Ken Livingstone’s ability to get major political issues aired and debated was demonstrated again yesterday with his speech on housing, which focused mainly on the private rented sector. He raised 2 key proposals which have got extensive coverage, for example here and here and here.
First, that he will launch a campaign for a London Living Rent. Possibly mischievously this has been interpreted as calling for a rent cap or rent control, but it is a different concept. It is about launching a campaign to raise the issue of excessively high and unaffordable rents, to undertake research into what is genuinely affordable compared to incomes, to set a benchmark against which real rents can be compared, and to develop ideas for future regulation. He argued that no one should pay more than a third of their income in rent (the traditional measure of affordability used extensively in the past is 35%, and there is more debate to be had about the precise level), and that rents had risen by 12% in the capital last year with no benefits for tenants in terms of improvements in the quality of the housing provided.
LLR obviously has parallels with the London Living Wage, which started as a campaign arguing that the minimum wage was unacceptably low given the costs of living in London, then gained traction when it was endorsed by Ken as Mayor and others, then developed into a reference wage now used by many employers. In that case, no legislation was needed, no mayoral powers were needed, but the campaigning skills of London Citizens, the mayor and others made a huge difference to the living standards of many people on low incomes.
Ken made the point that rent control has served some cities well, and cited New York. Research published last month by LSE showed that the countries with the most successful private rented sectors, like Germany, embrace both a measure of rent control and a stronger degree of security of tenure, which give confidence to both landlords and tenants. In London, excessively high rents fuel inflation, firms have to pay more to attract staff and the high cost of living remains a key barrier to London’s economic growth.
Of course Boris Johnson made asinine comments in reply. He says the mayor has no powers in relation to this, but fails to recognise that Ken achieved huge amounts in housing in London between 2000-2008 despite having few housing powers – he made advances by showing leadership and by using his planning powers in innovative and dynamic ways. Johnson achieves less despite the fact that he has stronger powers; regrettably they are not applied to serving the interests of Londoners. He also, equally ignorantly, said that rent control would dry up the market, but the evidence from major cities elsewhere shows that this is far from the case. The truth is that he is a laissez faire politician who believes in letting the market do its thing, whatever the cost to Londoners.
Ken’s second proposal was to establish a non-profit lettings agency. Although working across the spectrum of private renting, the agency would be likely to focus on the housing benefit market. As landlords become more resistant to taking tenants on housing benefit because of their fears that they will fall into arrears following the cuts to local housing allowance, the aim of the agency would be to put ‘good tenants in touch with good landlords’ to help modernise and professionalise the sector, and to cut costs for both sides. It would help develop smart regulation of the sector based on accreditation, licensing, enforcement of standards, and tenant deposit protection.
There is increasing anger at the role of agents in the housing market. Some are members of regulatory associations and try to provide services against a decent code of practice. Others are not, and encourage what Ken called ‘the churn and burn approach’. Agents get paid more for finding new tenants and rents tend to rise fastest when there is a high turnover – decent landlords tend to reward decent tenants by not increasing rents as fast as they would for a new tenant. The role of such agents therefore undermines the fair operation of the market, leads to unnecessary churn, and doesn’t even benefit landlords because they end up having to cope with void periods when no rental income is coming in.
Johnson again was against this. Just as his government has made clear it is on the side of the bankers versus the people, he is on the side of the estate agents versus the tenants. He has nothing to offer private tenants, and the fact that Ken has made the running on housing just as he has made the running on fares is a good sign that Johnson might be on his bike come May.
Ken has played a huge part in politics for a long time because he is willing to kick the hornet’s nest and provoke a real debate about the big issues that face ordinary people. The housing hornet’s nest has been waiting to be kicked for a very long time.
This post could have come at any time during the last nine month debate over welfare and public spending cuts, but it proved poignant as welfare minister Lord Freud faced growing criticism over the impact of his reforms on the most marginalised communities.
“The problem is that the reality of the debt has become an excuse to make decisions which will have profoundly bad consequences for some of the poorest people in our society,” argued David Orr, chief executive of the National Housing Federation. “The very people the Government should be helping during these tough economic times: the disabled, foster carers and families – are exactly the people who will be hammered by these measures.”
His powerful conclusion? “Ministers will tell you there is no choice. That’s rubbish. There are always choices.”
29 July 2011: ‘From festival trash to housing stash’, The Social Issue
At a time of growing pressure on housing and support services and a pervasive mood of doom and gloom across the sector, how refreshing to hear a good news story. Saba Salman’s blog showcased a captivating example of the kind of innovative thinking that will see the housing sector not only survive but flourish despite a lack of public funding.
St Mary’s, a homeless hostel in Bangor, launched a scheme to redistribute tents, camping equipment and sleeping bags abandoned in Cardigan Bay after a music festival to hostels and drop-in centres across North Wales.
“The equipment by the housing association staff and hostel users includes some 79 pop up tents, 38 normal tents, 47 sleeping bags, 54 inflatable beds, 51 camping chairs, 45 roll mats including thermo rests, 17 pairs of wellies and eight new pillows,” Salman wrote.
We welcomed the chance to share a feel good example of the simple ways in which the housing sector can support itself, and its clients, during the coming months.
17 June 2011: ‘You can’t defeat stereotypes by repeating stereotypes’, Red Brick Blog
In June, housing veteran Steve Hilditch shared his disappointment at Labour leader Ed Miliband’s willingness to repeat the very sentiments about social tenants and their communities that can make the job of the housing sector so difficult.
“Ed makes the point that he wants to reward contribution and not punish people. But there is shortage and the people who get punished are those that won’t get a home as a result of a change in priorities – your grannie who needs sheltered housing, your cousin with a severe medical condition who can’t stay in a private bedsit in a shared house, your son or daughter who has had a breakdown and needs supported housing, your sister with 3 kids evicted from her home because she can’t keep up with the mortgage. None of them working and none of them able to volunteer. These are not tearjerkers, this is the real life business of allocating social housing.
“We fall into the hands of the forces of darkness every time we play the undeserving poor game, every time we add to the negativity around ‘welfare recipients’ without explaining who they are,” Hilditch explained.
22 November 2011: ‘The strange death of social housing’, Patrick Butler’s Cuts Blog
In an insightful post on the brave new world of social housing under the coalition government, the Guardian’s own Patrick Butler spelled out the perverse choice that the government – indeed, any government – now faces in funding homes for social rent:
“If it wants to build new properties for social tenants, it has just two options: to raise its own investment capital (by selling off a couple of its million-pound properties to bankers or city lawyers); or to apply for investment under the affordable housing programme.
“If it does the former, it knows it risks abandoning its social mission to help provide homes for low-paid young people in the areas in which it operates… if it does the latter, it knows that any homes it builds or acquires in its core north London areas will never be rented by the people it was set up to help.”
If a housing provider charges 80% of market rent under the Affordable Rent scheme, “what would be the point of its existence as a housing association?” Difficult questions that all our members now face, and no easy answer.
13 July 2011: ‘You know you’re an innovator when…’, Social Housing Comms
In tough times, how do you know when your organisation – and staff – is performing well? Kat Hughes, head of communications at Wolverhampton Homes and a prolific housing blogger, shared her top tips on how to recognise the innovators in your workplace.
You are an innovator, she claims, if:
* You have your best ideas in the shower * People describe you as tenacious – and you’re never sure if it’s a compliment * You love change * You bookmark web pages, favourite tweets or tear out pages of magazines obsessively * You talk a lot but you listen more *Your friends are all cleverer than you *You’re willing to take the hit if an idea doesn’t work out *You never feel like you’ve reached the top
But our particular favourite has to be: “You know you’re an innovator if you wake up in the middle of the night and email or text yourself.”
This content is taken from Guardian Professional. You can sign up as a member of the housing network and receive news, views and jobs direct to your inbox.