Winwaloe
02 August 2004 11:34
Back to the House
Apart from revolution, turning the clock back "x" years (to stop
the original Cornish owners selling to incomers)and convincing the banks and
financial institutions that they are actually charities what are your suggestion
for the low cost housing issue? As an aside you might be interested to know that
in the Saintly location a 3 bed, "pretty" Victorian terrace house can
now set you back £300k+ The main reason being that the state schools are good
and it is cheaper to buy a house in the catchment area than to pay private
school fees. The housing situation has
pockets of fright everywhere. However, as I have kept a watch on property prices
in Cornwall over the last few years it is very interesting to note how they have
risen at all levels. There are now many more Cornish properties gracing the
pages of Country Life than there were a few years back (subjective opinion
though). Do you have housing trust's down there? They had a scheme in Milton
Keynes where first time buyers could get on the ladder by buying a share of a
new house the remainder being owned by a property trust or something similar.
Not ideal but what is?
=====
Benatugana - Tereba nessa - Winwaloe
Vile Jelly
02 August 2004 13:48
Nowt wrong with violent revolution (unless you're Marie Antoinette and/or the
cake industry).
The way the RT see it, affordable housing is an issue in a lot of areas (even
your stockbroker belt) but the problem is particularly virulent down here
because of the appallingly low income levels. I agree that £50k for a property
is a bargain by a lot of places standards but the fact that it is still
economically unviable down here puts the whole thing into perspective. What
effectively seems to be the situation is that in order to get the bottom quarter
of the population under a permanent roof down here you can forget 'cut-price'
affordable homes, you'd basically have to almost give them away for nowt in
order for them to be within the means of the targeted peeps.
I was saying in an e-mu to Helling t'other day that it now seems to be almost
mandatory that you have to house people by making them property owners. I can't
recall seeing anything of significance about new council houses being built. In
fact, I'm not sure what goes on in your burg but down here, the councils have
really clamped down on the 'right to buy' thing because they've realised they've
just given away a huge chunk of their housing stock, making a relatively few
long-term tenants very nicely off thank you, without making any meaningful
impression on the housing crisis. There is one big private ass I'm aware of
(Penwith Housing Association) but they aren't exactly busting a gut to expand
their property portfolio. Yea verily, the last time I can remember PHA's name
memorably cropping up in the press was when it was claimed that they were in
cahoots with the Tate to evict the wrinklies from Meadow Flats. Hardly
reassuring!
I think council and/or private association housing schemes are the only
realistic way of dealing with the problem down here. Either that or do something
to boost the income levels. As long as a huge chunk of the population are in
non-contract, piece-work, minimum wage type jobs then the first (or any) rung of
'the property ladder' is always going to be beyond them.
Winwaloe
02 August 2004 16:50
What would you say is the average wage for someone in West Penwith, under the
age of 30 and who has not gone in to a family business or set up their own
business? Is it mainly young singles and young couples that are finding it hard
on the property ladder or does it apply across the whole spectrum. IS there an
organisation helping young singles to form
co-operatives to buy a share in a home (quite good on a bull market).
Vile Jelly
03 August 2004 14:18
I'd say that the majority of them are £5 an hour or less or on less than £11k
a year in the unlikely event they've actually got an employment contract. That
would certainly tie in with the TUC report which reckoned that more than a
quarter of the working population too home less than £250 a week gross. And
that was on average for the whole of Cornwall. Penwith was the poorest of the
Cornish districts so one would guess that means that considerably more than 25%
are earning less than £250 pw down here. [Jelly's one
of them and never has any munny, so if anyone would like to buy us a drink .....
The RT] And, of course, the beauty of paying someone an hourly wage
is that you don't have to worry about annual salary reviews, keeping up with
inflation, etc, so I can only see the proportion of povs increasing in the
foreseeable future. Even if you could just about afford it would you take out a
long-term commitment like a mortgage when you don't even know if your income
will keep up with inflation in the next five years?
This is one of the reasons I have been arguing against the 'tourism brings money
into Cornwall' fallacy. No doubt it does but the money doesn't go into the
pockets of the vast majority of the indigenous workers. Most of the jobs created
by tourism are the deadest of dead ends. It can't be healthy for any society to
have a substantial chunk of its people in non-contract, low wage, no security,
no prospects jobs. Hardly investing in the future is it? I do not understand why
government and development agencies aren't pushing projects that create skilled
jobs with prospects. Another Edam Project might look very well in the tourist
brochures but is creating vacancies for a few more ticket-pushers, tour guides
and ice cream vendors really investing in Cornwall? Yes, you can't get round the
logistics problem so far as businesses that require constant physical
communication are concerned but there are loads of other operations that are not
location dependent. They moved the bulk of the Met Office to (the posh part of)
Plymouth. Why couldn't they have moved it or something similar to Truro or
Camborne? I mean, would you really be that pissed off if Mrs W got a skool
transfer down here and your whateveryouworkfor moved to Penzance?
I don't think there is any particular age group being done down. I know people
through the age spectrum working in various jobs and they are all pretty poorly
paid. People tend to harp on more about 'young peeps/families' because it is
more of an attention grabber but I don't think they are any worse off than the
rest. Someone twenty years older or younger than me would still be getting the
same for doing my job. And all three of us wouldn't be able to afford a mortgage
on a £50-60k property. Not aware of any revolutionary housing associations or
schemes of that ilk down here. But, even if there were, I still go back to the
jobs issue. If you've got a no prospects/no security job are you going to want
to commit yourself to a 20/25/30 year mortgage? Would it even be responsible to
encourage people in that economic position to do so?
Next Back
Home
Site Map