Most people in Britain today are relatively well housed. But for a sizeable minority that is certainly not the case and there is a small but rapidly growing number who have no housing at all – good or bad. Public concern inevitably focuses on the most visible – those sleeping in the street. However, while sleeping rough is declining there has been an explosion in the numbers of families forced into temporary or bed and breakfast accommodation, a roof over their head but homeless nevertheless. As one of the most potent symbols of social exclusion, what steps are being taken to address this issue and what should be our longer-term objectives in housing?
Tackling the scandal of rough sleeping was an early government priority. The priority has been to help hardened rough sleepers to rebuild their lives and to prevent vulnerable people from becoming the rough sleepers of tomorrow, with a short-term target to reduce by two-thirds the numbers on the streets by the middle of next year. However this only addresses the tip of the iceberg. Many thousands of people are homeless and threatened with the street, moving from friend to friend or living temporarily with their family, in squats, hostels or hotels. It is widely recognised that action must tackle all forms of homelessness if we are to keep the numbers living on the streets as low as possible. This requires a more inclusive response to homelessness, as outlined in the Homelessness Bill now before Parliament.
The Bill will require local authorities to carry out a review of homelessness in their area and develop strategies both to prevent and deal with the consequences of homelessness. Additionally, housing authorities must now secure long-term accommodation for those who are genuinely homeless, and the Bill will introduce a flexible lettings policy to provide more choice for those in housing need. Concurrently, the government is consulting on an extension of the legal obligation to vulnerable groups suffering social exclusion and at risk of homelessness. These include the young, those leaving care, those vulnerable as a result of violence and harassment, or those leaving an institutionalised background. Together this will form the policy framework to address homelessness at a local level.
Yet statutory homelessness continues its relentless rise – 12 percent in the first quarter of this year. As a result we have seen the return of the scandal of families living in bed and breakfast hotels, now over 7,000 in the capital alone. Coming, as it does, on top of the harrowing experience of homelessness itself and characterised as expensive and inadequate with unacceptable long-term effects, there is widespread concern about the impact this is having, especially on young families. A special unit has been set up by the government to work in partnership with local authorities, to help reduce and hopefully eliminate the future use of bed and breakfast accommodation. But if we are to achieve that, something needs to be done to reduce the overall numbers who become homeless and find themselves inevitably in this kind of accommodation.
It was, in part, as a result of the concerns over homelessness and because of the strong correlation between poor housing and social exclusion that the government set up the first comprehensive review of housing for 23 years. The Green Paper, subtitled A Decent Home for All, responds to the major challenges facing the sector – those who want to own their own home but are being priced out of the market, and those living in squalor in much of the private rented sector. The years of systematic under-investment in social housing have left far too many people with little real choice or control over where they live. Coming on top of that, in 1999 the then Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions announced new household formation figures based on a significant increase in projected housing demand of 150,000 new households each year for the next 20 years. But it doesn’t end there. Housing problems and their solutions are not uniform across the country. The low demand and area abandonment characteristic of some northern regions is very different from the rocketing house prices and acute housing stress of London and much of the South East.
The Green Paper and its successor document promises a modernised housing policy and reform to the system of personal housing support. There are initiatives to tackle the worst conditions and exploitation of those living in houses in multiple occupation in the private rented sector. And proposals are being brought forward to assist key workers and those on modest incomes to purchase their own homes. It has set a target to ensure that all social housing is brought up to a decent standard within ten years. Almost simultaneously the Comprehensive Spending Review signalled a significant increase in investment in housing with expenditure projected to nearly triple in as many years. Combined with better use of the existing stock, conversions of redundant office blocks and innovative use of the planning system (such as the proposal in the draft London Plan for all new developments to include 50 percent affordable housing) this will go a long way to reverse the long-term decline of the social housing sector during the Tory years.
The original rationale for the Green Paper was to reform housing benefit as part of a wider welfare reform within the context of making work pay. The government’s objectives suggested a radical reform. In reality, however, a combination of wide variations in rent levels and the horrendous complexity of benefit administration led to a much more cautious approach. A coherent pattern of rents is to be developed over ten years through a restructuring that hopefully will minimise both disruption and hardship to those tenants directly affected. The wider reform of the housing benefit system has been shelved for the time being, with just a hint that some form of housing tax credit may be the preferred way forward.
What of the longer-term? Repossessions for mortgage arrears have been a major cause of homelessness. Over half a million families were affected in this way in the 1990s. The resurgence of house prices, especially in Greater London, has reawakened fears of negative equity and mortgage debt spiralling out of control. With the economy buoyant and interest rates low, this is unlikely. But now is the time to give some thought to ensuring a more sustainable owner-occupied sector. Affordable private mortgage insurance is helping but the evidence suggests it is not taken up by those who are most in need of it. A safety net for low income home owners, reducing help as income rises, would not only ensure that home ownership is sustainable, but, according to recent evidence, would be cheaper than providing housing benefit following rehousing in the rented sector.
The key issue in the socially rented sector remains the affordability of good quality accommodation for those on low pay. In the 1980s and 1990s, as rents were forced up, housing subsidy shifted from bricks and mortar (rent) to the tenant as housing benefit was allowed to take the strain. Although the overall cost of subsidy remained roughly the same, this change resulted in a dramatic increase in polarisation with large numbers of households on benefits concentrated in social housing and a negative image for the sector as the tenure of last resort. This was accompanied by severe labour market problems in some parts of the country where it was difficult for many to make work pay. There are strong arguments to suggest that a shift in subsidy towards rent, especially in high cost areas, would help to create more mixed and sustainable communities. Also enhanced mobility would ease some of the difficulties of finding keyworkers for our public services in high cost areas. Why hasn’t this happened?. Before there can be any move in that direction, a way has to be found to achieve that change within a reasonable timescale without creating perverse incentives, disruption or severe hardship.
The private rented sector, with rents recently going through the roof in some areas, is often characterised by very poor conditions. The aim must be to improve quality and achieve better value without further restricting supply. A licensing system should improve standards at the bottom end of the market. To improve standards and arrest the long-term decline of the whole sector requires large-scale institutional investment. The Green Paper hinted at the possibility of fiscal measures to promote that investment. What is required is a fiscal framework that provides long-term stability and will promote improved quality and greater security for tenants. Recognising the role bad housing played in exacerbating community tensions in Oldham and other northern cities, the demand for action is growing. Nothing less than a partnership between government and those interested in regenerating the private rented sector will achieve that task.
But, perhaps, the most critical issue is the image of housing itself. In recent years the sector generally, and social housing in particular, has had an almost entirely negative press. If it is not gazumping or cowboy builders, it is neighbours from hell. And it is by no means only the tabloids that portray housing as part of the problem and not part of the solution. The reality is that those working in the sector suffer from low esteem, a condition that can only be treated by raising housing and its problems and opportunities up the political agenda. The challenge is how to achieve that when most people are reasonably satisfied with their housing and they have a low expectation of what can be done to improve the life chances of those who, through no fault of their own, find themselves homeless or in housing need.