Reform UK has said it would prioritise British-born people under 35 when allocating social housing if it entered government, alongside other groups including former members of the armed forces and married couples with children.

The party set out plans alongside leader Deputy Leader Richard Tice, who also outlined a proposal to build 50,000 affordable social homes per year. Reform said the plan could be delivered without new taxes or extra borrowing.

Allocation Rules For Social Housing

Reform’s policy would change the rules that determine who receives a social home in England. It said at least half of all social homes would be reserved for British-born applicants aged under 35.

Under the wider priority list, it said preference would also be given to married couples, veterans, victims of domestic violence and care leavers.

Tice argued the approach should move away from allocations based on need alone towards “suitability”, with British families, workers and veterans placed at the front of the queue.

Reform also claimed that overseas nationals currently occupy a large share of social housing. It said there were 540,000 social homes occupied by foreign nationals, and pointed to the English Housing Survey figure that 88.5% of main householders in 2024/25 were UK or Irish nationals, meaning about 11.5% were non-UK or Irish nationals.

Plans To Build 50,000 Homes A Year

At a news conference, Tice said Reform aimed to deliver 50,000 affordable social homes each year. He said this would require investment of £10bn a year.

Reform said it would raise money by reintroducing the Right to Buy scheme from the 1980s, allowing tenants to purchase council homes at a discount. The party said proceeds would be reinvested into building new affordable homes.

Tice said a third of the funding would come from housing authorities, while the final third would be raised via local government pension schemes. He added that reinvestment from Right to Buy sales would cover part of the overall investment needed for the ten-year programme.

Criticism From Labour, Tories And Others

Labour criticised the proposals as “unworkable and unserious”, arguing they could leave British citizens without a place to live. A Labour spokesperson also said the plan would create a £10bn blackhole in public finances and would involve years of dispute with the European Union.

The Conservatives said Reform was trying to “catch up” with its own approach. The Tories have also said they would revoke the right of foreign nationals to social housing, while their plan would allow Irish citizens and some EU nationals to remain. They said this would free up around 230,000 homes.

Sir James Cleverly, the Conservatives’ shadow housing secretary, said the party already had plans to ensure British nationals were prioritised, and argued that Reform’s policy was a delayed version of similar proposals.

Liberal Democrat spokesperson Gideon Amos said Reform’s plan was a “cruel gimmick”.

Green MP Siân Berry said the party would instead end Right to Buy, build and buy hundreds of thousands of new council homes, and introduce rent controls. She described Reform’s proposals as racist and said they would create a two-tier system in which people born in the UK are treated differently from others.

Join the discussion?

25 August 2026

View full article

Breaking news' an outbreak of common sense is beginning to descend,

soon to be stifled out by Andy' and Ang' filling all available space with failed as phoney asylum seeker's claiming Doctors and engineers must come first 🤔

"Reform UK has said it would prioritise British-born people under 35 when allocating social housing if it entered government, alongside other groups including former members of the armed forces and married couples with children."

Surely, this is just common sense, why give 'foreigners' housing?

Maybe if they didn't give illegals accommodation in the first place, they would go home, or even not even arrive?😆

18 hours ago, webfact said:

Liberal Democrat spokesperson Gideon Amos said Reform’s plan was a “cruel gimmick”.

Somebody with real common sense

Of course. We're in Britain. Why would anyone other than the British get priority?

Let the Liberals find another way to deal with their white guilt.

43 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

deal with their white guilt.

What is that? 😳😳😳 Can you explain it?

1 hour ago, newbee2022 said:

What is that? 😳😳😳 Can you explain it?

Sure.

White guilt is a counterproductive, identity-focused narrative that is manipulative, divisive, and disconnected from individual reality.

It is an artificial form of collective shame imposed by ideological institutions like academia, media, and corporations. It is a tool used to pressure individuals into feeling personally responsible for historical wrongs they did not commit, based entirely on a racial category they did not choose.

The narrative oversimplifies history by ignoring historical complexities, such as the active participation of African kingdoms and elites in capturing and selling slaves to European traders.

It judges people based on group identity rather than individual character, exploits history for political leverage, and creates a divisive hierarchy of victimhood. Furthermore, it dismisses the personal struggles of working-class individuals and ultimately damages social cohesion by undermining the ideal of a society where people are judged solely by their actions and merits.

Hope that helped.

11 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Sure.

White guilt is a counterproductive, identity-focused narrative that is manipulative, divisive, and disconnected from individual reality.

It is an artificial form of collective shame imposed by ideological institutions like academia, media, and corporations. It is a tool used to pressure individuals into feeling personally responsible for historical wrongs they did not commit, based entirely on a racial category they did not choose.

The narrative oversimplifies history by ignoring historical complexities, such as the active participation of African kingdoms and elites in capturing and selling slaves to European traders.

It judges people based on group identity rather than individual character, exploits history for political leverage, and creates a divisive hierarchy of victimhood. Furthermore, it dismisses the personal struggles of working-class individuals and ultimately damages social cohesion by undermining the ideal of a society where people are judged solely by their actions and merits.

Hope that helped.

🙏

The problem as I see it is that if they don't also stop the dinghies, they'll be putting the scientists and doctors in hotels if there's no public housing for them. When they do that, they also have to feed them since cooking isn't possible recommended in a hotel room. And that gets spendy...

The problem needs to be addressed on the upstream side. Not the downstream. Housing them wouldn't even be an issue if they couldn't come in.

The UK needs a Trump... Europe needs a Vance or a Rubio. Not a Macron or a Merz or a Von der whatever.

I don't think I believe Reform's finance figures, and I think the UK'd need more of the right type of immigrants as there are not enough people with the right skills in the UK to build that number of houses. After years and years of 💩 governments it seems the UK is finally getting the message though.

I read that Sir Keir promised 1.5 million new homes in the term of the current parliament, and around 400k have actually been built (how many would have been built in any case though?). https://fullfact.org/government-tracker/1-5-million-homes/

This is my hassle with all of this, governments of all colours promise but they don't deliver. These fluckers should be in jail for conning the UK public.

Illegal immigrants should NOT be getting homes, they are illegal and should be held in secure accommodation. Asylum seekers who entered the UK illegally are illegal immigrants, see previous sentence. Asylum seekers who claimed asylum in line with the appropriate international conventions at the UK border should get looked after. I know it's not easy, but really, how can illegals be treated better than UK citizens?

29 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

is an artificial form of collective shame imposed by ideological institutions like academia, media, and corporations. It is a tool used to pressure individuals into feeling personally responsible for historical wrongs they did not commit, based entirely on a racial category they did not choose.

What do you think? We should not consider the pain, death and torture we imposed on eg black or other colored people by slavery and colonial wars, exploitation and genocide?

My opinion is we should never forget the misery we pushed them into but respect everybody and help to find a place in our society as a contributing member.

1 minute ago, newbee2022 said:

What do you think? We should not consider the pain, death and torture we imposed on eg black or other colored people by slavery and colonial wars, exploitation and genocide?

Why only black/coloured people? There has been plenty of pain, death and torture imposed on ALL races.

1 minute ago, newbee2022 said:

My opinion is we should never forget the misery we pushed them into but respect everybody and help to find a place in our society as a contributing member.

"We"? Speak for yourself. I didn't do anything.

The black people alive today who try to leverage the past to improve their present situation weren't slaves. Dianne Abbot never picked cotton. I never owned cotton pickers.

I'd rather focus on modern day slavery in places like India, China, N.Korea and stop that, than entertain these race grifters who want to use something that happened centuries ago, to someone else, to extract money today, from people who never owned slaves.

8 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Why only black/coloured people? There has been plenty of pain, death and torture imposed on ALL races.

"We"? Speak for yourself. I didn't do anything.

The black people alive today who try to leverage the past to improve their present situation weren't slaves. Dianne Abbot never picked cotton. I never owned cotton pickers.

I'd rather focus on modern day slavery in places like India, China, N.Korea and stop that, than entertain these race grifters who want to use something that happened centuries ago, to someone else, to extract money today, from people who never owned slaves.

Well, but remember that the wealth of Western countries is built on slavery, exploitation, robbery and crimes. Think of the empires like UK, Germany, France, Italy, Spain and yes, US. Others apply.

Isn't it time to give back something?

At least education? (or the crown jewels?)

11 minutes ago, newbee2022 said:

Well, but remember that the wealth of Western countries is built on slavery, exploitation, robbery and crimes. Think of the empires like UK, Germany, France, Italy, Spain and yes, US. Others apply.

Isn't it time to give back something?

At least education? (or the crown jewels?)

As a Brit, we ended the slave trade and my taxes helped pay for it.

We finally paid it off in 2015. People like me paid for it, despite having absolutely nothing to do with it.

So no, I do not feel your obvious white guilt and as someone who never owned slaves I feel ZERO obligation to pay money to people who never were slaves.

It's a massive race grift and only fools fall for it.

Anyone who disagrees with this is a moron and should remember where you are.

Those brain-dead idiots applaud the Thais for putting their people first.

34 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

As a Brit, we ended the slave trade and my taxes helped pay for it.

We finally paid it off in 2015. People like me paid for it, despite having absolutely nothing to do with it.

So no, I do not feel your obvious white guilt and as someone who never owned slaves I feel ZERO obligation to pay money to people who never were slaves.

It's a massive race grift and only fools fall for it.

Sorry to say, but you're obviously totally wrong.

I don't know where you got your wisdom from?

At least I would have expected that you checked "your facts"

Here the real thing:

In 2015, the UK government fully paid off the remaining national debt used to fund the [Slavery Abolition Act of 1833](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/06/17/government-finished-paying-uks-slavery-debt-2015/). [1, 2]

The core facts of this financial package include:

*

* The Original Payout: In 1833, the British government agreed to pay £20 million to compensate slave owners for the loss of their "property" (enslaved people). [1, 3]

* The Budget Impact: This sum was astronomical at the time, representing roughly 40% of the UK government's annual budget. [1, 4]

* Long-Term Debt: To pay the enslavers immediately, the government took out a massive loan. This debt was rolled over into government bonds (gilts) for generations. [1, 5, 6]

* The 2015 Settlement: Modern British taxpayers—including descendants of enslaved people—unknowingly helped pay off the interest and principal on this debt until the final gilts were officially redeemed in February 2015. [6, 7, 8]

* No Reparations for Enslaved People: None of the original £20 million, nor any subsequent payouts, were given to the formerly enslaved people or their descendants. [5, 9]

*

If you want, I can provide more details

AI

I wonder if that will include housing for blacks and other colors born British?

4 hours ago, JonnyF said:

Of course. We're in Britain. Why would anyone other than the British get priority?

Let the Liberals find another way to deal with their white guilt.

Yawn.

Thankfully some Reformers can have their eyes opened. Can you?

https://www.instagram.com/reels/DcQuVQooA4S/

57 minutes ago, newbee2022 said:

Sorry to say, but you're obviously totally wrong.

I don't know where you got your wisdom from?

At least I would have expected that you checked "your facts"

Here the real thing:

In 2015, the UK government fully paid off the remaining national debt used to fund the [Slavery Abolition Act of 1833](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/06/17/government-finished-paying-uks-slavery-debt-2015/). [1, 2]

The core facts of this financial package include:

*

* The Original Payout: In 1833, the British government agreed to pay £20 million to compensate slave owners for the loss of their "property" (enslaved people). [1, 3]

* The Budget Impact: This sum was astronomical at the time, representing roughly 40% of the UK government's annual budget. [1, 4]

* Long-Term Debt: To pay the enslavers immediately, the government took out a massive loan. This debt was rolled over into government bonds (gilts) for generations. [1, 5, 6]

* The 2015 Settlement: Modern British taxpayers—including descendants of enslaved people—unknowingly helped pay off the interest and principal on this debt until the final gilts were officially redeemed in February 2015. [6, 7, 8]

* No Reparations for Enslaved People: None of the original £20 million, nor any subsequent payouts, were given to the formerly enslaved people or their descendants. [5, 9]

*

If you want, I can provide more details

AI

The enslaved people you are talking about are long dead. Why should people alive today who never had slaves pay people who are alive today (but are not slaves) money because a relative they never met hundreds of years ago might have been a slave? 😄 The concept is ridiculous. A massive grift to extract money from stupid people who would otherwise be helping Nigerian princes claim their long lost inheritance.

I'd rather spend money helping slaves that are alive TODAY in China, N.Korea, India etc. Do you not think that would be money better spent appeasing your white guilt?

Not virtue signal by paying people who may or not be descendants of slaves in another country centuries ago.

1 hour ago, newbee2022 said:

Here the real thing:

In 2015, the UK government fully paid off the remaining national debt used to fund the [Slavery Abolition Act of 1833]

Yes, that's exactly what I said.

Britain paid to end the slave trade. My taxes helped pay the debt incurred.

Why are you repeating what I told you?

2 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Yes, that's exactly what I said.

Britain paid to end the slave trade. My taxes helped pay the debt incurred.

Why are you repeating what I told you?

Did you read to the end ❓

The money was not for the former slaves but the slave traders.

So by paying 20 millions you supported the rich slave traders/owners.

That's quite different what you expressed

9 minutes ago, newbee2022 said:

Did you read to the end ❓

The money was not for the former slaves but the slave traders.

So by paying 20 millions you supported the rich slave traders/owners.

That's quite different what you expressed

We didn't "support" rich slave owners.😄

It was a strategic payment to end the slave trade. It worked. Maybe some gratitude is in order?

You're welcome.

4 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

We didn't "support" rich slave owners.😄

It was a strategic payment to end the slave trade. It worked. Maybe some gratitude is in order?

You're welcome.

The money was going to the traders only. They (and the crown) earned millions of pounds already for many years.

And on top they got 20 millions. (Yes, also from your taxes)

That's ok for you? To fund them?

11 minutes ago, newbee2022 said:

The money was going to the traders only. They (and the crown) earned millions of pounds already for many years.

And on top they got 20 millions. (Yes, also from your taxes)

That's ok for you? To fund them?

It stopped the slave trade, so yes, it is OK with me.

Would you prefer to pay the slaves themselves, so they leave and then the slave owners simply go out and get new slaves to replace them? 😄

Anyway, feel free to donate to people who might be descendants of slaves if it appeases your white guilt. I don't have white guilt, therefore I will be paying exactly the square root of FA.

Walk down any high street in the average affluent town and you see the dregs of third world ,families of them scrounging for a foothold,its sickening. Never to integrate/work, not wanted and ignored,mostly shunned. Begging becomes the norm with an eff off following. There will be serious riots here in UK,cannot come quick enough

19 hours ago, webfact said:

Reform’s policy would change the rules that determine who receives a social home in England. It said at least half of all social homes would be reserved for British-born applicants aged under 35.

Under the wider priority list, it said preference would also be given to married couples, veterans, victims of domestic violence and care leavers.

Tice argued the approach should move away from allocations based on need alone towards “suitability”, with British families, workers and veterans placed at the front of the queue.

This seems like a reasonable proposal, provided it applies to all 'British-born" - and not filtered through ethnic background.

5 hours ago, JonnyF said:

Sure.

White guilt is a counterproductive, identity-focused narrative that is manipulative, divisive, and disconnected from individual reality.

It is an artificial form of collective shame imposed by ideological institutions like academia, media, and corporations. It is a tool used to pressure individuals into feeling personally responsible for historical wrongs they did not commit, based entirely on a racial category they did not choose.

The narrative oversimplifies history by ignoring historical complexities, such as the active participation of African kingdoms and elites in capturing and selling slaves to European traders.

It judges people based on group identity rather than individual character, exploits history for political leverage, and creates a divisive hierarchy of victimhood. Furthermore, it dismisses the personal struggles of working-class individuals and ultimately damages social cohesion by undermining the ideal of a society where people are judged solely by their actions and merits.

Hope that helped.

Aaw bless. Jonny’s learning how to use A. I.

Yes I will stay on topic. There was no serious homeless problem in UK until 1980.

Yes, there were homeless people before then but the problem escalated after the “right to buy “ act (tenants already had this “right” BTW.

Now the far right are pandering to their low IQ fans by threatening to evict longstanding tenants who have migrated to UK and are working and paying tax.

Well Tice; I hope I hope that the first to be evicted, Buddha forbid, will be the family who work in the care home in which they feed and wipe the ars*s of your elderly parents

5 hours ago, JonnyF said:

Sure.

White guilt is a counterproductive, identity-focused narrative that is manipulative, divisive, and disconnected from individual reality.

It is an artificial form of collective shame imposed by ideological institutions like academia, media, and corporations. It is a tool used to pressure individuals into feeling personally responsible for historical wrongs they did not commit, based entirely on a racial category they did not choose.

The narrative oversimplifies history by ignoring historical complexities, such as the active participation of African kingdoms and elites in capturing and selling slaves to European traders.

It judges people based on group identity rather than individual character, exploits history for political leverage, and creates a divisive hierarchy of victimhood. Furthermore, it dismisses the personal struggles of working-class individuals and ultimately damages social cohesion by undermining the ideal of a society where people are judged solely by their actions and merits.

Hope that helped.

30 minutes ago, Red Forever said:

Aaw bless. Jonny’s learning how to use A. I.

Yes I will stay on topic. There was no serious homeless problem in UK until 1980.

Yes, there were homeless people before then but the problem escalated after the “right to buy “ act (tenants already had this “right” BTW.

Now the far right are pandering to their low IQ fans by threatening to evict longstanding tenants who have migrated to UK and are working and paying tax.

Well Tice; I hope I hope that the first to be evicted, Buddha forbid, will be the family who work in the care home in which they feed and wipe the ars*s of your elderly parents

Would seriously like to see the so called "family who work in the care homes" what you will get is a fat arsed 20 ton African woman more than likely ,all laughing will be the cruelest bitch available on night shift

Affluent town ,reduced to slum areas in no time. When time comes and it will, Ill be out with the pitchfork, Reform are coming in mind (already here) and body ,France now can look forward too,at moving toward the right

3 hours ago, JonnyF said:

It stopped the slave trade, so yes, it is OK with me.

Would you prefer to pay the slaves themselves, so they leave and then the slave owners simply go out and get new slaves to replace them? 😄

Anyway, feel free to donate to people who might be descendants of slaves if it appeases your white guilt. I don't have white guilt, therefore I will be paying exactly the square root of FA.

You’ve done something here that I’ve never been able to achieve.That is to get the last word with that brainwashed prick.

Well done Jonny.

1 hour ago, Red Forever said:

Now the far right are pandering to their low IQ fans by threatening to evict longstanding tenants who have migrated to UK and are working and paying tax.

Amazingly, with your high intelligence level, you didn't seem to have understood the story .

Evictions hasn't even been mentioned, no one will be getting evicted .

More houses will be built and whom the houses will be allocated to is the topic .

It maybe a good idea for you to read the story again, this time reading it slowly .

You state others have a low I.Q , but this story is beyond your level of comprehension