Tenants lose fight as council can evict families to house homeless

Reply to the comment left by Beaver at 30/06/2025 – 10:24
Don’t forget junior doctors, who were also handed a hefty increase with no productivity commitment, and now they’re back for more.

Reply to the comment left by NewYorkie at 30/06/2025 – 14:09
I haven’t forgotten junior doctors, although I suspect that there may have been a better case for giving junior doctors a pay rise than train drivers.

Whether you look at the NHS or the rail service you are looking at a complex, data-rich environment. This is particularly the case with a partially-privatised rail service, but even if it were to come to pass that the rail network was renationalised it would still be data rich and ripe for AI.

The best case for the introduction of Artificial Intelligence into the UK economy would be the rail network. That could tell you which train drivers were worth £50k and which train drivers were worth £70K. AI would also do a better job of scheduling trains than the people currently doing the scheduling.

I think the next base case for AI is in the NHS, a highly data-rich environment. That could tell you which surgeons or consultants were worth their £100K+, which procedures gave the best outcomes. But I can’t see any proposals from Keir Starmer to apply artificial intelligence to the 10% of the economy that works in the public sector.

When it comes to housing I think that AI would do a better job than most tenants of managing an energy-efficient house. The only organisation I know that supplies software to manage a domestic battery today is Tesla.

Using AI technology to manage local electrical generation, storage and use would make far more sense than anything that Ed Miliband has come out with. But there’s nothing built into the tax system that would drive any of this change. The only tax incentives that used to be around (and are being withdrawn) were to incentivise company car drivers to buy expensive Tesla cars. Personally, whilst I am not a fan of the Chinese record on human rights, I would much rather buy an electric car from BYD than Elon Musk and I wouldn’t buy a Tesla domestic battery from Tesla either.

On the post that started this thread…it seems to have evolved into speculation as to whether Lambeth got rid of tenants to house asylum seekers and I suspect that we just don’t know. But something this government clearly doesn’t understand or acknowledge is competition. Serco, funded by a government keen to reduce the asylum seeker hotel bill, are competing for the available supply of rental stock and this supply is limited. At the same time, via the Renters Reform Bill, the government is trying to push through further changes that will continue to penalise small portfolio landlords disproportionately.

This government doesn’t understand markets or competition AT ALL. The ministers in this government are of exceptionally low quality, ability and experience, other than knowing how to climb the greasy pole of politics. I don’t think that they should be permitted to enact their Renters Reform Bill until they’ve let the Competition and Markets Authority take a look at it, because the CMA is more competent than this government.

Reply to the comment left by Beaver at 30/06/2025 – 14:37
Every nail hit hard on its head!

Starmer probably doesn’t wish to discuss AI in the public sector too much because he knows Rayner and her Union cronies would revolt and threaten their standard Strike!!! mayhem

I have been banging on in other places for years that the quailty on BOTH Front Benches is and has been lamentable for a very long time. Apart from such as Andrew Griffith (my excellent MP until boundary changes) who had a real and also successful job before entering Partliament, few of them seem to have had any experience of a proper job and the hard knocks of life.
My suggestion is that there must be an age threshold of over 30 to apply to be an MP.

Reply to the comment left by Blodwyn at 30/06/2025 – 16:02
The evidence suggests that the government just doesn’t understand housing, markets or supply and demand AT ALL. The CMA did take a look at the housing market and drew some conclusions in August 2023:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/64e7653020ae89000df26d83/Private_Rented_Sector_Housing_pdfa.pdf

They concluded:

2.10 We have been told REPEATEDLY by stakeholders that there is a shortage of property to rent in many areas of the UK. Data for England suggests that the supply of rental properties has not kept pace with demand in recent years.

2.12 This has led to increasing rents.

2.13 We have been told that in recent years a number of tax and regulatory changes
have had negative effects on some landlords.

[Question here: Did the CMA really notice and take account of the fact that the government was disproportionately punishing the MAJORITY of small portfolio landlords and instead encouraging large institutional investors like Blackrock to invest]

Under 5.6 “Housing remains a key concern for the CMA. If we identify further or additional issues as our work develops, we will consider whether further intervention is appropriate.”

So given that the CMA still has an interest and that this is a “key concern for the CMA”, before the government comes out with its “Renters Reform Bill” it would be great if somebody asked the CMA:

– what happens to supply and demand, whether in Lambeth or Liverpool, if the government gives Serco a big chunk of money to compete in the market for housing homeless people

– what happens to advertised rents and upward pressure on rents and MARKET RENT if the RRB prevents landlords from taking an offer ABOVE the original advertised price and it is it likely, for example, that landlords or agents will then advertise properties at a HIGHER rent and then possibly come down.

– what happens to the supply of housing and therefore rents if your net-zero minister bans landlords from renting D, E or F properties?

– what happens to supply, demand and therefore rents if you penalise the majority of small portfolio landlords who traditionally used to hold rents down a bit via the tax system and instead encourage larger institutional investors like Blackrock (who are incorporated and good at maximising rents).

– how do actions like the government’s contract with Serco and penalising small portfolio landlords from renting their properties out via the tax system affect the supply of social housing, for example in places like Lambeth? Or West Yorkshire? In other words, what do these measures imposed upon the PRS have on the supply of housing available generally? And what effect are they likely to have on the bill for benefits, which is a bigger bill than the Asylum Seeker Hotel Bill, although that may be coming out of the Overseas Aid Budget.