John MacKenzie, if council housing is "another ball game", it's a related ball game as HB takes up some a large chunk of welfare spending.

'Right to Buy' was a complete mess: it was an ideological sleight of hand and the execution of it was ludicrous. Thatcher et al was so certain that the proles could really be affluent, 'arrived' potential home owners, then it should have been possible for them to own homes in the first place without out the need for a 'knock down' housing sell-off. This deceit was the first act of the 'middle-class fantasy' play concluded by the availability of 'easy credit'.

The monies raised from the housing sell-off should have gone into more housing but they didn't and the building of 'social housing' and even new 'affordable' housing is becoming a rarity at a time when there's a chronic housing crisis. Even the idea of 'affordable' housing is a joke when so many people in work are eligble for housing benefit because of rent prices (and not just in the 18 bedroom mansions stories loved by the likes of the Daily Mail).

I agree with the 'judge by need' idea but I'm not sure how would be a realistic or moral way to implement this. The earnings argument is similarly difficult as there's an argument this would hinder the kind of 'aspiration' that the Tories love to talk about. However, talk of "earnings" is all a bit moot considering most people lucky enough to have a job these days are seeing wage freezes, pay cuts: a pattern that's going to continue for a good few years yet. All those part-time jobs with zero hour contracts that the Coalition seem to think are 'good news' aren't going to generate bread-winners with high wages. Cut working tax credits and the conditions needed to get them in the first place only exacerbates the problem.

You might (or not) be glad to know that your neighbour might have to move soon if he's of working age (including disabled people). Housing benefits are being cut to begin with, but the double whammy of the 'bedroom tax' is also being introduced. Tenants with a single 'spare' bedroom (doesn't matter the size) will pay an extra 14% of their rent themselves. Tenants like your neighbour with two 'spare' bedrooms will have to find an extra 25%.

I live in a 1960s-vintage block of flats outside Manchester that was passed on to a social landlord in the mid-1990s. I live in the pilot area for universal credit which means I'll have the universal credit, the reduced housing benefit and an extra 14% or my rent to find to contend with all at once. Due to the chronic lack of 1 bedroom social houses places available for exchange (no private landlords in my area take benefit recipients), my landlord has explained that I'll be homeless myself come April as the rents will be more than I can could possibly receive in benefits (even if I didn't have to pay gas/electric/water; the latter being £10 a week alone).