Sir Bob calls for extra housing for former soldiers (From Essex County Standard)
Get involved: send your pictures, video, news and views by texting ECS to 80360, or email »
Sir Bob calls for extra housing for former soldiers
1:00pm Wednesday 13th June 2012 in News
Sir Bob calls for extra housing for former soldiers
COLCHESTER MP Sir Bob Russell has called on the Government to build more homes in garrison towns for former soldiers.
Speaking in the House of Commons he told defence ministers the armed forces covenant had committed the Government to housing personnel leaving the armed forces.
He also called on Department for Communities and Local Government to provide more money for homes in areas where large garrisons are.
Speaking after the defence debate, Sir Bob said: “The reality is that we, as a country, need to spend more on building and providing low cost rented accommodation not only for our civilian families but also for the families of military families who are leaving HM Armed Forces.
“The situation is likely to be made more serious if there are compulsory redundancies from Colchester Garrison.”
Currently there is no requirement for local authorities to give any preference to military families.
Comments(24)
jut1972
says...
5:07pm Wed 13 Jun 12
We dont want ANY more homes in Colchester! The town is full of empty properties and more estate agents flogging unsold homes than you can shake a stick at.
You campaigned in conjunction with the Mile End councillours to stop any more developments!
What we are talking about here is army redundancies because your coalition partners have decided they are not needed. If they leave the army they already get more support than any other profession. There are families who will be more deserving than someone who made an army career choice and now wishes they had saved some money up for rent.
angryman!!!
says...
5:44pm Wed 13 Jun 12
Sdapeze
says...
6:00pm Wed 13 Jun 12
saloo
says...
7:55pm Wed 13 Jun 12
jut1972 wrote:"If they leave the army they already get more support than any other profession. There are families who will be more deserving than someone who made an army career choice and now wishes they had saved some money up for rent" - And you base these "facts" on what???
Bob,
We dont want ANY more homes in Colchester! The town is full of empty properties and more estate agents flogging unsold homes than you can shake a stick at.
You campaigned in conjunction with the Mile End councillours to stop any more developments!
What we are talking about here is army redundancies because your coalition partners have decided they are not needed. If they leave the army they already get more support than any other profession. There are families who will be more deserving than someone who made an army career choice and now wishes they had saved some money up for rent.
Clearly you haven't served in any of the Armed Forces or you wouldnt have such a biased view!!!
The old see dog
says...
9:35pm Wed 13 Jun 12
I for one am getting fed up now with everyone jumping on the poor army/ex army personal all you read every day is help them to do this and help them to do that. They joined the army for a job or career they knew what they were taking on, the army is a fighting force you join they train you to fight and kill and you go off to where you are sent to do just that. Some are heroes most are not, you have to earn that not just be there to become one. When the first and second world wars finished and the service personal were demobbed there was not so much as a thank you, it was here's your demob papers on your bike, no help, no nursing homes, no collections and if you were lucky and had a wife or parents in a council house good if not you joined the queue to get one. Ninety five percent of them do not even come from this town they were just stationed here so why should they jump the housing queue when there are hundreds of locals on it already. They are getting a good pay off and pension so why cant they rent and work their way up the list like everyone else have to. Why is every one making out they are more special than past service personal.
Boris
says...
2:00am Thu 14 Jun 12
The old see dog wrote:I don't always agree with old see dog, but he writes a lot of sense here. So do Say It and jut1972.
This might get up a lot of peoples noses, but here goes.
I for one am getting fed up now with everyone jumping on the poor army/ex army personal all you read every day is help them to do this and help them to do that. They joined the army for a job or career they knew what they were taking on, the army is a fighting force you join they train you to fight and kill and you go off to where you are sent to do just that. Some are heroes most are not, you have to earn that not just be there to become one. When the first and second world wars finished and the service personal were demobbed there was not so much as a thank you, it was here's your demob papers on your bike, no help, no nursing homes, no collections and if you were lucky and had a wife or parents in a council house good if not you joined the queue to get one. Ninety five percent of them do not even come from this town they were just stationed here so why should they jump the housing queue when there are hundreds of locals on it already. They are getting a good pay off and pension so why cant they rent and work their way up the list like everyone else have to. Why is every one making out they are more special than past service personal.
.
Bob voted for so many cuts, rather than voting for sensible taxes, and that is how he got his knighthood. He must now accept that the army has to take its share of the cuts, and just as there is no money to pay EMA to my grandson, there is no money for special treatment for retired soldiers.
angryman!!!
says...
1:32pm Thu 14 Jun 12
Because again unlike most people on low wages they move about the country/world. so unlike the great unwashed/dole quers down and outs haven't been on towns waiting lists for long so if they do retire get kicked out or injured or maybe have just had enough of getting shot at they at the bottom of the que.
Obviously for you it should be first come first serve, I'd better go and stand outside the careers office and tell the young lads walking in there not to bother and just sit on their arses and get housed for free and never have to risk legs or life!!!
The old see dog
says...
10:42pm Thu 14 Jun 12
angryman!!! wrote:That is the most pathetic reply I have seen in a long time. I have worked since leaving school at 14, 50 years in total. In that time. (perk 1)I have been made redundant once. (perk two) I have been layed off twice without any cash pay out. (perk three) I have had to pay into a retirement fund not had it paid for me and finally (perk four) I went onto the housing list 42 years ago and still waiting so dont whine on about the perks being there for giving up the best part of their lives because the most they serve is 21 years (less than half their working lives and like I said they know what they are letting their selves in for. And finally for the last 50 years I would say that my wages have not been much more than crap.
the perks of the army are supposed to be there for the fact that they give up the best part of their life's for what is crap pay. In a year they could have done a tour of afghan, then collared to do petrol driver, fireman, Olympic security, parades for the world and his wife, all of which they have to do specific training for.
Because again unlike most people on low wages they move about the country/world. so unlike the great unwashed/dole quers down and outs haven't been on towns waiting lists for long so if they do retire get kicked out or injured or maybe have just had enough of getting shot at they at the bottom of the que.
Obviously for you it should be first come first serve, I'd better go and stand outside the careers office and tell the young lads walking in there not to bother and just sit on their arses and get housed for free and never have to risk legs or life!!!
upandaterm
says...
10:04am Fri 15 Jun 12
The old see dog
says...
9:56pm Fri 15 Jun 12
StopLookListen
says...
2:57pm Sat 16 Jun 12
.
Point 2: Point 1 means that they are aware that if there is a war or conflict of any kind, they could be seriously dead or injured. It is part of being a fighting/defence force. Not that we aren't grateful, but hey, you should have read the not so small print, boys. That includes the bit about the wages!
.
Point 3: There is a good remark above about what happened to servicemen from previous conflicts. So many of the veterans are now dying, very old and helpless, and who gives a **** about them? Only their families and loved ones. They are cruelly treated at times, and there is nobody to champion them and their families. They had to go, no voluntary side to their service, although many I know went before they were called. For this they got a pittance, did as they were told, and were proud to serve. It is amazing that few of them suffered ptsd or whatever it is now termed. If they did turn out a bit gruff or antisocial post-war, it was put down to "what they've been through" and they had to get on with life, albeit with some sympathy for those who knew about them.
.
Some of the worst treated even felt sorry for their abusers, as in the cases I knew of ex-Jap prisoners who had been starved and driven to extremes, coming home as living skeletons. Those I knew gloried in their "second life" and gave thanks for the chance denied to so many.
.
It's not that we're ungrateful, we do need to be free from fear of oppression by other nations and creeds which are not our choice, but do give a breathing space to the rest of the population and their problems.
.
Give precedence and rewards to the returning serviceman of today, and the same should be available, readily and without question, to those of yesteryear,
but you'll find most of those still able to protest, would say no thank you, we will soldier on as we have always done, just allow us a bit of respect from time to time.
jut1972
says...
8:33pm Sat 16 Jun 12
saloo wrote:No, I haven't served in the armed forces. I made a career choice same as they did.
jut1972 wrote:"If they leave the army they already get more support than any other profession. There are families who will be more deserving than someone who made an army career choice and now wishes they had saved some money up for rent" - And you base these "facts" on what???
Bob,
We dont want ANY more homes in Colchester! The town is full of empty properties and more estate agents flogging unsold homes than you can shake a stick at.
You campaigned in conjunction with the Mile End councillours to stop any more developments!
What we are talking about here is army redundancies because your coalition partners have decided they are not needed. If they leave the army they already get more support than any other profession. There are families who will be more deserving than someone who made an army career choice and now wishes they had saved some money up for rent.
Clearly you haven't served in any of the Armed Forces or you wouldnt have such a biased view!!!
Go and google "support for ex servicemen" there are plenty of charities and support networks out there. Those support networks do not exist for other professions. Or do you know different?
Clearly you and your family haven't had to sit on a waiting list for years or you wouldnt have such a biased view.
angryman!!!
says...
10:21am Sun 17 Jun 12
the difference is what civilian employer will expect you to move home every two years, therefore meaning that you can't get yourself on waiting lists for council houses.
Also if you narrow minded gimps had actually read the report all it says is that towns with large garrisons should have more homes built, this would simply mean that soldiers could be treated fairly but for you and your selfish ways worry that it might effect you, it's you idiots that have said why do they want to be treated specially, when this isn't the case, shame on you!
The old see dog
says...
11:46pm Sun 17 Jun 12
angryman!!! wrote:Well, here we go again. What started off as a decent discussion has been ruined by a webbed foot, knuckle dragging one brain cell Neanderthal, careful, you dont get wet when it rains because if that one cell gets watered it might multiply and you might, and I say might get some intelligence. Weather it`s 21, 22 or 24 years is nether here or there its still less than half their working lives if they serve that long without the government laying them off, which is no different to what is happening to thousands because of government cuts,and people are moving around the Country now to find work these days but you dont see them whinging on about it they just get on with it. So, unless you can comment with a little bit of common sense then may I suggest that you, no I wont sink to your level. Stay happy.
21 years is the most they will serve? Don't just pick random dates you fool, if your going to argue your case at least don't just make up facts. By simply checking on the Internet you can see its 22-24 years now. But many extend further.
the difference is what civilian employer will expect you to move home every two years, therefore meaning that you can't get yourself on waiting lists for council houses.
Also if you narrow minded gimps had actually read the report all it says is that towns with large garrisons should have more homes built, this would simply mean that soldiers could be treated fairly but for you and your selfish ways worry that it might effect you, it's you idiots that have said why do they want to be treated specially, when this isn't the case, shame on you!
jacklumber1
says...
12:01pm Tue 19 Jun 12
None of which seem to do much for the ordinary Colchester voters. But he is being a good Coalition backbench MP and keeping quiet about other matters!
romantic
says...
5:22pm Tue 19 Jun 12
We now have a situation where thousands of boxes are being built by private developers, but lots of them are sitting empty because people cannot afford them. I went through the new (2 years old?) houses off Port Lane yesterday, and loads of them are still empty, for sale. Same situation in the Hythe, same on Hawkins Road.
Maybe if a house has been empty for long enough, it could be "loaned" to the council and used as council housing for 6 months. No idea how practical that would be, but it might at least give people a place for a few months while they get sorted long term.
Not sure if the military should get priority over everybody else. Their job is dangerous, and I would not want to do it, but the fact is anybody who has signed up in the last 10 years at least has done so knowing that they will probably end up in Iraq or Afghanistan. The spending that has gone on these ridiculous campaigns could have paid for lots of houses for ex-military people and the rest of us too.
If Bob Russell wants to fight for this issue, it should be for more council housing in general.
jacklumber1
says...
5:53pm Tue 19 Jun 12
The old see dog
says...
8:12pm Tue 19 Jun 12
jacklumber1
says...
9:13pm Tue 19 Jun 12
Yet this Coalition Govt puts tax on pasties and Grannies!
Housing is the same. Who is buying up all the £M homes in London? Russian £Millionaires allowed in by the Coalition Govt! Meanwhile British couples cannot afford to buy their own homes because the banks will not lend although they were bailed out with public money!
It should be homes for ALL deserving Brits civvy & military!
The old see dog
says...
9:33pm Tue 19 Jun 12
jacklumber1
says...
11:04pm Tue 19 Jun 12
Your growling at the wrong robbers!
The old see dog
says...
11:26pm Tue 19 Jun 12
jacklumber1
says...
5:05am Wed 20 Jun 12
Say It As It Is OK? says...
3:23pm Wed 13 Jun 12
Housing needs should be based on individual and family needs and by making this suggestion Bob is just playing to his audience. Very dangerous!