Tenants make their voice heard on Housing and Planning Bill At three events hosted by our Involvement team, 80 tenants have discussed the Government's proposals and the impact that these could have on their family, their community and future generations who may rely on social housing. The proposals include major changes to the rights of social housing tenants, including those living in council houses, and include: The end of lifetime tenancies People moving into council houses will have tenancies that will only last for up to five years The sale of higher value homes The forced sale of higher value council houses as they become empty, with the income derived going to the Government to finance the roll out of the Right to Buy scheme to housing associations. Pay more to stay Households with an income of more than £30,000 will have to pay more rent. The events seem to have captured the attention of our customers raised the following issues: The end of lifetime tenancies. Customers gave their views on the potential impact this part of the Housing Bill such as the negative impact on general health and vulnerable people, the breakdown of neighbourhood relationships and the increased cost to social housing providers. Key concerns from customers around the end of lifetime tenancies were that tenants in the future tenants would have no incentive to care for their home if they needed to move after 2-5yrs. They would lose a sense of security that comes with living in a home for life which could have a negative impact in turn on their family unit, neighbour relations and there general health and wellbeing. “There’s less incentive to take ownership or look after property” “Why bother with the up keep – decorating, gardening. All a waste if moving out in a few years” “I don’t want my council estates to be turned into ghettos where only the poorest will be housed for 2-5 years and then moved on” “What about vulnerable people who need stability?” “Families will be unable to feel settled and secure – disruption to schooling etc.” “No security anymore…increased stress” “Financial cost of void repairs” “It will be extra work for landlords to administer” “People have lived in the same communities all their lives and feel secure. This Bill would rip communities apart and cause so much pain”
“No sense of family home, neighbourhood, no sense of belonging” “Communities need long term residents to invest in neighbourhoods” “Decent communities will be disrupted and may not support each other as before – lose heart” The sale of higher value homes. The discussions were highly emotive with tenants identifying devastating irreversible effects on their own lives, their families and their local communities. Tenants felt that the forced sale of high value homes would create a sense of instability; large homes tend to be high value and if these are sold it will cause the breakup of families and families may be forced into other accommodation such as private rented. It would result in the breakdown of communities, the breakdown of networks of support and result in ‘ghettoisation’ of neighbourhoods. There were concerns that bungalows could be included as ‘high value homes’ “Communities as we know it won’t exist anymore as people will be forever on the move” Tenants think that private landlords will benefit from the proposal by purchasing the high value properties. The affordability of those wanting to live in these areas will be reduced by private landlords increasing rent; this could potentially lead to a high turnover of tenants in these properties which will impact on the community and neighbourhood: “No sense of community and neighbourhood once these homes become private owned” “Private landlords will buy up areas, pushing up rent for some properties. Tenants forced to pay more and have less disposable income” The impacts on social housing could be devastating with some tenants commenting that there would be fewer homes to rent; it would limit the size of properties that are available, longer waiting lists and others envisaging the end of social housing. “The sale of social housing is a backdoor method of getting rid of social housing” “Very soon there will be no social housing . . . what will happen to people on the waiting list?” “Less income for YHN to invest in communities” Tenants felt that the proposal is highly unfair with homes being taken away from them to subsidise the purchase of homes by others: “Why should council tenants suffer to benefit housing association tenants? Unfair” “Why should council tenants subsidise others wanting to buy?” Pay to stay Customers gave their views that this part of the Bill could have an impact on the following; negative impact on incentive to find employment, decline in social housing standards, the provoking of unfairness, division and unrest between neighbours and the breaking up of families to reduce household income. Furthermore with little incentive to work customers were concerned that this would cause the overall decline in the social housing sector in terms of a stigma that social housing would only be for the poorest of people with the potential to create ghettos.
“It would put me off applying for social housing if I was earning a decent wage” “No incentive to better yourself, no reason to go after a promotion” “This won’t encourage younger generation to work” “Fewer applicants, demand for properties” “I feel this will be the beginning of the end of social housing” “It’s punishment for hard working families” “Some will pay more to live in the same house” “Social housing is social it was never meant to create class A and class B tenants” “Communities are made up of people who care for each other not what is in their wage slip”
What we have done with the information from the events
We have shared it with councillors and YHN Board members We have shared it with the Fair Housing Unit at Newcastle City Council We tweeted as part of #haveyoursayonhousing on 13 March 2016 A presentation is going to local MP’s on both the impact on the Housing Bill and Welfare reform Bill in April An article will go in the Spring edition of Homes and People. We have shared the information with Lord Shipley and are currently awaiting a response