Mike Amesbury (Weaver Vale) (Lab) I beg to move, That this House
has considered the future of social housing. It is a pleasure to
serve under your chairmanship once again, Mr Paisley, for this
important debate. I am glad that so many Members from across the
House have joined me to make their case and give their perspective
on the future of social housing. I want to acknowledge the
contribution of the stakeholders that have campaigned for social
housing over a...Request free trial
(Weaver Vale) (Lab)
I beg to move,
That this House has considered the future of social housing.
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship once again, Mr
Paisley, for this important debate. I am glad that so many
Members from across the House have joined me to make their case
and give their perspective on the future of social housing. I
want to acknowledge the contribution of the stakeholders that
have campaigned for social housing over a considerable number of
years, and especially those that have supported this debate,
including Shelter, Crisis, the Local Government Association and
its constituent councils, the National Housing Federation and the
housing associations in my constituency.
I will make a passionate case for a new generation of social
housing in this country, built at scale, in mixed communities,
from north to south and throughout out devolved regions and
nations. It should put tenants centre stage in the healthy and
affordable—I mean genuinely affordable—houses of the future.
I will start with the story of a real family in my constituency
to add context to the debate. Members from across the House will
have encountered similar stories in their caseloads. Sarah and
Eddy are a young couple who approached me some time ago. They
have a baby on the way. They had been living in the private
rented sector for nine years, and were served a section 21
notice. Section 21 should have been consigned to the history
books some time ago. There have been many promises that that will
happen, and I am sure the Minister will elaborate on that.
Sarah and Eddy were desperate. Weaver Vale Housing Trust, one of
the housing associations in my constituency, was in the process
of building affordable housing in a place called Helsby, and I
was able to go along with the chief exec and hand keys not only
to that family but to other families that the housing association
and I had helped. I saw their desperation, then their hope, then
their happiness. It was one of those days that makes us all tick
in this job. Those issues keep us awake at night, but resolving
them gives us a sense of purpose and achievement.
That example is one of only a few that I can refer to, because
housing is not being built at a sufficient scale to meet the need
that is out there; it barely scratches the surface. We have 1.2
million people in housing need, and the number is growing. There
are 100,000 families living in temporary accommodation. I am sure
some Members have seen the report published today—I think it was
from City Hall, commissioned by the Mayor of London—which shows
that there are 300,000 children sharing bedrooms with their
siblings in very cramped conditions.
Of course, we see the visible consequences of not building enough
genuinely affordable housing, whether we walk around the streets
of Westminster, Manchester, Norwich or Birmingham, and
undoubtedly it will be the same in Northern Ireland, Scotland and
so forth. Quite simply, the status quo is broken.
The consensus on the need to build 300,000 homes of all tenures
has now been ditched by the Conservative party—the Conservative
Government—to placate Back Benchers and some Tory councillors.
Now it is being reported that planning applications in England
have fallen to their lowest level in 16 years. The Government are
once again well below their target—I say “target”, but I am not
sure that it is now. Is it a target or not? It changes by the
day.
Limiting supply is shattering the dreams, hopes and aspirations
of so many families and young people. There will be Government
Members sat across from me now who are very much aware that it is
actually market-led housing schemes that are providing some of
the affordable housing schemes in our community. The situation
provides yet more evidence that the current Government have set
in train a collapse in house building across England, with all
the harmful social and economic consequences that that
entails.
Let us take our minds back to the covid pandemic. There was grand
talk from Ministers of “building back better”, with the homes for
key workers scheme draw on the post-war programmes of homes for
heroes. We saw that scheme being announced, and spun, in the
press. Unfortunately, it amounted to little in the way of
substance. It was policy by press release, soundbite and broken
promises. Lessons from history are simply being ignored.
During the current cost of living crisis, the relationship
between housing and income has been magnified more than ever.
Many commentators refer to a housing crisis; in reality, at its
heart this is an affordability crisis. Too many people and
families are excluded from what should be a basic right for all—a
decent, genuinely affordable home that is safe and secure, and
free from damp and mould. The case for social housing is stronger
now than ever before—for now, not just for the future. That case
is not just a moral one; it is about sound economics, too.
Let me start with the economic case. The cost of housing benefit
in the UK is now truly astronomical. The Government’s own figures
show that it is £23 billion a year. I will repeat that figure:
£23 billion a year. Much of that goes into substandard properties
in the private rented sector, where—as we all know from looking
at our caseloads—rents are rocketing and local housing allowance
rates are not meeting the basic costs of those rents. Again, I
would like to hear from the Minister whether that will
change.
As and City Hall have highlighted,
over £1.6 billion is being spent on very
bad—substandard—accommodation. The Government talk about the
affordable homes programme, don’t they? In reality, in a lot of
cases that programme is not building affordable homes, yet it
costs £11.4 billion over four years. There is £23 billion every
year going into the private rented sector, much of it for
substandard accommodation, and yet £11.4 billion over four years
has been spent on the so-called affordable homes programme.
(Blackley and Broughton)
(Lab)
Does my hon. Friend agree that it is a measure of the waste of
public funds and the state of the housing crisis that in Kersal
and other areas in my constituency—and, I dare say, in his
constituency and others—small terraced houses are being turned
into houses in multiple occupation for four families, with each
individual family in these tiny properties claiming housing
benefit? It is bad housing policy and bad public finance
policy.
My hon. Friend is correct, and he will know that I am very
familiar with the area that he refers to.
Surely it would be better to recycle that money and build the
green social homes to provide for need, reduce costs and
stimulate the economy. This Government talk about growth, and we
do not have it. What better way could there be than to get
Britain building and get Britain working? The result of that
investment would be a long-term saving for the nation, while
improving health and wellbeing and, importantly, the
environment.
The National Housing Federation, Shelter, Crisis and the Local
Government Association all point to figures of between 90,000 to
100,000 for the number of new homes needed every year over the
next decade if we are to stand a chance of meeting demand—I
mentioned the 1.2 million who are in housing need—yet the
Conservative Government’s record on social housing is pitiful.
Since coming to power, they have failed to build sufficient homes
to meet demand and even to meet their own targets. Under right to
buy, 2 million homes for social rent—public assets—have been sold
off. Just last year, some 21,600 social homes were either sold or
demolished, while only 7,500 new homes were built, leading to a
net loss of 14,100 homes. That has happened every year since
2010; it is a familiar picture.
The Government aim to deliver just 32,000 social rented homes
over the next five years. The Prime Minister is quite keen on
maths—that is 6,400 a year. It is even less than they are
building now, which is pitiful, so it gets even more pitiful. In
contrast, post-war Governments built more than 100,000 homes for
social rent right up until the end of the 1970s. Part of the
answer to this housing affordability crisis has been staring us
in the face for too long. It is time to summon that spirit of the
1945 Labour Government and the consensus years beyond it to build
hope, houses and opportunity Britain.
If this Government do not change tack over the next 18 months, a
future Labour Government must reprioritise social housing to
tackle housing poverty and provide genuinely affordable housing
for those in need. Our party has already committed to ensure that
social housing is the second largest tenure, with that pledge
made by my hon. Friend the Member for Wigan (), the shadow Secretary of State
for Levelling Up, Housing, Communities and Local Government, at
the last Labour conference.
I want to put a number of points to the Minister. The affordable
homes programme should be reinvigorated, with an increased focus
on delivering homes for social rent over the next 18 months, not
the current vandalised version of affordability that, in many
cases, is anything but. Social rent of up to 80% of market rents
in London, the south-east and many cities is just not realistic.
The Government must change direction on their current proposals
for section 106, given that 47% of affordable homes are currently
funded by these means. The proposed infrastructure levy is
becoming the Government’s very own magic money tree. We have all
been in debates where we have been told that it is a remarkable,
amazing levy that will pay for all these things. The one thing
missing is affordable “affordable housing”.
The Government need to power up local councils and combined
authorities, as argued by the Local Government Association, with
even greater freedoms to borrow to build, while reforming
planning to reduce the cost of land for public housing. I know
that it is rather difficult with Government Back Benchers and so
forth, but they have to do the right thing. The Government should
also direct Homes England to take a more interventionist approach
in the marketplace and acquire the land needed for building. In
their first 100 days, an incoming Labour Government will do much
of that, and very much more, with our “take back control” Bill. I
think it will be in the first 100 days after the King’s speech; I
look forward to that moment.
Some councils, from Manchester to London, and out to Norwich and
further afield in our nations, have started to build council
housing again, but meeting the scale of need will require
political leadership and missionary zeal to charge up councils as
well as housing associations—certainly those that have not lost
sight of their founding principles. We must ensure that there is
capacity in planning departments to turbocharge that missionary
zeal into building social homes. I believe that time is up for
right to buy—that is a personal perspective. To protect and grow
the public housing stock, redirect an element of that subsidy to
first-time buyers, so that they can have first dibs on market-led
housing development.
The current Government’s first homes scheme has delivered just 35
completed homes. It is a scheme that had lots of fanfare in the
not-too-distant past, with a target of 10,000. I suppose I will
pay some slight credit to the Government and the Minister: it is
much better than what came before it, which was zero. I think
that is referring to starter homes, none of which have been
started in any way. The direction of travel on social housing
regulation is the correct one, but putting the voice of the
tenant at the heart of the community will require sufficient
resources for tenants as well as social housing providers to
improve housing stock.
I am interested to hear the Minister expand on that. What minimum
standards can we expect to be required of social housing
providers? Will we see a programme such as we saw some years ago,
in the last Labour Government, which drove up standards of social
housing? I hope that the Minister can update us on when we can
expect to see section 21 abolished.
Let us consider the pressing question for the Minister: will she
recognise that it is now time to make significant investment in
building genuinely affordable social homes? If she changes tack
in the next 18 months, maybe she can make a mark in history. If
that is not the case, it is clearly time to step aside and let
people and communities take control, with a Labour Government to
provide hope, houses and opportunity.
Several hon. Members rose—
(in the Chair)
Can hon. Members remain standing so that I can see who wishes to
speak? I do not want to put a time limit on Members, but if they
can keep in mind a maximum of three and a half minutes when they
make their speeches, it will give everyone an opportunity to
speak. This is a very well-subscribed debate, and I know Members
have important things that they wish to say.
2.48pm
(Milton Keynes North)
(Con)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Paisley. I
congratulate the hon. Member for Weaver Vale () on securing the debate and
enabling us to have this vital discussion about social
housing.
I am sure we will cover a broad range of issues relating to
social housing; therefore, given the time limit, I will limit my
comments to speaking about conversions and incentives to build
social housing, where I know we need to be making much more
ground than we already are. As of now, 145,000 new affordable
homes need to be supplied in England each year to meet current
demand, including 90,000 homes at social rent levels. However,
Government figures show that just 59,000 new affordable homes
were delivered in 2021-22, with only a small proportion for
social rent, so we know that we need to do more.
I will cut to the chase: some 1 million households are currently
on the social housing waiting list in England, and private sector
rents are increasing at their fastest rate in 16 years. It is
harder for younger people to afford social housing, and it is
harder for anybody to find affordable housing. It is well
documented that a lack of affordable housing options contributes
to homelessness, which unfortunately remains a significant
problem in my constituency of Milton North. It is vital that we
deliver more affordable and social housing to keep people off the
streets. Therefore, we must incentivise building more affordable
social housing.
I have been looking at getting that done through conversions. The
all-party parliamentary group for housing market and housing
delivery, which I chair, is doing a joint inquiry with the
all-party parliamentary group for ending homelessness, which is
spearheaded by my hon. Friend the Member for Harrow East () and the hon. Member for Vauxhall (), who I am delighted to
be stood opposite.
We must find a way to make it easier for council housing
associations, individuals and organisations to build. Permitted
development could be an opportunity for that. Between 2015-16 and
2019-20, a total of 72,980 new dwellings were added to our
housing stock through permitted development rights, 89% of which
were the result of office-to-residential conversions. We have all
heard the horror stories about PDRs, so we must ensure quality
and standards. In addition to boosting affordable supply through
conversions, another crucial element to consider is the
infrastructure levy itself. I welcomed the Minister’s commitment
at the Dispatch Box last year to look into exempting affordable
accommodation from the infrastructure levy, following an
amendment I tabled that would have done exactly that. Social
housing should be included in that.
We must incentivise SME house builders to play a more significant
role in the social housing sector. SMEs bring innovation,
flexibility and local knowledge to the table and are often better
equipped to take on small, bespoke projects than large firms.
Therefore, we must make it much easier for them to enter the
market.
The future of social housing in the UK requires a comprehensive
and co-ordinated approach from both the Government and private
sector. We must increase the supply of affordable housing,
including social housing, by incentivising conversions and
supporting SME builders. Consequently, we can realise our shared
ambition, which is for everyone to have access to safe, secure,
and affordable housing that meets the needs of our local
communities.
2.52pm
(Hammersmith) (Lab)
Not only could I have made this speech in any year since I was
first elected in 2005, I have made this speech in every year
since then, because sadly, since long before that, there has been
a sustained decline of social housing. Effectively, half the
council homes have been lost since the right to buy was
introduced as part of Thatcher’s attack on social housing.
It has been a very political attack. There is a completely
erroneous belief that social tenants vote Labour and that
Conservative voters do not particularly like social housing to be
built. Actually, a survey last week showed that 70% of
Conservative voters do want more social housing to be built.
Perhaps the Conservatives’ electorate is slightly ahead of them
on housing policy, because we are now in a deep housing
crisis.
The cut to the social housing grant that was introduced in about
2011 and the freeze on rents, which prevented housing
associations and councils expanding their stock, has really
hobbled providers. This has been a 40-year process of decline. We
have lost about half our council homes. It has gone from being a
mainstream to a residual form of housing. Until we can reverse
that, we will never resolve the housing crisis.
In fact, the struggle now is much greater. Because the last major
building programmes were back in the ’60s and ’70s, many of those
estates and homes are now either reaching the end of their useful
life or need substantial repair. That money is not there. We now
have, for sound environmental reasons, a huge bill for
retrofitting and we also have—which we discovered in the wake of
the Grenfell tragedy—a huge bill for fire safety. Against that,
there has been a decline in the amount of money available. This
is a created crisis. I do not believe that this Government are
going to even begin to try to solve it in the next year, but a
future Labour Government will have to tackle it head-on.
There are many practical ways. Yes, of course more grants and
investment are needed, but there are underspends in Homes
England. There are ways of incentivising developers. There are
ways of changing plans to require a minimum of 50% affordable
housing, particularly in areas of extreme shortage. That is not
impossible; in Vienna the requirement is 66%. We need development
corporations and an interventionist market in areas of high
need.
One of the good things about canvassing, which I first started
about 40 years ago, is that we get to see how people live. Forty
years ago, we were worried about conditions in the private rented
sector. Now, in many cases the social housing sector is just as
bad. Housing associations are running their stocks badly, partly
because they do not have the means to do it. Unless and until we
have a Government that are serious about housing people on low
and medium incomes particularly, but also the population
generally, as was the pledge from Governments of both parties in
years gone by—until we get that sea change in attitude, we are
not going to resolve this problem. To think it can be tinkered
with through the sorts of means this Government are introducing
now is a pure fantasy.
2.56pm
(Dover) (Con)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Paisley. I
thank the hon. Member for Weaver Vale () for securing this important
debate. Housing has long been my driving passion and interest. I
have published extensively on housing. In that regard, I draw
attention to the Register of Members’ Financial Interests and my
unpaid role in the Housing and Finance Institute.
Hon. Members know that I am a strong advocate for the importance
of social and affordable housing. I grew up in council housing,
and I firmly believe that it is social and affordable housing
that provides a good home. That is somewhere that provides
opportunity—a springboard for life chances—as well as stability,
flexibility and affordability. A good home is not incidental or
subsidiary to the other fundamental needs or priorities of a
Government, such as health or education. Providing good homes is
itself a fundamental need and priority. It is the foundation
stone for families and people across all ages to live well and
prosper in our society.
The evidence is clear that a good home is provided best in two
forms of housing tenure: social housing and home ownership, not
the private rented sector. The link between the private rented
sector and deprivation has long been shown, and it is time to
rebalance the long-standing issue of growth in that sector. The
uncontrolled expansion is a grave error. There needs to be a
fundamental change to rebalance the tenure mix and provide more
social and affordable homes. The nation needs good homes to
provide home ownership and stable social rented housing.
Last month, I published Operation Homemaker, which is a
groundbreaking plan to house the homeless and provide permanent
homes for the most vulnerable households in Britain. Nearly
100,000 households in our country are without a home of their
own, including a staggering 11,000 children in bed and breakfast
accommodation. The Homemaker plan is to build 100,000 homes over
a year and a half. Those homes will house the homeless and
provide a permanent home for every family stuck in temporary
accommodation such as bed and breakfasts. Operation Homemaker
will not only house the homeless, but boost the economy. Building
the homes will provide a £15 billion stimulus to the economy,
which will help to keep the building industry going and secure
hundreds of jobs. The Homemaker plan can be funded by better
using available funding. That is both public and private finance,
revenue and capital spending. With private finance and
institutional investment appetite, the funding and the planning
permissions are available to deliver on this important
ambition.
As a constituency MP, I am proud of the work that the
Conservative-led Dover District Council has undertaken to provide
new council and affordable homes for our local community.
However, more must be done nationally to support those in need.
It is time for Operation Homemaker —a new national mission to
house the homeless and build the affordable homes that our
country needs. We can and must deliver the social homes that are
needed. The time to deliver social and affordable housing is not
the future; it is right here and right now, and that is what we
must do.
2.59pm
(Ellesmere Port and Neston)
(Lab)
It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair this afternoon, Mr
Paisley. I congratulate my neighbour and hon. Friend the Member
for Weaver Vale () on securing this important
debate and his excellent introduction on a subject that he is
passionate about, as is every hon. Member here.
If our debates were guided by issues that constituents come to
see us about, housing would be very near the top of the list.
Whether it is tenants facing eviction, tenants coming to see me
for the fourth or fifth time because the damp has still not been
fixed, or people who simply want a roof over their heads, it is
clear that we do not have enough housing at the right price, of
the right quality, in the right places or of the right
tenure.
I look at what the young people of today are facing: student loan
repayments, sky-high private rents, huge deposits for a home, and
maybe even saving for retirement. With inflation continuing to
outstrip wage increases for many, even renting privately is a
challenge, never mind saving for the future or for a home of
their own. A young person who lives with their parents and cannot
afford to move out, as many cannot, will probably not even
qualify to get on the housing register in the first place. They
are essentially trapped.
To get on the housing list now, people have to be in a pretty
serious situation. Simply being unable to afford a place of one’s
own is no longer enough. Even with those restrictions, there are
nearly 6,500 people on the housing register across my local
authority area of Cheshire West, with more than 1,500 in the most
urgent categories. For context, in the past year, only 922 vacant
properties were advertised across the whole of Cheshire West. The
average waiting time for an applicant in band A—which is for the
most urgent cases, such as those involving domestic abuse or
homelessness—is around 22 weeks, while the longest wait is just
over three years. Those are just the most urgent cases—the
so-called lucky few who can even get on the register in the first
place.
The only answer is to massively increase the amount of council
housing. As the LGA says, a generational step change in council
house building is required to boost housing supply. What we have
at the moment is a lottery. If there is a central Government
grant going, or a new private development, where the developers
might be required to build a few affordable homes, we might get a
bit of new social housing, but it is piecemeal and nowhere near
enough to meet demand.
The new builds we are seeing are not even enough to replace the
homes lost to the right to buy, never mind to meet existing
demand. I understand why, in the rush to reach the decent homes
standard, many councils transferred their stock to housing
associations at the start of this century, but that has led to
council housing becoming detached from the communities it is
supposed to serve. It is now all about asset management.
Although our council has built what it can, it is nowhere near
what it needs to be, because of the straitjacket imposed by
Government. Most of the new social housing built in my
constituency in recent years has been built by housing
associations, often based many miles away from the constituency,
with no connection to the area, other than having a few dozen
homes there. I doubt very much that the leaders of those
organisations have spent much time in the constituency, if they
have visited it all.
When councils had the capacity and resources to plan over the
long term for housing need, it was about so much more than just
putting a roof over people’s heads. It was about building
communities, and successive generations living side by side in
secure, well maintained, low-cost homes. We have lost all that.
Decent and affordable housing, built in sustainable, joined-up
communities, has the power to fundamentally improve people’s
lives, and the life chances of children in my constituency and
across the country. What we have now is a market-first,
people-last approach, which ultimately makes us all the poorer.
Build more council houses and build them now.
3.03pm
(Stockport) (Lab)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Paisley. I
thank my hon. Friend and north-western neighbour the Member for
Weaver Vale () for securing this important
debate. I know he is passionate about improving the provision of
social housing in his constituency and across Britain.
Every single week my office is inundated with stories about
scandalous rent hikes in the private sector, amounting to
hundreds of pounds, and an ageing stock in the social sector,
meaning damp and mould are rampant. Recent census data revealed
that house prices in Stockport have risen by almost 50% in the
last five years, compared with 20% in the rest of England and
Wales. As a result, rents in the private sector are sky
rocketing. Understandably, people are turning to an already
oversubscribed social housing sector, where temporary and
emergency accommodation is full.
Local housing allowance is dwarfed by the median rental value in
the two broad market rental areas in my constituency, and with
the Government’s consistent delay in abolishing section 21
no-fault evictions, the security of tenure in the social sector
is rightly and more understandably attractive. When the
Chancellor announced his Budget last month, I was deeply
disappointed that local authorities were not given the money to
improve the housing stock, or the ability and finances to build
more council houses.
I recently received an email from a woman living in social
housing, who said that conditions were so bad that her
one-year-old baby has
“had to stay with family as we have to protect her health. She
was constantly coughing and had bad breathing”.
Another example is a mother who wrote to me following an accident
that left her paralysed from the waist down. She is in a property
that has no wheelchair access and so is bedbound. There are
currently no suitable properties for the family.
In the last fortnight I met with Stockport Homes, which is the
primary social housing provider in my constituency. The truth is
that it is so much more than a social housing provider. Whether
by providing food and mental health or employment support to its
tenants, or by tackling antisocial behaviour in and around its
properties, it regularly goes above and beyond. Take, for
example, the work it does through its money advice team, which
supported more than 2,000 customers to obtain additional income
worth £7.2 million. Stockport Homes is truly an example of an
excellent social service.
But when I met with representatives from Stockport Homes, they
shared with me the utter despair that they feel, day in, day out,
about their inability to provide suitable housing to the people
who come through their doors, despite the excellent work and
services they already offer. There are 7,000 households on the
waiting list, 4,000 of which are in housing need of some kind.
There has been an almost 30% increase in the number of
homelessness inquiries from people currently in the private
rented sector across the Stockport borough. A total of 569
properties have been reported as having damp, mould and
condensation. If those figures are not shocking enough, in the
last month a single studio flat received 325 bids. That means
that 324 people missed out on securing one single-bed property,
which demonstrates the exceptionally high demand in the Stockport
constituency. I place on record my thanks to the chief executive,
Helen McHale; the head of homelessness and rehousing, Jeff Binns;
and all the staff at Stockport Homes who work so hard to provide
for people in my constituency.
The Government must understand, though, that without addressing
the inadequate finances and the much-needed upgrades to a
significant portion of the stock, Stockport Homes will continue
to struggle. The Government talk a good game on housing. The
Secretary of State has previously publicly shamed failing social
landlords, and the overdue renters reform Bill is coming,
although it seems to be stuck in the pipeline. Beyond words and
empty promises, what are the Government doing to ensure both that
there is enough social housing provided and that the stock is of
the highest quality, meeting the demands of tenants in Stockport
and across Britain? I want to hear much more from the Minister on
that.
3.07pm
(Strangford) (DUP)
I thank the hon. Member for Weaver Vale () for introducing the debate,
setting the scene so well and, by having the debate, giving us
all an opportunity to participate. The Minister will obviously
not be able to answer questions on Northern Ireland, because she
does not have responsibility for that—it is a devolved matter—but
I always like to come along and add a Northern Ireland
perspective to debates. It is important that I do so, because I
will replicate what everybody else is saying. The problems in the
UK mainland are problems for us back home in Northern Ireland, so
I want to make that contribution, if I can.
Housing issues have always been at the top of my agenda in my
office, which perhaps indicates that back home we have the same
problems that others have referred to. I work incredibly closely
with the local housing executive and housing associations in my
constituency of Strangford. I put on record, as the hon. Member
for Stockport () did, that the managers
provide incredibly timely responses and always aim to do their
utmost for their tenants and my constituents. I very much
appreciate our working relationship and partnership.
There are issues, however, that need to be addressed for the
future of social housing, so it is good to be here. I have no
hesitation in saying that in my office—I am sure that yours is
the same, Mr Paisley—we receive and deal with between five and 10
housing issues per day, for five to six days per week. It is
massive issue. When it comes to the workload in my office, the
only thing that beats housing is benefits. More individuals are
relying on social housing, especially because of the rise in the
cost of living—private rentals are so expensive and out of
proportion. Many people are pushed financially to the very
limit.
On 31 March 2022, there were 44,426 applicants on the social
waiting list, and of those, 31,000—three quarters—were in housing
stress. In other words, they were priorities. Others, including
the hon. Member for Weaver Vale, have referred to the number of
priorities. One of the issues that must be dealt with is the
disparity between the amount of social housing available and the
number of tenants waiting to be homed. I am very pleased that two
new social housing developments are coming to my
constituency—those properties will be allocated in about a
month’s time—but the number of priority tenants on the list has
increased by 12% to 15% in the last number of years.
The locality of social housing must be addressed as well, as well
as the sharing of properties. There was a news story this
morning, which I am sure others will also have noticed. A
gentleman died in a flat, and there were 16 people staying in
that flat—multiple people in one property. We have a real
issue.
The girls in my office would say that the issues we deal with are
split 50:50 between maintenance issues and social housing
transfers—50% for maintenance issues and 50% for housing
allocation. Maintenance issues such as mould, damp and insulation
are prevalent. That is one of the most important factors in
providing a successful future for social housing. I asked a
parliamentary question back in January about what the Department
was doing to address the issues of damp and mould. The reply
said:
“All social housing must be safe and decent, providing those
living in homes with security and dignity.”
The problem is that that is not the reality. We will all have
examples of that across our constituencies.
I am conscious of your direction on time, Mr Paisley, and I will
conclude. Despite the issues, we have a social housing system to
be proud of, and a system that looks out for and protects those
who are at risk and vulnerable. We must do our job here, to help
them do theirs. In this place, we have the capacity to improve
things further down the line, and to help the social housing
sector to create healthy and safe homes for those most in need.
That is our job to do here. Let us do our best.
3.11pm
(Wirral West) (Lab)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship this afternoon,
Mr Paisley.
Recent figures suggest that at least 271,000 people are homeless
in England. Of those, 2,400 are sleeping rough on any given
night. We desperately need more social housing. In the 1950s,
councils were building an average of 147,000 homes a year. Slums
were cleared and people moved into decent modern homes. According
to figures from the National Housing Federation, by the 1960s, a
quarter of all the country’s housing was council housing. There
was a belief in state provision of housing.
Since those days, there has been a massive decline in council or
social housing. The introduction of right to buy in 1980 under
the Thatcher Government reduced the amount of social housing
owned by councils and the amount of social housing overall.
Following the Housing Act 1988, many councils transferred
ownership of their housing stock to housing associations, and
housing associations continued to build more social homes through
the 1990s and 2000s. However, a drastic reduction in Government
funding since 2010 has seen fewer social and affordable homes
built.
In 2010-11, nearly 36,000 social rented homes were started. The
following year, after funding cuts, that number reduced to just
over 3,000. But it is worse than that. Some 165,000 social homes
for rent were either sold or demolished without direct
replacement between 2012-13 and 2021-22. That is an average net
loss of more than 16,000 desperately needed, genuinely affordable
homes a year, meaning that those who cannot afford to buy their
own home—that includes pensioners and those living in poverty—are
often forced to rent privately and live in constant fear of rent
hikes or eviction. It is not just people in poverty who are
affected. A generation of young people are struggling to find a
home in which they can have some dignity and raise a family.
The Government should be bringing forward an ambitious programme
of new social homes built on brownfield sites to high energy
efficiency standards. It is also important that existing social
housing is maintained to a decent standard. It is a matter of
real concern that after almost 13 years of Conservative
Government, there are insufficient welfare rights agencies to
support tenants when they need help with issues such as damp,
mould and disrepair. I know from the casework I receive, as I am
sure colleagues across the House do, that there is a desperate
need for such support.
It is a matter of extreme concern that the Government have failed
to address the crisis in supply of social housing. Successive
Conservative Governments have not only singularly failed to build
the social homes we need over the past 13 years, but they have
actively sought to remove them on an unprecedented scale. We need
a sea change in attitudes to social housing and a commitment and
a belief that social housing is a social good. Without it, the
misery of homelessness and insecure and overpriced accommodation
will continue to prevail.
3.14pm
(Stockton North) (Lab)
I, too, congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Weaver Vale
() on securing this debate. If
I had a fiver for every time I was asked by an older person to
help them move to a bungalow, or I encountered a plea for help
from a person with a disability who needs specialist
accommodation, I could probably build a house. I could build half
a street if I included all the individuals and families who are
homeless, or who need more space for a growing family or an extra
room so they can accommodate and care for a relative. After 13
years of Tory Government, we simply do not have the houses to
meet those needs. All those people have been failed. We have
simply failed to build sufficient social housing.
We do not just need to put a roof over people’s heads; we need to
provide safe homes that are fit for purpose in places where
individuals and families can thrive without worrying about the
end of yet another 12-month lease, which are so common in the
private rented sector. More and more people are stuck in that
sector when they should have a council house to rent.
It is reprehensible that the Tories have abandoned their 2019
manifesto commitment to build 300,000 homes a year. The Prime
Minister refused to say why when he spoke at Prime Minister’s
questions today. Perhaps the Minister will be able to answer that
question. Thatcher produced the right-to-buy scheme and opened
the door for millions to buy their council houses, but she failed
to ensure that those homes were replaced when they were sold,
which meant that there were insufficient homes to rent for future
generations. The Labour Government from 1997 did not build enough
houses to rent either, but they did concentrate on refurbishing
millions of existing council homes, which had been neglected by
the Thatcher and Major Governments for nearly two decades.
The Local Government Association says that we should
“give local government the powers and funding to deliver an
ambitious build programme of 100,000 high-quality,
climate-friendly social homes a year”,
and I agree. It adds that that would
“save the public finances by £24.5 billion over 30 years, which
includes a reduction in the housing benefit bill and temporary
accommodation costs.”
For a long time, what used to be our council housing stock has
been transferred to housing associations, and they have succeeded
in many ways, but I worry about the focus on building new houses
rather than social houses for rent. More and more are being built
for sale. I do not doubt that there is a place for that sort of
activity, but we need a policy to drive a revolution in the
building of affordable homes for rent. Shelter is banging the
same drum. It says:
“Unless we act now, we face a future in which a generation of
young families will be trapped renting privately for their whole
lives, where more and more people will grow old in private
rentals, where billions more in welfare costs will be paid to
private landlords—and hundreds of thousands more people will be
forced into homelessness.”
My local authority, Stockton-on-Tees Borough Council, is also
seeing rent increases, which are making housing more unaffordable
for residents. There is therefore a greater demand for social
housing. That comes at a time when there is a lower turnover in
social housing, which means that the generations coming up that
require housing do not get it. Of course, there are significant
waiting lists for properties that can provide independent
accommodation for those who have a family member with a
disability.
Thirteen, the social housing provider, wants to upgrade its old
houses, but it is a risky business because of the way the
financial system works. We need that revolution, and I believe
that only our Labour pledges will drive a generational step
change in housing. Our people will be happier and healthier as a
result.
3.18pm
(Vauxhall)
(Lab/Co-op)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Paisley. I pay
tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Weaver Vale () for securing this really
important debate and for his powerful contribution. He spoke
passionately about this issue, which is close to many of our
hearts.
Debates on social housing are personal to me, as they are to many
people in Vauxhall. Like many other Members, I grew up on a
council estate. I am the eldest of three girls, and I still
remember being placed in temporary accommodation in a bed and
breakfast in King’s Cross. My mum never allowed us to miss
school, so we still had to get on the tube every morning down to
Brixton. I remember the joy we felt when we received our
permanent accommodation in the Barrier block in Brixton, and the
relief of not having to wheel around a suitcase or look at my
belongings in a black bag.
Many years later, many of the constituents I represent are still
in that vicious cycle of not having somewhere stable to call
home. I look back on my childhood and almost feel guilty, because
I had my own bedroom on our council estate. In many of my
constituents’ houses, three, four or five siblings share a
bedroom. That is totally unacceptable.
This morning in the Jubilee Room, I hosted, along with Shelter,
an event looking at young people’s housing aspirations. Many of
the issues that we have discussed today came up. Those young
people cannot start their lives—how can we expect the next
generation to build a life and study properly if they do not get
an adequate night’s sleep?
Housing is a basic human right. One of the things that I remember
about growing up on a council estate is the fact that people
stereotyped us and looked down at us. That is still how social
tenants are treated but, as we all know from our casework, these
tenants just want to live their lives, pay their rent and work.
They have aspirations. The sneering in some of the media about
people in social housing is part of why we are not building
enough. We need to believe in those people—they are our
future.
The home I had in Brixton gave me and my family a roof over our
heads. In my borough of Lambeth, more than 36,000 people are on
the housing waiting list, and a number of them will never get the
social housing that I grew up in. My casework, like that of many
other Members, is filled with housing issues. Housing is the top
issue—repairs, damp, mould. I will read out one example of an
email I received recently:
“I’m 27 years old and I currently live with my disabled 70 year
old mother and poorly 92 year old grandmother. I am currently 33
weeks pregnant and at my wits end with the issues I’m facing.
Over the past 7 years one of the bedrooms has suffered dark
stains that come through the wall. These stains are so severe
that a recent workman told me that it looks like there has been a
fire. This is the room I have been breathing in the last 8 months
of my pregnancy and this is the room I plan to bring my newborn
baby into. As my due date is looming my anxiety is through the
roof. Please please help.”
After the tragic case of Awaab Ishak, nobody should be living in
those circumstances—but they are, because our housing
associations and councils do not have the funding. The Minister
is the 15th Housing Minister since 2010. When will the Government
make housing a key priority? They keep on talking about it. I
know that the Minister is very able, and I hope we will see a
step change when it comes to building more houses, supporting our
local councils and making sure that my constituents and many more
do not have to live in this way.
3.22pm
(York Central)
(Lab/Co-op)
It is always a pleasure, Mr Paisley. Here is a scandal: in York
over the past four years, just 94 social housing units were
developed, in addition to some resettlement homes. Currently,
just 27 units are in development. Over that period, there have
been 229 sales of social housing, while the waiting list has more
than doubled—an average of 24 social homes built and 57 sold each
year.
Meanwhile, York has seen the growth of short-term holiday lets:
this morning, AirDNA showed 2,056 places to let. Why does that
matter? It matters because people who want to rent social housing
are forced to rent private housing, then their landlords serve
section 21 notices, kicking out their tenants and flipping homes
into Airbnbs, while residents have nowhere to go. We are drowning
in luxury accommodation, with relocations, second homes and empty
homes having driven up the “for sale” market costs by 23.1% in
York just last year—the highest in the country.
There is a housing crisis. Ownership is inaccessible, current
residential properties are flipped into Airbnbs, private rent is
unaffordable and insecure, and council house builds number fewer
than half the sales. There are no excuses, but that is what we
get after 13 years of Tory Governments combined with a Lib Dem
council.
The stock is old, cold and full of mould and damp. As I was
switching off my laptop last night, there was yet another email,
pleading:
“I live in a 2 bed second floor flat. I have 3 kids. I’m
overcrowded and I’ve got bad mould on bedroom windows and on
walls and living room windows are broken and unsafe for my 3 and
4 year old kids. Can you please help?”
It was not the first such email that day and, given that we
receive hundreds and hundreds of cases, it will not be the last.
Overcrowding, neglected conditions, people placed in completely
unsuitable neighbourhoods—that is York today under this
Conservative Government and the Lib Dem-Green council. My city
and my residents are ignored as developers and private landlords
profit. Our council and this Government are not incensed by the
burning injustice of their own failure, but seek every reason to
justify it.
Forgive me for being angry, but I am. I talk to these families
every week. I am part of their community. I see the price of
neglect; I know their stories, frustrations, sadness and lost
dreams. When I see the Ministers, Government and councils with
all the power to make a difference squander opportunities and
fritter away the privilege that elected power gives to transform
lives, it says politics is a sham, and politicians must be shamed
if they cannot even build the homes that the poorest among us
need. They cannot even find the parliamentary time for the
promised renters reform Bill. Instead they publish Bill after
Bill, consuming an inordinate amount of time fighting petty
political battles, crushing workers and human rights, rather than
using their power to retrofit homes and build the new ones that
we need to restore communities and give people a new start.
Labour will do that, because that is why we are here. It is the
purpose of our politics.
I want no more embarrassing justifications. We have the
Levelling-up and Regeneration Bill in the House of Lords right
now. As the Government heard my cries about Airbnb and introduced
legislative changes and a consultation, I ask them to do the same
in that Bill to bring forward the legislative changes to build a
new generation of social housing. The opportunity is now. It must
not be missed.
3.25pm
(Luton South) (Lab)
It is a pleasure to speak under your chairship, Mr Paisley. I
congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Weaver Vale () on securing this debate. We
have heard fantastic, powerful speeches, particularly from Labour
Members. I add my voice to say that the UK faces a severe housing
crisis.
As the Member of Parliament for Luton South, I find that housing
is the most common issue that local residents contact me about.
High rents, poor quality housing and low rental stock mean that
many Luton residents struggle to access affordable, safe, healthy
and secure housing. Luton council has over 8,000 families on its
housing waiting list, many with complex and multiple needs, and
over 1,000 families in temporary accommodation. That is
completely unsustainable and getting worse with the increase in
section 21 no-fault evictions in Luton. Alongside low pay, rents
in Luton are high mainly because of the town’s proximity to
London, and the average house price is £289,000. That is 10 times
the average wage in Luton, so owning their own home is a pipe
dream for many.
We can see that the Government do not recognise the importance of
a good affordable home. Around 2 million private renting
households—about 38% of the total of those in the private rented
sector—receive housing costs support through either universal
credit or housing benefit. Yet the Government have chosen to
freeze local housing allowance rates at the same time as rent
inflation continues and new cost of living pressures have
emerged. In Luton, Institute for Fiscal Studies analysis shows
that there is now a £100 deficit in the local housing allowance
rate in comparison with the lowest rents in the area. That does
not acknowledge the types of properties that people need, as high
demand for family homes means that the average rent for larger
homes continues to grow.
In Luton, all homeless applications are placed in band 2 on the
choice-based letting system. For a three-bedroom property, which
is where the high demand is, the likely wait time is four to five
years. That is four to five years of bringing up children in
overcrowded and unsuitable accommodation. Without action, it will
get worse over the coming years. The Government’s decision making
is forcing people in Luton South and across the country into
poverty.
I am proud that the Labour party has committed to be the first
Government in a generation to restore social housing, including
council housing, to the second largest form of tenure. The next
Labour Government will rebuild our social housing stock and bring
homes back into the ownership of local councils and communities.
Home ownership will be opened up to millions more. For those in
private renting, we will put into law a new renters charter and a
new decent homes standard. Unlike the Tories, we know that
housing is not a market, but a fundamental human right. The title
of this debate is “Future of Social Housing”, but, as so many
have said today, the future is social housing; the future is
council housing.
(in the Chair)
Before I call the SNP spokesperson, I thank colleagues for
self-disciplining themselves brilliantly and making sure that we
got to this point without my having to call anyone to order. I
call the SNP spokesperson, .
3.29pm
(Glasgow South West)
(SNP)
It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair, Mr Paisley. I noted
that your friend, the hon. Member for Strangford (), exercised self-discipline, which is not always the
case.
(in the Chair)
It is because I am in the Chair.
I noticed your strict chairing, Mr Paisley, but it is a pleasure
to serve under your chairmanship.
I thank my good friend, the hon. Member for Weaver Vale (), for opening the debate. He
said a number of things that resonated with me; in fact, I got
flashbacks when he talked about the challenges in the private
rented sector. To this day, I remember the exchange I had with
the landlord associations in the Work and Pensions Committee.
They told me there was no such thing as “No DSS” and no adverts
put out that said it, and then I managed to find one that said,
“No DSS. Small dogs considered.” I am still waiting on an answer
to the vital question in that exchange: did the small dog have to
provide proof of income to get a property? Colleagues raising
these types of debates, and the work of the Select Committee
system, ensured that that particular policy was put in the
bin.
The hon. Gentleman talked at great length about the very real
need for social housing. I will touch on that, but not only is
there a need for social housing; we need to acknowledge the
support provided by social housing providers to their tenants on
a daily basis. They must provide those wraparound services
because of the effects of Government policy and a broken social
security system, such as the challenges people face getting
pension credit or disability benefit, or getting deductions at
the very start of a universal credit claim, and all the other
problems that social housing providers have to support their
tenants with.
A number of colleagues have talked at length about the level of
rents. With that comes food price inflation—currently at 18.2%. I
thank the Linthouse housing association for providing the
Linthouse larder, along with Good Food Scotland and Feeding
Britain; Southside housing association for opening the Cardonald
larder; and the Wheatley Group, which has opened the Threehills
larder in Glasgow South West. These Glasgow housing associations
have a vision of ensuring that there is affordable food for their
tenants right across the great city of Glasgow. What is the
benefit of that? It has been calculated that someone who uses an
affordable larder saves £20 a week on their weekly shop. That
goes a long way to help tenants to not only afford their rent,
but buy other things, and it helps them with this Tory-made cost
of living crisis.
In Scotland, the Scottish Government are leading the way in the
delivery of affordable housing across the UK. They have delivered
115,558 affordable homes since 2007, over 81,000 of which were
for social rents; that includes 20,520 council homes. The
Scottish Government are working intensively with social landlords
to develop an agreement on a below-inflation rent increase for
the next financial year.
The Scottish Government are also committed to tackling disrepair
in housing, which many colleagues have talked about, by driving a
culture in which good maintenance is a high priority. Social
landlords in Scotland are already required by law to meet the
tolerable standard, which forms part of the Scottish housing
quality standard. That requires housing to be substantially free
from rising or penetrating damp. Compliance is monitored annually
by the Scottish housing regulator.
One of the challenges we face in Glasgow South West is that
housing provision for asylum seekers does not often meet the
Scottish housing quality standard. The Home Office has argued
that there is no need for asylum accommodation to meet the
Scottish housing quality standard. I must say, I find that a
disgrace, but I am sure Glasgow is not the only asylum dispersal
area where we find that housing standards for those seeking
sanctuary in the UK do not meet basic standards.
The hon. Gentleman is making a very good speech. Understandably,
most of this debate has been about general needs housing, but
there is also social housing, asylum seeker and refugee housing
and housing for Roma Gypsies and travellers. These are especially
neglected groups, and the Government have an appalling record on
each of them.
I agree that there is an appalling record here, and I am sure the
hon. Gentleman agrees with me that it is the social housing
providers that have allowed their homes and accommodation to be
let out to the Home Office to provide accommodation, but far too
much of it is being let out to the private sector. I hope to work
with him in holding the Government to account on these
issues.
It is important that the Scottish Government are committed to
enabling disabled people to live independently in their own home
where possible. The Scottish Government want disabled people in
Scotland to have choice, dignity and freedom to access suitable
homes and to enable them to participate as full and equal
citizens. The Scottish Government have flexible grant funding
arrangements, ensuring that specialist housing provision
identified by local authorities is a priority, so that disabled
people can be supported. The Scottish accessible homes standard
will futureproof new homes, building in accessibility and
adaptability from the start, to ensure that older and disabled
people have an increased range of housing options and to reduce
the need to make costly changes to people’s homes as their needs
change.
It is also important that steps are taken to strengthen rights
for tenants and to prevent homelessness. Tackling homelessness
and ending rough sleeping is a priority for the Scottish
Government. On top of the funding provided through the local
government settlement, the Scottish Government are providing a
total of £100 million funding from their multi-year Ending
Homelessness Together fund to transform the homelessness support
system. I hope that the UK Government will look closely at the
situation of people with no recourse to public funds. Too many
people with no recourse to public funds are at risk of becoming
homeless or sleeping rough. I hope that the Government look again
at this issue, because the clear view of the Scottish National
party is that nobody should be at risk of homelessness or
destitution because of their immigration status.
As other colleagues have already said, the UK Government
should—indeed, must—take urgent action to support struggling
households by increasing the local housing allowance rates and
scrapping poverty-inducing Tory policies; no devolved
Administration should have to mitigate those policies, but that
is what they have to do.
I look forward to hearing the Minister’s response and I thank
hon. Members for participating in this debate.
3.37pm
(Greenwich and Woolwich)
(Lab)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr
Paisley.
I start by warmly congratulating my hon. Friend the Member for
Weaver Vale () on securing this incredibly
important debate and on the compelling remarks he made to open
it. His personal commitment to tackling the housing crisis in all
its manifestations is second to none. He made a passionate case
today for doing what is necessary both to tackle the present
chronic undersupply of genuinely affordable social homes and to
drive up standards in those that already exist. I thank all the
other hon. Members who have contributed this afternoon in an
extremely powerful set of speeches, particularly those of Labour
Members, who really brought home the human cost of the neglect in
recent years.
A wide range of issues has been raised in the debate this
afternoon, but the vast majority of them have related either to
the pressing need to build more social homes or to the equally
pressing need to ensure that our existing social housing stock is
well managed and of good quality. I will seek to address each
issue in turn, starting with supply.
It is beyond dispute that England’s social housing deficit is now
immense. Over 1.2 million households are now on local authority
waiting lists, and that number is almost certainly a significant
underestimate of the number of families for whom social housing
would be an appropriate tenure if it were available. The point
was made by my hon. Friend the Member for Vauxhall () that because successive
Governments have failed to build enough social homes, millions of
families are trapped in overcrowded or unsuitable properties, an
increasing number of low-income households have been forced into
insecure, unaffordable and often substandard private rented
housing, and the number of households in temporary accommodation
has rocketed from 48,000 in 2010 to 99,000 in 2022.
The cost of this tenure shift has been borne not only by those
trapped in inappropriate housing, who are often at risk of
homelessness, but by the state in the form of a rapidly rising
housing benefit bill, which now stands at a colossal £23.4
billion per year. That sum amounts to more than the total running
costs of several Government Departments, yet when it comes to
social housing supply, the record of successive Conservative-led
Governments since 2010 has been nothing short of woeful. As my
hon. Friend the Member for Weaver Vale mentioned, the
Department’s own data makes it clear that just 7,528 social homes
were built last year. At the same time, 21,638 were either sold
or demolished. That is a net loss of 14,110 genuinely affordable
homes when we know that we need to build around 90,000 a year if
we are ever to meet housing need.
That meagre 2021-22 output figure is not an aberration. By means
of slashed grant funding, the introduction of the so-called
affordable rent tenure, increased right-to-buy discounts and
numerous other policy interventions, Conservative-led Governments
have actively engineered the decline of social housing over the
past 13 years, presiding over an average net loss of 13,000
social homes in each and every one of them. For all that the
present Secretary of State waxes lyrical about the need to build
more social homes, the steps that the Government are actually
taking—namely, slightly tilting the balance of affordable homes
programme spending towards social rent and providing local
authorities with some additional flexibilities around the use of
right-to-buy receipts—are not only too little, too late but
undermined by other measures that Ministers are committed to
enacting; not least, as my hon. Friend mentioned, the
introduction of a new infrastructure levy that will almost
certainly deliver less affordable housing overall than is
provided through the present developer contribution system.
Labour is the only party seriously committed to a marked increase
in social house building. We will set out plans ahead of the
general election that will make clear the level of our ambition
and how we intend to meet it.
Given the chronic shortage of social homes across England and the
corresponding lack of choice available to tenants, it is critical
that what social housing stock remains is of decent standard, yet
we know that the lives of far too many social housing tenants are
blighted by poor, unsafe and unhealthy conditions. The shared
recognition across these benches of that fact and the
consequential need for the Government to act—[Interruption.]
(in the Chair)
Order. There is a vote in the other Chamber, and there will be at
least two votes, possibly three. Hopefully, we will be back here
at about a quarter past the hour to complete the debate.
3.42pm
Sitting suspended for Divisions in the House.
4.19pm
On resuming—
(in the Chair)
I thank colleagues for making their way back so promptly; that is
very helpful. I call the Opposition spokesperson—you have six
minutes, or thereabouts.
Thank you, Mr Paisley. As I was saying, the shared recognition
that exists across these Benches of the fact that the lives of
far too many social housing tenants are blighted by poor, unsafe
and unhealthy conditions, and of the consequential need for the
Government to act, enabled the Social Housing (Regulation) Bill
to complete its Commons stages in short order.
However, when it comes to ensuring that standards in social
housing improve markedly and rapidly, the Bill is not a panacea.
The onus to drive reform is, of course, ultimately on the sector
itself, and the steps being taken following the publication of
the “Better Social Housing” review are a welcome sign that it may
be doing just that. However, the Government are ultimately
responsible for the state of social housing in England and,
subsequent to the Bill’s receiving Royal Assent, the Government
will still have a significant role to play in assisting social
landlords to improve their stock and tackle the underlying causes
of problems such as damp, mould and leaks.
The problem is that political choices made by successive
Conservative-led Governments have piled significant financial
pressure on to social landlords. As my hon. Friend the Member for
Hammersmith () argued earlier, the
cumulative impact of having to build new, affordable homes
despite swingeing grant funding reductions; the four-year 1% rent
cut imposed between 2016 and 2020; the fact that the shortfall
arising from this year’s 7% rent cut is unfunded; and the
long-term challenges posed by decarbonisation and building safety
in the absence of adequate Government support cannot be
overstated.
Social landlords who wish to improve their existing stock face a
monumental challenge. We need a Government who at least recognise
that situation and are willing to explore what more is required
from them, not least in funding and financing mechanisms to
support social landlords to upgrade their stock, yet we see no
signs that the present Government are giving the issue the
attention it deserves. It is therefore likely to be yet another
task that will fall to the next Labour Government.
The historical and ongoing failure to build enough social rented
homes has seen growing numbers of families trapped in
overcrowded, unsuitable, insecure or unaffordable properties.
Those families suffer in terms of diminished health, wellbeing
and life chances, and the state also pays in the form of an
eye-watering and ever-rising housing benefit bill. Social housing
is at the heart of the solution to the housing crisis, and the
Labour party is committed to its renewal and rebirth through a
substantial programme of social house building and further
measures to drive up standards in our existing stock.
When it comes to social homes, “more” and “better” must be our
watchwords. It is high time we had a Government who do not just
pay lip service to the importance of social housing, but are
wholeheartedly committed to providing decent, safe, secure and
genuinely affordable homes for all who need them.
(in the Chair)
I call the Minister—our third Rachel of the day.
4.22pm
The Minister of State, Department for Levelling Up, Housing and
Communities ()
It is a great pleasure to serve under you, Mr Paisley. Before I
start, may I seek your guidance? How much time do we have for the
debate?
(in the Chair)
You have 10 minutes, Minister; we probably have another 12
minutes left.
Thank you—I will crack on, then. I thank the hon. Member for
Weaver Vale () for today’s really
important debate. It is a pleasure to be here and to respond for
the very first time on this particular issue in this Chamber.
The hon. Member powerfully articulated the case for building more
social homes not just in his constituency, but across the
country—that is reflected in the Members here. It goes without
saying that that is an objective we all very much share. I will
be responding to the comments made by Members, both in the course
of my speech and at the end, and I thank every Member for making
powerful contributions.
I start by reaffirming the unshakeable commitment of the
Government to driving up both the quality and quantity of this
nation’s social housing stock. It is a core tenet of our
levelling-up agenda, and that has been reflected in recent years,
starting with our affordable homes programme. The Government have
been clear that they are entirely committed to increasing the
supply of affordable housing in the country. That is why we
launched the £11.5 billion affordable homes programme in 2020,
with a commitment to deliver tens of thousands of affordable
homes for both sale and rent.
At this point, I would like to say a bit about the social rent
component of our affordable homes programme. We recognise how
vital these homes are to building and maintaining thriving
communities, and I was particularly struck by the very fluent
remarks of the hon. Member for Vauxhall () on this point; she
really brought it to life and I thank her for doing so.
I know that every hon. Member will agree that homes for social
rent are a fundamental part of our housing stock—a lifeline for
those who would struggle to obtain a home at market rates. It was
absolutely right for us to bring social rent homes into the scope
of the affordable homes programme, as the Government did in 2018.
Since then, we have doubled down in our levelling-up White Paper
on our commitment to increase the supply of social rented homes,
while also improving the quality of housing across the board in
both the social and private rented sectors. The affordable homes
programme has been changed to meet this commitment, with further
increases to the share of social rented homes we are planning to
deliver.
However, although social rent is a key element to our approach,
we are also a Government who truly believe in supporting aspiring
homeowners to take their first step on to the housing ladder. We
understand what a difference that increased sense of security can
make to all aspects of someone’s life and the lives of their
family. That is why home ownership continues to be a fundamental
part of the affordable homes programme offer and we will continue
to deliver a significant number of homes through our shared
ownership tenure.
At Prime Minister’s questions, the Prime Minister dodged the
question as to why the Conservative party was reneging on its
manifesto commitment to build 300,000 homes a year. Can the
Minister answer the question and say why that has happened?
The hon. Gentleman must be telepathic, because I was just about
to come to that point. We are more broadly focused on
accelerating housing delivery to make home buying a reality for a
new generation, so we must build homes in the places that people
want to live and work. As the Prime Minister said, and I agree
with him, we want decisions about homes to be driven locally,
which is why we need to get more local plans in place to deliver
the homes that our communities need. We are working tirelessly
across the country with our local partners and we intend to
deliver 300,000 homes per year, as our commitment set out, so
that we create a more sustainable and affordable housing market
that benefits everybody.
However, I am not here only to talk about commitments, because it
will make no difference unless we deliver on those commitments.
We are making progress in our mission to increase housing supply
and the numbers back that up. Many Members talked about numbers;
let me give them some. Since 2010, we have delivered over 632,000
affordable homes, including 441,000 affordable homes for rent,
over 162,000 of which were for social rent.
I hope that the hon. Member on the Opposition Front Bench, the
hon. Member for Greenwich and Woolwich (), will forgive me for
making the comparison, but it is worth noting that this
Government have delivered more affordable homes in the last 12
years than were delivered in the preceding 13 years of a Labour
Government. Actually, I note that the hon. Member for Stockton
North () agrees with me. He said
very clearly—
Will the Minister give way?
When I have finished this point, I will. The hon. Member for
Stockton North said very clearly that the last Labour Government
did not build enough social homes, either to rent or to buy, and
I agree with him. [Interruption.] I will let the hon. Member for
Weaver Vale intervene on me, but I want to answer his point. He
has set out that he thinks a Labour Government are the answer to
this situation; I disagree. A Labour Government are not the
answer—the last Labour Government did not build enough affordable
homes, social homes or council homes. If we look at Labour-run
Wales, we see that they have an appalling record of building
social housing.
Two London MPs spoke in the debate to highlight problems in
London. I would like to remind—
Will the Minister give way?
When I have finished my remarks. I would like to remind the House
that the Mayor of London is responsible for housing in London. He
is a Labour Mayor of London and the problems there lie firmly at
his door.
Many Members have also spoken about councils. I would like to
point out my own local council’s record. Conservative-run
Redditch Borough Council is delivering council housing. That is
happening now that the Conservatives are in control of the
borough. When Labour was in control of Redditch Borough Council,
it delivered precisely zero.
rose—
rose—
I give way, first to the hon. Member for Weaver Vale, who first
asked me to.
I thank the Minister for giving way. I should have welcomed her
to her place, so I will get that on the record now.
This debate is about the future of social homes. I keep referring
to that vandalised version of the definition of “affordable
homes”; many of them are not affordable. On the track record of
the previous Labour Government, let us compare social housing
build. In those last few years of a Labour Government,
considerably more social homes were built than under this
Government—not enough, as hon. Members have said, but, going
forward, the next Labour Government definitely will build
enough.
I thank the hon. Member for his remarks. I listened carefully to
the response of the hon. Member for Greenwich and Woolwich on the
Front Bench. What I heard is our agreement about the need to
build more social homes to rent or buy, and Government Members
also set that out very clearly. What I did not hear—from any
Opposition Member—was a clear answer on how they will do that, so
we await that.
Will the Minister give way?
No. With respect, the hon. Gentleman has had his time, and I need
to get these points on the record.
I want to talk about what we are doing. To support continued
delivery, in March this year we announced that local authorities
will have access to a new concessionary Public Works Loan Board
interest rate for council house building from June this year.
Local authorities have a real part to play in that endeavour. We
are giving them the flexibility to make locally led decisions
that deliver the best deal for their communities.
The Levelling-up and Regeneration Bill will create a new
infrastructure levy—many Members touched on that, so it is
important that we set the record straight. The new infrastructure
levy will capture more land value uplift. That will enable us to
deliver even more affordable housing, which is badly needed.
Local authorities will continue to benefit from the £11.5 billion
affordable homes programme, which we have discussed today, along
with the scrapping of the housing revenue account borrowing cap.
They will also benefit from greater flexibility, which someone
mentioned from a sedentary position, in how they can use receipts
from right-to-buy sales. I strongly urge councils to make use of
those measures so that we can see more new homes built in the
places where they are needed the most.
We briefly touched on social housing standards. The Secretary of
State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities could not have
been clearer in his statements to the House when he said that
every person in this country, no matter where they are from, what
they do or how much they earn, deserves to live somewhere that is
decent, safe and secure.
The tragedy of Awaab Ishak’s death made clear to us all the
devastating consequences of inaction. The time for promises of
improvements is well and truly over. Awaab’s law has been added
to the Bill, with new requirements for landlords to address
hazards such as damp and mould in social homes within a fixed
period.
I want to finish by thanking all the Members who have
contributed. We are committed to the abolition of section 21
eviction orders—
Hon. Members
When?
Very soon—Members do not have long to wait. They will have all
their questions answered in due course.
I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Milton Keynes North () for his excellent speech on
social housing. I reassure him that social housing will be part
of the infrastructure levy, and it was a pleasure to meet his
small builders and business experts. I thank my hon. Friend the
Member for Dover (Mrs Elphicke) for her considerable expertise in
the sector and for bringing to us the Operation Homemaker
programme. I thank her for all the work she is doing to help
us.
I thank the hon. Member for Strangford (), who highlighted similar issues in Northern Ireland;
the hon. Members for Wirral West (), for Stockton North and
for Vauxhall; the hon. Member for York Central (), who will know that we
are committed to introducing the measures she has called for to
control Airbnbs; and the hon. Member for Luton South (). I thank everybody who has
contributed. We will not stand for any tenant being
mistreated—[Interruption.] I forgot to thank the hon. Gentleman
from the Scottish National party Front Bench, the hon. Member for
Glasgow South West (), for his contribution.
That is all I will say on the matter—[Laughter.] We are committed
to working with all hon. Members across the House to ensure that
we get the safe and decent homes people deserve.
(in the Chair)
Thank you, Minister. It is clear that Mr Stephens needs to try
harder to get noticed. Mr Amesbury, you have one minute to wind
up.
4.33pm
I thank everybody for the good spirit in which they staged the
debate. Everybody made powerful contributions, particularly the
Labour Members. They were genuinely passionate about building a
new generation of decent, affordable social housing. The future
is social housing, and the future is a Labour Government to build
it.
Question put and agreed to.
Resolved,
That this House has considered the future of social housing.
|
