UKIP query ‘Locals Only’ housing plan

UKIP leader Nigel Farage has challenged Eastleigh’s Lib Dems to explain how they intend to  limit new housing to just local people and prevent occupation by immigrants.

Earlier this month Eastleigh News reported how Councillor Paul Bicknell had published and distributed a leaflet around the town’s Aviary estate that claimed  that new houses to be built on Chesnut Avenue were “not for people from Portsmouth or Europe”.

The leaflet – published and promoted on MP Chris Huhne’s behalf – appeared to contradict a statement from the Lib Dem Communities minister Andrew Stunell who, when asked about the likely effect of immigration on housing demand over the next 20 years, said that 40% of new housing would be needed to house immigrants – this equates to about 80,000 houses a year.

These are government figures based on information released by the Office for National Statistics.

Nigel Farage told Eastleigh News:

“It’s about time politicians were honest about immigration and the effect it has had and will continue to have on our public services and houses.

All three old parties voted for EU laws which allow uncontrolled immigration from the EU and the same access to public services as British nationals. Only UKIP voted against and only UKIP are holding the politicians to account on this issue.

Chris Huhne should be honest and explain to his constituents just why that deceptive leaflet went out to voters in his name”

  14 comments for “UKIP query ‘Locals Only’ housing plan

  1. maureen
    October 29, 2011 at 8:29 pm

    Will keep checking this page for Huhne’s response, I read somewhere that he follows this website so I shouldn’t have long to wait………..

    • mm
      Eastleigh Xpress
      October 30, 2011 at 8:26 pm

      I read somewhere that he follows this website so I shouldn’t have long to wait………..

      Well Mo, that’s what he told Jon Sopel on the ‘Politics Show’ – in fact he must have mentioned Eastleigh News about five times bless him!

  2. October 30, 2011 at 9:59 am

    There are several problems with these housing proposals.

    1. That figure of 6000 people on the housing list. Nobody’s ever satisfied me that it is an accurate figure, free from list inflation. If you wanted a new home in this area, wouldn’t you register with Eastleigh, Southampton, Fareham, Winchester and Test Valley…? I would…! I’d like to see the local Councils working together here, to compare lists and get accurate figures that have all the list inflation removed…

    2. Many people on the lists will currently have a roof over their heads. They may very well need better accommodation, but it would not accurate to portray them as homeless.

    3. Unless it is Council Housing, there’s no way that the housing can be committed to local people only. As soon as the private homes are built, there’ll be hoardes of people from outside of the area wanting to buy them, taking advantage of the comapratively cheap prices compared to new homes in the London area, enjoy our great countryside (or what’s keft of it) and to further over-crowd the rail link up to London…

    4. There’s a lot than could be done to get older people (like me) who are currently rattling around in a privately-owned 3-bed semi into more appropriate accomodation. I’d be quite happy to shift into a decent Housing Association flat if the Council (or Housing Association) would buy my house and release some capital so that I could retire early and let somebody younger have my job…!

  3. Jay
    October 31, 2011 at 7:33 am

    Sorry Roy Turner but how do you expect the council to come up witht he cash to buy your private house AND also provide you with a council property. Has the council won the lottery or Xmas come early? You are free to downsize yourself; why does the council need to get involved?

    To return to the original debate, immigrants should not be allowed to apply for social housing until they have been here for at least ten years; it is plainly unfair to give away precious social housing to people who have been here for 5 minutes.

    • saintsman
      October 31, 2011 at 10:05 am

      It’s a myth that immigrants jump the queue after being here for ‘5 minutes’.
      What evidence do you have?

      • Jay
        October 31, 2011 at 6:42 pm

        Thousands of Council houses full of immigrants. So what evidence do YOU have that they DON’T jump the queue then??

        • mm
          Eastleigh Xpress
          November 1, 2011 at 8:50 am

          Are you a Lib Dem by any chance?

          • Jay
            November 1, 2011 at 12:15 pm

            Hell no: are you joshing or drunk?? The Limp Dems love immigration even more than Labour. Noticed he still hasn’t answered my request for evidence btw….

    • October 31, 2011 at 6:39 pm

      I’m not saying it would be easy (or cheap) to achieve this Jay.

      I am saying that there is a pool of people who (for all sorts of reasons) would be quite happy to interchange between private & public sector housing, if that could be arranged.

      That would release larger-sized properties which could be snapped up by Housing Associations and redeployed for families to use, thus easing pressure on the housing list.

      At the moment there is no way of making that switch, from private-sector to public. Once you are in private housing, you are trapped there with no way of moving back into public sector housing until you have some sort of health issue.

      Minds seem to be closed to the idea at the moment, but I believe that it is a line of thinking that needs to be explored at local and national level. Our housing system is not felixible enough to facilitate that ebb and flow between different types of housing. That needs to be addressed.

      Its not quite as ludicrous as it seems. My understanding is that EBC has been investing in commercial property in recent years. It has certainly invested in a major new development at the Rose Bowl, so if that’s OK why shouldn’t the Council invest in residential property too..?

      If it were a Housing Association making the investment, wouldn’t it be private money that was being invested rather than Council money…?

      And whoever made that investment, there would of course be a regular return in the form of rental, to offset their investment…

      • Jay
        October 31, 2011 at 6:50 pm

        My main point is that as a private owner why on earth do you want to return to the murky waters of social housing? Why not simply sell your house and buy a one bedroom retirement property: you would have better neighbours etc!

        • October 31, 2011 at 10:34 pm

          I know what you mean, I’d have said the same thing 10 years ago, but one’s circumstances, one’s outloook on life and one’s priorities tends to change as one gets older.

          BTW. Its a myth that one would automatically have better neighbours in private accomodation…!

          • Jay
            November 1, 2011 at 7:33 am

            Well each to their own, I admire your faith in human nature that you think any profit from the transaction would be ploughed back into the system rather than to line the pocket of some council fat cat..

            It will be a cold day in hell before the state gets their hands on my private property!

  4. mm
    Eastleigh Xpress
    November 1, 2011 at 12:37 pm

    Hell no: are you joshing or drunk?? The Limp Dems love immigration even more than Labour. Noticed he still hasn’t answered my request for evidence btw….

    I just wondered from the sentiments expressed if you were really Cllr Paul Bicknell… 😀

    • Jay
      November 1, 2011 at 1:00 pm

      No I am not he! I think you’ll find the majority of ordinary people hold the view that priority should be given to people who have lived/contributed to an area for generations rather than newcomers.

      I am a UKIP supporter shock horror! The title of the report got me reading it!

Comments are closed.