Housing study to dispel immigration myths
Study to look at allocation of social housing
Friday, 02, Nov 2007 12:00
The UK’s racial equality watchdog has called for an investigation into whether white British families are passed over for social housing.
Trevor Phillips, chair of the Commission for Equality and Human Rights (CEHR), said he had seen no evidence this was the case but there was a perception among the public that it was.
Speaking to the Local Government Association (LGA) in Birmingham, Mr Phillips said people were realistic about immigration.
But, he said tensions over services and a widespread perception of unfair treatment biased in favour of new immigrants were driving tensions.
Specifically he said there was a perception “that white families are cheated out of their right to social housing by newly-arrived migrants.”
Mr Phillips blamed the “careless media and racist parties” for fuelling public feeling.
However, he warned it would not be sufficient to simply dismiss the suggestion of unfair treatment and said the debate needed hard facts.
He called for a study by “dispassionate academics” into whether the housing system is abused to the detriment of anyone, including white families.
The CEHR said such a study would look at the relative treatment of migrants versus longstanding residents rather than specific ethnic groups. The issue is complicated as black Britons and British Asians feel eastern European migrants are unfairly privileged.
Mr Phillips was speaking to the LGA after it called for a £250 million contingency fund to help local councils meet the demands placed on public services by rising populations.
Local leaders have complained existing methods of counting population and funding services are not responsive to sudden influxes of migrants.
Speaking to the LGA, Mr Phillips also supported David Cameron’s recent comments on immigration, saying he was draining the debate of the “racial toxicity which it has held for his party for some 40 years.”
Mr Cameron this week called for a cap in immigration, setting limits “substantially lower” than present levels.
Ministers have dismissed his comments, however, as he refuses to name what this limit would be.