Housing White Paper
You’ll never fix the broken market without social housing
The Government’s much-anticipated repair-plan for Britain’s broken housing market is missing a critical part of the fix. It begs the question, do ministers really want to solve the crisis – or just contain it to manageable limits?
By Mark Cantrell
This article first appeared in the February/March 2017 edition of Housing magazine
THE Housing White Paper was billed as a “bold, radical vision” to fix Britain’s broken housing market, but we’ve heard it all before. On the day, the package that finally arrived hardly resonated with originality and it left many feeling decidedly unconvinced.
The White Paper was
soon labelled “timid” and “vacuous”. Indeed, shadow housing
minister John Healey greeted its publication with an incredulous: “Is
that it?”
Meanwhile, UK Business
Insider reported analysts at Barclays Bank were so unimpressed by
what they regarded as its lack of substance that they likened it to
“homeopathy”. Ouch, so “watered down” it’s not even snake
oil, then?
That may be a tad
uncharitable. But it remains the case that the White Paper’s
formula is really quite derivative, repackaging much previous policy,
with a tweak here, and a twist there; it’s hard to interpret this
as any kind of radical departure. Yes, it puts renting back on the
agenda, loosening the Cameron regime’s all-but-exclusive focus on
buying. Yet for all the sweet talk it offers renters, it remains very
much a manifesto for ownership.
“The idea of owning
or renting a safe, secure place of your own is, for many, a distant
dream,” said Sajid Javid, secretary of state for communities, as he
launched the White Paper in the Commons. “Behind the statistics are
millions of ordinary working people. I’m talking about the
first-time buyer who’s saving hard but won’t have enough for a
deposit for almost a quarter of a century; or the couple in the
private rented sector handing half their combined income straight to
their landlord.
“The symptoms of this
broken market are being felt by real people in every community. It’s
one of the biggest barriers to social progress this country faces.
But its root cause is simple. For far too long, we have not built
enough houses.”
Indeed. If nothing
else, then, the White Paper at least demonstrates that ministers have
grasped there’s a problem. That’s got to be worth something.
Unfortunately the
secretary of state’s words ring rather hollow – because of the
emptiness at the heart of the White Paper. There’s a gap where
genuinely low-cost social housing ought to be, if this was a serious
contender for change.
At best the document is
ambiguous about the fate of this tenure; at worst, its proposals
threaten to escalate the decline of remaining social assets,
depriving not only current but future generations of a secure – and
sought-after – housing option. This absence has been noted.
Though the word
‘social’ wasn’t used, it is nevertheless implicit in some of
the industry’s responses. It contains a “glaring omission”,
Campbell Robb, chief executive of the Joseph Rowntree Foundation
(JRF) observed, and that’s “a lack of new, genuinely affordable
homes to rent for families struggling with rising rents, particularly
in high-cost parts of the country”.
“For many people in
the UK, high rental costs make the difference between just about
managing and not being able to manage at all,” he added. “Poverty
in the private rented sector has doubled in the last decade, leaving
millions trapped in insecure, expensive housing. Increasing supply is
crucial, but the cost of renting matters too and [this] offer is out
of reach for many of those on low incomes.”
Terrie Alafat, chief
executive of the Chartered Institute of Housing, said: “We still
believe the Government could do more to help those who need housing
the most by supporting the building of more homes at rents that are
truly affordable. Our projections show we could lose 250,000 of these
homes between 2012 and 2020, which is very worrying when they are the
only truly affordable housing option for many people – including
some of our most vulnerable.”
Quite simply, we know
the housing market is broken. We’ve known it for years. There’s
no silver bullet for solving the housing crisis, that’s true, but
we know that social housing is an essential part of the package.
However, too many, for too long, have simply ignored this. The White
Paper continues that sad tradition.
Fortunately, the tenure
does have advocates. The socioeconomic case for social housing was
well-made by the Capital Economics report for SHOUT (Social Housing
Under Threat). Many individuals, meanwhile, from within and without
the housing world, have tirelessly spoken up for the tenure.
Furthermore, there’s plenty of expert analysis that reveals how
rising housing costs increase poverty and inequality, such as the
work undertaken by the JRF.
All told, there is
evidence aplenty of a demonstrable need for investment in the
delivery of more social homes. A properly functioning social housing
system could be thought of as a stabilising foundation for a wobbling
and top-heavy market. With sufficient numbers, it could be opened up
beyond the poorest and most vulnerable. Its lower price bracket could
serve as a serious challenge to the generally higher rents of the
private market. In so doing, it would offer a more humane means of
lowering the housing benefits bill than crude cuts and caps.
What’s more, a
properly function system of social housing could offer families the
scope to move from one part of the country to another, for jobs say,
without having to risk sacrificing the security and stability, not to
mention the genuine affordability of a social home. The tenure can
also offer a stable platform for those who so choose to save for a
deposit to buy. All it needs is the backing hitherto enjoyed by home
ownership.
Alternatively, we can
dismiss such notions as hopelessly naive and continue to push for
more expensive housing, which, it must be said, has been the broad
thrust of the approach for some considerable time. As it is, we
should perhaps ask ourselves – and answer honestly – do we really
want to solve the housing crisis, or do we just want to rein it in to
more manageable levels? After all, from a certain perspective, and
within limits, the crisis is a good thing: the desperation of those
at its sharp end can be lucrative lubricant for the machinery of
commercial interest.
That’s a cynical
view, no doubt, but these are cynical times, and the White Paper does
nothing to slay the ‘golden geese’ of proliferating,
premium-priced ‘affordable’ housing products. The bottom line,
really, is simply this: Britain’s broken housing market won’t be
fixed without many more social homes.
# # #
Renters’ charter?
DAN WILSON CRAW,
director of Generation Rent, said: “Sajid Javid has the right
analysis about the plight of renters, but his White Paper has failed
to offer us anything of substance. By limiting longer tenancies to
new purpose-built, private rented homes, the Government has offered
renters the bare minimum. The institutional investors building homes
for rent are already keen to encourage long-term tenants, and it will
typically be the better-off who can afford to rent them.
“The vast majority of
tenants will remain in existing properties, with no certainty over
their home beyond the next 12 months. The Government should
incentivise all landlords to offer tenants greater security by
putting a cost on the use of evictions where the tenant has done
nothing wrong.
“Until the Government
builds enough to overcome the housing shortage, high rents will
continue to stifle living standards, and ambition here is also
lacking. Renters on stagnant wages need homes that cost no more than
a third of their income, not ones let at 80% of the market rent, with
a sticker that says ‘affordable’.”
GRAEME BROWN, interim
chief executive of Shelter, said: “Talk of longer-term tenancies is
welcome but risks being disingenuous unless these are rolled out
across the board, not just for a handful of people living in new
build-to-rent properties.
“The scourge of
inadequate tenancies, and indeed our broken housing system, are
fuelled by the shocking lack of affordable homes available to rent or
buy, so the Government is right to want to ‘get Britain
building’... The white paper poses the right questions, what we
need now is quick and bold action that helps people in need of a
decent home tomorrow not in 10 years.”
DAVID SMITH, policy
director at the Residential Landlords Association, said:
“Unfortunately, the White Paper falls a long way short of the
radical changes for renters that we were promised. There may be more
build to rent resulting from this in our large towns and cities, but
without any plans to support the hundreds of thousands of smaller
landlords who make up the bulk of the supply, there will continue to
be a major shortage. Landlords are happy to offer longer tenancies
provided the climate is right to do so. They give landlords certainty
and they are good for tenants as rents tend to increase less often.”
JOHN SHIPLEY, Liberal
Democrat shadow housing minister, said: “This White Paper is
utterly vacuous. It is not the ambitious, radical plan we need to
solve the housing crisis. There is no mention of the one million
homes commitment by 2020 and no new money for investing in the homes
we need – it’s clear the Government has no real grip on the
situation at all.
“We desperately need
genuinely affordable housing and many more homes for rent and yet
there was nothing announced to help the 35,000 people who have been
on housing waiting lists for over 10 years. It’s a disgrace.”
COUNCILLOR MARTIN TETT,
the Local Government Association’s housing spokesperson, said: “All
types of homes – including those for affordable and social rent –
have to be built to solve our housing crisis and flexibility around
Starter Homes is much-needed recognition of this. It is important
that councils have powers to ensure a mix of homes is built,
alongside the infrastructure to support strong communities.”
He added: “Local
government believes even more needs to be done to rapidly build more
genuinely affordable homes to help families struggling to meet
housing costs, provide homes to rent, reduce homelessness and tackle
the housing waiting lists many councils have.
“For this to happen,
councils desperately need the powers and access to funding to resume
their historic role as a major builder of affordable homes. This
means being able to borrow to invest in housing and to keep 100% of
the receipts from properties sold through Right to Buy to replace
homes and reinvest in building more of the genuine affordable homes
our communities desperately need.”
TOM COPLEY, London
Assembly Member, said: “More than anything we need an upsurge in
truly affordable housing, but unless Government is willing to lift
the cap on councils’ borrowing this will be difficult to achieve.
While a first glance suggests this White Paper will probably have
limited impact on London, the spectre of the forced sale of council
homes in the capital to pay for Right to Buy discounts still hangs
over us.
“The Government have
indicated that they have finally woken up to the need to look beyond
home ownership, with the shift in focus onto Build to Rent. But this
is to attract institutional investors – and whilst the promise of
longer tenancies is welcome, its bearing will be miniscule unless it
is extended to existing rental properties, where the vast majority of
renters actually live.
“With the Government
insisting on clinging steadfastly to its definition of affordable
rent as 80% of market prices, any positive step it takes towards
making life better for renters will be undermined.”
This article first appeared in the February/March 2017 print edition of Housing magazine. It was subsequently republished on the Housing Excellence website, 10 April 2017
Leave a Comment