The Great Military Housing Scandal!

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by Winstanley, Apr 15, 2007.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. A couple of days ago, there were articles in the papers about military families queuing for many hours to register their interest in buying former MQs. One of the wives interviewed made a good point - many service personnel serve for 22 years or more, but have no right to buy their rented homes. Compare with council tenants etc (many of whom have never done a decent day's work!).

    Back in 1996, like other service people living in MQs, I received a nice little letter from the Secretary of State for Defence, Michael Portillo. He defended the sale of MQs, and said that the proceeds would be spent on refurbishment and modernisation. Fat chance!

    Is there a back-boned politician out there who will stand up for service families, and ensure they are treated properly? Why should we suffer a huge disadvantage in the ever-rising housing market because we have been moved around ad nauseam at HM pleasure?
     
  2. In answer to your question posed in your third paragraph - no. There is not a 'back-boned' politician out there who will stand up for the military. Not many votes in that course of action. The current bunch of third rate t*rds are in any case too frightened of upsetting the Chancellor to seek funding for anything - except their own pay, allowances and pensions of course.
     
  3. Point by point...there are many families in council homes who have, in fact, done a decent days work. Generalising does not help the argument. If you allowed all Service people to buy their own homes (ie the ones that they have rented) then you would end up with no MQs, and a cohort of silly old buggers living inside (or just outside) the wire. Not practical. The question of priority housing from council stock also arises, but is unlikely to be solved in the near future - the Government simply would not allow someone to leave the Forces and "select" a place to live - and before the "f**kin immigrants" debate starts, they don't get this option either.

    Local councils need to be forced to be more flexible with their interpretation of "local ties". Five years at your final unit should be enough to tie you to an area, but councils routinely do not play by the rules. Personally, I know why, and it tends to relate to people here (in Portsmouth) walking in with a chip on their shoulder, demanding housing for "serving Queen and country" - when they have in effect had 22 years propping up the flagpole at Nelson. And they also "forget" about their pension and terminal grant, which technically should be used to secure housing.

    The argument that is always put forward is that you have never been prevented from buying housing - in fact, with LSAP now available to almost everyone, you are considered more fortunate than many (I know, it's a stupid little amount, but it covers legal fees). And we know that you have always been encouraged to populate the married patch and not to strike off on your own. What needs looking at are the charges that are made for personnel who own their own homes but are required to occupy Single Living Accommodation at their place of work. Concession should be sought in terms of Council Tax, Food and Accommodation, and also in Travel entitlements.

    The sale of MQs has always been a sharp point - Annington Homes frequently buy them up and sell them for more than your average Service person can afford, unless you follow the Housing Association or Part-Rent/Part-Buy route. It is difficult for the Forces, as it is difficult for many others who are employed ostensibly by the Government, and it could (and should) be argued that the Government should be assisting more.