New research from the Prosperity Institute has revealed the "enormous" cost of social housing in the UK, with taxpayers subsidising people without jobs to live in expensive areas like London.
The research, carried out by the Pimlico Journal, shows that social housing represents a large, hidden transfer from taxpayers to favoured groups who have been allocated homes at below-market rates.
Senior Researcher at the Prosperity Institute Guy Dampier said on GB News: "We are talking very, very big costs. This article has worked out the implied rent subsidy."
He explained: "That means if you have a house you can put on the market at £2,000 a month but because it's social housing it's £1,000 a month, the implied rent subsidy is £1,000."
Guy Dampier reacted to a shocking report by the Pimlico Journal
GB NEWS / PIMLICO JOURNAL
Dampier revealed that in Kensington and Chelsea, the average implied rent subsidy is £23,000 per year for social housing residents.
"What they have worked out is the amount of money going to people in social housing in London is enormous," Dampier continued.
LATEST DEVELOPMENTS
Dampier joined Charlie Peters and Miriam Cates on GB News
GB NEWS
Even in Manchester, the implied rent subsidy is over £7,000 per year for those in social housing, while in Southwark, London, the total value of these subsidies is £661 million.
"These are staggering numbers of essentially subsidies, effective subsides, the taxpayer is paying to a select few in social housing," Dampier said.
The research shows that in 2024, the total "general needs" housing stock in England has an implied rental subsidy of around £19.1 billion, equivalent to 0.8 per cent of GDP. This represents the difference between potential private sector rent and actual social housing rent charged.
The figures reveal that around a quarter of a million social homes in London are being rented by people not working, raising questions about the allocation of these valuable subsidies.
Guy Dampier said the trend 'should not be happening'
GB NEWS
GB News's Miriam Cates commented: "I think a lot would think social housing has an important role to play, especially in somewhere like London where housing costs are so high and people on low wage jobs can't afford to live where they work, which is of course a problem."
Dampier responded: "Absolutely not. Up until the 1970s, social housing had very strict conditions on who could get it. What we're talking about here is the taxpayer subsidising people without jobs to live in our nicest city."
"A great many people who are working class or middle class even cannot afford to live in our own capital city," Dampier continued. "We should obviously be changing this."
The research also found that London's social housing in 2024 represents an asset portfolio worth £210 billion, with the rest of England's social housing potentially worth a further £215 billion if it were to be sold to private investors.
