London mayor Sadiq Khan cuts funds for affordable housing but finds £5.7 million for a retirement home for LGBTs

Affordable housing: Building plans cut by two-thirds for second programme

The number of homes built in London with funding from the Affordable Homes Programme is to drop by two thirds, mayor Sadiq Khan has announced.

About 35,000 homes are planned by 2026, using £4bn of government funding - an average of £114,000 per house.

The cost per house of the first programme, under which 116,000 homes were to be constructed, was £41,551.

The Greater London Authority (GLA) Conservative group has accused the mayor of "failing Londoners".

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-56222957




What is described as the UK's first retirement community celebrating LGBT+ people is set to open.

The 19 flats at Bankhouse in Vauxhall, central London, will be available on a shared-ownership basis, with residents expected to move in by mid-summer.

The apartments were bought by Tonic Housing with a £5.7m loan from the mayor of London.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-56252018





WTF!?

Am I reading those stories wrong?

Funding hasn't been cut for affordable housing, costs have risen, meaning fewer houses for similar money. Unless I'm missing something here.

Despite that, are you really comparing £4-5 billion housing plans to a to a £5.7 million loan and implying the existence of one comes at the cost to another?

Don't be silly.

Why do the LGBT groups need a retirement home that is just for them?


Which discriminates against everybody else?

That’s a different complaint. I guess since you know your original complaint is flimsy you’ve just moved on to moaning amount gay stuff.

Have at it

So... No answer to justify it then...

Your post wasn’t about justifying it, and I don’t care to.

Your post was implying costs used for one little had an impact in costs being cut for a massive housing project. It clearly does not, your OP was silly. I just replied to show as such.

So... No answer to justify the massive increase in costs of housing programme from £44,551 per home to £114,000 per home?


And no answer to justify the loaning of £5.7 million to create a set of retirement homes exclusively for LGBT people?


Why do LGBT get to have these homes exclusively for them, which is discrimination against everyone else?


Especially when LGBT would be kicking up a proper fuss if a set of retirement homes restricted their access and had homes discriminating against them?


And why are taxpayers funds being used for this?

Tommy Monk wrote:


So... No answer to justify the massive increase in costs of housing programme from £44,551 per home to £114,000 per home?


And no answer to justify the loaning of £5.7 million to create a set of retirement homes exclusively for LGBT people?


Why do LGBT get to have these homes exclusively for them, which is discrimination against everyone else?


Especially when LGBT would be kicking up a proper fuss if a set of retirement homes restricted their access and had homes discriminating against them?


And why are taxpayers funds being used for this?

How on earth should I know why the costs are different, that isn’t my interest in your OP.

I'd like to know how Tommy thinks that a retirement community "celebrating LGBT people" is somehow off limits to everyone else.

I suppose management will require prospective tenants to engage in gay sex in front of a leasing agent before they can move in...

All I can say is if that's pensioner's assisted living accommodation in London - I'm moving to London.

The cost of house building has not tripled, but khan has agreed to pay 3 times as much for each affordable home, which means only a third of the homes that could be e delivered are going to be delivered.


His reasons for the triple cost...


"...currency devaluation, availability of materials and shortages of skilled construction labour all contributory factors, along with Brexit and need to replace cladding on properties following the Grenfell fire..."


Bullshit!!!


And to the second part of the op... Is it right for him to be lending £5.7 million to a private company to set up a retirement home that is to be exclusively for LGBTs and discriminates against everyone else?


My take on it is that he shouldn't be using taxpayers funds in this way in the first place... And secondly, he should not be supporting any project that discriminates against anyone