Putting the vision back into public and council housing Becky Tunstall, Prof. Emeritus, University of York Becky.tunstall@york.ac.uk, 07588 630 478 www.york.ac.uk/chp @CHPResearch Calder Valley CLT, Hebden Bridge 29th October 2018 Centre for Housing Policy

Three well-known facts about social housing… It is shrinking away It houses people on low incomes This is more and more true over time   The first fact remains true, but less than in the past. The second fact only really started being true in the 1970s. The third fact stopped being true in the 1990s.

Residualisation: Median income of renting households as a percentage of median income of owners (gross income before housing costs, not taking account of household size), 1953/54-1983

Change: 1999/00-2015/16

Change: Economic status rates for HRPs in social housing relative to HRPs overall, 1984-2016/17

…Private renting has overtaken social renting and taken on some of its traditional roles Proportion of total in each rented tenure (2015/16):  All households – 17% social, 20% private People in poverty (after housing cost): 34% social, 34% private Families with children - 19% social, 25% private Lone parents - 39% social, 36% private One person households- 26% social, 19% private .

Two facts about social housing that should be better known…   4) It is valued by millions 5) It is quite boring

In 2017 Sajid Javid said, “We need to return to the time, not so very long ago, when social housing was valued… treasured” But: In 2015-16, 82% of tenants were satisfied with their homes. 83% were satisfied with being social tenants (= 3.4m satisfied households) In 2017 1.2m more were on registers (And: There has never been a time when social housing has been treasured universally, or valued unconditionally)

The English Housing Survey shows that most social housing is unremarkable. The median social rented home in England is a house 50+ yrs old. It meets the Decent Homes standard, and has energy rating A-C or D. The landlord has made some improvements in recent years. The home is in a suburban area, more deprived than average, but not very deprived. Its residents have not experienced any serious crime in the past year. The median residents are satisfied with their home, with the repairs service, with their neighbourhood, and tenure. They do not expect to buy. They have a tenancy with long-term security, and been resident for 11 years. (Tunstall and Pleace 2018) .

So are its residents The median social renting household has one or two residents. The typical householder is a white woman in middle age. She works or last worked in a routine or semi-routine occupation, and has an income in the bottom 40% compared to households nationwide. The household is claiming housing benefit (or the housing element of Universal Credit). (Tunstall and Pleace 2018) .

Some more facts about social housing as a tool of housing policy… Well-known: 6) It is a good way to increase development rates Less well-known: 7) It is a good way to make big increases in quality 8) It is a good way to distribute benefits of housing growth and improvement.   *

Share of increase in households with sole access to basic amenities in England due to building council/social housing - 1951-81 - 29% 1967-71 - 46%

The role of social housing in distribution of housing 1911-2011 If ‘inclusive housing growth’ = Growth in mean housing space per person + no increase in inequality in space - - England and Wales has only had inclusive housing growth in the decades with substantial council/social housing development (Tunstall 2015) *

ENGLAND AND WALES, 1911-2011 HOUSING GROWTH (mean space per person) No change/ reduction Growth INCLUSIVITY (change in house space inequality) Increase in inequality Non-inclusive non-growth Non-inclusive growth 1981-91 1991-2001 2001-2011 No change /reduction in inequality Inclusive non-growth Inclusive growth 1911-21 1921-31 1931-51 1951-1961 1971-81

Summary: Facts about social housing… It is stable in size It houses people on low incomes This is getting slightly less true It is valued by millions It is quite boring 6) It is a good way to increase development rates 7) It is a good way to make big increases in quality 8) It is a good way to distribute benefits of housing growth and improvement   .

Potential steps forward Bring public/policymaker perceptions, media representations more in line with (generally positiv)e reality. Sustain current strengths Monitor changes to HB/UC and security of tenure. Address current problems (for a minority), and uncertainty (quality of management, tenant involvement, regulation). Ensure systems can prevent and mitigate any further problems over time, including investment needs (Tunstall and Pleace 2918)   .

Sources: Bentham, G (1986) ‘Socio-tenurial polarisation in England, 1953-83: The income evidence’ Urban Studies 23(2) pp157-162 Tunstall, R and Pleace, N (2018) Social housing evidence review York: Centre for Housing Policy, University of York http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/136236/ Tunstall, B (2015) ‘Relative housing space inequality in England and Wales and its recent rapid resurgence’ International Journal of Housing Policy 13th Jan pp105-126

Social housing has strengths... High quality of homes Long-term security for (most) tenants who abide by their tenancy agreement Relatively attractive city locations Relatively attractive built form Low rents and costs relative to other tenures Housing benefit (or Universal Credit) can help pay the rent for people on low incomes The right to buy Higher rates of satisfaction with homes and tenure than for private tenants.   .

Social housing has weaknesses (relative to other tenures)... Waiting, choice of area and home. Less spare space (especially for those on HB or UC). Flats High costs (relative to resident income) Neighbourhood Repairs services Fears of anti-social behaviour Poor reputation. .

Small numbers of residents have serious problems: 13% very dissatisfied with their homes. 14% did not meet the Decent Homes standard. 6% had Category I (serious) health and safety hazards. 5% damp. 4% very dissatisfied with their neighbourhood. 6% very dissatisfied with their tenure.

U-turns Seemingly inexorable social and structural trends can reverse – eg: After constant decline since 1918, the proportion of households in private renting in England started to grow in 2001, and overtook social renting in 2011. After constant increase, the proportion in home ownership peaked at 69% of all households in 2004. These U-turns take a while to be recognised… If Right to Buy sales are stripped out, ownership peaked in 2001 at 63%. If only homes being bought with a mortgage are considered, ownership peaked in 1995 at 43%.

‘Residualisation’ “the growing concentration of social tenants amongst the lowest income groups”; “one of the most pronounced trends of the 1980s and 1990s” (Hills 2007:45).

Change: Unemployment rates for HRPs in social housing relative to HRPs overall, 1984-2016/17

Who gained (absolutely) from housing growth 1981-2011? England and Wales – All but the worst housed 10th percentile Greater Manchester London Hardly anyone/what growth? Median housing space per person did not change. Only the best housed 80th and 90th percentiles of Londoners saw significant increases. (

Residualisation: Proportion of households in the tenure in lowest quarter of incomes compared to the average 1953/54-1983

  HOUSING GROWTH (mean space per person) No change Growth INCLUSIVITY (change in house space inequality according to ratios and percentage under 60% median space per person) Increase in housing space inequality Non-inclusive non-growth L 1991-2001 L 2001-2011 Non-inclusive growth EW 1981-91 EW 1991-2001 EW 2001-2011 GM 1981-91 GM 1991-2001 No change in housing space inequality Inclusive non-growth GM 2001-2011 L 1981-91 Inclusive growth

Is housing growth ever ‘inclsive growth’? 15% growth in population 32% growth in households 44% growth in rooms Mean rooms/person increased = ‘housing growth’ Median increased from 1.5 to 2.0 rooms/person Those at worst housed 10th percentile improved from 0.95 to 1.0 rooms/person Inequality in housing space increased (according to 10:50; 10:90 ratios, proportion under 60% median space) (Tunstall 2015) = ‘non-inclusive’ (

There was housing growth England and Wales 1981-2011 15% growth in population 32% growth in households 44% growth in rooms = Average rooms/person increased from 1.5 to 2.0 rooms/person But it was not inclusive! Inequality in housing space increased (according to 10:50; 10:90 ratios, proportion under 60% median space) (Tunstall 2015) Those at worst housed 10th percentile improved from 0.95 to 1.0 rooms/person (