Author: Rachel Blake MP

Enforcement will define the Renters’ Rights Act’s success

Post author By Rachel Blake MP
Post date May 6, 2026
No Comments on Enforcement will define the Renters’ Rights Act’s success

Since being elected, one of my priorities has been to tackle the insecurity faced by private renters across the country and within the Cities of London and Westminster. In my constituency, thousands rely on the private rented sector, and for too many, the reality has meant unstable tenancies, unpredictable rent increases, and a system that too often leaves tenants with little power over the place they call home.

Long before I was elected, I met with renters who shared their experiences, families forced to move at short notice, tenants hesitant to challenge unfair treatment, and individuals living with the constant fear that a rent increase could push them out of their community. Those conversations made one thing clear: insecurity in the rental market does not just affect individuals, it shapes the stability and cohesion of entire neighbourhoods.

Since entering Parliament, I have continued to work closely with residents, using their experiences to shape my work and pressing for reforms that would deliver genuine security. Shortly after being elected, I was happy to join the Committee that scrutinised the Bill going through Parliament. By banning Section 21 ‘no-fault’ evictions and introducing clearer protections around rent increases and tenant rights, it begins to rebalance a system that has for too long favoured landlords over renters.

But passing legislation is only the first step. For reforms to have impact, they must be backed by systems that are accessible, fair, and effective in practice. One of the most important of these is the process through which renters can challenge rent increases.

For many tenants, the idea of formally challenging a rent increase has felt out of reach. It can appear complex, uncertain, and, above all, risky. When your home is on the line, few feel able to question a landlord’s decision, even when it seems unreasonable. That imbalance has allowed rent increases to become, in some cases, a tool of pressure.

The changes introduced alongside the Act recognise this reality. By reducing the risks associated with challenging rent increases, they aim to give renters the confidence to assert their rights without fear of unintended consequences. This is essential if we are serious about ending the culture of insecurity that has defined renting for too long.

However, if barriers, whether financial, procedural, or practical, discourage renters from using these protections, then the system will fall short of its potential. Even modest upfront costs or the fear of retrospective charges can be enough to deter people from coming forward, particularly at a time when household budgets are already under strain.

At its heart, this is about more than dispute resolution. It is about ensuring that rent increases are fair, transparent. If renters are to feel truly secure, they must have confidence not only in the law, but in the mechanisms that enforce it. Of course, these reforms to the process of the tribunal must work side by side with investment in the tribunal process so that there are not delays.

This is more than a technical reform. It is a statement about the kind of housing system we believe in. One where renters are able to act on their rights. Where stability is the norm, not the exception. And where the ability to remain in your home does not depend on your willingness to accept whatever terms are put before you.

The Renters’ Rights Act is a landmark achievement, and one that will make a real difference to people’s lives. Its success will ultimately be measured by how it works in practice, by whether renters feel empowered to use the rights it provides, and whether those rights deliver the security they have long been denied.

For renters across the Cities of London and Westminster, and across the country, this is a moment of real progress.

For more information on what the Renters’ Rights Act means for you, please check out Shelter’s website which offers an explainer on this topic.

Would you like to write for Red Brick? Email rose.grayston@gmail.com to pitch your piece (c.600-900 words)

Tags Private rented sector, Renters Rights Act

Blog Post Class of 2024

Labour’s first year in Government has kickstarted a generational uplift in social housebuilding

Post author By Rachel Blake MP
Post date September 15, 2025

Like many in the Labour movement, fixing the housing crisis has been a key priority for me before and throughout my journey into politics.

Throughout my early career working on planning reform in the Treasury, to co-ordinating between boroughs at regional and sub-regional levels, to directly programming and delivering social homes in local government, the challenge and potential of social housing has been ever-present to me.

Every social home we build represents a household with a stable roof over their head, shielded from the increasingly unaffordable private rental sector. It is a child who is protected from moving miles to a new school after being rehoused into temporary accommodation; it is a pensioner freed from the worry of their rent increasing beyond their fixed income; it is a carer whose Local Housing Allowance is being reinvested into the state rather than funnelled into a landlord’s bank account. Most importantly, every social home we deliver puts the sector as a whole on a firmer footing, guarantees stable income to run a sustainable service, and provides a tangible asset for registered providers to lend against in building even more social homes.

It is easy to pin the blame for the state of social housing on the first introduction of the Right to Buy, which led to the mass sell-off of council homes, but we cannot let the past 15 years of neglectful Tory Governments of the hook either. From cutting the Affordable Homes Programme by 40% upon entering office, to supercharging the Right to Buy, as well as suppressing rents for years, the Conservatives enabled the sell-off of social homes while stripping away the ability to build more. From 2012 to 2024, 124,000 homes were sold on the Right to Buy, at the same time as the number of households in temporary accommodation increased to 127,890.

This alone is challenging enough, but the Conservatives’ decisions on housing delivery were also deeply harmful by letting developers off the hook with a range of intermediate tenures. The introduction of affordable rent in 2011, and the inclusion of student accommodation and build-to-rent housing within planning guidance from 2019, have all funnelled crucial developer contributions towards other tenures and further weakened social rent.

The fact that this has come at the same time as a historically difficult environment for delivery has resulted in a perfect storm preventing new social homes. Supply chain inflation and skills shortages have all increased the cost of building, at the same time as social housing providers have faced financial squeeze from introduction of important regulation in building safety, social housing regulation, as well as the pressing need to decarbonise our housing stock.

The result has been profound for the sector, as the delivery of new social homes slumped from 60,000 in 2010/11 to under 10,000 in 2023/4.

We need safer, warmer, and better-managed social homes, and we cannot expect social providers to deliver this alongside more homes without substantial support.

And this is exactly what the new Government has provided. Within a single year of power, Labour has introduced a number of reforms which will not only prevent the sell-off of social homes and laying the groundwork for a generational boost to this most important tenure which was laid out in our manifesto.

The Government has curtailed the Right to Buy, reducing the available discounts and setting forward a number of new reforms including ensuring that council tenants are truly long-term residents by ensuring that they have lived there for ten years, removing newbuild council homes from the Right to Buy, and preventing homes sold through the Right to Buy from being let out in the private rental sector.

Importantly, the Government also made it easier to build new social homes, through reforms to planning and focus increasingly on social rent. Three particular changes here have been particularly exciting to me: the decision to instruct England to focus Affordable Homes Programme spending on social rent; the new Compulsory Purchase powers in the Planning and Infrastructure Bill which will allow local authorities to purchase land for social homes at use value, rather than inflated ‘hope value’; and the ‘golden rules’ allocated to ‘grey belt’ sites of low-quality land on the edge of cities, which will prioritise the development of affordable homes.

Finally, the Government has provided a stable financial footing at the most recent Spending Review for registered providers to increase supply at pace. Alongside the much-discussed £39 billion Affordable Homes Programme, other grant funding for decarbonisation and building safety will reduce the pressures faced by the sector to bring existing stock up to date, and a ten-year rent settlement will bring their revenue in real terms back up to 2015 levels and enable for longer term business planning.

The significant investment in social housing by this Government shows a key recognition of the value of a social tenancy. But we cannot rest on the laurels of this progress and we need to continue to find and address faults preventing the development of new social homes.

One of these has to be around developer contributions, the Section 106 process and viability assessments. Local authorities and housing campaigners rightly complain that developers too often sidestep contributions, make the most of loopholes, or renegotiate affordable housing requirements after Section 106 agreements are made, and discerning what is a reasoned response to a fast-changing delivery environment is challenging. This is particularly the case as we look more and more on land value uplift to deliver what the state has failed to do for the past 15 years, whether that is building roads, GP surgeries or schools, or building social homes. We need streamlining of this process to ensure that agreements are conducted transparently and enforced effectively. Prioritising social rent and empowering local authorities to scrutinise developer claims, would all help in this area.

The Government also needs to press forward in its work to reform the Building Safety Regulator. Social housebuilders are those with the least resources and are more likely to be looking into building high rises than homes for market sale, and so ensuring that mandatory guidance is given beforehand and that feedback from failed applications is readily available is crucial as the new regime embeds itself.

Finally, social homes need to be at the heart of the Government’s New Towns vision. If these are to live up to their promise and deliver genuinely new communities in new settlements or urban extensions, then affordable and secure options need to be present for those priced out of home ownership.

Labour’s record of delivery on housing policy in its first year of government has been impressive, and I am proud of the work already done to lay the groundwork for the generational boost in social housing as promised in our manifesto. Undoing decades of decline under the previous Government’s tenure will have a meaningful impact on living standards and make meaningful progress on the human consequences endured by the hundreds of thousands of people in temporary accommodation. We must continue to act quickly and decisively and to prioritise any measures which will create more social homes, and to deliver the change which millions of people voted for a year ago.

Tags Housing, Social housing

Blog Post

What’s wrong with the Conservative housing proposals for Two Cities?

Post author By Rachel Blake MP
Post date June 15, 2022

Cities of London and Westminster residents experience the housing crisis at its most acute and extreme. Families are forced to move away from their communities because there just are not enough genuinely affordable homes. From Middlesex and Mansell Street and Golden Lane to Tachbrook and Churchill Gardens, from Hyde Park to Pimlico, families are living in overcrowded conditions, where children find it difficult to study. Private renters across the Cities are left with no certainty about the future of their home and soaring rents.

Let’s not forget that Conservative politicians in Westminster were responsible for a loss of affordable homes in the Homes for Votes Scandal and for 50 years, Westminster City Council was at the forefront of efforts to limit the obligations of local authorities to homeless people. In advance of the original Housing (Homeless Persons) Act 1977, Westminster tried to persuade MPs to water down the legislation. Throughout the 1980s and 1990s, WCC developed ways of ‘gatekeeping’ homeless people from accessing their rights. Thousands more received ‘offers’ of insecure tenancies in the Private Rented Sector creating further inequality and leaving them in uncertainty.

Last week, the Conservative Government has announced two poorly thought-through policies which do nothing to address the long-term housing crisis or tackle the immediate struggles that households are facing.

The Right to Buy for Housing Associations has been trailed for years by this Government. I’ve been campaigning against it ever since it was first suggested. Some Housing Association tenants already have a preserved Right to Buy as a result of living in a home transferred for a Local Authority. Housing Associations themselves are deeply sceptical about the proposals with many of them questioning how the homes sold under the Right to Buy would be replaced. I hope that Housing Associations will stand up to these policies.

The proposals for tenants to use Housing Benefit to pay for a mortgage reveal a serious lack of understanding of the challenges families claiming Housing Benefit face. The Government has provided no evidence for how many households would have nearly enough savings for a deposit on a home. It is not clear with mortgage lenders have been consulted on any of the detail of the proposals or whether they are prepared to bring forward mortgages in these circumstances.

It says it all about this Government that when they run out of ideas, that they turn to the failed policies of the 1980s Thatcher governments.

Instead of these policies which will just reduce the number of social homes, Cities of London and Westminster needs a MP who will stand up for long term sustained Council Homebuilding Programme. I’ve delivered council homes in London and championed delivery of council homes across the country. Cities of London and Westminster needs and MP who believes that Housing is a Human Right and who would call for a review of homelessness legislation putting Housing as a Human Right at the heart of the process. But at the moment, there simply are not the resources available within local authorities to administer this system.

The Homelessness Reduction Act must be funded properly and Local Housing Allowance cap must be lifted. After decades in which their experience has been disregarded, it is vital that the voices of homeless people are listened to by decision-makers. As a housing activist, these are the issues that I have campaigned on for years and as the first ever Labour MP for Cities of London and Westminster, these are the housing proposals I would stand up for.

NB: RB would be open to any contributions from any other candidate running for selection in Two Cities as well as other constituencies.

Rachel Blake

Rachel is a Labour and Co-operative Party Councillor in Bow East and is Vice-Chair of the Labour Housing Group.

AUTHOR

Tags cities of london and westminister, city of london, Conservative, conservatives, housing act, housing associations, housing is a human right, Right to Buy, right to buy housing associations, RTB, WCC, westminister

Blog Post

What does the Queen’s Speech mean for housing?

Post author By Rachel Blake MP
Post date May 20, 2022

Despite presenting a large volume of legislation, overall the policy proposals in the Queen’s Speech will do very little to address the underlying causes of our country’s housing crisis. Labour Housing Group has long argued for systemic change in the supply of genuinely affordable housing (the planning system and housing finance), reform of the benefits system, and regulation of the private rented sector and is campaigning for housing to be set in legislation as a human right.

The legislation proposed in the Queen’s Speech will not address the challenge of a desperate shortage of genuinely affordable homes, the poor quality and energy inefficiency of all housing stock or the growing problems of homelessness and temporary accommodation. The legislative programme does not bring forward ideas for the failing social security system which is leaving families having to choose between heating and eating. I have set out the outline of what is expected in each of the Bills and then highlighted what’s missing.

The Renters Reform Bill is expected to abolish ‘no-fault’ evictions by removing Section 21 of the Housing Act 1988. We have heard this before and we must hold this Government to their promise to now deliver this. The Bill also proposes to reform possession grounds for landlords – it is not clear what these will be or how the Bill will tackle the issues with administration of evictions.

The proposal for a legally binding Decent Homes Standard in the Private Rented Sector is certainly welcome but currently lacks detail for how this will be enforced, how the enforcement will be funded and how the works to ensure the Decent Homes Standard will be administered or paid for. Similarly, the introduction of a new Ombudsman for private landlords to resolve disputes could be a positive step forward but experience from the Housing Ombudsman, under-resourced and under-powered and struggling to keep up with the flow of escalated complaints from social landlords, suggests that unless this is properly funded this will create more uncertainty for renters.

The Social Housing Regulation Bill attempts to give more focus on consumer standards. With plans to enable the Regulator to intervene with landlords who are performing poorly on consumer issues there is hope for the many residents who struggle to secure a decent level of repair service from their landlord. This is a u-turn from the Coalition Government’s abolition of the Tenants Services Authority in 2010. The impact of this Bill will only really be felt by tenants once the new powers and functions come through the Social Housing Regulator. Labour Housing Group will work with Labour MPs to make the case that the Social Housing Regulator is properly funded to deliver this expanded role.

Enabling the Regulator to inspect landlords is encouraging – the tenants that I represent who receive a poor repairs service would welcome the chance to call for an inspection and to see the outcome of that inspection. This Bill still has gaps. There is no stated role for Local Authorities or Local Councillors who are often the first to hear about the impact of poor consumer standards.

It is also silent on the role of local authorities with housing association disposals – local authorities have a responsibility to assess housing needs for their local areas and planning powers to secure affordable homes but there is no requirement for housing associations or the Social Housing Regulator to consult local authorities on the impact of disposals. Finally, this Bill is a missed opportunity to invest in tenant engagement including a requirement for tenants to be on Housing Association Boards or to have a say on local management decisions.

The Levelling Up and Regeneration Bill promises mostly administrative changes to monitoring levelling up, alongside tinkering at the edges of the planning system. Anyone committed to seeing more affordable homes built will despair at the lack of ambition from this Bill. The idea of organising votes on a street by street basis to determine planning applications will just bring in unnecessary bureaucracy to an under-resourced planning system.

The focus should have been on supporting clear policies which prioritise affordable homes and high-quality design standards. We await the detail on how the Bill will support local authorities to bring empty premises back into use and support the high street – currently local authorities have broad powers to support regeneration and so it’s difficult to see what more will be added which would have a meaningful impact.

It is positive that the Energy Security Bill proposes to appoint Ofgem as the new regulator for heat networks. I represent residents in new build homes who have no control over their energy prices and no powers to demand transparency over costs or choice of provider. The appointment should go further and provide clear local involvement for consumers so that they have a say in their energy provider. There is a huge gap in making plans to insulate and retrofit existing homes so that they are more energy efficient. Only a street by street, block by block programme, with sustained investment from national Government will secure the reduction in energy use that is needed to get to Net Zero.

It’s clear what’s missing from this legislative programme. The Government has failed to address the issue of short term lets, which is eroding the availability of affordable homes across the country, particularly in London and areas with a growing tourist economy. The Government’s failure to really grasp this issue and tackle the impact on housing supply and on communities lets down both homeless families and those hoping to join the housing ladder.

It is unsustainable for short term lets platforms to continue operating in central London without further regulation. There is a gap where there should be a long term commitment to investment in genuinely affordable council and social housing. This should be delivered through Government co-ordination of major new housing schemes alongside a sustained funding stream.

Going forward, Labour Housing Group will work with the Labour front bench and Labour MPs to make the case for the strongest possible action within these Bills to address the housing crisis.

Rachel Blake

Rachel is a Labour and Co-operative Party Councillor in Bow East and is Vice-Chair of the Labour Housing Group.

TWITTER

Tags Decent Homes Standard, genuinely affordable homes, Homelessness, Housing Ombudsman, Labour Housing Group, levelling up and regeneration bill, Private rented sector, queens speech, Renters Reform Bill, Section 21, social housing regulation bill, social housing regulator

Blog Post

Ending rough sleeping needs more than a sticking plaster

Post author By Rachel Blake MP
Post date February 5, 2021

In December, I gave evidence to the MHCLG select committee about the impact of Covid-19 on rough sleeping. My message to them was we desperately need investment in front line housing advice and long-term funding for genuinely affordable housing to really tackle the complex causes of rough sleeping. The pandemic has shown is what is politically possible, but short-term sticking plasters really need to become longer term solutions – and now is the time to make that case to the Government.

At the start of the lockdown councils were told by the government to do ‘whatever it takes’ to support our communities. One of the actions we took was to quickly house rough sleepers. Prior to the pandemic hitting rough sleeping had been steadily increasing after a decade of austerity, having been all but eliminated under the last Labour government.

The ‘Everyone In’ initiative made local authorities responsible for housing rough sleepers and those at risk of rough sleeping. This was regardless of priority need, local connection or recourse to public funds.

We stepped up to the challenge in Tower Hamlets, the borough I represent. Around 260 individuals either rough sleeping on the streets, or at imminent risk of rough sleeping, were given emergency accommodation. 49 of this group had No Recourse to Public Funds (NRPF). We placed entrenched rough sleepers into newly procured commercial hotels and emergency B&B accommodation. Statistics are one thing but each number represents a life transformed and having a roof over your head unlocks access to so many other services and life chances.

Now we face a situation of uncertainty about future funding to support this cohort of people. While the Government has called for councils to come up with a plan on how to move rough sleepers on to the next stage of accommodation, we have again stepped up, but we need funding to back us all the way.

The Next Steps Accommodation Programme, a £400m national fund, offers some help but the costs we face are substantial. Housing benefit claims won’t cover the cost of the support for a group with complex needs. Ongoing announcements about additional funding streams create pressure on already under resourced teams to write ‘bids’ and applications for resources for projects that are so clearly needed. This relationship between local and national Government is breaking and needs urgently fixing.

Now we are in a further lockdown, with high levels of Covid cases and temperatures plummeting, we need the Government to make suitable provision. On a practical level normal provision such as hubs will not work as self-contained units are still required. If the Government does not get this right it will lead to an increase in infections. A decade of austerity has shown that if you simply turn off the funding taps in one area it leads to further pressures on other public services with longer term impacts on other services like the NHS.

It’s taken a time of crisis for the Government to step in and give councils the funding they need to tackle rough sleeping and they desperately need to address the long-term undersupply of genuinely affordable housing. If something good can come out of the pandemic, it’s eradicating rough sleeping. The Government has a real chance to not undo the progress we have made.

Rachel Blake

Rachel is the Deputy Mayor for the London Borough of Tower Hamlets. She was elected to represent the Labour Party for Bow East Ward in May 2014 and appointed to Cabinet in July 2015.

Rachel has held Cabinet Member roles for Regeneration, Planning, and Air Quality. Rachel is now the Cabinet Member for Adults, Health and Well-being.

She has previously been called in as an expert witness to the Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee on its inquiry into the long-term delivery of social and affordable rented housing.

TWITTER

Tags covid-19, Everyone in, Homelessness, MHCLG, next steps, rough sleeping, Tower Hamlets

Blog Post

Westferry highlights everything wrong with planning

Post author By Rachel Blake MP
Post date July 15, 2020
1 Comment on Westferry highlights everything wrong with planning

I’ll always remember the moment on 14 January 2020, I heard that Robert Jenrick had approved Richard Desmond’s application for Westferry Printworks: 1,524 new homes with only 21% affordable housing. The news came through on my way into work, preparing for the Full Council meeting that very night, that would adopt our new Local Plan ‘Managing Growth and Sharing the Benefits’ and a new Community Infrastructure Levy schedule. As soon as the decision was announced, the importance of the timing could not have been clearer.

The publication of the decision that day, saved the developer £30-50 million and took that funding away from the residents of Tower Hamlets who, through the democratically led Local Plan process, had established infrastructure needs for the area: primary schools, health centres, community centres and green space and more.

At the heart of this very long and complicated story are 2 basic questions which still need answers.

First why did the Secretary of State approve the application against his own inspector’s and officials in his own department’s advice?

Secondly why did he approve the application the day before the development would have been eligible for £30-50 million infrastructure payment?

The decision had been a long time coming. After Boris Johnson, then Mayor of London, approved the first application in 2016, the developer chose to almost double the size of the scheme in a further application. Before the local Strategic Development Committee had a chance to make a decision, the applicant ‘appealed against non-determination’ arguably a tactic to avoid local decision making.

During a parliamentary debate on the matter, Tory MPs fell over themselves to suggest that the fault in the process lay with Tower Hamlets Council – how painfully ironic that the delay was in part due to negotiations over the level of affordable housing.

In Tower Hamlets, we had been working on our new Local Plan for over 3 years (much of that time was spent waiting for the Government’s Planning Inspector to schedule our inspection – a required part of the process). At its heart the Planning System – established in the Town and Country Planning Act 1947 – was designed to democratise the use of land and give people a say in the development which comes forward.

Through months of consultation, we listened and heard our community want to see more genuinely affordable homes and confidence that new development brings with it the schools, GP surgeries, public transport and shared space needed to support a thriving community.

The most concerning responses to the consultation were those which said residents did not feel connected to new development and that residents could never afford live in new homes. And so, Tower Hamlets Council established a vision: ‘Managing Growth and Sharing the Benefits’- introducing new policy on genuinely affordable rents, access to open space, health impact assessments and more.

The same night that we approved our Local Plan, Tower Hamlets Full Council set a new Community Infrastructure Levy. This was a progressive policy meaning developers had to pay their fair share to invest in infrastructure. The new levy established the Westferry Printwork sites as eligible for a Community Infrastructure Levy payment.

For years, the owners of Westferry Printworks had benefitted from not having to pay this Levy on the grounds that the complexities of the site would make development ‘unviable’ if the payment was required. Thanks to the careful evidence gathering and analysis from officers, Tower Hamlets Council successfully argued that this was not the case and so the site became ‘liable’.

Amongst the deeply depressing and some frankly embarrassing contributions from Tory MPs in the debate last month, it was the hollow arguments on housing supply that really grated. The suggestion that in some way, Jenrick was doing us a favour by allowing such inappropriate development to take place would be laughable if the consequences of his actions were not so serious.

Tower Hamlets has a track record of approving high levels of housing and office development, is consistently home to the highest levels of affordable housing development by housing associations and has one of London’s most ambitious Council home building programmes.

The Secretary of State and his cheerleaders really were grasping at straws to suggest that this development was making a contribution to housing in Tower Hamlets – Desmond already had a planning consent that he refused to build out and the vast majority of homes provided in this development would have been way out of reach for most of the UK, let alone residents of Tower Hamlets.

As a proud representative of Tower Hamlets, it hurt to hear our community attacked and undermined in the House of Commons by Conservative MPs who were reading lines from a script. After several weekends of revelations in the papers, Jenrick had tried to dodge scrutiny and when he finally had to face the music it was lazy to trot out lines about a ‘rotten borough’ which are out of date or blame the Mayor of London.

This was pure deflection and tribal politics.

I invite everyone of them who tribally stayed ‘on message’ in the chamber to come and sit with me or any of my Councillor colleagues in our surgeries where we listen to and work with our constituents who desperately need a new home and action on health inequalities.

The suggestion that Jenrick made this decision in the interest of overcrowded and homeless families is grossly insulting, at best. I hope that they will think on their positions and consider whether they are prepared to stand by their statements in the weeks and months to come which I expect – through the Select Committee and the next decision taken by a different Minister – will reveal further irregularities

This whole saga reminds us just how much needs to change about housing and planning in the UK. For communities to accept and welcome new development, they have to have confidence in the planning system. The ‘viability assessment’ process should be taken out of the regulations.

The Mayor of London Sadiq Khan has made great progress in London with the ‘35% threshold’ process but many other councils still report viability assessments and the regulations which allow developers to vary their affordable housing contributions as a huge barrier to securing sustainable development. Local Authorities still need more effective powers to intervene when sites are not being developed.

The Secretary of State’s decision on Westferry Printworks casts a long shadow over the Government’s new proposals for ‘cutting red tape’ and encouraging ‘permitted development rights’ which give communities very little say over levels of affordable housing their high streets and neighbourhoods

The Westferry decision highlighted everything that is wrong with planning. But let’s try to make it a moment to galvanise us all to work towards delivering the homes, offices, community buildings and public open spaces that residents need.

Rachel Blake

Tags local plan, Planning, Richard Desmond, Tower Hamlets, Westferry, Westferry Printworks

Blog Post

Post-Covid crisis how should the Private Rented Sector change?

Post author By Rachel Blake MP
Post date June 29, 2020

The Covid crisis exposes weaknesses at the heart of our housing system. The emergency ‘all in’ policy for rough sleepers, temporary eviction ban, lifting of Local Housing Allowance rates are all life-saving measures. But we should all be ashamed that our housing system is so broken that such interventions were needed.

Access to a safe, secure and affordable home is no longer available to hundreds of thousands of children and their families. Our whole housing system has to change and alongside national investment in genuinely affordable homes, major reforms to the private rented sector must be a core part of that change.

Labour Housing Group Patron Karen Buck MP, has done outstanding work on improving rights for renters, including bringing forward the Homes for Human Habitation Act in 2019. Labour needs to campaign for a private rented sector where renters pay a fair rent, are treated decently by their landlord, get their repairs done on time and can put down roots in a community.

There is hope that this is a moment to reflect on the powerful impact that our housing situation has on our health and inequalities in our housing system but this Tory Government is not bringing forward the legislation needed. For a decent and fair recovery, where no-one is left behind, we need urgent measures to keep renters safe and a programme of long-term reforms.

Renters need secure homes – this is better for them and for economic recovery. It is a huge relief for renters that the eviction ban has been extended to the end of August but there is so much more to do. Following years of collective action, the Government has scheduled the Renters Reform Bill, but we must continue to press them and our representatives in Parliament to make sure that it is debated and enacted as soon as possible. The sooner that Section 21 ends, the sooner that tenants can feel secure in putting down roots in their community.

Private renters have very few rights to information about their landlord or new home. It is not right that renters cannot check whether landlords have met certain standards. Mayor Sadiq Khan’s blue print for renters in London sets out how we can improve access to information for renters and we should campaign for devolution to local and regional authorities to establish accountability locally for landlords. For Labour activists, preparing for local elections in May 2021 will be a key moment to speak to private renters, listen to their experiences and work on local policies to support private renters.

As a local Councillor, I know just how hard it is to use the legislation available so that repairs are done on time, homes are properly maintained and renters are treated decently. The powers to take action on these issues rest mostly with local authorities who have endured a decade now of funding cuts. For a fully functioning private rented sector, which works for renters, landlords and the economy, we need a transparent and standardised funding settlement for local authority enforcement services.

The connection between housing and health was cemented in public policy nearly 150 years ago in 1885 in the Royal Commission on the Housing of Working Classes. This relationship was maintained when Nye Bevan became the Minister for Health and Housing in 1945. The Covid crisis reminds us just how linked our health is to our housing. We cannot afford to wait another 75 years before this connection is renewed in policy.

Many renters report not just a detrimental impact of insecure housing on their physical health but also a strain on their mental health. Not only are some of our most vulnerable households living in insecure homes but many of the key-workers who care for us, feed us and nurse us are spending their already low wages on private rented homes with very few rights. We urgently need transformation of the private rented sector, for a recovery that leaves no-one behind.

Rachel Blake

TWITTER

Tags blue print for renters, coronavirus, covid-19, crisis, Housing, Private rented sector, renters, sadiq khan