Old Conservatives don't understand

[Deleted member 221031]

No. It's frequently cheaper than running a complete in house department.

So you’re against right to buy, but you support outsourcing?

 

[denso13]

So you’re against right to buy, but you support outsourcing?

I support getting the best value for tenants, however that is done.

 

[Deleted member 221031]

I support getting the best value for tenants, however that is done.

What a splines answer

So direct labour then? As most councils are moving back to that.

Unless you agree with Thatchers idea instead ?

 

[denso13]

So direct labour then? As most councils are moving back to that.

Some are some aren't, horses for courses.

Unless you agree with Thatchers idea instead ?

Not the compulsory nature of it.

 

[Notch7]

You make an excellent case for a profitable right to buy model run by local government.

I make an excellent case for councils owning social housing.
Because it’s better if the state own assets, it save money

I’ve nothing against right to buy, provided councils replace more homes than they sell.

If councils owned plenty of social housing that would stabilise the market and reduce property being made an investment rather than a home for people to live in.

 

[Deleted member 221031]

Some are some aren't, horses for courses.

Not the compulsory nature of it.

You’d make a good women or politician! You can’t give a straight answer.

 

[Notch7]

It was implied.

Only the maintenance company or contractor make money out of maintenance. Oh dear me

thank you for admitting you were wrong

shame you are too much of a coward to openly admit it, but that’s who you are

And no it absolutely was not implied, the debate was councils owning social housing being cheaper than paying out housing benefit and thus paying the private sector for house ownership + maintenance.

 

[Notch7]

You’d make a good women or politician! You can’t give a straight answer.

You might want to reduce everything to a binary argument, real life is more complex.

 

[denso13]

You can’t give a straight answer.

No, I don't agree with Thatcher's model.

Tendering may be better in some circumstances. Give me some real world figures and I'll give you a specific answer on a specific case.

 

[Deleted member 221031]

No, I don't agree with Thatcher's model.

Tendering may be better in some circumstances. Give me some real world figures and I'll give you a specific answer on a specific case.

I’m not that interested in it. I just think councils should run as much as possible in house.

Right to buy wasn’t a brilliant idea, but there’s been worse.

 

[Deleted member 221031]

thank you for admitting you were wrong

shame you are too much of a coward to openly admit it, but that’s who you are

And no it absolutely was not implied, the debate was councils owning social housing being cheaper than paying out housing benefit and thus paying the private sector for house ownership + maintenance.

It was implied and you know it.

Show me the post and well see lol

 

[Deleted member 221031]

thank you for admitting you were wrong

shame you are too much of a coward to openly admit it, but that’s who you

Did I admit it not lol ?

Are you ok Notchy lad

 

[Deleted member 221031]

Housing benefit is a huge cost.

The reason it is a huge cost is because social housing is managed by private landlords and they are making money out of their asset because they can link rental value to market rates, and no doubt by doing so they make money on the maintenance.

That’s the post!

So are you going to deny that states private landlords make money out of maintenance?

Would you like to say sorry or keep digging ?

@Notch7

 

[Deleted member 221031]

I didn’t say private landlords

But you did though lol

 

[motorbiking]

Then their 30 year plan is shot to bits. I don't know why you keep ignoring that.

because it isn't