Council houses – a dream come true?

The Government’s intention to have the biggest Council House building programme since the 1940s and 50s will give immediate hope to the 134,210 homeless households, including 176,130 children, living in temporary accommodation and the 4,793 people sleeping rough. And as the “right to buy scheme” still, at the time of writing, applied in England (but not in Scotland or Wales) could get them on the housing ladder. …Although former Council Houses have been notoriously difficult to sell.

The programme will create work for some of the 1.01 million young people between the ages of 16 and 24 who are not in education or training, thereby also boosting the economy. It will divert public funds through Housing Benefit from unscrupulous landlords with houses of multiple occupation to Local Authorities at reduced cost. Therefore, economically it is a win win.

Although very much needed, is it a medium-term quick fix which could perpetuate the stigma and labelling associated with Council Houses? In recent times so called social housing (a dreadful term) has been included within new developments in search of integration but this has still attracted similar stigma and labelling.

Therefore, is this another case of addressing the symptoms and not the cause? Widening income inequality and increasing poverty are the great social evils of our time and the root cause of so many of today’s problems.

When I married in 1965 my wife and I were on low starter salaries and yet were able to save up for the deposit on a house (no financial help from our parents) by not going out during the year of our engagement and obtain a mortgage to buy a new two bedroomed semi-detached Wimpey House.

The average wage in 1965 was £800 per year and the average house price £3,500 which was 4.3 times the average salary (ours was £1,100 – 1.3 times the average salary). By 1980 the average salary had increased to £6,500 and the average house to £23,288 (3.5 times the average salary).

The average full-time salary in the UK in 2026 is £39,039 per year with a median salary of £31,584 including part time workers and the average cost of a house £270,000 – which is 8.5 times the median salary. And therein lies the problem.

In 1965, the chief executives of the UKs top hundred largest companies earned an average of roughly £18,000 to £24,000 per year which was 22 to 30 times average earnings. By 1980 the average earnings had increased to £6,500 and that of a Chief Executive of a top hundred company to £117,000 per year.

By 2026 the median pay package for a FTSE 100 CEO had grown to between £4.4m and £5.89m. This is 186 times median earnings.

This widening income inequality has escalated since the economic policies of the 1980s. As a first step perhaps, Government could consider raising the tax-free personal allowance to 60% of median household income (which would currently be £22,022) so that no one living in poverty ever had to pay income tax again.

Given there are 31,000 people in the UK being paid over £1m per year and the top tax band cuts in at £125,140 per year, there is room to make this cost neutral.

However, one cannot address this widening income inequality via income tax alone. Steps need to be taken to restrict excessive profiteering (most of the increased prices at the pumps and on utility bills manifested in increased profits for the companies) and tackle income inequality at source. Those at the top could still have their million-pound salaries if they paid those on whose hard work they depend proportionately.

According to Oxfam in its report “Takers not Makers” global billionaire wealth increased by £1.5 trillion in 2024. Elon Musk became the first trillionaire in 2026.

Unless Government addresses pay differentials, so that all employees get a fair and proportionate reward for their endeavours, chasing inward investment in search of growth will make the rich richer and create low paid jobs for the masses as it has for over forty years. The Resolution Foundation anticipates that if the economic forecasts and policies remain unchanged, an additional 1.5 million people, including 400,000 children will be in relative poverty in the UK by 2029 /30. Morris Pearl, Chair of the Patriotic Millionaires said: “Rising and extreme inequality threatens everything we hold dear: our democracies, our planet and our broader society”.

According to a recent study by Christopher Hoy who interviewed 9000 people in 8 countries who grossly underestimated the ratio of Chief Executives pay in the larger corporations, banks and utilities to the average pay of their employees believing it to be 18 times higher and wanted it to be 5 times. When told it could be as much as 269 times higher surprisingly it was the far-right voters who altered their views about redistribution the most. Even in Japan with the lowest ratio of 59 times, people thought it was 8 and wanted it to be 5.

Frequent surveys by The Equality Trust have shown there is growing recognition that the economy is a human made system and, as such, could be changed.

Income inequality must be central to Government Policy.

These ideas are developed further in my latest book A Better World.

* Chris Perry is a former Director of Social Services for South Glamorgan County Council, a former Director of Age Concern Hampshire, a former Non-Executive Director of the Winchester and Eastleigh Healthcare NHS Trust and a former presenter of an award-winning public affairs programme on Express FM.

Read more by .
This entry was posted in Op-eds.
Advert

One Comment

  • “ Government could consider raising the tax-free personal allowance to 60% of median household income (which would currently be £22,022) so that no one living in poverty ever had to pay income tax again”

    This proposal would not remove a single person from poverty (using the current definition) since their income would still be less than 60% of median income, even though they would have more take-home income. However, increasing their income by the amount of income tax they would pay on their salary up to 60% of median income would remove people from poverty using the current definition.

    It is time we had a measure of poverty that was linked to the cost of buying basic necessities rather than being linked to other people’s incomes.

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

*
*
Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?

Advert

Recent Comments

  • Jana
    “ Government could consider raising the tax-free personal allowance to 60% of median household income (which would currently be £22,022) so that no one livin...
  • Chloe
    It comes as no surprise that some on here support the Dilnot proposals. It gave the biggest tax break to the wealthy in generations .. Someone with an asset of ...
  • Ruth Bright
    This might be a wonderful opportunity for us to work cross-party to bring about solutions regarding social and residential care. We have however been pretty vag...
  • Alex Macfie
    "Legacy news media has degenerated into titbits of gossip and so called reliable sources." and social media hasn't? Political podcasts and social media tend to...
  • David Garlick
    We get what we pay for and whilst there is no doubt room for improved ways of working it will require more of our cash!...