Social housing in England after the GFC: affordable vs ‘affordable’ Kath Scanlon LSE London RESHAPE final conference Bolzano 19 April 2017

Themes England’s ‘housing crisis’ Changing nature of social landlords Marginalisation of social housing and growth of ‘affordable’ – but not social -- products ‘

Number and % of social units in England, 1961 - 2015

Built form Reflects sector’s history—municipal construction boom in 1960s/70s, including many high-rise or deck-access monotenure estates Current practice is to provide mix (social/tenure/income) in new build Many existing estates have become mixed through RTB—but not all ‘

Has public perception caught up? 1960s estate, Wapping, East London

Social landlords Two types: local authorities (historically the main providers) and housing associations (now more important) Councils have always operated under strong government constraints Housing associations in principle private non-profit (often charitable) organisations ‘

Control vs freedom Government increases constraints on housing associations’ social-sector activities 2015: requires associations to reduce rents for 4 years 2016: Extension of right to buy But Great freedom outside the social sector ‘

Increasing commercial focus Largest associations focus on areas where government exercises less control Consolidations and mergers create some very big players, who compete directly with major house builders in private sale market Genesis (32,000 homes): will no longer build new social housing ‘

England’s ‘housing crisis’ Generally shorthand for affordability problems in private housing markets Focus on difficulties of would-be first-time buyers high rents and insecurity of tenure in the private rented sector Largely a London problem ‘

Current policy priorities stimulate housing construction so as to dampen price increases, help first-time buyers purchase new homes and increase provision of ‘affordable’ housing. Social housing is seen as irrelevant for working families needing a home in higher-cost areas. ‘

Policy case study: The Housing and Planning Act 2016 Social housing measures: increase targeting enable more social tenants to buy reduce stock in expensive areas and increase in cheaper neighbourhoods Introduce new affordable but not social products—e.g., Starter Homes A collection of policy ideas rather than worked-out rules ‘

Idea 1: Give housing association tenants the right to buy ‘ Would give housing association tenants same right to buy their homes as council tenants HAs crafted ‘voluntary’ agreement to protect status as private organisations Government compensates them for discount using…

Idea 2: Make councils sell high-value homes Councils sell ‘high-value’ homes as they become vacant Transfer £ to government, who uses it to compensate housing associations What is ‘high value’? ‘

Idea 3: Make higher-income social tenants pay more rent ‘ Historically social rents in England not income-dependent (unlike in many countries) ‘pay to stay’—rent would increase for higher-income tenants

Idea 4: Require councils to use fixed-term leases Social leases generally indefinite, in contrast to very limited security of tenure in PRS Eligibility assessed on arrival but not after Idea: councils to use fixed-term leases for all new tenancies ‘

One year on Policy idea Status Voluntary right to buy Pilot programmes in a few areas. Will not be rolled out nationally until 2018. As ‘voluntary’, some associations may not participate Sale of high-value council homes On hold until VRTB takes off Pay to stay November 2016: housing minister abandons policy Fixed-term leases for council tenants Regulations expected later this year

Social vs affordable ‘Affordable’ products/schemes include Discounted Market Rent Affordable Rent London Living Rent Help to Buy Shared ownership Starter Homes Etc etc etc

Conclusions… Housing systems are highly path dependent and can be hard to change--especially when there is no consensus about the need for change Given long-term ↓ in subsidy, less reason for housing associations to remain onside. Many now want to fulfil their social aims in other, less regulated sectors of the housing market ‘

…and questions Will social housing strictly defined retain its relevance for broader housing issues? Is the traditional housing-tenure split (o-o, social, PRS) still a useful analytical tool, or should we look more at submarket options in the round? ‘