Examination of Witnesses (Questions 360-379)
MS JANET
HUNTER, MR
LAURENCE MOFFAT,
MS FIONA
BOYLE AND
MS CAROL
O'BRYAN
15 JUNE 2004
Q360 Chairman: You have heard nothing?
Ms Hunter: We were of the view
that it was scheduled for the spring of this year, so I suppose
that gives us another seven days. It has made tentative beginnings
but, as far as we are aware, no substantive work has been undertaken
on it and we would like to see that. The scheme has now been in
operation for three and a half years and it requires that kind
of substantive review.
Q361 Mr Bailey: Can we just go on to
the House Sales Scheme. What views have you got on the proposals
contained in the DSD consultation document on the House Sales
Scheme?
Ms Hunter: We very much welcome
the review which has been undertaken of this scheme. Obviously
working with the type of client group which we do, which is very
often people without a home, we are very conscious of the need
to balance the aspirations of people to be home owners and the
aspirations of those who quite simply want a home. We feel that
up until now this scheme has not been balanced. The details of
the scheme we are largely fairly happy with, I think it includes
almost everything which ourselves and other organisations in the
voluntary sector have probably called for. We are very glad that
we appear to have been listened to. The issues which we would
have remaining with the scheme are probably around the level of
discount. It would be our view that the discount level proposed,
the maximum discount level of 24,000, is still very generous.
The document does not go into the details or the rationale as
to why 24,000 has been chosen as the preferred level and we would
like to hear that rationale, we are not sure why 24,000 has been
chosen. It does seem very generous and it is still more generous
than England, Scotland or Wales, as far as we are aware, and yet
market values here would probably be slightly lower than some
of those areas and it would appear to be a significantly greater
discount than has been afforded in other areas, such as England,
Wales and Scotland. We would like to see the discount level reviewed
again. The other concern we would have about the scheme, and maybe
this is more about clarification and in our response we will be
asking for this, is that in the scheme which has been produced
there seems to be insufficient precision about the exemptions,
which properties are going to be exempt. It does talk about sheltered
housing and it is very closely modelled on the wording which would
have been used in the previous Housing Executive scheme but, of
course, this is now a scheme that we are talking about rolling
out to include housing associations as well and housing associations
would manage quite a lot of what we would call supported housing.
We are very unclear. I do not think it is in that document as
to how supported housing would be treated. Those sorts of details
need to be ironed out before the scheme is introduced because
that will be very important and it is best to have clarity from
the beginning than to leave it up to a court to decide on a case
by case basis as to whether a property is eligible to be treated
under the House Sales Scheme. Those would be our concerns about
the details of the scheme, that we need a bit more detail on exemptions
and also the discount is too generous. There are obviously broader
concerns about ultimately what will the impact of this scheme
be, bringing housing associations in under the House Sales Scheme,
what impact will that have on their ability to deliver the new
build programme that Fiona talked about earlier. As you are all
well aware, the housing associations are nearly almost all sole
providers of new build. Our understanding is that there is some
nervousness amongst the lending institutions about what extending
house sales to housing associations will do to their credit rating.
Will they still consider them such a good investment? There is
also the ultimate impact of what the department is going to have
to pay out in voluntary purchase discounts because they have to
repay all the discounts to the housing associations. Our understanding
is that comes out of the amount of money that has been allocated
for the housing programme, so if that increases mathematics would
tell me that that decreases the amount of money that is available
for new build. Maybe it is not as simple as that but I think that
needs to be looked at very, very closely. We do not want to get
into a situation where so much money has been paid back to compensate
the housing associations for the discounts offered that there
are insufficient funds to meet and produce the number of new homes
that we need.
Q362 Chairman: You talk about the impact
on housing associations and one of the issues that we picked up
in a Northern Ireland context is that there are a lot more smaller
housing associations than would be the case in GB. If you have
a house sales policy which could impact more because you have
got small housing associations, do you feel that some of those
housing associations could be under threat? Are there too many
housing associations? Should they merge? Are there concerns in
terms of the sector itself could be vulnerable?
Ms Hunter: I think it is a very
real threat to the smaller housing associations that the impact
of house sales could be it is no longer feasible for them to operate
independently and that could ultimately lead to what some people
might term rationalisation of that sector.
Q363 Mr Bailey: Can I turn to the privately
rented sector now and I will roll a couple of questions into one
for brevity's sake. First of all, what contribution do you think
the private rented sector can make to meet the needs of the homeless?
Secondly, are you satisfied that the recently published strategic
framework on "Renting Privately" contains appropriate
measures to ensure that, where the private rented market is used
as an alternative to social housing, the accommodation is of an
appropriate standard?
Ms Hunter: The private rented
sector is a tenure of increasing importance in Northern Ireland,
as I am sure you are aware. It covers a broad spectrum of both
properties and practices, right from the luxury end of the market
to much poorer quality accommodation and we would have to say
the clients we deal with on a daily basis do not tend to live
at the luxury end of the market, so you will appreciate my comments
will be coming from the perspective of those who live in the poorer
quality accommodation. You will be well aware from the evidence
you have heard previously that in general the private rented sector
does have much poorer quality housing with higher levels of unfitness,
much greater levels of disrepair, than in the social rented sector.
There are also much poorer management standards and that is important.
It is not just the physical characteristics of the building, it
is also the standards of management and, again, there are great
variations in practice there. There are very good examples but
also very bad examples. In that context there are concerns about
both management and maintenance standards at the lower end of
the spectrum, which is ultimately where most homeless people would
find themselves, they are unlikely to be accessing the luxury
end of the market. What the private rented sector has, which I
think is positive, is that it offers a degree of flexibility which
is not as obviously available in the social sector and quite often
it can also offer people the opportunity to live in a mixed community
whereas the majority of social housing will be quite polarised.
If people genuinely want to live in a mixed community sometimes
that option is more readily available in the private rented sector.
Those are the positives, if you like, but there are a lot more
negatives I would have to say. Firstly, there is an issue about
accessing the private rented sector for homeless people. Very
often the practice is that landlords require rent in advance or
substantial deposits which often people on low income are unable
to provide. We do have a number of rent guarantee tenancy deposit
schemes operating in Northern Ireland but they do not offer comprehensive
coverage. What we would like to see is something similar to what
is just being introduced in the Housing Bill in England and Wales,
which is some kind of protection for the tenancy deposit schemes
to try and overcome that hurdle of access for people. The other
issue for homeless people when they go into the private rented
sector is really about an ability to sustain those tenancies.
A major issue for our clients would be around affordability. About
a quarter of all the enquiries we receive from people around the
private rented sector is about affordability and that is linked
very closely to Housing Benefit and the administration of Housing
Benefit. It is a serious issue for us. The levels of benefit which
are being paid in Housing Benefit very, very often do not meet
the actual rent which is being charged and there is a reliance
then on a discretionary housing allowance which the Housing Executive
have discretion over whether or not to pay in the first place
and how long they will pay it for. What we find is that very often
people who are unable to access that discretionary allowance very
quickly fall into arrears and they lose the tenancy. That can
lead to a situation where if they present as homeless they are
treated as intentionally homeless because they have lost their
property because of rent arrears but they are simply not able
to make up the shortfall from the income that they have. The issues
of Housing Benefit and the levels of Housing Benefit and general
affordability in this sector are the real issues for homeless
people going into this sector. Another important issue is that
in the private rented sector, there is very limited security of
tenure by and large, a lot of it depends on the individual relationship
between landlord and tenant and the tenancy can be very quickly
brought to an end. In many cases that is not a long lasting solution
for people, it is more of a stopgap. That does largely depend
on the relationship between them and the landlord. One of the
initiatives which we would be quite keen to see introduced is
some kind of mandatory arbitration, mediation scheme between landlords
and tenants. A significant amount of our enquiries are about a
breakdown in the relationship between the landlord and the tenant
and at the moment there is very little recourse to resolve that
dispute, it generally means the tenancy does come to an end. We
would like to see something like the Private Residential Tenancies
Board which is operating in the Republic of Ireland at the moment
on a mandatory basis. I know this is something which the department
have said they will consider piloting on a voluntary basis, and
that is very welcome in itself, but we would say on a voluntary
basis it will not work, just as the licensing of houses in multiple
occupation did not work on a voluntary basis. On a voluntary basis
you will only get the good landlords coming to the table and they
are not the people we need to target. The last point I would make
about the appropriateness of the private rented sector for homeless
people is around access to support that Carol alluded to earlier.
Very often there are support issues for people who are homeless
and it is obviously much more difficult to access those kinds
of support services if you are living in the private rented sector
rather than the social rented sector which is quite closely controlled.
There is a trend recently for an increasing number of people for
whom English is not the first language to live in the private
rented sector and there is an issue for them in terms of accessing
services, even knowing that services are available. I think the
short answer is no. There are positives but there are grave concerns
about the private rented sector as a genuinely attractive alternative
to the social rented sector. Do you want me to touch very briefly
on the adequacy of the strategy on the private rented sector which
has just been produced?
Q364 Mr Bailey: Yes.
Ms Hunter: We would welcome the
production of the document and we would particularly welcome the
fact that it has come out of the joint document between the department
and the Housing Executive, who are obviously two key players.
It is very important that they are working in a co-ordinated fashion.
There has been a commitment that the strategy will be taken forward
by an implementation group and, again, we would like to see that
up and running as soon as possible. We think it will be helpful
in tackling the worst conditions in the sector but the legislation
which is proposed is focusing on statutorily unfit properties,
so it is absolutely the worst. We think it will be effective in
tackling those and also better enforcement for the repairing obligations
that are around in the private rented sector. Where we think it
falls short is probably the fitness standards which are being
used are fairly basic. They are still those that were included
in the 1992 Housing Order which are basic amenities. You can live
in a house which is statutorily fit and still it can be a real
health and safety hazard. For example, it does not look at things
like defective electrical wiring. We think in the 21st century
those standards are not really adequate. You will probably be
more familiar than I am with the new system which is now being
introduced in the Housing Bill in England and Wales, which is
the housing health and safety rating system. We would like to
see the potential for the application of that higher standard
to Northern Ireland because the standard which we have got is
not adequate.
Q365 Mr Bailey: My third question was
going to be on the issue of Housing Benefit, private sector rents
and homelessness, which I think you have pretty well covered.
Is there anything you would like to say on that issues which you
have not covered so far?
Ms O'Bryan: As Janet was talking
I was reflecting on some of the issues that had affected some
people we would be working with who have moved out of temporary
accommodation into the private rented sector and were threatened
with homelessness, not necessarily because of the issue around
the discretionary Housing Benefit, although that is a real issue
for folk, but around the administration of the basic Housing Benefit.
One woman we were working with who was visually impaired, so moving
her to her own accommodation meant a lot of time and effort from
ourselves, from housing, from health and social services to orientate
her to her new dwelling and her new geographical environment,
because of the inadequacies in managing the administration of
her Housing Benefit was going to be made homeless. I use that
as an example. The energy that went into trying to stabilise that
situation to make sure that did not happen, and it hung over that
woman for a good two or three months as to what was going to be
happening to her, shows another part of it. There are issues around
the general administration that I would want to reinforce of Housing
Benefit.
Ms Hunter: Just one final thing
I would like to add is that somebody once said that there is a
lot of talk about preventing homelessness and the one thing that
could probably do more to prevent homelessness than any other
thing is to review and reform the Housing Benefit system. Certainly
from the experience of our clients, on a daily basis we deal with
people who are losing their homes precisely because of the situation
which I described earlier. It seems to me to be an area where
government policies are conflicting. Obviously there is a desire
to keep the Housing Benefit bill down, but at the end of the day
is it really value for money to the public purse if the result
is that people are being made homeless and have to be put up in
temporary accommodation for long periods. That is not something
which you can make a superficial judgment on, it is a very serious
issue. I do not think it is something which the government can
continue to ignore and duck, serious research needs to be undertaken
into that, the link between Housing Benefit, the regulations and
also the administration of Housing Benefit and its ultimate impact
on homelessness. If that link is as strong as the experience of
our clients would suggest, and I acknowledge that we are dealing
with a particular end of the market, would it not make better
economic sense to make some changes to the Housing Benefit system
so that the private rented sector could be a viable alternative
for these people?
Ms Boyle: Can I mention one example
in relation to young people. In Foyer's, what we are trying to
do is get young people out of the homelessness trap by encouraging
them into education and training so that they can then afford
the private rented sector. The current 16 hour rule means that
young people cannot study full-time. That 16 hour rule within
Housing Benefit restricts their ability to get their qualifications
and get back into the housing market. Just following on from what
Janet was saying about the dichotomy between the policy and the
practice, that is one example for young people.
Chairman: We started to touch on standards
and I know my colleague, Mr Luke, has got some questions on standards.
Q366 Mr Luke: We have touched on the
private rented sector standards but this is a more general question.
In a previous evidence session, witnesses to whom we have put
the question of overall standards have generally favoured the
introduction in Northern Ireland of a Decent Homes Standard similar
to that that has been introduced in other parts of the UK. One
of the issues raised in this discussion is, given the lower level
of poor quality housing in Northern Ireland relatively speaking,
would that standard be exacting enough for the circumstances in
Northern Ireland?
Mr Moffat: I will try to answer
the question. Obviously the question of quality of housing is
fundamentally important and as part of that the question of standards
has to be fundamentally important. We are in favour of raising
standards. The fitness standard is a pretty basic standard, as
Janet has already said, and the Decent Homes Standard is a bit
higher than that, so we would support a move in that sort of direction
that focuses on not just fitness but amenities and also the question
of thermal comfort, the question of health and safety, even questions
of efficiency, for example, the efficient use of energy, eco questions,
conservation type questions. We are in favour of moving in that
direction. I think you have already suggested that the standard
of our stock here is probably lower than it is in England or Wales
or Scotland and, therefore, it may not be appropriate in the short-term
to follow the exact details of what is happening across the water
but I think we are in favour of moving in that direction. That
would be our general position on that matter, we want to move
in the direction of improving standards and improving the quality
of our stock and that is an important matter to all of us.
Q367 Mr Luke: Thermal comfort is something
that we discussed earlier. Thermal comfort is a bigger issue in
Scotland than it is in England, I do not know about the comparison
with Northern Ireland, it is warmer here than in Scotland. In
your response you talk about looking at the introduction of much
more efficient and effective heating systems. You may be aware
of the Scottish Executive's initiative to introduce a heating
for all programme, especially targeting the elderly. Is that something
that could be introduced here in Northern Ireland?
Mr Moffat: I am not familiar with
the details of the Scottish Executive's proposals, therefore I
am at a bit of a disadvantage in answering that. Basically what
we are saying is we want to see the standards improved. The fitness
standards have served us well over the years but we want to see
them further improved. Anything that does that, any recommendation
that you make in that direction, we would probably support. We
want to move in that direction. Can I add something else to that.
Particularly we welcome the focus on the whole question of quality
because quite often it is ignored in favour of things like supply
and legislation for the homeless, and so on and so forth. We welcome
the focus that you have put on quality here, we think it is a
fundamentally important issue. I just wanted to make that point
to you.
Q368 Mr Swire: You will be aware of Shelter
Northern Ireland's concern about the transfer of new build and
I wondered if you thought that a mixed funding regime was compatible
with ensuring high build standards in the social sector?
Mr Moffat: I suppose it depends
on what the rate of grant funding from the department is, I would
imagine. If the department had a policy of pushing it down then
I think there are going to be difficulties with regard to the
quality of the stock that is ultimately delivered. There is some
evidence that suggests that contemporary association dwellings
tend to have a lower space standard, for example, particularly
outside and their environmental works are of a lower quality than
used to be the case with Executive built dwellings. I cannot say
whether that is the case or not but I have heard Executive staff
say that to me. There is a general concern that mixed funding
could lead to a situation where the quality of the stock is lowered
but it depends where you place your rate of support from the department
itself. This is something that the local associations themselves
could discuss in more detail than we can.
Q369 Mr Luke: I want to cover two areas
which I have been involved in for some time. In an earlier role
I was for 18 years on a planning committee in Scotland on a local
authority and I was convenor of a housing committee in Dundee
for about seven years. One of the questions reverts back to the
earlier provisions for homelessness. In Scotland, the UK, the
local authority is the primary provider and strategic body involved
in the provision of housing. Given that you have got the Housing
Executive here and the local government plays a lesser role in
housing, is it a good thing or a bad thing that there is no local
government involvement?
Mr Moffat: I would say that is
essentially a political question. Personally, I think the establishment
of the Executive was a very good reform and I would be very supportive
of it. I think they have done a good job, they have brought professionalism
and focus on housing need. They took the debate out of the whole
arena of sectarianism in as much as they could do it and that
allowed us to focus the debate on housing need, which is what
we are doing here. If you look back at old newspapers, the whole
focus was on Protestants getting more than Catholics and vice
versa, but we have got beyond that now. It is not clear to me
what the advantage would be in transferring housing to local authorities.
At the end of the day it seems to me the question is what is the
need? How do you measure the need? How do you meet the need? How
do you allocate your dwellings? How do you manage them? That is
a professional issue and it should be done by a professional body.
Q370 Mr Luke: In Scotland I would be
the first port of call as a local councillor for homeless people
in many cases. I do not know what the equivalent is in Northern
Ireland. Who has the major role in advocating the rights of the
homeless? Is it the local council?
Mr Moffat: The first port of call
here is the Housing Executive district office or the Homeless
Advice Centre headquarters. You must remember, although we make
a lot of noise we are actually very small, we are talking of a
million and a half people, equivalent to somewhere the size of
Yorkshire for example. You could argue that Northern Ireland is
not much more than a large local authority area anyway. On the
homeless question, the first port of call here is to the Executive.
It could be to Simon, but if you are talking about the statutory
first port of call you are talking about the Housing Executive.
Ms Hunter: I just wondered were
you talking about who acts as an advocate on behalf of a homeless
person.
Q371 Mr Luke: Yes.
Ms Hunter: I would just like to
reassure you that even though our elected members are not directly
involved in allocating or managing housing, they are still very,
very effective advocates. A lot of people as their first port
of call, if they were unhappy or unsure what to do, very often
would go to their local Assembly Member or their local councillor.
If you speak to any elected member or any councillor in Northern
Ireland I think most of them will tell you that most of their
constituency enquiries are about housing, it is still right up
there, even though they are not directly involved. There are some
that would say you could be a more effective advocate if you are
slightly removed from the decision making process. It is not that
they are not involved, they are still very much involved but not
directly involved in the management or allocation.
Mr Moffat: Can I just add that
they do have a statutory involvement through the Housing Council
who have to be consulted and obviously they like to present their
case in terms of their own party or in terms of the local authority
with regard to policy to the Executive or the department directly,
so they are involved at that level anyway. What Janet says is
true, of course. I used to work in a councillor's local office
so I know quite a lot of housing cases come in or come in to advice
centres run by voluntary organisations.
Ms Hunter: They do have a very,
very genuine interest in housing and I think that was very apparent
when the Assembly was operating locally, the whole issue of housing
was moved right up the agenda.
Q372 Mr Luke: It is one of the reasons
we embarked on this inquiry, to keep the Assembly going. Turning
to planning, we have had some discussion that the planning model
is different from the British model and English model, it is different
from the Scottish model, but how would you like to see the planning
system used here in Northern Ireland to encourage or require the
delivery of sufficient numbers of affordable and social housing
in Northern Ireland? Are there any changes that you would like
to see made, any improvements?
Mr Moffat: I think I have been
given the short straw on this one! I would like to make a specific
point first of all. We did make a suggestion in our own submission
to you that there should be a look at the role of the planning
service regarding the delivery of public sector programmes. A
former minister, Des Browne, did send a letter to the former Lord
Mayor of Belfast, Councillor Maskey, stating that there are possibly
some planning problems associated with the delivery of the public
sector programme. We do not know what they are and that is why
we have suggested that they should be investigated. We also suggested
that there should be a community type approach to planning which
would involve the Executive and also involve the planning service
and allow people themselves to develop their own neighbourhoods,
their own villages and their own towns. That is a bigger issue
than housing but that is a possible way forward. I think there
is room for that type of development following at some stage in
the future the outcome of our review of public administration.
The other issue is this whole issue of planning gain, which is
what you are alluding to really, where, for example, a developer
has to set aside, say, 20% of a site for public sector housing.
I think there was some attempt in the Republic to do something
along those lines but I do not think it met with a positive response
from developers. I am not an expert on that. If it makes sites
available at the right cost and allows the programme to be built
that has to be built then we would welcome it, but it is not clear
how it would work in practice.
Ms Boyle: Could I come in there
to add that maybe there is room for an investigation into the
planning difficulties that have been noted in the delivery of
social housing build. That seems to be one of the reasons that
we keep coming back to, that there are planning issues and planning
difficulties and there is a need to look into that. A further
point is in relation to housing associations where not just for
specialist housing but for general needs there is a requirement
on them to consult and that is probably one of the other reasons
that causes schemes to fail and not to be taken forward or not
taken forward at the right time. There is a need for further investigation
there.
Q373 Mr Luke: Obviously you have raised
at the end of your contribution something that I was going to
move on to anyway, and the key words are "partnership working".
Are you satisfied with the level of partnership between the DSD
and Northern Ireland Housing Executive in the promotion of policy
development?
Ms O'Bryan: I will start off.
The two main vehicles for that engagement at the moment would
be through the Promoting Social Inclusion Working Group on Homelessness,
which is led by the Department for Social Development, and also
through the Northern Ireland Housing Executive's Homelessness
Strategy Steering Group. In both of those groups the lead organisation
has invited representatives from the voluntary sector around the
table, so in terms of engaging us in the debate around the table
I would have to say that they certainly need to be acknowledged
for doing that in a very positive way. The relationship is always
one where there has got to be some tension because our agenda
and their agenda is not necessarily going to be the same. In principle
it may be the same agenda but when you get down to resource issues
and how policies work out in practice then you start to get the
tension. As a general model, I think there are good ways of engagement
at that level but as you come down from the higher level into
the engagement at the more local level then the scenario would
be either one where there are good collaborative relationships
and good engagement or, at the other end of the spectrum, there
is an inability to want to engage. Going back to the higher level
issues in terms of the Promoting Social Inclusion Working Group
on Homelessness, we are moving to the stage where the consultation
report should be released some time during the summer and then
there will be an opportunity for people to respond. We will wait
to see what comes through in that final report to see if the issues
are there that we believe were hard fought around the table, which
were issues primarily not for DSD but for some of the other government
departments because this is where the real action begins. Homelessness
or housing could be seen as just a DSD issue but it is much wider
than that. Even in terms of planning it is DRD and DoE, so it
brings in two other government departments right away. Because
of the complexities of that, that means that engagement can be
much more difficult and the results of that engagement may not
be as productive.
Q374 Mr Luke: The report of the Promoting
Social Inclusion Group was supposed to be out in March and has
been delayed. Have you got any concerns given that you were talking
about different departments looking at the implications of it?
Ms O'Bryan: Being one of the members
of that group, as is Janet, at one level I would not have concerns
because the work that was done in the latter months has been very
useful work looking at issues to do with community attitudes to
homelessness and taking a commitment to tackle some of those issues.
It was really good to get those issues around the table. If some
of the issues that came in the latter part of the work of that
group come out in the final consultation report then that delay
would be a delay that has been worthwhile, but the big issue there
is if they come through in the final consultation report. I am
comfortable enough about that delay at the moment because I think
we have made good use of that and have come up with what I and
others believe is actually quite a good robust report at this
stage.
Ms Hunter: I would just endorse
Carol's comments. It was preferable that we took a bit longer
and produced what we hope will be a very useful substantive document
rather than trying to take shortcuts. It is a very serious issue
and it deserves to have serious consideration.
Mr Luke: We will look forward to seeing
that. Thank you very much.
Q375 Chairman: A few general questions.
First of all, targeting social need. How well are the Executive
and the housing associations doing in terms of their own targeting
social need? Is there evidence of good performance, of focus on
targeting social need, or is it something they add on?
Ms O'Bryan: On the Housing Executive
front the main vehicle would be through the Homelessness Strategy,
so that means there are other people who are in housing need and
who need social housing who do not come within that. If we are
talking generally about those folk who are in need of social housing
the main vehicle, as I see it, would be through the Homelessness
Strategy. That being said, given the commitment through new TSN
or the five% of departmental budgets to be skewed towards need,
once again that could be happening but how that is happening is
not made known and it is not transparent, so it would not be clear
to us in that regard. In terms of the Homelessness Strategy, there
is a highlighted need for temporary accommodation units and that
is being reflected within the housing association development
programme. There is some tie-up between that, which is very helpful.
That also being said, we have schemes which are being developed
so we have the capital go-ahead for those schemes but the Revenue
for those schemes is not as yet guaranteed. Obviously one would
not like to think that a capital development would go ahead and
the revenue costs to fund the running of that building would not
be forthcoming but organisations have to go forward with a certain
degree of faith in relation to this one.
Q376 Chairman: The Simon Community called
for a Regional Housing Strategy and I think, as we are approaching
the final lap, you will recall that earlier on I asked a question
which I said we would come back to. It is probably the shortest
question but the hardest to answer. First of all, how do we prevent
homelessness from the point of view of your organisations? What
is the one thing we ought to be doing to prevent homelessness
that you would write in this strategy?
Ms O'Bryan: Are we only allowed
one thing, Chairman? We will all take a different one.
Q377 Chairman: Do feel free to go further.
I am writing this Regional Strategy and at the top it says "We
have got to prevent homelessness", but can you suggest how
we would do that?
Ms O'Bryan: I tend to come at
this from two levels. One is the structural issues and one is
the reasons why people immediately present as homeless. We always
look at it in both ways. On the structural reasons, the two key
issues are the issues to do with the housing market and having
a more robust social housing market than we currently have and
one that has good quality standards within it. The second part
of that are the issues about tackling our long-term unemployment
and issues around that. Both of those things have routes up through
the new TSN to the national action plans within the European context.
They all feed in through that route. When we come down to the
experience of the individual, we have looked at an analysis of
different ways to help prevent homelessness and obviously the
structural one is one way in which it can be tackled in the longer
term, but then there is identifying those groups who we know are
likely to become homeless. We know the young care leavers are
likely to become homeless, we know that people who leave school
without qualifications are likely to become homeless. There are
indicators that we have already and it is about trying to get
engaged with those people before a crisis comes around. The big
issue is how you measure impact. Then there is trying to identify
groups which the likes of Shelter and Housing Rights Service will
work with trying to pre-empt the homelessness situation so for
people who are having difficulties with money management, with
relationships, going in there and doing some work with them and
then responding to people at the stage of homelessness. There
are those four different layers. Finally there is the re-prevention.
I think we are probably aware of the revolving door syndrome in
relation to people with mental health problems but for some of
our homeless population there is a revolving door syndrome. Part
of that is to do with their lifestyles and them not being able
to settle anywhere and not being able to engage in any support
services, so there is a small group that would apply to, but there
is a larger group which is about trying to get people moved on
to sustainable tenancies, and Janet, Fiona and Laurence have talked
about that. What does that look like when you move into your own
tenancy and have good support there? I think there are five layers
to that as we would see it.
Q378 Mr Swire: I am interested that in
none of those five points you referred to those who are internally
displaced and rendered homeless by the sectarian problem. Is that
a factor? Secondly, are you experiencing what we are in Great
Britain, which is a significant proportion of homeless people
coming from those who have led a regimented life in the Armed
Forces?
Ms O'Bryan: In terms of those
who would be presenting because of some kind of sectarian or intimidation
issue, where it is a situation that is likely to be reported in
the national media in terms of the feuds, for example, those people
are either supported through people in their own community, moving
out to caravans or holiday caravans as a way out of the area,
or they are supported by the Housing Executive. By and large those
people are not the people who are coming to organisations like
ours looking for support. That is when it is a high profile feud
situation. In terms of intimidation, we do get individuals who
are required to leave their area because they may be perceived
by the people who control that area as engaging in some antisocial
behaviour which they, as the people in control of the area, do
not like. We would support those individuals. They are a small
part of the work that we do and that work can only happen whenever
there are other organisations that come and work alongside us
because for some people—not so much now, it is dwindling
off somewhat—they might have to leave the country because
of their own personal safety. It is a feature, but in terms of
the work that we are doing it does not come up in terms of volume
to the kind of scales that issues like family breakdown, unemployment,
etc would come up to. In terms of the ex-Armed Forces, from my
knowledge, and I would need to look to my colleagues here because
I can only talk about the 4,000 people who would we be supporting
in any one year, that would not come up as a significant issue
for us.
Ms Boyle: I know that it is not
reflected in the Housing Executive's statistics and I do not think
that it is with any volume across the voluntary sector.
Ms Hunter: I do not think it is
as significant an issue as it would be in England, for example.
Q379 Mr Luke: In the first part of your
answer to Hugo Swire you mentioned the issue of structural elements
in combating homelessness and that was one of the starting points
of this inquiry, the PC's criticism in his report of the Housing
Executive and how targets they were setting were not being met
for the build of new units of social housing. One of the issues
we have raised with previous witnesses is, are the housing associations
big enough to actually provide the muscle to get these housing
units on the ground? The Housing Executive was a very efficient
body, is there a case for bringing back some responsibility for
new build to the Northern Ireland Housing Executive to fill that
gap because it could play a part in the ability to meet the demand
for homelessness?
Ms Boyle: If I might suggest that
what we need is further investigation of the performance of DSD
and the housing associations. Out of the 39 housing associations,
which ones are able and capable and have the management structures
and finance to be in the development programme because clearly
they are not meeting their targets. We need some form of review
to see the delivery mechanisms, the structures. This also takes
us back into the whole argument about where does the finance come
from: mixed funding, should we have more from the private sector?
DSD are telling us that for every 10 million of private finance
roughly 155 houses are produced and yet in year we just have 25
million coming in from private finance. There are a whole lot
of interconnected issues here about delivery, capacity and capability
and coming back again to the Net Stock Model of what we are actually
predicting we need and then funding that accordingly. That is
the crux of the structural issue that Carol was talking about.
Ms O'Bryan: There is also a Northern
Ireland historical community perspective because, with the development
of the housing association movement, quite a number of our small
housing associations would be growing very much out of the needs
of a particular community and at that stage are providing an incredibly
valuable service both in terms of housing for the people in their
area and creating some regeneration within that area. If they
are no longer able to do significant development one very clear
approach may be a question around their future but I think the
management of that would be incredibly sensitive because of the
strong community identity and also given that we have quite a
number of our government documents, Pathways for Change
being one of them, which are pushing community development as
a model to be embraced and there might be at one level a general
managerial approach to this saying that this can be sorted in
order to help the delivery. There is a really important process
in there because we cannot ignore the history of that and the
value that those organisations offered at the time. Yes, I think
we have moved on from that and if we were now creating a system
I do not believe we would come up with the model that we currently
have to engage with, I do not think that for one moment, but in
many ways the system we have reflects where we have come from
and any movement away from that would need to be a very clearly
planned and phased movement. It does need to be simplified. When
you are hearing things like two housing associations bidding over
the same plot of land, that is folly. At the end of the day, in
part that is coming out of the public purse and that is not where
we need to be.
|
