YouGov’s weekly poll for the Sunday Times has voting intention figures of CON 42%, LAB 37%, LDEM 13%. It’s a higher Conservative lead than YouGov have shown recently, and the highest Lib Dem score from YouGov for a while – but nothing that couldn’t just be normal random variation. What it does suggest is that the continuing row over housing benefit is not damaging the government. Full tables are here.

On that specific issue, YouGov asked again about support for the cap on housing benefit, and found 72% of people in favour (this is much in line with the levels of support YouGov found when the cap was first announced in the budget back in June, althought the question itself was not the same so you cannot draw a conclusion about support going up or down).

The regular trackers are broadly positive for the government. David Cameron’s approval rating is up to plus 15, from a low of plus 8 a week ago and people’s opinion of whether the government is managing the economy well is back in positive territory after falling into negative territory a week ago.

Ed Miliband’s approval rating has dropped to plus 2, as those thinking he is doing a bad job rises to 32%. This is largely following the normal pattern for party leaders – when they first become leader people give them the benefit of the doubt for a couple of weeks. After a while supporters of other parties start giving them negative answers and leader’s net ratings fall.

Impressions of the state of the economy have risen following the announcement of GDP figures – 7% think the economy is in a good state, 70% a bad state. While extremely pessimistic, the net figure of minus 63 is actually the highest since the end of July and start of August… straight after the last lot of GDP figures were announced. The boost in optimism then didn’t last very long.

YouGov also asked some questions about Europe. Unsurprisingly people overwhelmingly thought that Britain paid too much towards the European Union. Attitudes towards an expansion of the EU’s powers to limit government borrowing and impose greater budget discipline were more positive though. 29% supported the idea of gving the EU greater powers to stop countries borrowing too much, including the UK. 37% supported the EU having such powers over the Eurozone, but not the UK. We did also ask a question about David Cameron supporting the economic powers in exchange for a freeze in EU funding, but it was alas overtaken by events.

336 Responses to “YouGov show 72% in favour of housing benefit cap”

1 3 4 5 6 7
  1. My descriptions, never as entertaining as those of BJ, sum up to ‘the worm turns’. I think the key to Lab’s change in fortune, lies not in fancy new policies, Eoin, but in a sudden realisation of some voters that they really are going to be, or are already, victims.

    President Ceausescu’s wife had it summed up, as did, perhaps unwittingly, Ms Antoinette.

  2. Howard,

    I apportion great hope to the fact that you are correct.

  3. @ Howard

    Homeless families given sea-side holiday at tax-payers’ expense?

    “We’ve been moved to areas where there are no jobs,” say homeless families living in Sea-side hotels.

    Councils face bankruptcy over costs of hotel accomodation for homeless families.

    Unemployed family of 10 living in 4 star hotel at UK taxpayers’ expense.

    I envisage media stories like this appearing unless the Coalition have a cunning strategy that I am unaware of. 8-)

  4. Amber
    Yes I do. I will have to check if Aberdeen send people outside Aberdeen but think we probably do for short distances.
    However I can give you dramatic precedent in the shape of a group to whom a system similar to the emerging HB cap was applied- asylum-seekers. I used to train police in the highlands and islands. police officers would approach me privately about awkward situations they faced. I came across the situation where a property speculator bought a very large hotel in a highland town which had been empty for several decades. He went to one local authority in London and took away one busload of Iraqis, enough for one per room in his hotel which is what the deal was meant to be. He then went to another local authority and did the same saying to both groups that if they shared with a friend then he would give them a tenner per day. He was then getting £60 per day per room. He then rented out the men as workers in a fish factory charging the factory agency rates and paying the men less than half that making more than $5 per hour
    Given the loss Aberdeen City Council is making, I would be surprised if we do not receive suggestions for long-distance solutions

  5. @eoin (4.26pm) That makes pretty clear then that they didn’t announce BoE independence pre election. In fact, this particular policy rather makes the point of your opponents – that it’s best to sit tight and make some encouraging noises in opposition, while leaving the concrete policies until you get into power.

  6. DC’s great victory in europe looks like a train wreck

    that’s gonna hurt

    first he’s the invisible man and then he gets his nose rubbed in it by the euro parliament

  7. Amber/Howard et al
    Sorry to bang on but long distance temporary housing for the homeless is not the end of the story. The original host council does not just have to keepating but has to seek to ensure they are “adequately housed”. A bed-sit in Margate will not count as that.
    The outcome is that in any reasonable demand local authority, the only method of accessing social housing will be through homelessness and the conditions we are describing. This is already virtually the case in Aberdeen for example.
    Amber/Old Nat
    thanks for the comments about Obanzc4

  8. Despite the arrogance of our Housing Minister – I did detect a note of panic in his voice this evening re: the outrage beign vented in his direction but both professional bodies and his fellow Conservatives – but he soon slipped back in to the usual spin about handing out vast sums to “ordinary workign people” (his words not mine).

    At least The Mayor of London has realised that the Housing Benefit policy is anti-family and undermines social cohesion.

    What remains to be seen is will the Coalition address the need to build 3 million houses in the UK? Please do not respond with the usual hysterical rubbish about immigration – the primary cause of our housing need is demographic change. We are living longer, marrying later, and living in smaller households. In 1971 the average household was 2.9 people per home, in 2001 it fell to 2.1. If we deported every immigrant we would still need at least 2 million more houses – unless you compel everyone aged 70 or over to move into shared retirement homes

    With the abolition of all planning structures by Pickles, we are likely to see more homelesseness, overcrowding and empty properties in Central London. Unless of course the High Court actions against Pickles by various house builders are succesful, and we can start building badly needed houses again in Britain

    Or maybe the Coalition are going to start handign out tents to pitch in Epping Forest

  9. I am surprised that nobody has mentioned a new storm that is alledgedly brewing for the Coalition.

    The much maligned anti-terrorism laws, & more specifically, control orders have raced up the agenda.

    This was the issue that David Davies resigned over.

    This issue was the foundation on which LibDems built their civil liberties agenda.

    The intelligence services/ police services are saying that these anti-terrorist powers were granted for a reason. Withdrawal would make them less able to prevent terrorist attacks on UK targets.

    Well, apparently Ms May has been signing control orders at an unprecedented rate since her appointment to the Home Office.

    There hasn’t been any polling on this issue recently, unless I am mistaken. I’d like to see some because it was this, along with the Iraq war, that caused many Labour voters to switch to the Dems.

    I’d be interested to see the impact, if it transpires that Clegg is about to discover terrorism when it is explained to him by MI5/6 (along the lines of suddenly discovering Greece thanks to Mervyn King – or not, depending which of them you believe).

  10. Way back in the early 1980’s a friend of mine forecast that, by 2020 the UK would collapse – economically speaking – and that it would do so for one reason and one reason alone: housing.

    He forecast ‘a massive false wealth’ (as he called it then) based on hyper-inflated house prices.

    He also forecast that successive governments – of any persuasion – would i. fail to prevent it and ii. make it worse.

    He is no longer with us.

    But, so far at least, he was absolutely correct.

  11. Alec,

    It is one of eleven. I think the others illustrate my point.

  12. @ Barney

    I appreciate all your comments about the housing issue; & how it affects local councils, who will be at the sharp end of the HB changes, as they begin to impact ordinary families. 8-)

  13. @ Richard in Norway

    DC’s great victory in europe looks like a train wreck..
    Have I missed some development of this story? Can you fill in the gaps for me, please?

  14. Amber
    Well the irony is, perhaps it did not reach your area, that the image in our seaside resorts since they went down the pan following cheap flights, is of a benefit scroungers’ riviera.

    (cue for Sue).

    I had to counteract the nonsense of a justification for a new access road to a faded resort (Weymouth) which was based originally on providing job prospects, It was said that the higher unemployment would be solved by this rape of an AONB.

    Analysis and interviews with local Job Centre managers shewed that the situation was hopeless whatever was done. It had and has to do with the willingness not to be in that situation and the ability to emerge form it.

    The whole south coast is engaged in the unemployment industry, because, like retirement, it’s an industry. It gives the landladies and back street renters a stable income.

    The sought out couple in London, portrayed by NN, neither of whom can work, because of depression, but who were very articulate and confident on telly, will feel very much at home with the benefit of those bracing sea breezes.

  15. Holiday resorts have been blighted by DSS incumbents for years. You can’t really blame the B&B ers because it provides a year round income, but it does make seaside resorts less pleasant. And why should people who have never worked in their lives be on a permanent seaside holiday?

  16. Of course this Armageddon is predicated on the assumption that rents won’t shift an inch as a result of the new measures, and that private landlords who were previously happy to accept HB tenants at a particular rent will find replacement tenants able to pay the same money out of their own resources.

    The truth is, if such replacement tenants already existed, the landlords would have taken them instead of the HB tenants in the first place.

    The rental market is floating on a massive lake of government cash. The water level will fall..

  17. chris todd

    your friend was a clever man, it’s a shame that he’s no longer with us

    i started to get worried about house prices in the mid ninties

    and they are still worrying me today, but it’s too late we are trapped, any attempt to solve the problem will collapse the economy, but if we don’t solve it the economy will collapse anyway

  18. Chris T
    You’re not the anti road building man I once met are you?

    If so, pleased in this strange way, to meet again

  19. @Eric Goodyer
    “What remains to be seen is will the Coalition address the need to build 3 million houses in the UK? Please do not respond with the usual hysterical rubbish about immigration”

    You made some good points, but when 25% of live births in the UK for the last few years have been to mothers not born in this country, it has to be part of the problem.

  20. @ Neil A

    Of course this Armageddon is predicated on the assumption that rents won’t shift an inch as a result of the new measures…….
    IMO, Political armageddon may follow from all the publicity this policy has been given. Landlords – who had no idea that HB/ DSS was such a lucrative proposition – will be raising their rents.

    Similarly, working people who had no idea they could claim – or claim for such an amount – will be mvoing closer to their jobs with HB making up the slack. They will be in pocket because of the transport costs saved.

    Given that this is such a popular & important policy, when Labour point out that the HB bill has sky-rocketed on the back of the changes, political armeggedon will follow. ;-)

  21. amber

    wrote a post but lost it, fat finger

    heard on radio 4 that the deal has to be agreed by the euro parliament and they want 6%. so more haggling final deal 4 to 4.5%

    bedtime for me

    goodnight all

  22. amber

  23. To repeat myself nothing will unravel over these any of the details of policy, the public don’t care about detail just the headline. Brown made the mistake of coming out with masses of stats an numbers and it turned the public off. Always keep away from detail.

    Reading above, I never realised u could get benefits for depression. Depression is a treatable illness with the correct care and a lot of will and hard work on the part of the sufferer. There is not enough good quality support available.

  24. Amber/Neil A
    Its not as simple to get HB as people (now) think. You can’t just move somewhere and claim. You have to there. The checks are intricate. It is hard to predict the impact on rents in London because the unpredictable factors eg movement from abroad etc are so great but there is unlikely to be downwards movement outside London except for areas of very low demand because the fundamental pressure is demand for housing which is as others have posted very high.

  25. @SimpleSimon,

    In my child protection work, the majority of those I met on long-term sick (and there were a few) were claiming for some sort of stress related illness.

    This is partly a legacy of the tendency, which began under the Tories, to shift people from unemployment to sickness. After all, being unemployed for a long time is depressing, right?

  26. “Reading above, I never realised u could get benefits for depression. Depression is a treatable illness with the correct care and a lot of will and hard work on the part of the sufferer.”

    To cure depression, take some brisk walks, look up at the open sky (away from the sun so you don’t go blind), and if that doesn’t work get blind drunk. Simples! I have tried all these and they work. Best is the brisk walk.

  27. @Barney,

    My point remains though. If the demand is causing the prices, and the demand is from “own resources” tenants, how come HB tenants are even considered by landlords in the first place? We all know that the majority of landlords specify “no DSS”.

    If on the other hand the demand from those with HB entitlement is causing the prices then a reduction in one should lead to a reduction in the other.

    As you correctly point out, away from the expensive areas the whole thing is less of a problem anyway. Certainly in the city where I live, the rates for HB would be pretty generous (you can rent a 3 bed house here for around £650 pcm if you’re not too fussy on location).

  28. I discovered depression a few years ago. The first thing the doctor did was give me some pills and sign me off work for 2 weeks while the medication kicked in. Fair enough, after all I had started hallucinating.

    But after 2 weeks, there was a prepared sick note for 6 months ! Apparently thaw what people do. I ripped it up. I had counselling for 1 year, eased off the pills after a year, bought a dog, read several books on the subject, learned to meditate, painted and bought a guitar. All to deal with the stress related illness – I eased back to work after 2 weeks.

    Point being, I just didn’t realise it I thought it IB was paid only to physical disabilities. Everydays a schoolday

  29. Simplesimon
    Benefits for depression?
    Aberdeen is one of two test areas for pushing people off incapacity benefit and on to Job-seekers. The other area is Burnley. Presumably government are choosing a high unemployment area and a low unemployment area. There shouldn’t be an easier place in the uk to get work than Aberdeen but I would be surprised to see many such people move in to work. If you have the choice of someone who has been out of work for a long time in Aberdeen with for example depression and someone just off a bus from Kaunas who do you pick? The real world answer is the second
    Pete B
    BTW in Aberdeen 50% of babies are to foriegn born mums> Landlords don’t need to reduce rents

  30. SimpleSimon
    Glad you pulled yourself together.

  31. Neil A
    You may be proved right but my ssuspicion would be that landlorsmay shift to more crowding which might reduce their profits but not reduce rents. I may be proved wrong. Housing benefit is huge but tiny compared to the total of all rents/mortgages etc

  32. @Amber

    “IMO, Political armageddon may follow from all the publicity this policy has been given. Landlords – who had no idea that HB/ DSS was such a lucrative proposition – will be raising their rents”

    Though I go along with you on the, on balance, negative political impact for the coalition of HB proposed changes- once the reality hits home (no pun intended) as opposed to now pre-implementation; I have to go along with @Neil A on the likelihood that the rental levels charged by private landlords will be falling. Though of course we don’t know the final details yet/ neither whether there will be the (obviously sensible) geographical variations in the proposed cap that reflect the geographical variations in underlying housing costs (of purchase or rent).

    If private sector landlords do lose social tenants to council organised B n B or transfers to other council/ RSL stock then realism would dictate that rather than have no income stream at all they’d pretty quickly reduce their rents. At least in the short term to a level that covers their mortgages- which are historically low at this moment in time.

    Such a price movement would make the short term B n B policy void. Another decision would be to exit the BTL segment altogether and sell up- which would add downward pressure to local house price markets and would potentially enable FTB’s to enter at nearer-to-normal-trend prices.

    I can actually see a scenario where there is a mass downward price reorganisation of tenancy agreements in order for landlords to continue to get that ‘security-premium’ that they get by picking up this welfare cheque by which the government (a much safer bet than a tenant) pays their BTL mortgage(s).

    To be frank: IMO if no social tenant gets their life massively disturbed (in the social cleansing sense that SOME Tories are genuinely quite keen on – not all I agree) then I am quite happy for the Arthur Daley’s of the BTL world getting their margins severely trimmed as for too long now they have ripped off the system in a manner far greater than any other ‘benefit cheat’.


    None of the above though deals with the lack of council housing (not) built by *all* governments of the last 31 years.

    That was largely because all governments wanted to see “far greater provision of rental housing by the private sector”. Of course private sector rents paid by HB is not actually a private rented sector ! You can only get a genuine private rented sector at the bottom end of the rental market by returning to the state and condition of stock you had pre war: filthy non-maintained slums with several families sharing a property and all paying a rent- only by such shenanigans can private landlords make their profits without any public subsidy. Council housing and subsidised rents for the poor was the mechanism by which the state ended such disgusting uncivilised occurrences in the post war period. The stock was then debased by Thatcher’s uncontrolled ‘right- to- buy’ (the best properties) and then the Major and Blair-Brown focus on RSL’s rather than local authorities as a sort of ‘social enterprise’ approach bundled up in sleights of hand like ‘shared equity’ and ‘asset-backed tenancies’- all the ilk of new labour and Phil Blond i.e. new localism/ Big Society smoke and mirrors because it fails to address the underlying issue: which is the need for a massive increase in the number of low price residential units for rent.

    A ‘big building programme’ for council housing is something that is going to be high up the Labour party manifesto at the next election I predict.

  33. Rob S,

    A very well thought out line of argument. Impressive.

  34. @All,

    So, as promised, I’m back on October 31st. First things first…


    I note your disclosure of your Crohn’s disease via your blog on h ttp:// . I’m sure that everybody here wishes you the best with respect to your condition and I note approvingly the many comments from contributors here on your blog. We have very different views on politics and that will continue. Neverthless, I hope that you and your family enjoy a long and happy future together and, if remission does not manifest itself, then your condition does not exceed the limits consistent with long-term management (that latter is phrased a bit convolutedly but hopefully you know what I mean).

    @Anthony, @Eoin

    I’ve been trying to follow your correspondence re: the discrepancy between ICM and YouGov. Am I correct in saying the situation is that ICM’s practice of reassigning don’t knows according to recalled past voting is thought to account for some (if not all) of the discrepancy?


    As promised, the poll figures up to weeks 21-24 since the election (i.e. up to 20 Oct 2010) have been plotted. I’ll go through them in the upcoming days but if anybody wants to look at them beforehand, the results are here: h ttp://[email protected] , including animations here h ttp://[email protected]/5121236431 and here h ttp://[email protected]/5121839286 The next set (up to weeks 25-28, i.e. up to Nov 17th 2010) will be released within ten days of nov 17th.

    Regards, Martyn

    [Martyn – currently about 2 percentage points of the difference between ICM and YouGov’s Lib Dem score is due to the reallocation of don’t knows. I some some ideas about the rest of the difference, but haven’t actually written about it yet – AW]

  35. Rob S

    “A ‘big building programme’ for council housing is something that is going to be high up the Labour party manifesto at the next election I predict.”

    I wouldn’t be too sure of that. When the SNP ended the “right to buy” for new tenants last year, the Labour response was that councils should decide if “right to buy” should continue in their areas.

  36. @Eoin,
    I woke up with pre school nerves after half term?

    On agreeing to disagree, my main point is that there is no real cyclical blue-red show.
    Only 9 years of non-blue peace time rule since advent of universal suffrage pre TB
    And desite his low % in 2005, (due mainly to LD revival and partisan and clas dealignment?) TB was a winner.
    And the reds dumped him.
    John Rentoul is devastating in the ‘Indy’ for 31.10.10

  37. Amber (11:06)

    You’re right – the law of unintended consequences strikes again. After all, someone on this site said that a relative was letting out a house in Battersea for £1,300 per month (if I remember), and we all pointed out how cheap that was and how much more they could get.

    Imagine the same conversation happening across the country thousands of times. I hadn’t thought of the possibility of encouraging people to move, but if that happened it would actually increase upward pressure on rents.

    I believe a similar “you can never get the genie back in the bottle” effect applied to the change to the LHA system (itself an attempt to apply the magic of the market to save money). Landlords realised they could get more with new tenants and costs rose generally. Of course if applying the new rules to all existing recipients, the coalition risks doing the same.

  38. Chris,

    I am entertaining so I have to be bief. I will reply in the morning. I would advise to look at the pre 1945 data also… From 1847, the blues spent more years out of power than in power..


    Welcome back :)

  39. @Amber

    I think you’re right that Control Orders could be an even greater wedge issue for the LibDems than Housing Benefit has been. They could even have an amplification effect on each other as the LibDems, and even a few Davies and Bercow type of Conservatives, question the principles of the Coalition.

    I’m tempted to put down another whimsical bet on there being early elections.

  40. Eoin

    “I am entertaining”

    As always! :-)

  41. Rob S
    The claimants of HB who are not tenants of the council or of RSLs are in no sense social tenants. They are purely private tenants supported by benefit. Roughly speaking half of all claimants are social tenants and half private. I do not believe there will be a general downward pressure on rents unless there is a massive provision of new social housing which is not going to happen any time soon IMO. I think one likely option would be for more landlords to move to more multiple occupation, a step towards the slum housing you mention.
    The attack on RSLs seems unfair to me as the vast bulk of RSL houses are similar in rent etc to council houses. The shared equity etc are a very small proportion. What is true, I think, is that the largest ones in England are now fairly cut-throat in competition. However, I think it is questionable if council housing is the best approach now as we would risk falling between two stools with investment split between councils and RSLs. This has happened in my own area where we are building a very small number of council houses at very high individual cost with a lot of publicity but our RSLs are struggling to maintaintheir joint procurement system. The global number of social tenancies could have been bigger with an integrated approach.

  42. The old fears returning to a relatively small town that was just begining to recover from the dramatic impact of Thatcher’s housing benefit reforms; a combination of the unscrupulous landlords mentioned by Barney, and the old unofficial ‘single-fare exit strategy’ deployed by metropolitan authorities to deal with troublesome rough sleepers (ie the generation of unemployed teenagers who were deprived of housing benefit).

    h ttp://

  43. Over the next few months, voters in Scotland and Wales will be subjected to the normal scare-mongering (from every party).

    This US Tea Party poster seems relevant

    “We have nothing to fear but fear itself – and spiders”.

  44. @ Old Nat

    I don’t think that was a poster from an actual teabagger. I think that was probably a sign mocking them at Jon Stewart’s “Restore Sanity” rally.

    The teabaggers who are candidates in tommorow’s midterm elections have had an interesting problem. Usually in politics, the more an electorate gets to know you, the better you do in polling. The more exposure the teabaggers get to the electorate though, the more their numbers drop and disapproval rises. The most fascinating thing is how many of these people receive government benefits and are completely unaware of it because they bash government programs. It reminds me of a great line from the late 90’s show, the P.J.’s: “I don’t need any government help at all! As long as I have my welfare check, my food stamps, my food bank card, my Section 8 housing, my Medicare, and my Medicaid, I don’t need no help from anybody!”

    I’ve heard about attempts to export the tea party movement to the UK. I don’t think it would be very successful. Even the most right wing Tories would be disgusted by teabaggers if not frightened.

  45. @ Oldnat

    Even the most right wing Tories would be disgusted by teabaggers if not frightened.

    Contacts do exist between the Tea Party movement and the English Defence League (EDL). Some in the tea party movemeny have congratulated the EDL on its fight against “Radical Islam”

  46. @Howard – “I think you think I am a disappointed LD – wrong – I will be if we don’t get AV…”

    Apologies, my use of the second person pronoun was not meant to be directed at ‘you’, rather a lazy comment about buyer’s remorse, and who takes the medecine of GO’s policies.

    I was never under any misapprehension about your commitment to AV/PR.

    The more unequal a society, the more people derive their self worth from a feeling of being ‘better’ or better off than the strata below.
    There are limits though, and the stratification must in some sense seem to be ‘fair’.

    If GO’s reforms match the new incentives to work with actual jobs that pay a living wage then he will have restored his measure of fairness.
    If longterm depressives and the infirm continue to be given the “take a brisk walk” advice by potential employers, then the coalition will be seen to have placed the greatest burden on those least able to cope.

  47. Just a throw away observation which sprang to mind earlier….

    So, when those ‘displaced’ from their homes by the HB reforms find themselves in places (eg Hastings) where there is little if any work they will be encouraged “to get on their bikes” or similar) to find work. In other words, relocate to…oh, a place like London?

  48. ComRes on 19/10/10 said that they were doing weekly polls for the ITN news. I aint seen sight nor sound of these online panel polls since.

    Has anybody else?

    (I am aware of the Indy and Daily politics telephone polls, so please discount them).

  49. @Mike N

    The middle income earner in Hastings will make a two hour daily commute to Tunbridge Wells (though the A21 improvements have all just been cancelled).

    Housing costs in Tunbridge Wells are so high that the people there must make the two hour daily commute to ‘the smoke’. (Incidentally they could afford properties in inner London but would never dream of living under such conditions.)

    More broadly, many communities in East London for instance were forcibly relocated there centuries ago by their feudal overlords. Having survived the Blitz, they were gradually pushed aside by redevelopment of the Docklands during the 80s, 90s gentrification, and now the Osborne’s coup de grace.

  50. Mike N
    It is a bit more complicated than that. A large majority of those claiming housing benefit in privat accommodation will have nothing to do with the council. They are in their privately rented home. When their benefit is insufficient to pay the rent and they have no other income sufficient they will be evicted (unless the landlord chooses to reduce the rent). When evicted they are likely to present as homeless at the local authority who have the obligation to house them. If the council has no other recourse it may put them to say B&B in Hastings. They will remain as homeless in their original local authority which continues to have the obligation to ensure they are adequately housed which will not be the B&B for families etc. To save money they will be given priority on the housing list ensuring that those not homeless have no chance of social housing and ensuring a flow of tenants into social housing with a high intensity of problems and increasing the proportion of social tenants reliant on housing benefit.
    An alternative for councils wouls be to make deals with social or private landlords in areas of very low demand with very high unemployment and offer inducements for tenants or homeless to move. I believe for example Camden offered tenats a financial inducement to move to Burnley

1 3 4 5 6 7