IT is good that Oxford City Council says it wants to show flexibility over the creation of new ‘houses of multiple occupancy’.

Too often the debate is heavily influenced by the mistaken belief that these HMOs are all about ‘student ghettos’, where young people away from mummy and daddy will run riot through previously quiet family neighbourhoods.

But there is a need, particularly in Oxford, for HMOs because how else can the city hope to retain ‘natives’ who work here, or attract others from elsewhere for jobs.

Very few people (particularly with the fees increase looming) can walk out of university and buy or rent a home of their own straight away.

We suspect that some of those so opposed to HMOs in their own neighbourhoods probably started working life sharing a flat.

But it is right that there are limits imposed. The Divinity Road claim that 80 per cent of dwellings in one 100 metre stretch are HMOs is surely a situation that should never have been allowed to happen.

One in five homes in a location seems a sensible option by the council, but there needs to be some flexibility.

After all, not all HMOs are a blight on a neighbourhood. It would be a more sensible approach to ally this policy with a crack down on troublesome households.