Security of Tenure in Social Housing

David Robinson

Centre for Regional Economic and Social ResearchSheffield Hallam University

Housing Studies Association, University of York, 15 April 2010

Overview

         Introduction          Problematising Security of Tenure          An Argument in Search of an Evidence Base          Security of Tenure in Action          The Price of Reform          Conclusion

Introduction

periodic convulsion in unbroken cycle of discussion and debate about the future of social housing

the revisionist perspective - social housing as terminal destination, promoting dependency - an agent of social exclusion

security of tenure at the root of the problem

a critique consistent with the dominant framework of welfare policy now installed in the UK

critique therefore 'sounds right'…but it does not stand up to close scrutiny

Security of tenure for council tenants in England and Wales was introduced by the 1980 Housing Act

Secure tenants have a right to stay in their accommodation for as along as they keep to the terms of the tenancy agreement with their landlord.

Housing Act 1988 introduced assured tenancies for housing association and housing cooperative tenants

grant similar rights to secure tenancies, the key exceptions being around the right to buy and how rents are set

Minor reforms introduced, but the right of a social tenant to a secure tenancy remains largely intact

Problematising Security of Tenure

welfare policy framed by a notion of social exclusion that foregrounds individual shortcomings and behavioural deficiencies and pays little attention to wider social or economic processes

emphasis on the enforcement of greater conditionality and the reduction or

outright removal of rights in a bid to break the dependency on welfare provisions

social exclusion constructed as a condition - an outcome - synonymous with welfare dependency and disengagement from labour market

a policy framework is invoked in which issues of inequality and disadvantage are addressed through a process of responsibilisation

Calls for end to security of tenure consistent with this progressive erosion of the welfare entitlement in favour of the promotion of individual responsibility

Revisionist Manifesto

Rethinking Social Housing, a report edited by Tim Dwelly and Julie Cowans and published in 2006 by The Smith Institute, a centre-left think-tank formed in memory of the former Labour Party leader John Smith

Restoring Pride in Our Public Services, a submission to the Shadow Cabinet by the Public Services Improvement Group, as part of the Conservative Policy Review, published in 2007

Rethinking Housing, the Chartered Institute of Housing's response to the Department of Communities and Local Government's housing reform programme, published in 2008

Housing Poverty - From Social Breakdown to Social Mobility, a report published in 2008 by the right of centre think-tank The Centre for Social Justice, founded by the former Conservative Party leader Ian Duncan Smith

Social housing - part of the problem of dependency

social tenancy = a mode of exclusion, creating dependency and undercutting personal responsibility

tenants have no experience of the consequences of their behavioural and financial actions

tenants hunker down and cling to one of the few 'assets' they possess

children learn how to get their own safety net: a social tenancy

aspirations are dampened and social mobility thwarted

life in 'dead-end ghettos' - trapped in vicious circle of deprivation

Destination Rather than Springboard

social housing failing to fulfil its potential as a support mechanism for the poor and vulnerable; a destination, rather than a launch pad (Stroud, 2010)

scarce resource allocated on a secure, long-term basis, based on an assessment of need undertaken at one particular moment in a person's life

sector becomes 'silted up' with households whose housing needs and personal vulnerabilities may no longer warrant the support of social housing

people in "genuine need" presenting to social landlords in search of help and assistance struggle to gain access to the sector

help with housing costs is necessary, but a secure tenancy is not

The Response

An end to security of tenure…

an opportunity to radically transform the social tenant into a competitive, independent, self responsible and morally autonomous individual

AND

to create a more flexible, responsive and effective social housing sector which serves as a springboard for social mobility a "dynamic resource, helping people to get on their feet and on with their lives",

which provides a "temporary home before private renting, moving on when possible to shared equity, or outright ownership" (Stroud, 2010, p7) - a pathway to self-sufficiency

An Argument in Search of an Evidence Base

the case for reform considered to be self-evident

lack of evidence to substantiate the charges levelled at security of tenure

the corrupting influence of welfare support which promotes reliance on the state and undermines individual responsibility accepted as a given

the presence of distinct subcultures in 'places of the poor' which socialise residents into behaviours that perpetuate poverty is presented as an uncontested truth

as is the inevitable outcome; an underclass, physically separated and distinct from the rest of society in terms of income, life chances and aspirations

BUT

no evidence that social housing = deterrent to work

social tenants appear to have a positive disposition to work

there is no evidence of cultures of worklessness on social housing estates

there is no evidence that a social tenancy is a disincentive to work and breeds dependency

there is no evidence that management of social housing impacts on levels of worklessness within the sector

(Fletcher, 2007; Fletcher et al., 2008; Robinson, 2008)

Security of Tenure in Action

Security = stability, safety and confidence

You see the thing with private housing is sometimes they say that someone else wants to have a look or someone else wants to rent, just let us come at short notice, then they want you to leave the house. When they give you this sort of trouble then in my mind I’m thinking ‘well I’m going to have to run from place to place’ and you see with the company [social landlord] now they’re not like that because as long as you continue to give them the rent they’re not going to throw you out, they’ll leave you there for as long as you carry on paying the rent. You see with the private landlords it’s all about their own choice, whenever they want to they can ask you to leave. I don’t’ think it’s very safe having a private landlord. (36 year old unemployed married man with one dependent child, Austin, Derby)

Security makes work possible

Interviewer So you’ve got experience of living in private rented accommodation and social rented, so what do you think, which is better in terms of thinking about getting work?

Respondent Well the thing is, now, in the housing that I’m in I’m settled so I can start thinking about working now. Now I don’t have to think about being thrown out, where am I going to go or anything like that, now I can focus on looking for work, working and then buying my own home. I think life’s better now. Now I can start thinking about working, about having an education, my children can be educated too. I can look for work.

Interviewer So if you were living in private rented accommodation do you think that your situation would be different in any way?

Respondent Then I think I’d just be thinking about the house, when am I going to thrown out, because in that situation they can take their home back whenever they like and there’s no safety then.

Security makes work more viable

It’s easier with – I’d probably say it’s easier security with the Council because they can be a bit lenient when you first go to work. Because of getting paid and that they can be a bit lenient. They can carry your housing benefit on and that for a bit until you get paid, and then you’re sort of – or they’ll say, ‘Pay half your rent for the first few weeks,’ and you’ll probably an extra tenner a week thereafter, you’ve caught up. But with a private landlord, you know, the only way you can talk to them with a shot gun and persuade him that way to say, ‘Look, can you just be a bit lenient, I’m starting work. You ain’t gonna get your full rent for a few weeks because I ain’t gonna get paid for so long’. And he’s gonna say, ‘No, I want it now, so there’s the door’.

The Price of Reform

ending security of tenure WILL have significant detrimental effects

the generation of a series of perverse logics that serve to distance people from work (Hills, 2007)

the potential to complicate (rather than simplify) the management of social housing….and the danger of a reinforced cycle of housing vulnerability and homelessness

possibility of increasing numbers of households being exposed to poor living conditions - i.e. channelling increasing numbers of people into the bottom end of the PRS

Conclusion

political manifestos shy away from more radical proposals for the reform of social housing

BUT…. likely to be respite positions, adopted in the run up to a general election and in the context of a major economic downturn

ending security of tenure would be consistent with the direction of travel on welfare reform (exemplified by the Welfare Reform Bill 2009, which received all-party support during its passage through both Houses of Parliament)

such a move would have serious social consequences