Where is the justice or common sense in continuing with the Right to Buy?

A young woman from Lithuania, 25 year old Judita Simkeviciute, has secured a three bedroom council house in an area where she has no local connection and where there is acute housing shortage for local people.

No, you haven’t accidently strayed onto the Daily Mail Online website.  In all regards, other than one fact, this is the sort of story that would normally outrage the good folk who run the Daily Mail.

The missing fact is that Ms Simkeviciute bought the former council house sold through the Right to Buy.

The house in question was first bought in August 1980 for £8,315 after the original tenants qualified for a 40% discount.  It has been sold on a further four times, in 2001 for £101,000, in 2004 for £145,000, in 2007 for £183,000 and now for £180,000.

I have always had a problem with the Right to Buy.  Having spent public funds building (and probably refurbishing) the property that the original tenants secured because of their housing need, how is it right that it can then be sold to achieve huge profits, a real case of something for nothing.

I understand the populism of this policy for the lucky few, but with one in three former council houses now part of the buy to let market, I do not understand the economic or justice arguments for continuing this policy.

Meeting housing need requires cross-authority co-operation in Sussex

Martin Randall, head of planning and public protection at Brighton and Hove City Council, has called on neighbouring authorities, including the South Downs National Park Authority, to help the region meet housing need.  I think Martin is absolutely right.  The National Housing Federation has said that the number of new homes needed in East Sussex alone is set to increase from 354,600 in 2012 to 434,000 by 2033.

Yet the National Housing Federation has reported that Sussex Councils have reduced their house-building targets for the next 15 years by 43%. In Mid Sussex the target has been reduced from 17,100 to just 10,600.

Neighbouring authorities may not like it, but the Brighton and Hove economy is the powerhouse within the region and the well-being of neighbouring authorities, including Adur, Worthing, Crawley, Lewes, Mid Sussex and others, depend on a balance provision of housing and jobs across all authorities.

Eastbourne Borough Council deserves praise, having increased its target from 4,800 new homes to 5,022, and Worthing which has maintained its 4,000 target.

Brighton and Hove, under successive administrations, has had vision regarding the provision of housing, its economic success and that of the sub region. Far from Brighton and Hove trying to push housing need onto neighbouring areas, as claimed by the leader of Crawley Borough Council, the City Council is doing what it can but wider co-operation is necessary if we are to meet the housing needs of our children and others, and for the ongoing success of the sub regional economy.

 

Opposing the demonising of homeless men and women and applauding the actions of Hastings Borough Council

This is the text of my letter published in today’s Hastings Observer in response to very unpleasant comments about homeless households published in a recent edition of the paper (“Residents furious as homeless move in” 19 October 2012):

“I write in support of the action taken by Hastings Borough Council in securing emergency temporary accommodation for homeless households in St Leonards.

“While the concerns of neighbours should be heard, several of the statements reported in the Observer do not reflect well on the majority of residents of the town.

“The demonisation of homeless people by a resident of Eisenhower Drive is particularly unbecoming. There is no evidence from any chartered surveyor body that property prices fall merely because people in housing need are accommodated in a nearby facility. And to suggest that homeless men and women might vandalise a new car is particularly sad and reflects badly on the individual. Homeless people far more likely to be the victims of crime than the perpetrators.

“I was heartened, however, by the comment of another resident who said: ‘One of our friends recently had their homes repossessed and he needed emergency accommodation.’ He is right. Homelessness is happening to people from all classes and backgrounds. Hastings Borough Council should be applauded for its actions.”

Digital and Financial Exclusion Deepens

My colleague, Marc, recently alerted my to a great offer from Brighton and Hove buses for regular bus users in the City. As a result of the introduction of smart cards, big savings can be made on the cost of fares. A day saver with a smart card is £3.20, from a shop in advance £4.00 and from the bus driver £4.40. A weekly saver is £15 with the smart card and £19 from a shop and the monthly saver is £58 with the smart card and £68 from a shop.

As a regular bus user (I’m one of those relatively rare individuals who not only doesn’t have a car, but I’ve never learned to drive), I certainly will be getting a smart card.

Now, contrary to appearances, this post isn’t a free plug for Roger French or Brighton and Hove Buses. It is a post about digital and financial exclusion. A few years ago the was some research that said that it costs those who are poor more than £1,000 per annum to pay for basic items than people like me who are not poor. It is known as the ‘Poverty Premium’. This is how it works:

If you are digitally and financially rich, you can advantage of shopping around on the Internet for the best gas and electricity deals, get discounts for paying by direct debit, and taking advantage of similar opportunities. Credit through my bank or mortgage company is cheaper for me than someone who has to take their chances with payday loan companies or worst still door step lenders. If I need a new cooker, I have the disposable income to buy one. If you have to use one of the infamous high street outlets, the cooker that would cost me £159 cash, will cost you £406 when charges and high interest rates are taken into account.

And now we have smart cards. I will, once again, benefit, from a daily saver that costs me £3.20 and some clients of BHT £4.40 from the driver.

The challenge for BHT, for Brighton and Hove Buses, for the City Council, is to find ways that we can overcome digital and financial exclusion. At BHT we are making available affordable Internet access for all out clients. Making it meaningful access is also a challenge, and overcoming financial exclusion is a major challenge. We are working closely with the City Council on its financial inclusion strategy, but my fear is that with reforms to welfare benefits and rising unemployment, the financial divide will grow.

It is pure lunacy to continue to allow sale of council houses, let alone double the subsidy

The government is proposing to double the subsidy on the sale of Council houses. This is pure lunacy, and will compound the housing problems in Brighton and Hove.

Social housing is there as a safety net for those in the greatest need. But such is the shortage of social housing, many people in need will never win this particular ‘lottery’. By allowing those who have been lucky enough to get council housing to buy their home with subsidy seems as though they are winning the lottery twice over.

But the real issue for me is the loss of housing for local people in housing need. Social housing is the one form of housing that is reserved to meet local housing need. There is nothing to stop someone who buys their council house from selling it to someone from outside Brighton and Hove. Fewer houses to meet housing need locally, potentially more people moving to the area.

Reduction in youth homelessness in Brighton and Hove will be undermined by cuts in housing benefit

In today’s world, it is great to celebrate a remarkable achievement. Youth homelessness in Brighton & Hove has fallen by almost 80 per cent as targeted initiatives prevent the city’s most vulnerable residents becoming homeless.  Highlights include initiatives that intervene early to help prevent family breakdown, a new supported housing project for teen mothers and tackling the underlying causes of youth homelessness such as mental illness, drugs or alcohol dependency.

 

Congratulations are due to all concerned, particularly Brighton and Hove City Council, whose Youth Homelessness Strategy action plan contained 76 actions, of which 69 have been achieved since January 2007, and seven partially achieved. 

At risk of souring the celebration, the fantastic achievements recorded above could be undone by the recently announced changes to Housing Benefit entitlement.  While young people are already restricted to a room in a shared house, the changes to entitlement would see those living in an ordinary room in a shared house in Brighton and Hove lose up to £13.09 per week from their housing benefit which they would be required to make up from their Job Seekers Allowance of £50.95.  This would leave them just £37.86 to live on – food, heat, light, clothes, and everything else.

 

It is likely that they will not make up all their rent, resulting in arrears and the possibility of eviction.  But for many, young and old alike, the prospects of securing private rented accommodation might become a lot more difficult.  As Chris Norris of the National Landlords Association said in the Telegraph on Saturday, “Landlords will have to look at their profit and loss and decide how much they can afford to cut their rents by.  If they are not going to do that, they will have to seek non-housing benefit tenants or sell up”.