Few would argue that public money should not be spent as efficiently as possible. Indeed, local government rightly prides itself on performing well on this front. But sometimes it lets itself down.
With plenty of councils evidencing the ever-worsening housing situation they face, there can be no justification for failing to maximise the benefit from their existing stock.
Research carried out by The MJ shows many London boroughs – where the housing crisis is most acute – are continuing to provide successful applicants on their housing lists with lifetime tenancies. And a similar picture is likely to exist nationwide. This is despite local authorities having the power to provide fixed-term tenancies.
The central reason someone is provided with social or affordable housing is because they can't afford private rents, but to act as if this will never change is frankly absurd.
Arguments for lifetime tenancies range from ‘people need to have housing security' to ‘very few in this housing will ever earn high salaries'.
To the first point, we don't provide low earners with ‘security' from higher taxes in the future. To the second, most people on modest – let alone high – incomes have to survive the private system and if this argument was valid 7,278 homes would not have been sold via Right to Buy last year.
Many councils are moving towards a wider mix of housing options, with intermediate homes particularly popular. Here, if your income exceeds the eligibility threshold, the rent will be increased to market rate with a view to you moving on. The same should plainly apply to all social and affordable housing to ensure that the most in need benefit. Or, at the very least, the rents could be increased to raise more revenue to invest in more housing.
No doubt there are reasons why this would be difficult, but it is not impossible. And, if we are desperate for more social and affordable housing, then we are desperate, meaning every property matters and all avenues should be pursued.
Reputationally, I'd wager most people think those provided with council housing become ineligible if your circumstances improve. They will assume councils are forking out huge sums on temporary accommodation because they have no other options. How would they respond to the sector's approach to lifetime tenancies?
Analysis: Are boroughs doing enough to fix London's housing crisis?
