UKPOL.CO.UK

Category: Housing

  • Dehenna Davison – 2022 Statement on the Community Ownership Fund

    Dehenna Davison – 2022 Statement on the Community Ownership Fund

    The statement made by Dehenna Davison, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities, in the House of Commons on 12 December 2022.

    Over the weekend I was delighted to announce the outcome of round 2 window 1 of the £150 million Community Ownership Fund, which will see £6.7 million awarded to 32 projects across the United Kingdom. Combined with round 1 projects, this additional funding takes our overall funding total to £16.7 million for 70 projects.

    This targeted support is delivering much needed investment to ensure that important parts of our social fabric, such as pubs, sports clubs, theatres and post office buildings, can continue to play a central role in towns and villages across the United Kingdom. In this round we will be funding a diverse range of projects, from the Margaret Haes Riding Centre in Bury to the Llandyrnog Community Shop in the Vale of Clwyd.

    The Community Ownership Fund is helping to reduce geographical disparities across the United Kingdom. To this end, the funding provided in round 2 window 1 will see over £800,000 awarded to projects in Scotland, £1.1 million to Wales and £555,000 to Northern Ireland. This, so far, brings the total funding awarded across Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland to £4.9 million collectively.

    The funding provided in round 2 window 1 will also see £4.2 million awarded to projects in England. This brings the total funding awarded across English regions to £11.8 million collectively.

    The projects supported by the Community Ownership Fund, such as the United Kingdom’s most remote pub, The Old Forge in Scotland, Ballymacash Sports Academy in Northern Ireland, and the Leigh Spinners Mill in Greater Manchester, are already making a genuine difference to their communities. With the additional investment awarded in this bidding window, I am delighted to be supporting many more small but mighty local assets across the United Kingdom, levelling up the places we love and cherish.

    Interested groups can submit an Expression of Interest form to start their application process at any time. With a four-year window until 2024-25 for investment to be released, there is plenty of opportunity for interested community groups to apply to take over invaluable community assets and to run them as businesses—by the community, for the community.

  • Stuart Andrew – 2022 Speech on the Short-term and Holiday-let Accommodation Licensing Bill

    Stuart Andrew – 2022 Speech on the Short-term and Holiday-let Accommodation Licensing Bill

    The speech made by Stuart Andrew, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, in the House of Commons on 9 December 2022.

    I thank the hon. Member for York Central (Rachael Maskell) for bringing this important debate to the House and for her diligence in continuing to highlight this important matter. I know that we had a lot of exchanges while I was the Minister for Housing, and I am sorry that we never got around to doing the roundtable I promised to do with her in her constituency.

    The short-term and holiday letting sector is a matter of considerable interest across all parties, and many hon. Friends have raised it with me, too. I am sure it will continue to be a big issue. The voices that we have heard are key to keeping this debate going and I offer my thanks to the hon. Lady.

    The short-term and holiday letting of residential accommodation to paying guests is not a new phenomenon in this country. We have long been able to boast about the quality and range of England’s guest accommodation offer. The quintessential English bed and breakfast, holiday cottage or homestay have been important parts of our accommodation offer for many years. They have long catered for the needs of tourists, those travelling for work or people in need of temporary accommodation. However, it is clear that, over the past 10 to 15 years, there has been a rapid and significant growth in the short-term and holiday letting market, which has changed the shape and size of England’s guest accommodation sector.

    At the heart of that change has been the emergence of the sharing economy. Online platforms have played a key role in making it easier to connect homeowners who want to rent out their accommodation with people who are looking for a place to stay for a short period. I want to be clear that the rise of these online platforms and the subsequent expansion of the short-term and holiday let market has been beneficial for hosts, consumers and the wider visitor economy. I am sure that many Members attending the debate today will have made use of them themselves, as will many of their constituents. At the same time, however, we must recognise that this expansion has created challenges and concerns in some of our communities.

    Chris Clarkson (Heywood and Middleton) (Con)

    Obviously we are still facing a housing crisis in this country and, while I completely agree that short-term lets go some way to helping our tourism economy recover from the after-effects of covid-19, does the Minister agree that we need to strike the right balance between the usage of private rented accommodation for short-term lets and ensuring that there are enough good-quality affordable homes available for people who would want to buy or rent them?

    Stuart Andrew

    I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend that we need to have a measured and effective approach, and I will come on to that shortly.

    Rachael Maskell

    On the issue of the private rented sector, the reason why so many are flipping is the inequality within the tax system, where landlords can no longer gain tax benefit as a result of the improvements they make to their property. We clearly now have an inequitable situation. Does not the Minister agree that that is why it is so important to bring forward tighter regulation to license these properties?

    Stuart Andrew

    I do. There are many complex issues around this important point, and the hon. Lady highlights one of them. During my time as the Minister for Housing, I was speaking to colleagues across Government about various solutions we could come up with, and I hope to elaborate on that a bit more in a moment.

    Our ambition has been and will continue to be to ensure that we sustainably reap the benefits of short-term lets and holiday lets, while protecting the interests of holidaymakers and local communities. The Government have recently taken a series of steps that we are confident will help us to achieve our ambition for the sector. The Government have recognised for some time now that there are significant concerns that need to be investigated further. That is why, in last year’s tourism recovery plan, we set out our intention to consider a tourist accommodation registration scheme in England. That forms part of the Government’s ambition to create a more innovative, resilient and data-driven tourism industry.

    There is, unfortunately, a lack of information and data on the short-term lets market in England. That is why our first step was to carry out a call for evidence, which ran from 29 June to 21 September this year. We had two key aims for that call of evidence. Our first aim was to hear from a range of stakeholders, to help us to develop a fuller understanding of the current market. Our second aim was to use the data and information we gathered to develop policy options. To do that, we asked questions about the changes and growth that have been evident in the market, the benefits and the challenges of short-term lets and the impact of potential policy responses. In total, we received 4,000 responses from all manner of individuals and organisations located throughout the country. Those included hosts operating in the market, guest accommodation businesses, online platforms, enforcement agencies such as local authorities and representative bodies and groups.

    That brings me on to the next steps we are taking to improve the short-term lets sector. The call for evidence highlighted that there is a case to introduce light-touch regulation in this currently unregulated sector. The Government are therefore introducing a registration scheme for short-term lets through an amendment to the Levelling-up and Regeneration Bill tabled on Wednesday 7 December. There are a number of benefits to introducing a registration scheme. It will deliver much-needed data and evidence on short-term letting activity across England, providing transparency on the numbers and locations of short-term lets for local authorities, central Government and enforcement agencies. It will improve consistency and coherence in the application of statutory health and safety regulations. It will boost England’s reputation as a destination for visitors, and it will help to attract more international visitors by giving a visible assurance that we have a high-quality and safe guest accommodation offer for all. Finally, it will support local authorities where a high number of short-term lets are deemed to be impacting their local housing market.

    Local authorities have highlighted the challenge of accurately assessing the scale of short-term lets in their areas, often having to rely on data from third party providers. As there are some questions over the reliability of that data, a registration scheme would provide local authorities with better information on short-term letting in their area. A consultation on the design of the scheme will be carried out next year before the summer recess. For those reasons, the registration scheme should be seen as a significant step in our policy approach to the short-term lets sector.

    Rachael Maskell

    Does the Minister realise that over that period, another 6,525 properties—29 a day—will flip over to become short-term holiday lets? Surely we need to get on with licensing now.

    Stuart Andrew

    I hope that I have indicated how seriously the Government take this issue, but it is right that we do this properly and make sure we get as much data as possible, so that we really know the position we are facing.

    The registration scheme is an altogether different step from the licensing scheme put forward in the Bill. As the Government are already progressing with the registration scheme that I have outlined, I am afraid we cannot support the Bill. None the less, the Government recognise that a registration scheme alone will not address all the challenges that have been highlighted today, particularly in the case of housing. The Government are aware of calls for changes to the planning system. Currently, planning permission is not normally required when an existing house starts to be used as a short-term let. We therefore propose to consult next year on whether planning permission will more often be required when a house seeks to start to be used as a short-term let and for new short-term lets, especially in tourist hotspots.

    Today’s debate has also touched upon concerns that landlords may be prioritising short-term letting activity instead of long-term tenancy agreements. This has limited the ability of local people to secure affordable private rented sector properties. The Government are also committed to giving private renters a better deal, with greater security of tenure and safer, higher-quality homes. On 16 June, we published our White Paper, “A Fairer Private Rented Sector” which sets out our plan to fundamentally reform the sector and level up housing quality in this country. Since then, we have also committed to banning section 21 no fault evictions to protect tenants.

  • Michael Gove – 2022 Statement on the Planning System

    Michael Gove – 2022 Statement on the Planning System

    The statement made by Michael Gove, the Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities, in the House of Commons on 6 December 2022.

    I will be making further changes to the planning system, alongside the Levelling Up and Regeneration Bill, to place local communities at the heart of the planning system.

    I will set out more detail on the following approach in an upcoming National Planning Policy Framework prospectus, which will be put out for consultation by Christmas.

    Community Control

    I will retain a method for calculating local housing need figures, but consult on changes. I do believe that the plan-making process for housing has to start with a number. This number should, however, be an advisory starting point, a guide that is not mandatory. It will be up to local authorities, working with their communities, to determine how many homes can actually be built, taking into account what should be protected in each area—be that our precious Green Belt or national parks, the character of an area, or heritage assets. It will also be up to them to increase the proportion of affordable housing if they wish.

    My changes will instruct the Planning Inspectorate that they should no longer override sensible local decision making, which is sensitive to and reflects local constraints and concerns. Overall this amounts to a rebalancing of the relationship between local councils and the Planning Inspectorate, and will give local communities a greater say in what is built in their neighbourhood.

    Local Plans

    We will end the obligation on local authorities to maintain a rolling five-year supply of land for housing where their plans are up-to-date. Therefore for authorities with a local plan, or where authorities are benefitting from transitional arrangements, the presumption in favour of sustainable development and the ‘tilted balance’ will typically not apply in relation to issues affecting land supply.

    I also want to consult on dropping the requirement for a 20% buffer to be added for both plan making and decision making—which otherwise effectively means that local authorities need to identify six years of supply rather than five. In addition, I want to recognise that some areas have historically overdelivered on housing—but they are not rewarded for this. My plan will therefore allow local planning authorities to take this into account when preparing a new local plan, lowering the number of houses they need to plan for.

    Places with existing plans will benefit from the changes above, as they will be free of five-year land supply obligations provided that plan is up to date. However, I am aware that those with local plans at an advanced stage of preparation will not benefit from these changes so I will also put in place transitional arrangements. Where authorities are well-advanced in producing a new plan, but the constraints which I have outlined mean that the amount of land to be released needs to be reassessed, I will give those places a two year period to revise their plan against the changes we propose and to get it adopted. And while they are doing this, we will also make sure that these places are less at risk from speculative development, by reducing the amount of land which they need to show is available on a rolling basis—from the current five years to four.

    I will increase community protections afforded by a neighbourhood plan against developer appeals—increasing those protections from two years to five years. The power of local and neighbourhood plans will be enhanced by the Bill; and this will be underpinned further through this commitment. Adopting a plan will be the best form of community action—and protection. Furthermore, we will clarify and consult on what areas we propose to be in scope of the new national development management policies, and we will consult on each new policy before it is brought forward by the Government. National development management policies will also not constrain the ability of local areas to set policies on specific local issues.

    I will consult on the detail of proposals increase planning fees, including doubling fees for retrospective application where breaches of planning have occurred, as soon as possible. I will also consult on a new planning performance framework that will monitor local performance across a broader set of measures of planning service delivery, including planning enforcement.

    Build Out

    I already have a significant package of measures in the Bill to ensure developers build out the developments for which they already have planning. I will consult on two further measures:

    on allowing local planning authorities to refuse planning applications from developers who have built slowly in the past; and

    on making sure that local authorities who permission land are not punished under the housing delivery test when it is developers who are not building.

    I will also consult on our new approach to accelerating the speed at which permissions are built out, specifically on a new financial penalty.

    Character of a Developer

    I have heard and seen examples of how the planning system is undermined by irresponsible developers and landowners who persistently ignore planning rules and fail to deliver their legal commitments to the community. I therefore propose to consult on the best way of addressing this issue, including looking at a similar approach to tackling the slow build out of permissions, where we will give local authorities the power to stop developers getting permissions.

    Brownfield First

    The new infrastructure levy will be set locally by local planning authorities. They will be able to set different levy rates in different areas, for example lower rates on brownfield over greenfield to increase the potential for brownfield development. That will allow them to reflect national policy, which delivers our brownfield first pledge by giving substantial weight to the value of using brownfield land.

    I will consult to see what more we can do in national policy to support development on small sites particularly with respect to affordable housing and I will launch a review into identifying further measures that would prioritise the use of brownfield land. To help make the most of empty premises, including those above shops, I am reducing the period after which a council tax premium can be charged so that we can make the most of the space we already have. I will also provide further protection in national policy for our important agricultural land for food production, making it harder for developers to build on it.

    The Housing Market

    I intend to deliver a new tourist accommodation registration scheme as quickly as possible, working with DCMS, starting with a further short consultation on the exact design of the scheme. I will also consult on going further still and reviewing the Use Classes Order so that it enables places such as Devon, Cornwall, and the Lake District to control changes of use to short term lets if they wish.

    I have also asked the Competition and Markets Authority to consider undertaking a market study. I believe the case is clear for it to take this forward, but respect its independence as it comes to a decision.

    These reforms will help to deliver enough of the right homes in the right places and will do that by promoting development that is beautiful, that comes with the right infrastructure, that is done democratically with local communities rather than to them, that protects and improves our environment, and that leaves us with better neighbourhoods than before.

  • Gerald Jones – 2022 Parliamentary Question on the Local Housing Allowance

    Gerald Jones – 2022 Parliamentary Question on the Local Housing Allowance

    The parliamentary question asked by Gerald Jones, the Labour MP for Merthyr Tydfil and Rhymney, in the House of Commons on 5 December 2022.

    Gerald Jones (Merthyr Tydfil and Rhymney) (Lab)

    What assessment his Department has made of the potential impact of real-term reductions in local housing allowance rates on levels of poverty.

    The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Mel Stride)

    First, on behalf of the whole House, may I welcome the hon. Member for City of Chester (Samantha Dixon) to this House, and wish her every happiness and a productive time in the House?

    The Government have maintained the uplift they provided in the local housing allowance in 2020, at a cost of almost £1 billion, targeting the 30th percentile of rents. Those who need assistance with housing costs also have recourse to the discretionary housing payments administered by local authorities.

    Gerald Jones

    I welcome the Secretary of State’s comments about my new colleague, my hon. Friend the Member for City of Chester (Samantha Dixon), but that is as far as I can go.

    The local housing allowance is a lifeline for tenants to access the private rented sector. The Government have accepted the need to uprate most benefits in line with inflation, so why have they chosen to freeze the local housing allowance, which will have a disproportionate impact on constituents in my constituency of Merthyr Tydfil and Rhymney? Will he commit to reviewing that situation urgently?

    Mel Stride

    As the hon. Gentleman will know, annually I review all benefits, including LHA—indeed, around this time next year, I will do precisely that. It has to be borne in mind that we are currently spending almost £30 billion a year on housing allowance and that figure is expected to increase to around £50 billion by 2050, so there are cost considerations.

  • Michael Gove – 2022 Statement on the Homelessness Prevention Grant

    Michael Gove – 2022 Statement on the Homelessness Prevention Grant

    The statement made by Michael Gove, the Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities, in the House of Commons on 5 December 2022.

    The Government understand the pressures people are facing with the cost of living and have taken decisive action to support households. This includes the energy price guarantee, to support households with their energy bills over the winter, and a further £37 billion of support for the cost of living this year. At autumn statement the Chancellor also unveiled £26 billion of support to protect the most vulnerable households in 2023-24.

    I recognise that some vulnerable households may find themselves at risk of homelessness and may need additional support. The Government want to make sure councils are able to respond effectively to support households and prevent homelessness.

    Homelessness Prevention Grant—winter 2022 financial support

    I am therefore announcing an additional £50 million that will be made available to local authorities in England in 2022-23 through a top-up to the homelessness prevention grant. The additional funding will support local authorities to help prevent vulnerable households from becoming homeless. Local authorities will target this funding to those who need it most to help manage local homelessness pressures.

    The details of individual local authority allocations can be found here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/homelessness-prevention-grant-2022-to-2023. This additional £50 million investment builds on the £316 million in funding already available to local authorities through the homelessness prevention grant for 2022-23, bringing total spend through that grant to £366 million. This is part of £2 billion of Government funding to tackle homelessness and rough sleeping over the next three years.

  • Vaughan Gething – 2022 Statement on a Statutory Licensing Scheme for all Visitor Accommodation in Wales

    Vaughan Gething – 2022 Statement on a Statutory Licensing Scheme for all Visitor Accommodation in Wales

    The statement made by Vaughan Gething, the Welsh Minister for the Economy, in the Welsh Parliament on 15 November 2022.

    Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. I am pleased to have the opportunity today to provide an update on the steps we are taking to help secure a sustainable and thriving visitor economy that supports and enhances communities across Wales. The visitor economy is rapidly changing, and the role of visitor accommodation presents major challenges for communities across the world. For example, the growth of online booking platforms has brought many benefits, such as new routes to market and increased consumer choice. However, we are aware of the concerns around compliance with existing requirements and the impact of short-term lets on housing stock and our communities.

    Our plans to develop a statutory licensing scheme will be focused on levelling the playing field as part of a long-term response to the major challenges that we face. Our co-operation agreement with Plaid Cymru commits to a statutory licensing scheme for holiday lets as part of a package of measures to address the negative impact second homes and short-term holiday lets can have on the availability and affordability of housing for local people in our communities. In July of this year, the First Minister and the leader of Plaid Cymru confirmed plans to introduce a statutory licensing scheme for all visitor accommodation, including short-term lets, making it a requirement to obtain a licence, with the aim of raising standards across the tourism industry.

    Prior to that, and over the course of the past year, we have been exploring and engaging with stakeholders how such a scheme could work in Wales. Contractors were appointed to undertake this work last year and they conducted interviews and focus groups with key stakeholders from local authorities, sector representative bodies and accommodation operators. They explored the benefits of such a scheme and the key considerations of how such a scheme could be taken forward and implemented here in Wales. A review of how other destinations globally approach such schemes was also taken into account. This initial work has shaped the consultation that the Government will look to be launching shortly.

    But first, Dirprwy Lywydd, I’d like to outline the aims and proposed benefits of such a scheme. The primary aim is to establish a level playing field for all visitor accommodation businesses operating in the sector. The concern around the lack of a level playing field has been a long-standing area of discussion. Specifically, there are concerns that certain parts of the sector, for example informal short-term lets, do not meet or comply with their statutory obligations, whereas established, bona fide businesses do. A statutory licensing scheme could provide the mechanism to address this through requiring operators to evidence that they have certain requirements in place, such as the correct insurance, confirmation of planning status, evidence of fire-risk assessment, gas safety certificate, proof of electrical safety, to list a few examples. This scheme will help to ensure that there is a consistent standard that all operators should meet. Having a scheme where visitor accommodation businesses must meet a certain threshold of requirements conveys a very clear message to consumers that visitor accommodation businesses in Wales meet certain requirements on standards and safety.

    A scheme would also give us enhanced intelligence—a comprehensive database, which is not currently available, of exactly who is operating in the industry. It is currently not possible to determine how many visitor accommodation businesses there are in Wales or in any given community. Understanding the scale and the nature of the sector will be an important tool in developing future policies at either a local or national level. Establishing a statutory database of licensed visitor accommodation businesses would give the Welsh Government and other partners, such as local authorities, a mechanism to communicate on key issues relating to the sector. We saw how challenging it can be to reach all parts of the sector through our recent experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic.

    We also recognise that a statutory licensing scheme will provide an important foundation for other policy areas. Having the information provided by such a scheme will provide data on the scale and nature of our tourism offer to inform policy considerations, locally and nationally, around evidence-led management of second homes, holiday lets and developing the visitor economy and infrastructure. It could also support the collection of a visitor levy. For the visitor levy, having a licensing system would provide a comprehensive list of all visitor accommodation providers in an area. This could support the ongoing administration of the levy, as those who will require a licence will likely be the same as those who will be required to charge and collect a levy. There are clear links between these proposals, and I would encourage contributions to the 12-week visitor levy consultation, which closes on 13 December.

    As I previously mentioned, in looking to establish a statutory licensing scheme, we’re also looking at similar mechanisms operational or in development across the world. In the UK, different approaches have been taken by our neighbours and are at different stages of development. In Northern Ireland, visitor accommodation providers must receive certification by Tourism Northern Ireland in order to operate, and this scheme has been in place since 1992. The Scottish Government has legislation in place requiring all short-term let hosts and operators to obtain a licence to operate, unless specifically excluded. Existing hosts and operators have until 1 April next year to apply for a licence in Scotland. And in England, the Department for Culture, Media and Sport recently closed a call for evidence on the potential introduction of a tourist accommodation registration scheme. The purpose of the DCMS consultation is to better understand the benefits and challenges of the increase in short-term and holiday letting in England, and to gather initial evidence on the potential impact of a range of possible policy responses. There are other examples too, such as the compulsory schemes operating in the Isle of Man and in the Republic of Ireland. We’re looking to learn from these various examples, including what lessons can be learnt from the Rent Smart Wales model in terms of developing our own scheme.

    Following a series of engagement sessions with key stakeholders over recent months, we will shortly be launching a formal consultation to seek views on the shape and nature of the proposed statutory licensing scheme here in Wales. Feedback on some of the aims underlying a proposed licensing scheme has been supportive, especially in relation to establishing a level playing field, developing better intelligence and increased consumer confidence. However, some concerns have been raised around the perceived regulatory burden that may accompany a licensing scheme. This includes the work involved in providing evidence of current use in relation to planning, and the role played by local authorities in meeting this demand.

    Both the Welsh Government and Plaid Cymru agree that a statutory licensing scheme offers the most robust mechanism for delivery in Wales, being an approach that sets a standard for visitor accommodation businesses to operate. However, the consultation will enable a range of views to come forward, including on the requirements of a licensing scheme. We’ll be seeking views on how such a statutory scheme could operate, be that nationally or at a local level, or a hybrid model combining elements of both. In addition, we’ll be looking to gather views on whether all visitor accommodation businesses should require a licence, or whether there should be any exceptions. We’ll also look to test how frequently licences should be renewed, and the licence fees that might need to be charged. In deciding on any fee structure, we are of course mindful of the pressures on businesses in the current climate.

    We believe that most people would want to operate within the law, therefore one of the aims is to develop a scheme that will ensure a high level of voluntary compliance. However, proposals for compliance and enforcement measures, including penalties, to ensure fairness will be tested at consultation. We will be launching the consultation in December and will be encouraging our stakeholders to engage in the process. Diolch yn fawr. I’m happy to take questions.

  • Rebecca Evans – 2022 Statement on Council Tax Premiums in Wales

    Rebecca Evans – 2022 Statement on Council Tax Premiums in Wales

    The statement made by Rebecca Evans, the Minister for Finance and Local Government in Wales, in the Welsh Parliament on 11 November 2022.

    On 24 May 2022, I announced the next steps being taken by the Welsh Government, following our consultation on local taxes for second homes and self‑catering accommodation. These steps form part of our plans to ensure property owners make a fair contribution to the communities where they have homes or run businesses. This work, in turn, contributes to the Welsh Government’s three-pronged approach to addressing the impact that large numbers of second homes and holiday lets can have on communities and the Welsh language.

    Following our consultation, the Welsh Government is of the view that properties let out as self-catering accommodation on an infrequent basis should be liable for council tax. We have therefore legislated to increase the number of days for which self-catering  properties must be available to let or actually let in order to be classified as non‑domestic. The new letting criteria will apply from 1 April 2023 and will ensure that self-catering properties are classed as non‑domestic only if they are being used for business purposes for the majority of the year.  We have also legislated to increase the maximum level at which local authorities can decide to apply council tax premiums to second homes and long-term empty dwellings to 300% from 1 April 2023.

    I recognise the strength of feeling among self-catering operators in response to the changes and have listened to the representations from individual businesses and industry representative bodies. We have considered whether further measures are needed to accompany the changes to the local taxes.

    The Welsh Government recognises that some self-catering properties are restricted by planning conditions preventing permanent occupation as someone’s main residence. The Council Tax (Exceptions to Higher Amounts) (Wales) Regulations 2015 were made to accompany the introduction of the discretionary powers for local authorities to apply council tax premiums and prevent specified types of second homes and long-term empty dwellings from being charged a premium.  These regulations already provide for an exception from a council tax premium for properties restricted by a planning condition preventing occupation for a continuous period of at least 28 days in any one‑year period.

    I am publishing today a technical consultation to invite views on the draft Council Tax (Exceptions to Higher Amounts) (Wales) Regulations 2023.  The draft Regulations extend the existing exception to apply to properties with a planning condition which specifies that the property may only be used for short term holiday lets or which prevents their permanent occupation as a person’s sole or main residence. Such properties would become liable for council tax at the standard rate if they do not meet the letting criteria for classification as non-domestic property but they could not be charged a premium. This is consistent with our policy view that property owners should make a fair contribution to local communities either through local taxation or through the economic benefit they bring to an area.

    It is intended the application date for introducing the extended exceptions will be 1 April 2023, in conjunction with the changes to the letting criteria and to the maximum council tax premium. It will therefore apply only to properties that become liable for council tax after 1 April 2023.

    I am also publishing a consultation on the revised guidance on council tax premiums for long‑term empty dwellings and second homes. This includes additional options that are available to local authorities in the event that self-catering properties restricted by planning conditions do not meet the letting criteria.

    The consultation on the draft guidance will run alongside the technical consultation for a period of 6 weeks. Responses are requested by 22 December 2022. All responses will be taken into account in considering any further developments.

    As part of the Cooperation Agreement with Plaid Cymru, we are committed to taking immediate action to address the impact of second homes and unaffordable housing in communities across Wales, using the planning, property and taxation systems. As we continue to progress the package of measures and drawing on the latest evidence base, we will keep under constant review the range of levers available to use and how they may be deployed most effectively to meet our policy objectives and avoid unintended consequences.

  • Dehenna Davison – 2022 Speech on the Death of Awaab Ishak and Rochdale Boroughwide Housing

    Dehenna Davison – 2022 Speech on the Death of Awaab Ishak and Rochdale Boroughwide Housing

    The speech made by Dehenna Davison, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities, on 24 November 2022.

    I thank the hon. Member for Rochdale (Tony Lloyd) for securing this incredibly important debate and for his heartfelt contribution. Seeing a case like this has shocked all of us right across the country. To have it happen in his constituency must feel incredibly personal, so I am grateful to him for raising it with the House today.

    I know that Members across the House and people right across the country were, and still are, completely horrified by the monumental failings that led to the death of a small boy before he even reached his second birthday. As Members have rightly highlighted, Awaab’s parents had repeatedly raised their concerns about the dire state of their home with their landlord, the local housing association Rochdale Boroughwide Housing, only for those multiple and repeated complaints to fall on deaf ears. Instead of acting on the clear evidence of damp and mould, Awaab’s family were given no choice but to raise their young boy in a mould-infested flat. Rochdale Boroughwide Housing’s failure to heed the family’s pleas—pleas made by Awaab’s father as early as 2017—was an awful dereliction of duty. If that failure in itself was not bad enough, the apparent attempts by Rochdale Boroughwide Housing to assign blame for the damp to the actions of Awaab’s parents were insensitive and deeply unprofessional.

    As was raised by the hon. Member for Bury South (Christian Wakeford), the comments about “lifestyle” were completely unacceptable. The housing ombudsman was absolutely right to squash that assertion, reiterating that damp and mould in rented housing is not a lifestyle issue. Members today have highlighted that prejudice. It is our duty, as Members of this House and as Government Ministers, to call out any behaviour rooted in ignorance and prejudice. I take this opportunity to extend my sincere thanks to the coroner, Joanne Kearsley, who undertook a vital public service in her meticulous piecing together of the facts behind this devastating incident.

    Nothing will bring back the life of Awaab, but this investigation has given us all a chance to deliver some small justice to the parents of this young boy and to enact reforms that help us provide the high-quality social housing that this country desperately needs. I know I speak for everyone when I say that blaming nuances and technicalities will not wash. What took place in Rochdale were monumental, inexcusable failings. As the Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities told the House last week, we have acted quickly and decisively off the back of the coroners’ findings and are continuing to push for urgent explanations and action from those involved.

    First, we demanded answers from the chair and the chief executive of Rochdale Boroughwide Housing. Much of the accountability clearly sits with the leadership of RBH. My right hon. Friend was spot on when he said that it “beggared belief” that the now former chief executive Gareth Swarbrick attempted to stay in post. While it is right that RBH recognised that the chief executive’s position was no longer tenable, the housing mutual still has serious questions to answer about the basic condition of its housing stock. My hon. Friend the Member for Heywood and Middleton (Chris Clarkson) said that even today he is still discovering new cases of terrible conditions within that housing stock. I would be grateful if he, and other Members with such examples, shared them with us in the Department.

    Tony Lloyd

    We are very much in the same place on this. What is astonishing is that, two years on from Awaab’s death, one would think that mould in these properties would be such a high priority that it would be hard to find. In fact, if the Minister walks around the estate with me or the hon. Member for Heywood and Middleton, she will see that mould is still there in huge quantities.

    Dehenna Davison

    The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right. If we can gather further examples of this, it will help us in the Department.

    Secondly, we have asked to see what concrete steps RBH is putting in place to immediately improve the living conditions of the tenants for whom they are still responsible. Thirdly, our ministerial team is planning to meet not only Awaab’s family but those who live on the Freehold estate to stress the fact that Government are in their corner. Fourthly, the Regulator of Social Housing is considering whether this landlord has systematically failed to meet the standards of service required to provide for its tenants. The hon. Member for Rochdale asked whether this would constitute an inquiry. I would not want to commit another Minister, given that this would fall within their brief, but I will take this away and raise it with them urgently, and I am happy to engage with the hon. Member further on that point.

    While our focus is absolutely on delivering justice for Awaab, all of us recognise that this is not an isolated incident; the problem is much bigger than one flat in Rochdale. As we gather here today, thousands of people across the country are stuck in homes that are not fit for human habitation. I believe the coroner spoke for everyone when she said that it was scarcely believable that a child could die from mould in 21st-century Britain. It was a damning statement that reinforced the urgent need for the kinds of reforms we have been working hard to get on to the statute book.

    The reforms we are bringing forward—measures designed to hold landlords to account and make sure their tenants are treated with fairness and dignity—can help us make Awaab’s death a watershed moment for housing in this country. And we are making progress. A fortnight ago, this House debated the Second Reading of the Social Housing (Regulation) Bill, which is designed to learn some of the incredibly painful but necessary lessons of the Grenfell Tower fire in 2017—a tragedy that shone a terrifying spotlight on the dreadful experiences of tenants in that tower block ahead of the fire.

    Grenfell tenants had spent years lobbying for basic changes to their building to make their homes liveable and safe. Their voices, like those of Awaab’s family, were kept on mute before disaster struck, so we set about making sure that that never happens again, with a strengthened housing ombudsman service to empower tenants by making sure their voices are truly heard. As part of that, we changed the law so that residents can now complain directly to the ombudsman, instead of having to wait eight weeks while their case was handled by a local MP or another designated person.

    It is one of the main jobs of the housing ombudsman service to make sure that robust complaint processes are in place, so that problems can be resolved as soon as they are flagged. In cases where landlords have clearly mistreated their residents, it can order landlords to pay compensation. If necessary, it can refer cases to the Regulator of Social Housing. Through the Social Housing (Regulation) Bill, we are strengthening the powers of the regulator, so that where there is a serious risk to tenants and the landlord has failed to take necessary action, it can issue unlimited fines to rogue landlords, enter properties with only 48 hours’ notice and make emergency repairs, with landlords footing the bill. The hon. Member for Rochdale asked about resourcing for the regulator. In this financial year, we have put in an additional £4.6 million to ensure that the regulator can operate, with more funding to come as we go further in designing how it will operate. I hope that provides him with some reassurance.

    But all the reforms in the world will be worth nothing if people do not know that they have rights to begin with. Awaab’s case, which never went before the ombudsman, shows that we can and must do more as a Government to promote this service and make sure it reaches those who need it. The Government have already run a nationwide “Make Things Right” campaign to raise awareness and tell social housing tenants how they can go about making complaints, and that has now reached millions of social housing tenants. We are working up another targeted, multi-year campaign, so that everyone living in the social housing sector knows their rights and knows how to exercise them. Where some providers have performed poorly in the past, they have been given plenty of opportunities to change their ways and start treating residents with the respect they deserve. I think that we are all in agreement that the time for empty promises has to be brought to an end.

    The Department will help to do that by naming and shaming those who have been found by the regulator to have breached consumer standards or who have been found by the ombudsman to have committed severe maladministration. I am sure that many hon. Members will have seen that that work is already well under way, with the Secretary of State writing to all local authorities over the weekend to set out the expectation that they will act quickly to resolve poor housing conditions in their area. He also separately wrote to all providers of social housing and made it abundantly clear that our expectation is that they will take all complaints about damp and mould seriously, act swiftly to rectify them, and be prepared to respond to a request from the Regulator of Social Housing on the extent of damp and mould issues.

    Finally, I will touch on standards. Although the pictures of damp and mould in social housing across the country leave us in no doubt that many properties fall well below the standards that we expect social landlords to meet, Awaab’s death has made it painfully clear why we must do more to better protect tenants. Our Social Housing (Regulation) Bill will bring in a rigorous new regime that holds such landlords to account for the decency of their homes.

    In the months ahead, we all have a chance to upend the appalling status quo and deliver a new deal for social housing tenants in the UK. I want to be clear that this is not about bashing all landlords and tarnishing them with the same brush—we have many fantastic landlords and housing associations in this country that treat tenants with the kindness and respect they deserve. It is about raising standards across the board and ensuring that every tenant has the chance to live in dignity.

    I echo the praise of the hon. Member for Manchester, Gorton (Afzal Khan) for the incredible work of the Manchester Evening News in raising awareness. As the hon. Member for Rochdale said at the end of his speech, we have to do everything we can to ensure that nothing like this ever happens again.

  • Tony Lloyd – 2022 Speech on the Death of Awaab Ishak and Rochdale Boroughwide Housing

    Tony Lloyd – 2022 Speech on the Death of Awaab Ishak and Rochdale Boroughwide Housing

    The speech made by Tony Lloyd, the Labour MP for Rochdale, in the House of Commons on 24 November 2022.

    I rise to speak in what is probably one of the saddest debates that I have had to take part in. It concerns the death of Awaab Ishak, a young boy whose tragic death was made more tragic by the fact that it should never have happened.

    In a way, it is easy on these occasions to look round for where for where responsibility lies, and I will do that in a few minutes, but I want first to record the dignity of Awaab’s family, who have made it very clear that all they seek is to ensure that this can never happen to another family or another child. I pay enormous respect to the family for precisely that level of dignity, and I stand with them even now, two years on from the death of their child, because of course a child is irreplaceable.

    We now need to ask what went wrong. On many occasions I have risen from these Benches and criticised the Government for funding lapses, but this case is simply not about funding. It is about a housing association that did not do its job. We know that some of the factors that led to the death were things that simply should never have happened.

    Afzal Khan (Manchester, Gorton) (Lab)

    I thank my hon. Friend for securing this important debate and for his tireless efforts. Awaab’s death was an avoidable tragedy, and I am sure that Members from across the House have casework where tenants in both the social and private rental sectors are too often left in terrible conditions similar to those that caused this incident. Will he join me, in thanking the Manchester Evening News for its important campaign with Shelter to bring back regulation on consumer standards for social housing? Does he also agree that we must strengthen the rights of all tenants, regardless of whether they are living in the social or private sector? Finally, does he agree—

    Madam Deputy Speaker (Dame Eleanor Laing)

    Order. I cannot hear what the hon. Gentleman is saying because he is facing away from the Chair. If he spoke to the Chair, we could all hear him.

    Afzal Khan

    I apologise, Madam Deputy Speaker. Finally, does my hon. Friend agree that, in view of this systemic failure, the whole board is in an untenable position and must go?

    Tony Lloyd

    I will deal with my hon. Friend’s initial points a little later, but on the question of the board, I do think that we now have to question the way it has operated. To allow the chief executive to cling on to his job until public pressure made that impossible is an indictment of those who sought to give him that cover.

    Christian Wakeford (Bury South) (Lab)

    Does my hon. Friend agree that, while it is welcome that Rochdale Boroughwide Housing has apologised, that is not good enough in these circumstances? It has admitted to making assumptions about lifestyles and therefore not dealing with the issue, which has cost such a young life and shows an inherent lack of leadership. The law has to be changed to make sure that landlords, both social and private, cannot ignore the health risks of damp and mould.

    Tony Lloyd

    Again, I agree with my hon. Friend. The reality is that blaming lifestyles in a case like this is ridiculous; we know that the things that went wrong go way beyond individual decisions and lifestyles.

    As I was about to say before my hon. Friend intervened, it is ludicrous to say to people that painting over mould is the answer. In my dim and distant youth, I lived in accommodation with mould, and when you walk into a building like that, you can feel it on your lungs. We know that children have much more sensitive lungs, so that combination cannot be blamed on lifestyle. The ventilation in the flat in this case was inadequate, but things could and should have been done about that. We know that the response of the housing association, RBH, was slow—as the hon. Member for Heywood and Middleton (Chris Clarkson) knows, RBH’s responses are customarily slow.

    Chris Clarkson (Heywood and Middleton) (Con)

    I thank the hon. Gentleman for securing this very important debate, and I agree that it is probably one of the more distressing debates that any of us has had to participate in. He has made an extremely important point: tenants repeatedly have to report issues to RBH, and sometimes those issues simply are not logged. In fact, I have an example from just today. Yesterday, I asked two members of my team to visit people who had made complaints about RBH. We wrote to RBH about those specific complaints, and today it acknowledged the complaints—which had been lodged four times by the tenant—and said that it had now opened a case. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that it is absolutely ludicrous that tenants are not being listened to by their housing association, and have to come to their Member of Parliament to get basic, decent housing standards?

    Tony Lloyd

    The hon. Member is absolutely right. Sadly, that kind of response—among other things—is what led to the death of Awaab; that failure to do the basics right is at the heart of what went wrong. I also had a response from RBH this week regarding a constituent, telling me that it had dealt with the mould problem in her property. One would think that at the moment, mould would be so high on Rochdale Boroughwide Housing’s agenda that it would be its No. 1 priority, yet the tenant has come back saying that far from the work having been done, the mould is still there. She has sent photographs to confirm that point.

    When the Ishak family went to a solicitor because they could not get justice directly through the housing association, RBH used a legal block, which automatically put a block on repairs. Most of us would regard a policy like that as ludicrous, but in this case it was more than ludicrous: it was dangerous. We know that many, many things went wrong, but the thing that probably got me most was that a letter from a health visitor was lost through bad IT. The health visitor recommended that the family be rehoused, yet that recommendation was never acted on. That is—well, people can choose their own words as to what it is, but it is pretty devastating.

    We know that many things have gone wrong. I say to the Minister that there needs to be an inquiry into RBH, even though we are two years on, because both the hon. Member for Heywood and Middleton and I are of the view that RBH is simply not up to the job that we expect of it. That is not a criticism of many of the staff there: it is a criticism of the most senior managers, and indeed of the board. We need an investigation; even in recent days, whistleblowers—former employees—have talked about a culture of cost cutting at every turn, of bullying, and of failure to prioritise repairs. There is also the question of whether racism was involved, either institutional or more deliberate. Things like that have to be investigated.

    This is not just a local issue. Mould does not exist just in homes and houses in the Rochdale borough; it is a nationwide problem, and we need nationwide solutions. The Secretary of State told us the other day that he believes that

    “there are at least 2.3 million homes that fail the decent homes standard”—[Official Report, 16 November 2022; Vol. 722, c. 714.]

    We have to do something about that. There are 800,000 homes with damp, of which 400,000 are in the social rented sector and 400,000 are in the private rented sector. It is a problem with social landlords and private landlords, and we have to deal with them both.

    As my hon. Friend the Member for Manchester, Gorton (Afzal Khan) says, we need to look at having an Awaab’s law to say that certain things must be done, including automatically treating mould as a potential health hazard. When mould or damp is reported, that should lead to an immediate response from the landlord. Anything else would be ridiculous. When the duty to repair comes in, there has to be a recognisable timescale. It is basic good housekeeping and we should put it on the statute book, because we know it is not happening. I can tell the House that it will be very popular, because 120,000 people have signed the petition that the Manchester Evening News has launched. I applaud those people and the MEN for taking up the case, and I applaud the fact that now the case has been raised, we are beginning to address the issues that the family want addressed.

    We also need to look beyond the immediate legal framework for housing associations. We have to ensure that if they fail to do the job we ask of them, other mechanisms will come in. Public health authorities, the local authority, the Regulator of Social Housing and other agencies all need to be involved. We have to ensure —this is a matter for the Minister and the Government—that they are properly resourced to do the job of controlling that we ask of them. We must not give them a legal duty and legal capacity unless we also give them the resource to undertake their role.

    One thing is bizarre. Supposedly, the Regulator of Social Housing is there to protect our interests by ensuring not only that housing associations are run with financial prudence, but that they conform to the standards that we expect. However, six months after Awaab died, the regulator did an in-depth assessment of Rochdale Boroughwide Housing. It gave RBH’s governance a G1—the best grade it can give, which is a little surprising —and said:

    “Based on the evidence gained from the IDA, the regulator has assurance that RBH’s governance arrangements enable it to adequately control the organisation and to continue meeting its objectives.”

    My goodness—I am glad that it is not in control of anything that affects me directly this very day.

    The regulator needs to up its own game. I say again to the Minister that we must give regulatory authorities the powers and the duties of the role that we need them to perform if housing associations and private landlords fail, but let us make sure that we give them the capacity as well. That means money, by the way, because without money we cannot employ qualified, competent staff.

    I turn to the role of the Secretary of State, who is in Rochdale today. It will be nice for him to hear this from someone on the Opposition Benches: I applaud the fact that he has been proactive in the days since the coronial inquest report. He has done a number of things that we all agree to be progress in the right direction, but I am a little uncomfortable about one thing, if I may say so.

    When the Secretary of State and I had an exchange in Parliament earlier this week, he spoke about the possibility of fines when housing associations go wrong. He was reported today as saying that he intends to take £1 million off RBH, from the affordable homes programme. It turns out that that may have been misreported, so perhaps it is important to set the record straight. I understand that what he proposes is simply that the money will be there for Rochdale but not for RBH; if so, I would be grateful if the Minister clarified that. Fining housing associations never seems to me to be the brightest way forward, because it penalises tenants. For residents in my constituency, it means repairs are not done and the homes they need are not available.

    Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—(Mike Wood.)

    Tony Lloyd

    It is rather nice to hear the chime of the Whips twice.

    The important point I was making is that fines do not do the trick, so I hope the Secretary of State and the Minister will think again, because there are other ways around this. For example, it is right and proper that we look at the role of the controlling mind—the senior officers. Clearly, we can have different responses.

    It is reasonable for the regulator, if properly structured, to be able to bring in disciplinary charges against senior managers. That is probably right because, as we know, the salary of the former chief executive went up to £170,000 a year at a time when the repair budget went down. It might have been sensible to consider cutting the salaries of senior officers on such occasions. When public money is involved, that is not an unreasonable proposition.

    In the end, it may well be that in the most egregious cases the criminal law should be involved, but not for the charge of corporate manslaughter, which is directed only at the organisation, so not properly at the controlling mind. I have always thought that was a weakness in such a proposition, because we need those who are in control and make decisions to concentrate on what needs to be done. Certainly, the investigation into RBH needs to take place. We then need to think about right and proper controls on the controlling mind. In the end, the structure of RBH is simply not up to it. It cannot be in anybody’s interests to have a faceless executive board that has no reference to the wider public.

    Let me share something with this packed Chamber. When I was about to complete my term as Mayor and police and crime commissioner of Greater Manchester, the chief executive of RBH approached me to see if I would think about taking on the role of chair of the board. Contemplate that: the chief executive instigating the appointment of the chair, who is responsible for discipline, pay and, ultimately, the hiring and firing of the chief executive. It is a very circular and dangerous little route, and I think we have to look at that structure, which is simply not fit and proper for the tenants we represent—the people of Rochdale. We must do better.

    There is a good case now for saying that the executive board has had its time and ought to go. Those on the board did not do the job that we expected of them. They did not scrutinise, and after Awaab’s death they did not insist on the kind of change that I would have expected. I have asked them for a timeline and have seen what they did, and frankly, it does not give them any cause for credit. In that context, we need to look at the temporary way in which that important housing association, which serves our community, is structured. In the longer run, the local authority has offered to take back control. That is supported not just by Rochdale Council’s controlling Labour group, but by the Conservative opposition group, and it certainly has to be looked at. In the end, the advantage of a council is that it has elected people, not faceless bureaucrats, and we can challenge and get rid of elected people.

    There has to be something about the tenants’ voice. There has to be something that allows tenants to have a voice that is amplified and heard, so that when things are going wrong, they can be dealt with and taken up.

    Those are a few semi-lengthy remarks. I could go on at greater length, but I will not. I will finish on this point: in the end, a little boy died. That is a little boy who should have been out playing in the streets, the parks or wherever in Rochdale, or wherever the family next move to live. That little boy should never have died. That little boy died because of an inadequate care of detail, and detail in this case really did matter. We must make sure it never happens again. Whether we call the legislation Awaab’s law or not—I hope we might think about doing that—is an open question. What I do know is that the only way we can say to the family that we have really learned the lessons, and not just as the formulaic words “We have learned the lessons”, is to show that we intend to take the actions that will make a permanent change so that this can never happen again.

  • William Clark – 1982 Parliamentary Question on the Right-To-Buy

    William Clark – 1982 Parliamentary Question on the Right-To-Buy

    The parliamentary question asked by William Clark, the then Conservative MP for Croydon South, in the House of Commons on 16 November 1982.

    Sir William Clark

    Is my right hon. Friend aware that with the recent 2 per cent. cut in mortgage interest, rates have come down by 5 per cent this year? Does she agree that in many cases it is cheaper for a council tenant to buy rather than to rent, which should be an added incentive for people to buy council houses?

    Margaret Thatcher (The Prime Minister)

    Yes. In many cases the discount permitted to council tenants and the tax relief on mortgage payments will mean that the net mortgage repayment is less than the rent that would otherwise have been paid. I hope that that fact will lead many council tenants to take the opportunity to purchase their houses under the right-to-buy legislation.