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
33%
6,000
31%
5,500
29%
27%
5,000
25%
4,500
23%
21%
4,000
19%
3,500
17%
15%
3,000
1961 1970 1971 1973 1975 1977 1979 1981 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014
Number of units
% of stock
Built form
• Reflects sector’s history—municipal
construction boom in 1960s/70s,
including many high-rise or deckaccess 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’ socialsector 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 incomedependent (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
Voluntary right to
buy
Status
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
Pay to stay
On hold until VRTB takes off
Fixed-term leases
for council tenants
November 2016: housing minister
abandons policy
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?