Category: Housing

  • Harold Gurden – 1972 Speech on Home Ownership and Right to Buy

    Harold Gurden – 1972 Speech on Home Ownership and Right to Buy

    The speech made by Harold Gurden, the then Conservative MP for Birmingham Selly Oak, in the House of Commons on 18 January 1972.

    I beg to move,

    That leave be given to bring in a Bill to extend to the tenants of dwellings owned by local authorities and other housing bodies the right to acquire the ownership or leasehold of their homes.

    Public ownership of housing, extended as it has been over the years under both parties, with additional controls on building and other housing regulations, in the opinion of many people and many experts, has accentuated the housing shortage. Many of these regulations were designed to cure the housing shortage, but some of us believe that they have only made matters worse. The object of this Bill is to “denationalise” family homes. However much one believes in nationalisation as a principle, surely the family home should be exempt.

    This is nationalisation in a most discriminatory form—against only the lower wage earners and the workers of this country, because the better-off can and do own their own homes. Few people, and fewer politicians, ever declare themselves opposed to the principle of a property-owning democracy. My own party has made this a very important part of its policy. Yet we have all allowed public authorities to deny nearly half Britain’s families the right to buy their homes.

    These are the homes provided by the taxpayers and ratepayers by means of subsidy. It is true that some local authorities in control of council houses permit tenants to buy their homes, but they are not in the main enthusiastic about it and many local authorities do not allow tenants to do so. There are now millions of families in this category, and in future they may never be allowed to buy their own homes. This will affect families from one generation to the next.

    This situation is clearly a class discrimination if ever there was one. It applies only to the lower income groups. Nearly all the higher income groups own their own homes. The tenant families and the working classes under both parties have had to accept constantly rising rents, and the Housing Finance Bill uses the Labour Party’s fair rent principle to increase the rents only partly to cover the cost to the tenant. So unless these tenants have the right freely to buy their own homes, they can never peg the cost of their home against inflation. The best way for a householder to insure himself against rising rents is to buy his home: it is better than a rise in wages.

    Also to be considered is the pride of ownership in one’s own home, the incentives that there are to improve one’s property and enhance its value. The Government’s improvement grants are freely available and are used mostly by home owners. It is easy for most of us to recognise property which is owner-occupied as we go about the country. In Birmingham, in my own constituency in particular, urban deterioration is a serious problem, but was made less acute by home ownership. It is or should be an essential part of our policy to create home ownership if we are to defeat urban deterioration.

    Another consideration is the mobility of labour. In our large cities, many unemployed are unable even to consider taking a job at the other side of the town, for the sole reason that they are municipal tenants and do not find it easy to move home. Changing a tenancy is far too slow and uncertain. If a job is offered to an unemployed man at the other side of a city as large as Birmingham, he has to think twice about accepting. I believe that many of our unemployed would not be restricted in their choice of job if they could sell their home and buy another.
    I have carried out some research on this matter and the best estimate that I can make is that about 10 per cent. of the people in the home owner belt are mobile and do change their homes in any one year, whereas only about 2 per cent. of the people in council-owned properties move.

    This leads one to assume that the security of tenure of having a municipal house is the main incentive, rather than employment. A man can easily get social security and unemployment pay, but he cannot easily get another house. This Bill is based on the Leasehold Reform Act, which was supported by both parties, to ensure specifically the right for people to own their own homes. The Bill carries this principle one stage further.

    My hon. Friend the Member for Bristol, North-West (Mr. McLaren) initiated a debate just before the recess which was very valuable and saves me having to mention many of the facts of the situation which we should be considering and which I hope will be considered in debate.

    Why should city councillors prevent home ownership? I am told that, in Bristol, an alderman voted against the city council allowing tenants to buy their homes, and after that vote went to the local authority and bought his own municipal house, before the city council could change the rules—

    Mr. Charles Pannell (Leeds, West)

    On a point of order. This cannot be in order, surely, in initiating a Ten-Minute Rule Bill, which has overstayed its time.

    Mr. Speaker

    These are matters for me.

    Mr. Gurden

    All I ask today is the right to debate this matter in the House. Any criticisms of the Bill—of its principle or any matters relating to it—can be debated at a later stage to the benefit of millions of people in this country.

  • Liam Fox – 2016 Speech on Housing Pressures Caused by Migrants

    Liam Fox – 2016 Speech on Housing Pressures Caused by Migrants

    The speech made by Liam Fox on 2 June 2016.

    All across the country, local authorities are facing huge challenges to meet additional housing targets set by Central Government. Local communities are facing the loss of green spaces in the rush for housebuilding, often failing to take into account the limitations on existing infrastructure.

    Take the village of Yatton, in my own constituency of North Somerset, for instance. Despite having no surplus school places, fully saturated GP surgeries and an already overstretched road system, it is typical of innumerable of villages across the country, where local communities are being asked to absorb large numbers of extra houses without any realistic possibility that the money will be found to provide the extra infrastructure required.

    It is a story being repeated time and time again in more and more places. People rightly ask, “how much of our green space will disappear, possibly forever?” and “how much of our quality of life will be compromised to deal with problems often created far away?”

    And they are right that the problem that is being faced at the local level begins well away from our communities at the level of national policy failure. It lies in the failure to control the growth of our population through immigration, including immigration from the European Union.

    As the Government fails to control the increase in the population due to migration, it forces local authorities to build more and more houses to deal with the ripple effect.

    If we remain in the European Union we will be forced to accept unlimited free movement of people – but there will be no free movement of space coming with them. The inevitable result will be worsening overcrowding in our land limited country.

    Most of the focus in the housing debate has been on supply. There is a relatively broad consensus that the UK needs to build around 250,000 additional homes every year to meet current demand. In the last ten years an average of only 170,000 have been built and the debate has largely been around how changes to planning can facilitate the level of house building required.

    Yet, what this approach to the problem fails to understand is that it is not merely an issue of supply, but one of demand.

    For much of the 20th century, the number of households grew at a faster rate than the population as a whole. Changes in social behaviour, such as divorce and the increased tendency for people to live alone, as well as demographics, meant that the average household size fell. In recent times, however, average household size has changed little, and the key factor driving the growth in household numbers has been population growth.

    The total non-British net inflow of immigrants is close to 350,000 with migration from the EU now accounting for about half of that figure.

    The outcome of the recent renegotiation of benefits will make no significant difference to these numbers, as the office for budget responsibility, the government’s advisory body has confirmed.

    This implies continued total net EU migration to the UK of the order of almost 200,000 people per annum.

    This number is growing dramatically and has already more than doubled since 2012.

    The continuing failure of the Eurozone and the tragically high levels of unemployment in Southern Europe is likely to mean that more and more young people will head to the North of Europe, including the UK, in search of work.

    And all this does not include those countries who may join the EU in the coming years.

    All these factors could considerably boost the numbers and we are powerless to stop it. Staying in the EU is likely to mean continued high levels of immigration over which the UK would have no control while leaving the EU would give back control of immigration policy to the UK government so enabling the number of immigrants to be reduced while, at the same time, being more selective about who can come to the UK.

    Continuation of net migration on the current scale would mean an increase in our population of almost 5 million in 15 years’ time.

    This would be the equivalent of adding the combined population of the cities of Birmingham, Glasgow, Manchester, Liverpool, Leeds, Sheffield, Bradford and Bristol.

    60% of this increase would be from future migrants and their children. This is not a scare story, simply an extrapolation of how today’s immigration figures will impact on our society in the years ahead if changes are not made to policy. Half of this huge figure is attributable to the EU.

    Official figures show that in the last ten years, two thirds of additional households in the UK have been headed up by an immigrant (that is to say that they had a foreign born “Household Reference Person (HRP) – what used to be known as head of household) [c]. Households with a foreign born HRP have increased by around 120,000 a year during this period.

    In London, despite the rapid growth in population the number of households headed by a British born person has actually fallen in the last ten years.

    This is a particular problem in England which takes over 90% of immigrants to the UK despite the fact that it is is already nearly twice as crowded as Germany and 3½ times as crowded as France.

    Yet population growth on the present scale means making our urban areas still more overcrowded or building over valuable green belt or farmland with all the loss of amenity involved.

    At current levels of immigration, the Office for National Statistics project that our population will continue to grow by around half a million a year – a city the size of Liverpool every year.

    This will mean that, in England, we will have to build a new home every six minutes, or 240 a day, for the next 20 years to accommodate just the additional demand for housing from new migrants. That is before we take into account the needs of those who were born here.

    Of course, it would be wrong to imply that most newly built housing is occupied by immigrants. Many immigrant households move into existing properties. The need to build a new home every 6 minutes it is to deal with the additional demand for housing, it is obviously not that these new homes will be occupied directly by immigrants.

    To be even more specific, the difference in projected household growth between ‘high’ net migration and ‘zero’ net migration is 95,000 households per year or more than one additional household every 6 minutes.

    These patterns create consequences for almost all sections of society.

    Most new immigrants move into the private rented sector which has grown as the immigrant population has grown. Competition for rented accommodation obliges all those in the private rented sector to pay high rents which take a large share of income and makes saving to buy a home even harder.

    These resulting high rents and a shortage of housing make it much more difficult for young people to set up home on their own so they have to spend more time in house shares or with their parents.

    The problem in the private rented sector may well be exacerbated by recent moves to clamp down on the buy to rent sector.

    High rents and high house prices resulting from an imbalance of supply and demand in the market often means that families have to live in overcrowded conditions or move away from their local area to find suitable accommodation that they can afford.

    Those living in the parts of the UK with lower housing costs cannot afford to move for work leaving, them trapped in areas with fewer opportunities.

    Of course there are other drivers to housing demand, some of which will have been hidden by the recent undersupply in the market.

    For example, if supply were to be increased some younger people would leave their parents’ home or house shares thus adding to effective demand.

    But this cannot get away from the fact that a huge increase in population is driving a demand for housing that we are finding difficult to cope with, at least without potentially damaging the quality of life for those who already live in our country.

    A satellite survey by a research team at the University of Leicester between 2006 and 2012, found that between 2006 and 2012, 22,000 hectares (54,000 acres) of green space in Britain was converted to “artificial surfaces” – mostly housing, but including the roads, other infrastructure required to support the houses themselves.

    More than 7,000 hectares of forest was felled, 14,000 hectares of farmland concreted and 1,000 hectares of precious wetland was drained to make way for urban sprawl.

    That’s a landscape twice the size of Liverpool, transformed forever, in just six years.

    Without a substantial change in policy, the same thing will happen – again and again and again.

    Membership of the European Union is usually measured in monetary terms but there are other ways of measuring the cost.

    A constant unchecked flow of migration will inevitably result in more of our open spaces and natural greenery being turned over to housing.

    Some of that may be inevitable, with growth of our own population, or changing social behaviours, but simply because some of this pattern may be inevitable is no reason to be resigned to it.

    My message, especially to the young and those with young families is this – if we remain in the EU, if we have uncontrolled migration year after year after year after year, you will find it harder to get a home of your own.

    You will find it harder to see a GP or you will find it harder to get a school place and you will see our green spaces disappear at an even greater rate.

    If we are unable to control immigration and registered from its current levels, then we will pay a much more subtle and long-term price than money can measure.

  • Sadiq Khan – 2021 Comments on Bringing Hounslow Housing into Council Ownership

    Sadiq Khan – 2021 Comments on Bringing Hounslow Housing into Council Ownership

    The comments made by Sadiq Khan, the Mayor of London, on 21 December 2021.

    I’m determined to continue increasing the number of council homes for Londoners and I’m delighted that Hounslow has committed to using investment from City Hall to bring so many properties back into council ownership. This will enable Hounslow to provide good quality and genuinely affordable homes to more than 500 families in London.

    London has a wonderful tradition of helping those in need, and I’m proud Hounslow will use some of the funding to help house vulnerable care leavers and Afghan refugees.

    Hounslow joins Islington in taking swift, bold action to help deliver the homes Londoners so desperately need. I’m hopeful that other boroughs will look to them and submit their own proposals. We also need to see ambition from Ministers to replicate the ‘Right to Buy-back’ scheme nationally, giving councils and housing associations the support they need to purchase much-needed homes.

  • Eddie Hughes – 2021 Comments on Tackling Homelessness

    Eddie Hughes – 2021 Comments on Tackling Homelessness

    The comments made by Eddie Hughes, the Minister for Rough Sleeping, on 21 December 2021.

    I have seen first-hand the devastation of those who come face to face with homelessness, and my heart goes out to anyone in this situation.

    The support we are announcing today is going directly to communities that need it most.

    It will help thousands of people across England, with councils able to prevent homelessness before it occurs and put a roof over the heads of those who have lost their homes.

  • Eddie Hughes – 2021 Housing Update Statement

    Eddie Hughes – 2021 Housing Update Statement

    The statement made by Eddie Hughes, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities, in the House of Commons on 15 December 2021.

    I wish to update the House on the publication of the Government response to the 2021 Future Buildings Standard consultation and the laying of a statutory instrument today to implement the outcomes of this consultation, and our previous consultation on the Future Homes Standard.

    Today’s publication of the consultation response, and the implementation of an ambitious uplift to the building regulations, will ensure new homes and buildings in England are highly efficient, with significantly lower carbon emissions. This marks an important step on our journey towards a cleaner, greener built environment and it supports us in our target to reduce the UK’s carbon emissions to net zero by 2050.

    The Future Buildings Standard consultation

    We have recently conducted a two-stage consultation on proposed changes to the building regulations and the associated statutory guidance. Today I am publishing the Government’s response to the second stage of the consultation, the Future Buildings Standard consultation.

    The Government response to the first stage of the consultation, the Future Homes Standard consultation, was published in January this year. It set out our plans for the Future Homes Standard, an ambitious new standard for new homes to be introduced from 2025. It also set out plans for an uplift in standards for new homes in 2021 as a stepping stone towards the 2025 standard.

    The Future Buildings Standard consultation built on that by setting out plans for the Future Buildings Standard, to be introduced for new non-domestic buildings in England from 2025. The consultation also set out plans for an uplift in standards in 2021 in advance of implementing the 2025 standard.

    The Government response to the Future Buildings Standard consultation confirms that, with implementation starting from 2025, the Future Buildings Standard will produce highly efficient non-domestic buildings which use low-carbon heat and have the best fabric standards possible. The 2021 uplift to the building regulations will support the delivery of the Future Buildings Standard through a 27% reduction in the carbon emissions of new non-domestic buildings in England.

    The consultation response sets out the measures we are taking to simplify and clarify the guidance on ventilation and safeguard the health of building residents and users. Covid-19 has also shown the importance of ventilation in reducing the spread of infection. The consultation response confirms that we are introducing new guidance to mitigate the risks of airborne infection.

    The consultation response also confirms our intention to introduce a new requirement on overheating mitigation in the building regulations. This will mean new residential buildings must be designed to reduce overheating. This is an important part of our work to adapt our country to face climate change, and it will protect people where they live and sleep. Several local authorities have already set overheating mitigation policies for their areas, and we have learnt from them in developing this national standard. The new overheating standard is a part of the building regulations and is therefore mandatory, so there will be no need for policies in development plans to duplicate this.

    I am placing a copy of the Government response to the 2021 Future Buildings Standard consultation in the House Library.

    Implementation of the 2021 uplift to the building regulations

    Together, the policies set out in the Government response to the Future Buildings Standard consultation and the policies set out in the Government response to the Future Homes Standard consultation, form the policy for the 2021 uplift to the building regulations. The 2021 uplift is intended to provide a meaningful and achievable increase to the energy efficiency standards in the short term and support industry to prepare and position itself to build to the full standards from 2025, as well as delivering the outcomes on ventilation and overheating covered above.

    Alongside publication of the Government response to the Future Buildings Standard consultation, I have laid a statutory instrument to implement the amendments to the building regulations and I have published new statutory guidance.

    Implementing this uplift is a significant moment for the sector and on our journey to net zero. It provides a pathway towards creating homes and buildings that are fit for the future, and a built environment with lower carbon emissions and homes adapted to the overheating risks caused by a warming climate.

  • Christopher Pincher – 2021 Statement on the Delivery Supply Chain

    Christopher Pincher – 2021 Statement on the Delivery Supply Chain

    The statement made by Christopher Pincher, the Minister for Housing, in the House of Commons on 10 December 2021.

    I wish to update the House on the measures the Government are taking to facilitate flexibility within the delivery supply chain and mitigate challenges faced by construction sites.

    Due to the covid pandemic, the logistics sector is facing an exceptional challenge resulting from the acute shortage of HGV drivers across the distribution network. This has resulted in missed deliveries which have the potential to lead to significant shortages and hinder economic growth.

    Through a previous written ministerial statement made by the former Secretary of State, dated 15 July 2021, the Government responded to these pressures proactively by ensuring the industry had the tools available to adapt effectively and minimise any disruption to the public. The statement made it clear that local planning authorities should take a positive approach to their engagement with food retailers and distributors, as well as the freight industry, to ensure planning controls are not a barrier to deliveries of food, sanitary and other essential goods.

    I am now expanding the scope of these measures. The purpose of this written ministerial statement, which comes into effect immediately, is to make it clear that local planning authorities should take a positive approach to their engagement with all supply chain stakeholders to ensure planning controls are not a barrier to the supply of all goods and services.

    Many commercial activities in England are subject to controls which restrict the time and number of deliveries from lorries and other delivery vehicles, particularly during evenings and at night. These restrictions may be imposed by planning conditions, which are necessary to make the development acceptable to local residents who might otherwise suffer from traffic, noise and other local amenity issues. However, this needs to be balanced with the public interest, for all residents, to have access to shops which are well stocked.

    The National Planning Policy Framework already emphasises that planning enforcement is a discretionary activity, and local planning authorities should act proportionately in responding to suspected breaches of planning control.

    Local planning authorities should not seek to undertake planning enforcement action which would result in unnecessarily restricting deliveries, having regard to their legal obligations.

    Construction output has also been inconsistent in recent months and not returned to pre-February 2020 levels. Construction sites in England may also be subject to controls which restrict the hours within which they can operate. Wherever possible, local planning authorities should respond positively to requests for flexibility for operation of construction sites to support the sector’s recovery.

    The Government recognise that it may be necessary for action to be taken in relation to the impacts on neighbours of sustained disturbance due to deliveries and construction outside of conditioned hours, particularly where this affects sleep. In this case a local planning authority should consider any efforts made to manage and mitigate such disturbance, taking into account the degree and longevity of amenity impacts.

    This statement will replace all the previous statements on these matters.

    This written ministerial statement only covers England and will expire on 30 September 2022, giving direction to the industry and local planning authorities over the next 10 months. We will keep the need for this statement under review.

  • Sadiq Khan – 2021 Comments on Keeping Homes Warm

    Sadiq Khan – 2021 Comments on Keeping Homes Warm

    The comments made by Sadiq Khan, the Mayor of London, on 3 December 2021.

    It’s unacceptable that many Londoners can’t afford to keep their homes warm and instead suffer cold, damp conditions throughout winter. We know the economic impacts of the pandemic and rising fuel prices are likely to plunge even more London households into fuel poverty. That’s why from today, I’m reopening my Warmer Homes programme to support vulnerable Londoners this winter.

    I’m pleased that our £51 million commitment will directly help those living in ageing, energy-inefficient homes. This investment will help tackle the climate emergency and support Londoners with the skills they need for jobs in the green economy.

  • Sadiq Khan – 2021 Comments on Homelessness in London over Christmas

    Sadiq Khan – 2021 Comments on Homelessness in London over Christmas

    The comments made by Sadiq Khan, the Mayor of London, on 1 December 2021.

    Since becoming Mayor, I have made tackling rough sleeping a personal priority. From City Hall we are doing everything we can with the resources at our disposal to keep rough sleepers safe and I’m confident Londoners will once again show their generosity by backing my winter fundraising campaign and helping to support young Londoners who find themselves homeless.

    Even so, the generosity of Londoners alone cannot end rough sleeping in our capital. This time last year we were hailing the remarkable success of the ‘Everyone In’ programme for saving the lives of hundreds of vulnerable Londoners. Despite seeing what can be achieved when we work together, ministers now appear unwilling or unable to confront the appalling reality that hundreds of young Londoners could spend this Christmas sleeping on the streets.

  • Sadiq Khan – 2021 Comments on Activating the Severe Weather Emergency Protocols

    Sadiq Khan – 2021 Comments on Activating the Severe Weather Emergency Protocols

    The comments made by Sadiq Khan, the Mayor of London, on 26 November 2021.

    Once again far too many people are facing the first cold snap of the winter on the streets of the capital, without the safe, secure accommodation that should be the basic right of every Londoner.

    Across London, we will do everything we can to protect rough sleepers in these freezing conditions. I know London’s councils and charities will also be working tirelessly over the weekend to help the most vulnerable amongst us and I thank them for their efforts.

  • Christopher Pincher – 2021 Comments on Keyworkers Getting onto Housing Ladder

    Christopher Pincher – 2021 Comments on Keyworkers Getting onto Housing Ladder

    The comments made by Christopher Pincher, the Housing Minister, on 26 November 2021.

    I am absolutely delighted that the first people to benefit from First Homes include a nurse and police officer. They have been helped to own a home in the community where they have worked tirelessly during the pandemic to keep people safe.

    This scheme is putting local people first and creating opportunities for young people and families to feel the sense of pride that comes with homeownership.

    We are determined to help more people on to the housing ladder and are providing significant funding to regenerate derelict land, deliver new homes and create prosperous local communities across the country.