As Janis Bright calls it a day as HQN’s lead researcher, she reflects on some of the key housing moments over the past 40 years and the lessons that can be learned.
At the end of riotous film Burn After Reading a nonplussed CIA director asks: “What did we learn?” Of course, there’s no answer.
It feels that way in the housing world sometimes. About 40 years ago, most social housing was still owned by councils. The Conservative government had plans, though. Right to buy was already nibbling away, housing action trusts (HATs) and stock transfers were starting up. Soon housing associations, much in political favour, would be expected to leap into the City to finance their new-build programmes.
New Labour
New Labour took power amid much relief. The IFS confirms that from 1997 to 2010 government tax and benefit policy was “highly progressive”, taking from richer households and benefitting poorer ones. Devolution allowed Scotland and Wales to make their own policy choices.
But back in 1997 any illusions about a change of tone in the housing sector were quickly dispelled. ‘Shopping incentives’ in the benefits system would help tenants make ‘choices’. Best value replaced compulsory competitive tendering. New social housing was in very short supply.
That’s not to say everything stayed the same. New Labour did place high value on standards, and quickly established that the bill for bringing all social housing up to scratch was enormous. This being the government of the third way, it was receptive to a new idea: arm’s length management organisations. The hybrid would help drive up standards while avoiding the anger of councils faced with losing their stock. But there could only be so many of them. The pace of stock transfers quickened.
New Labour did finally get around to building more. But all too soon, austerity was the name of the game with the coalition and Conservative governments. Housing associations became the bad guys too, accused of building empires not communities. Today we’re back to pressing for more ‘affordable’ homes while the government target for any kind of new build seems very far off. Once again there are problems with standards – and once again a Labour government is bringing in inspection to try to improve things.
The trouble with housing benefit
Back in the late 1980s when I first began reporting on housing, the Duke of Edinburgh inquiry was in full swing. It was by no means the first housing inquiry – in fact, this was part two of that same investigation – and it certainly wasn’t the last. One of its conclusions was especially striking: that social rents must rise to cover repair costs, mainly covered by housing benefit. The idea of rising welfare costs makes ministers of any description jumpy; deliberately raising them would be a bold move. So, before the ink was even dry on the report, trouble was brewing.
The Tories reported in 1996 that “The government continues to be concerned about the level of growth in HB expenditure…HB expenditure is forecast to rise to £12.03 billion in the next financial year”. More cuts were planned. And afraid of spooking the finance markets, New Labour pledged to stick to them.
“Bicycling baronet Sir George Young did manage to build an unlikely rapport with tenants, in one case over shared Elvis Presley fandom. Less so Brandon Lewis, who steered the ill-judged 2016 Housing Act into law, forcing secretary of state James Brokenshire to disown the dafter measures two years later”
By the early 2000s, the government was worrying again about HB costs. It brought in the local housing allowance (LHA) in the private rented sector, letting tenants who moved somewhere cheaper keep some of the difference. That was short lived though. As the IFS reported, “the cost of the policy greatly exceeded previous estimates”, capping came in and the incentive money ended.
Since then, we’ve had one initiative after another to limit housing-related welfare spending but according to UK Housing Review it remains pretty much the same as a percentage of all benefits spending. Imposing ever stronger limits has had visible consequences both for tenants, sometimes shunted hundreds of miles to cheaper areas, and for councils and providers trying to balance their books.
Memorable coups
Tenants have staged some memorable coups to upset the power balance with landlords and government. Walterton and Elgin residents’ dramatic use of new legislation to reject Tory flagship Westminster Council was surely the most audacious. On the Gipton estate in Leeds, tenants made their points forcefully in person to housing minister David Trippier when he tried to impose a HAT on them.
Ministers also felt the heat from Runcorn new town tenants whose homes were about to be flattened. The Southgate estate, designed by James Stirling, lasted only 20 years and residents wanted to see the back of it. But they had spent many hours planning for a new estate only to be told that wasn’t happening. This time the outrage prompted Merseyside Improved Houses to step in and rebuild. Today tenants regularly use social media to dob in their landlords for sometimes shocking failures.
Bicycling baronet Sir George Young did manage to build an unlikely rapport with tenants, in one case over shared Elvis Presley fandom. Less so Brandon Lewis, who steered the ill-judged 2016 Housing Act into law, forcing secretary of state James Brokenshire to disown the dafter measures two years later. In the interval, the tragedy that changed everything had happened: Grenfell.
Quality matters
It’s easy to see housing as a merry-go-round of policy, with ministers climbing aboard only to drop off soon after looking queasy, and similar ideas coming into view then retreating. But since Grenfell we can’t do that. Some things we can – must – learn. The first is that regulation and law for safety are not ‘red tape’ to be cut and discarded like parcel wrapping. The second is that whether at national or hyper-local level, someone will always try to game the system. So, the rules have to be enforced. And the third thing, so clear it hardly needs saying yet it’s fundamental, is that nothing in housing comes cheap. Quality matters and investment works.
