social boundaries. I know at least as many wealthy people who are lazy than those on council estates. (Which if you consider how few wealthy people I know, would seem to suggest that there are a greater proprtion of lazy amongst the wealthy, or possibly that I am a member of a secret 'lazy club'.)

If you mean that there are a greater number of people subsisting mainly on benefits living in social housing, then that is a different thing entirely. The first reason for that is quite obvious. They simply don't earn enough to cover their basic needs, and hence need to claim benefits to help with rent. Do not forget however that the cut-off point for many benefits is actually set quite low, and furthermore, because some benefits do not take account of other benefits, this means in some cases someone earning more money is worse off because of the loss of benefit this entails. In such a situation it is not surprising that some would rather hang on to their benefit and not get low paid job for fear of actually being less well off for their effort.

Consider also those who are quite aware that they will never be able to earn enough money to buy their own home. That now includes every young who cannot borrow a deposit from their parents, which is a very large part of the population, including those with full-time jobs! It also includes those who have for years been trying to save towards a deposit, only to find that the cost of a deposit is rising faster than they can save! What incentive does anyone have to try and get a better paid job when it is clear that even if you do succeed in 'getting on' the cost of a home will increase faster than your already insufficient income? No incentive whatever.

The idea that there was a large pool of people waiting in the background to 'jump on the bandwaggon' and get a house for free, is about as nonesensical as anything I have heard. Certainly if an oppurtinity presents itself, it will be taken advantage of. Anyone who does not take what few oppurtunities that life offers is, frankly a fool.

It is obvious that any system which is designed to provide a safety net for the 'deserving' (Whatever that means!) will also catch a few in that net who are let us say less deserving. But (if I may be permitted to stretch the metaphor a little further.) that does not mean we should not pull in the net and go home, with an empty hold, there is wastage in any system!

Certainly I know of a number of young women who in the 70's found that becoming a single mother practically guaranteed a council house, but knowing the home situation that many of these girls came from I can promise you that they would have tried almost antyhing to get out of the situation, and at that time if you were lucky enough to find work at all, it would not even then, be enough to obtain decent accommadation. No one should blame anyone from taking advantage of a system which offered them an easy escape. It is also true that there were one or two who were silly enough not to realise that having a small child on your own is not really an 'easy' way of obtaining accomadation, as well as a very small minority who could not care less as long as the got a 'free' house. The latter are a small minority (who should have their kids taken away for the benefit of all, but that'a another argument!) and a small price to pay, there are other means at our disposal for dealing with that sort of injustice!

People I find are all too quick to blame other people for societies problems, and so these arguments which single out individuals or groups of people (Single mothers, Chav's, immigrants, asians, etc.) as the cause of their problems are often bandied around. This of course is a form of prejudice, and should be treated as such.

In fact these prejudices are a form of laziness themselves. Probably the worst sort.

Why it is lazy? Becasue is saves us from having to really address the issues, and avoids having to do anything to solve the problem. So we don't actually have to work at the solution.

Why the worst kind?
Well apart from the fact that the problem that we fail to address is a serious one, there is very real danger of the simple (Lazy answer), and that is just eliminate the cause of the problem. That's common sense isn't it?

Erm, I can see this leading somewhere! Lets' start with labour camps, and herd the lazy into them. The camps are overcrowded? Well let's reduce the populatin of the camps. Let's get some kind of benefit out of these lazy beggars eh!

I think you can see the problem there, it's already been tried only now we don't blame all of the worlds ills on Jews anymore. (Now we blame Moslems! Oh, hang-on I'm beginning to see a pattern here!)

As I said earlier, the problem is not one of laziness. OK, you could argue that the truly terminally lazy tend to accummulate in social housing, but I would argue that there are very few truly lazy people.

First, it's very easy to confuse laziness with despair. Why bother to work if work is a pointless exercise which cannot bring me what I need. And don't forget that one of the clinical symptoms of depression is feeling tired all the time. Did we not just hear the results of a survey which showed (or at least strongly suggests) that teenagers in the UK are the most depressed in the western world. (Another well known symptom of depression is alcohol dependence!)

Second, it is wrong to assume that the majority of people who live in social hosing are lazy or on benefits. Frankly being on benefits does not give anyone any advantage in getting a council house, but if you do have a low income, your chances of living anywhere else are virtually zero.

Third, there are plenty of jobs which do not pay anything close to what is neccesary to pay even a council rent. I know this personally. I have a friend who works in a nursing home for mentally disabled adults. Despite many years experience, and despite having a number of relavant qualifications, and despite often having to remain at work for 56hours(!) at a time still can only afford to sleep on a sofa in a council flat rented by someone else! And that's not on minimum wage, and does include overtime. (The fact that travel to work and back can cost ten pounds each day, and many public transport workers are litle better off!)

There are also plenty of people on low incomes who live in private accommadation, but if you really llok at this accomadation you quickly realise that there is a problem. A bedsit may be sufficent for a single persons immediate needs, but that's about the lot.

I heard that more young people are 'choosing' to live in single accommadation. This is just nonesense, the fact is there is no choice these days for most people, it's either single accomodation or move back in with mum and dad. (Another modern phenomenon.)

This is also a very effective barrier to those who would like to have families in the conventional way. To many people now the only 'social life', they have at all is in the pubs and clubs, and we know about those problems don't we!

I think it is plain and obvious that there is a housing problem, nay housing disater in this country. I also think that the lack of cheap decent housing is the root of a great number of the social 'problems' we hear so much about.

Addressing the probelm of sufficient housing in the UK (and by sufficient I mean in quality and sutability not just quantity.) should be at the top of any political agenda. More policing, more 'work incentives' or any such measures are at best only sticking plasters, and in many cases make matters wors by demonising the victims who in many cases are just trying to get the best they can out of a pretty grim situation.

The problem here is not a financial one, but a political one, once the problem is recognised as primarily a one of decent affordable housing, then a means can be found of funding a building project.

That does not mean that it is the exclusive business of politicians. It means that we all need to think about what is needed, and what we have to do to achieve ou1r goals, and not to let career politicians to make these descisions for us. The problem is convicing enough people that the solution is to build more build better and build a wider variety. Once that is achived, we have a chance of getting something done!

(I always say beware of politicians who tell you that the solution to any problem is 'common sense'. In my experience common sense is a rare commodity to be cherished wherever it can truly be found. A career politicain who appeals to your common sense is in fact appealing to our prejudices!Do not forget, that however a politician started out, they soon become involved in intrigue and manipulation, so it is best not to listen to them, but instead do tell them what to do, and keep a close eye on them to make sure thay do it, because you can be sure that if you do not do this then someone else will, and that someone else is not likely to have your best interests at heart.)

It would appear that most of the contributors to this blog, recognise that there is a housing problem, and do think that the solution is somehow to increase the stcok of affordable public housing. (I am of course ignoring the obvious troll!) So it would appear that gettin peoplple to realise the problem is not a grat one.

So now all we have to do is to convince a large number of people that the solution is more housing and that we cannot rely pureley on private entrprise to provide it. (Sounds easy doesn't it!)

The next stage I think is to try and put out prejudices aside, and while recognising that there will be people we do not particulary like who will take advantage of such housing, realise that that in itself is a distraction from the main purpose.

That way to get aything done is to present a clear argument on which we all agree, and to have a solution which looks reasonable, and not to get bogged down in minor side issues. The main focus is to provide decent housing, and to make it accessible to everyone who needs it. (Of course this means lazy people will live in some of them, as I have pointed out right at the start there are lazy people everywhere!)

We must also be clear that it will not be an easy thing to get something useful actually done, but that if we don't try and do something it won't get better all by itself.

I hope we can all see that, and I for one don't mind if I have to dedicate a part of my own time to achieving that goal.

Interesting to see how last night's discussion would have developed after day's vote by Brighton & Hove tenants to reject housing transfer by nearly 80%! see www.brighton-hove.gov.uk
PS can you delete multiple postings!

It is the same old story with social housing,
Build an estate run it down with unsociable activities gangs, drugs and prostitution and what do you need? Answer more police to legitimise a police state therefore putting up council charges for us idiots to pay and all the time the people behind the drugs and guns coming into this country are the people that are running it, how on earth do the drugs and guns get into this country? Answer very easy, via foreign and domestic military bases no customs control and if you are part of a black operations unit you will have ultimate freedom to enact this, as they are the fools who act as mules for organised criminals who are in fact working for the black operation groups. Why do the main players never get caught? Simply because it is too good for business and they tip off certain targeted consignments which they will consider as a tax loss and the attention is diverted from the main consignment that is really coming in. In reality the opium wars never really ended just the locations, as the original mass market destination could see through the plot to take over their land and resources, but now other tactics are in effect to make the final land grab on that said land. As human beings we have to put a stop to the pollution of the minds of our youth, let them experience foods without additives as they are also having an adverse effect. If you take a look at your weekly shopping and separate the fresh unpolluted foodstuffs from the processed foods and write down the percentages of additives, chemicals, preservatives, flavour enhancers artificial sweeteners etc and calculate the gross weight that you and your family have consumed over a twelve month period then you will wonder why you are suffering from certain cancers, allergies, asthma and brain tumours, the scientific information is freely available just don鈥檛 get you information from government or company sponsored sources as it is not in their interest to tell the truth as both parties would lose revenue. It is part of the marketing solution in their eyes, orchestrate a health problem, produce a reaction by spreading panic within the world community, fuelled, I may say, successfully by the media, who are also affiliated to the political parties in the fore at the moment; 鈥渙h I think we had better get inoculations programme鈥� and the key? It just happens that a drug company has recently developed an easily distributable drug that will cure all your ills, once again introducing more chemicals into your system, compromising your immune system, making you ill?
. Why do you think places like Porton Down exist?
Dismantled and removed from Germany after WWII. If you have no intention of using a chemical or biological agent on any population then why go ahead with the investment or the research into this field, particular viruses are targeted at specific targets and the world population is growing at a rate of which the powers that be cannot control and we outnumber them immensely so the best way to solve that problem is to provide a solution to that problem and that is to spray the air with a said pathogen in designated area鈥檚 as had been done in Iraq in both wars, also to pollute your foods by mass medication and not for the benefit of your health. Remember who was the 1st to use biological warfare yes America on the 1st nations of that land, who were the 1st to use nuclear weapons yes America once again , you have to ask yourself who is it that your really fear at this present time is it your so called enemy the poor of this world who have no designs on your property or land or the multi-national mega-companies that are obtaining business, your utilities and land at your expense or do you fear yourself for your own incompetence and inability to see what is going on around you? I am only giving you my view of what I see and as I see it. Will you continue to take their pills and accept the RDIF chip? Remember this eventually you will not be asked you will be required to comply or the alternative will be the processing camps which are in effect now like in Guantanamo and Texas and no court in any land has any power over what they do and do you know why???
Take a look at the American flag, there is the basic stars and stripe then there is the version with the gold edging or trim. Once you have entered a building with the version with the gold edging it is understood that you understand that that building and any business and whatever goes on in the said building is subject to military/naval maritime law and supersedes any federal or supreme court ruling in America or anywhere else on this earth. Fact it was a product of Fascism.
The power of knowledge is dangerous in the wrong hands and that is why the Bible was written in Latin and only taught to the select few, why do you think laws are made with Latin names or subtexts?
The power to think for your self is more dangerous to those who want to control you.
Will you comply when they tell you resistance is useless?
You are after all just a commodity an expendable asset for them to use as they wish, you only have to look at the armed forces to see that, but you will always have an army of mindless cyborg鈥檚 when they have been indoctrinated and told how to think and fed medicated food. Oh and depleted uranium weapons are quite safe my son just aim it over there and don鈥檛 worry about the cancer鈥檚 you will develop in the future after all you are serving your country and liberating people in the name of democracy and freedom and ignore all that you hear to the contrary as they are just political agitators and anarchist鈥檚 even communists so kill em all oh dear we did not find weapons of mass destruction lets try Afghanistan or maybe Iran or North Korea, and what do we do with our own weapons of mass destruction Sir? We will use them eventually private we just need to bring this chess game into our favour.
The film Trading places is a true depiction of what the Illuminati are really like but unfortunately you will always play the game using their rules.
鈥淎wake From Unconsciousness鈥� expose the truth.

Thank you Gordon Stalker for your kind remarks.

I wonder if anyone posting on 主播大秀 blogs is not employed in the public sector.
I guess that would be as rare as a liberal American watching Fox News.
At most, bloggers here could be employed in the private sector as researchers in social policy (funded by Labour donors) thinktanks.
The crucial difference between Fox News and 主播大秀 is that jingoistic, conservative 'nuts' actually pay for their choice.
主播大秀 is funded by bloggers like you who love it AS WELL AS people that hate it and never watch it or post here. They have no choice but to pay
for "objective" news, public sector style. Stalin (and modern day, western style version - Brown) would be proud of the 主播大秀
It would be someone like you sir being
made to pay for Daily Mail or Daily Express. Let's see if you would like that.
By the way I don't like Fox News (I am a libertarian), I just brought it as an example of biased news similar to the 主播大秀 bias. Fox News is for American hardliners keen for war and 主播大秀 is for state spending.

Whoever thinks that council housing keeps general house prices lower than they would be otherwise is doing a dissertation in a (left-wing) University, parroting their tutors' ideas.
If council housing was sold in the market it would swamp the market with (over)supply and house prices would plummet 20-30%.
Most council houses are decent homes no different from 'private' houses.
What makes them different is people - ie. the vandalism, fear, higher insurance premiums, difficulty in having a functional (not burnt out) car.
Decent people that don't want to live in fear compete with each other for limited (non-council, and not near it)
houses and this causes massive house price inflation.
The private sector is so expensive because certain sections of cities are "no-go", out of bounds areas and there is very limited area for a lot of private renters/buyers.

The weakest argument by far is that it keeps wages (of bus drivers, rubbish collectors, etc...) lower than they would be and this benefits the rest.
Well get rid of social housing and the wages of workers will have to increase so that they can rent/buy in the private sector.
At the same time get rid of all the taxes/ social insurance/ child benefit that is paid out to work-shy single mothers and you'll see that there would be massive savings to balance the inflationary effects on such services.
More importantly these workers won't live with the stigma of "council estate" and won't have their car vandalised every week.
They will live a decent life. Now their life and work seems unvalued as they get exactly the same things as the mother of the yobs next door that make their lives hell.

How about all of us offering our services to society by being "carers" for our children.
Who would build and maintain the houses for such carers ? Who would produce food, etc...

You can't have a society whereby a certain section only offers services to their own family and yet it wants to use the resources/services of other people in society. If you want food/electricity... you have to offer something to people other than members of your own family.

I am sure such elusive concepts will be alien to Gordon Stalker and the rest of the public "servants" that frequent 主播大秀 blogs.
Public sector means = we decide what we want and we charge you, if you don't pay you go to prison
Private sector = we decide on the price, if you don't like it, don't buy it

It is clear that I am outnumbered (as any of you would be in, say, a Fox News blog) and this will cause prejudice and bigotry (troll).
Sit comfortably in your armchair sir and pontificate how much tax you need to charge to enjoy the perks of public sector life.

Dear Mr Goodall,

Please don't be downhearted. It's true that people who aren't prepared to listen to the views of others are extremely dull; they also wilfully deny themselves the opportunity of learning anything. This is a great mistake because learning new things is one of life's enduring pleasures. Fortunately, there are always more things to learn, and sometimes they are learned here.

I grew up in Wythenshawe, the scene of the Newsnight item and come to this debate late...
I would love to have seen the original programme in full.

George N who seems to have lots of issues that he has to live with, and through, dominates much of the early thought. Too bad that he has never met any of the good people facing the same struggles that he has obviously been affected by, who do manage to see that a society does need to care for the housing conditions of those who cannot get their feet on to the housing escalator of rising prices.

As a Minister of Religion for over 25 years, all around the country, the common thread of many instances of family and individual stress I have met are connected with the need to find a home. In the late eighties the life expectancy needed for each house built from whatever source was over 400 years, and nothing I have heard recently enables me to think that we have solved the desperate lack of housing in our society.

Does anyone in the Government, Civil Service, Housing Corporation, anyone, know what the current replacement rate for housing stock mean for the longevity of housing built?

yours,

Revd Ian Hamilton

move public housing? dont think so! i'll tell you what the problem is in the UK, STOP giving unemployed benefits to people who dont want to work.unemployed benefits in other countries are only given for 3-6 months, that should be enough for people to get sorted out and go out there and find a job doing something!, and of course my favorite is public homes to single mothers who because of having too many children cant work and the people who pays their taxes have to support them.