The Grenfell Tower tragedy of 2017 lifted the veil from over the abundant problems in the Social Housing sector; where a resident warning about serious fire risk within the building was labelled a “troublemaker” by the housing management, and a year later, found himself having to escape with his life in a fire that caused 72 bereavements. The green paper on social housing following the Grenfell Tower incident found “an imbalance in the relationship between residents and landlords”, wherein residents felt stamped on, overlooked, and frequently dismissed or disrespected; many reporting “very poor” experiences in trying to acquire the services their landlords legally owed them. A clear need was hence denoted by the green paper, to improve the degree of “choice and protection” offered to Social Housing tenants, in relation to garnering such services.
It follows that social housing is an issue primarily affecting ethnic minority groups. English Housing Survey 2020-2021 estimated that social housing makes up 17% of all housing (4 million houses in England), with the vast majority of social housing occupants being Black & Minoritised people. White British households, it was found, are less likely to rent social housing than all other ethnic groups combined. Whereas, within minoritised communities, it was established that a large proportion of each demographic occupies social housing; ranging from 7% (Indians) and 10% (Chinese), to as high as 40% (Black Caribbean) and 44% (Black African). The process of improving social housing is thus the tangible improvement of the living conditions and safety of Black, Brown, and other minoritised communities; but this is a process that has been criticised for being “torturously slow.” Indeed, the recent Twinnell House fire – which ravaged a residential tower block in Easton, Bristol – demonstrates the impedance of health and safety regulations. Easton itself contains a high proportion of Black and Minoritised residents, at 37.9%; compounded by Twinnell House residents feeling “completely ignored” by authorities, the tragic fire shows how lacklustre regulations continuously impact Black and Minoritised communities disproportionately.
As a brief outline of the unhurriedness of this process, since the occurrence of the Grenfell tragedy in 2017, it took over two years for the government to form a policy response to the 2018 green paper, and two more for the guidance documents and white papers to culminate in long-awaited legislation. Therefore, in the five year wait for adequate social housing reform, the impatience and criticism of stakeholder groups and activists has grown; resulting in increased levels of scrutiny for the 2022 parliamentary efforts to put social housing reform into law, from which the long-awaited Social Housing (Regulation) Bill, awaiting examination in the committee stage on September 26th, will not be immune.
Social Housing (Regulation) Bill [HL]
First introduced in Parliament on June 8th 2022, the Bill attempts to enact the two-fold aims of the social housing white paper (increasing protection for tenants and empowering them against landlords) through three core mechanisms;
Broadening the Remit and Powers of the Regulator of Social Housing (RSH)
Derived straight from the white paper, the Bill empowers the RSH to have increased powers such as carrying out immediate inspections, enacting emergency remedial action at the monetary expense of landlords, and issuing improvement plans that landlords are obliged to carry out.
Strengthening the Consumer Feedback Regime
The Bill creates an obligation for the RSH to set up an Advisory Panel composed of tenants, stakeholders, and shareholders within the social housing sector that will provide advice and information to the RSH about the impact of its decisions. Moreover, the Bill legally codifies the increased powers the Housing Ombudsperson was granted in practice in 2020; of improved complaint handling.
Increasing Transparency
The Bill creates an information-sharing process derived from the Freedom of Information Act 2000, that housing associations (unlike councils) were not previously subjected to. This calls for full information on facilities, services, and other features of the property to be disclosed to tenants; as well as publishing and disclosure of social housing management costs and executive salaries.
While these mechanisms are positive responses to the complaints coming from within the social housing sector, it is unclear whether they will be enough to satisfy those complaints entirely. As the Bill awaits Parliamentary scrutiny, the two points for public consideration are:
a. How impactful will these new mechanisms be?
Inarguably, many of the clauses of the Bill will affect significant change, such as the ‘Ofsted-style’ inspections and remedial powers granted to the RSH; but other concessions granted to social housing tenants in the Bill feel, five years after the Grenfell Tower tragedy, like too little too late. The “transparency” mechanisms within the Bill, for example, have been criticised since they were introduced within the government’s ‘Social Housing Regulation: Draft Clauses’ in March 2022; with stakeholders questioning what difference they would make when very similar transparency measures already exist, and the RSH and Housing Ombudsperson both have different lists and procedures for publicising the shortcomings of social housing managers, while rarely inducing any change. An example of the futility of ‘naming and shaming’ is an instance in May 2022 of Housing Secretary Michael Gove taking to twitter to admonish Clarion, the UK’s largest social landlord, for maladministration. The public reprimand was made, but what liability or implication could this be said to have had for Clarion? Such ‘transparent’ criticisms have shown little evidence of driving change within many organisations.
Similarly, the potential effectiveness of the Bill’s increase in consumer feedback can be called into question. For example, one of the steps the government has taken as part of the 2022 package of reforms, derived from the social housing white paper, was the creation of a Social Housing Quality Resident Panel in March-April 2022; allowing 250 social housing residents to apply and take part in six meetings over the next year to voice their concerns on social housing. There have clearly been steps taken to ensure a representative panel but being that 53% of it is comprised by white people who only make up 16% of rented social housing in England, the execution is still unequal and problematic. Representation is crucial in ensuring the voices of those most impacted are part of the conversation.
Moreover, the reality is that the panel members have been allocated a set number of discussion topics they can formally explore; and many pertinent problems integral to the social housing discourse, such as waiting lists and the construction of new housing, have been excluded from the panel’s agenda. To exemplify the practical implications of this – the West of England alone needs to see an increase of 105,500 houses in the next ten years, proportionate to population growth, including social housing (BSWN Housing Report 2020); yet the panel on social housing has been barred from talking about expansion.
“It’s almost like saying ‘here’s something, we’re doing something – please leave us alone.”
- Rob Gershon (Social Housing Tenant and Commissioner at Shelter)
b. What more should be done?
The Social Housing (Regulation) Bill has numerous positive considerations, but on their own, they are not enough. This is particularly true when it comes to ensuring the physical and material safety of social housing (particularly Black and Minoritised) occupants. In the aftermath of the Covid-19 pandemic and the current cost-of-living crisis, and the resulting increase in private rents and energy, the need for social housing will only increase for many, putting further pressure on the sector. Private rental rates have seen an annual increase of 12.9% and as cost-of-living pressures build, renters will be looking to balance the combined impact of rental and running costs as they make home-moving decisions. With potential social rent increases of 11% next year in line with recent Bank of England forecasts, a rent cap on social housing is crucial. However, this must be viewed as part of a policy, not a whole one.
Housing associations and local authorities need income in order to manage and repair social homes and build new ones. If the government is to reduce their incomes, through rent caps, it must fill the resulting hole in their finances through financial investment. The need for energy-efficiency measures to curb emissions and keep bills down make the need for investment all the more pressing. As well as ensuring that social housing providers do not lose out as a result of short-term rent controls, the government must scrap the benefit cap and address problems in the private sector, such as no-fault evictions.
The one advantage the Bill does have, that most bills at this early stage in the Parliamentary process do not, is that it is almost guaranteed to pass, given the years of build-up leading specifically to this one legislation that results from the four-year-old, post-Grenfell green paper; and the public and political pressure that has mounted for a long time to see it enacted. Thus, there is a dire need in the present moment for political momentum to continue mounting for other legislations that must crucially be passed alongside the Social Housing (Regulation) Bill for any meaningful change in the “leveling up” sector to actually be seen.
For example, where the Social Housing (Regulation) Bill does little more than appoint a mandatory ‘health & safety lead to social housing management bodies; the Healthy Homes Bill currently in Parliament adequately addresses all the fire, climate, and crime risks that threaten the safety of a home – yet it does not have any of the same guarantees of reaching assent; even in a housing market where one in six ethnic minority families live in category 1 hazard under the housing, health, and safety rating system, and often do not have the protection of so much as a fire alarm (RDA 2019; BSWN 2020). Councillors, MPs, and members of the Executive thus need to lobby for the greatest extents of reform possible and popularise the narrative that the Social Housing (Regulation) Bill is not the final step in drawing a line under the response to the problems in social housing that Grenfell Tower exposed – but the first step in an endeavor towards safe housing.