Select Committee on Office of the Deputy Prime Minister: Housing, Planning, Local Government and the Regions Written Evidence


Memorandum by the London Tenants Federation (DEC 52)

  The London Tenants Federation brings together independent borough wide tenant and leaseholder federations and organisations across London. The LTF welcomes this inquiry and the opportunity to contribute to it. As a tenant organisation, part of our remit is to argue for good tenant consultation and participation on all issues relating to our homes and communities. Our view is that government is failing tenants on this issue, in relation to the debate on "decent homes".

1.  THE DEFINITION OF "DECENT"

  Tenants have not been properly consulted on the definition of "decent". Issues that are of high priority or of higher priority for London tenants, than those included in the government definition are absent. Estate security, sound insulation, good community and play spaces are all issues that are raised frequently at tenant meetings across London and are generally defined to be of greater importance than "new kitchens and bathrooms" for the majority of tenants.

2.  THE SCALE OF THE PROBLEM

  The percentage of defined non-decent homes in London is huge and displays the need for real investment in our homes. Many council tenants live in substandard housing, suffering the legacy of decades of under-investment by Governments and of desperate responses to these policies by councils. We have seen our homes used as a political football. The majority of housing investment, itself only half the level spent in other European countries goes to pay service debt and patch up dilapidated stock. Under investment in our homes, has frequently been compounded by closures and sell-offs of the very things that help to sustain our communities—amenities such as schools, community centres, play spaces and libraries.

  The London Tenants Federation is extremely concerned about the restricted financial options available for dealing with the problems—detailed in point 3 and 4.

  We also believe that the governments proposed changes to management and maintenance allowances would work contrary to the governments stated intentions around decent homes. It will financially disadvantage inner London boroughs, which are also for the most part the boroughs with the greatest percentage of non-decent homes. We believe this will have huge impact on the ability of London local authorities to maintain homes at a decent standard.

3.  THE VARIOUS MECHANISMS FOR FUNDING AND DELIVERY—STOCK TRANSFER, PFI, ARMS LENGTH MANAGEMENT ORGANISATIONS AND COUNCIL HOUSING

  The London Tenants Federation is concerned that actual and proposed changes in government housing policy appears to be about fudging the differences between council and RSL housing—notably in rent restructuring and the proposed single tenancy agreement. We suspect that the government agenda here is simply about getting rid of council housing. The announcement in the Communities Plan that local authorities will only be able to use the three options above, to access additional finance, to bring our homes to a decent standard, has reinforced this suspicion.

  The London Tenants Federation (LTF) believes that to ensure all our homes are at a decent standard by 2010 and also that to achieve sufficient dwellings to accommodate the needs of affordable housing in London, government must invest positively in council housing. We believe that this should involve local authorities being able to build new housing as well as bringing empty homes in both the public and private sector into use as council dwellings.

  Positive investment in council homes would in the long-term be beneficial to issues high on the government agenda—social exclusion, our health and our children's educational achievements—issues that are exacerbated by existing hidden overcrowding and homelessness. It would give tenants a genuine choice, as the majority of tenants want, to have decent homes and to remain as council tenants.

4.  THE ROLE OF TENANT CHOICE

  Far from considering positive investment in council homes the governments options for extra investment are reduced to stock transfer, PFI or ALMOs. It seems that its public position is now of coercion rather than choice. The position has created divisions amongst tenants. At borough level it appears that some councils, perhaps fearing the outcome of genuine debate with tenants, have simply pushed through their choices using undemocratic methods. In other boroughs, tenants have reached the decision that ALMOs are the least objectionable of the three options, but many feel that their decision is far from one of choice.

  Following Hammersmith and Fulham Housing Commission's request that high performing council's should be entitled to receive the same investment allowance and freedoms as high performing arms length management organisations, the London Tenants Federation expressed its opinion on the three options in an open letter to the Deputy Prime Minister. The letter was supported by 16 borough wide tenant and leaseholder organisations in London—representing tenants and leaseholders of more than half of London's boroughs that still have council stock. We believe that it represent the views of the majority of London's tenants and leaseholders. The letter contained the following:

    "The London Tenants Federation believes that housing management structures should be the outcome of decisions made by tenants and their local authorities about what works best. For some this may be Arms Length Management. However our view is that such decisions should be prompted neither by financial need nor the existence of preferential funding arrangements. Whatever structures are chosen, tenants must all be treated with equality. Funding arrangements should therefore be the same for all.

    Through the Communities Plan, the government has made it clear that the only financial options open to local authorities unable to reach the decent homes target are stock transfer, PFI or Arms Length Management Organisations. We believe that tenants right to a decent home should not be bound by financial constraints that effectively remove their choice to remain under direct management of their local authorities.

    We believe that this crucial element of choice should be retained and ask that you reconsider this policy. We ask that councils be allowed the option of borrowing prudentially against their housing income, whilst their housing remains under direct management, should this be the clear will of tenants and their local authorities."

  The London Tenants Federation feels that the government has yet to demonstrate that it is taking the views of tenants seriously.

5.  THE LINK BETWEEN THE DECENT HOMES TARGET AND THE OTHER PARTS OF THE GOVERNMENT'S SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES AGENDA

  The London Tenants Federation believes that tenants must be more involved in the debate about "sustainable communities". We fear that the new regional structures represent a centralised government led agenda and that involvement in decision making by tenants will be even further removed. In relation to this year's London Housing Strategy LTF representatives have expressed concern that there has been little opportunity to engage, other than within a pre set government agenda.

  In London, issues high on tenants' agenda are—a desire for direct investment in council housing, fears that "high density" simply means smaller homes with little or no outside space, that the sustainability of our communities is undermined as we lose vital amenities—community centres, schools, play spaces and libraries to development and that in London's high property value areas tenants feel they are being "socially engineered" out. Many of these concerns are perhaps at odds with the government's regional agenda.

  Tenants have valuable contributions to make in relation to our existing homes and communities and indeed the debate about new developments. Listening to tenants is not just democratic "good practice"; it taps in to a valuable source of knowledge without which the grandest designs often fail. Tenant activists are generally committed people with a deeper understanding of the needs of their communities than professionals who, however professional, remain outsiders. We certainly have first hand experience of the mistakes made by politicians and professionals in the past.

  In conclusion, the London Tenants Federation believes that tenants must be involved in the debate about standards of "decency" in relation to both existing and new homes. There must be an extension of proper debate to tenants in relation to density, security, standards of flat sizes, construction, sound insulation, play areas, communal and public spaces. Tenants demand for positive investment in council housing must be included on the agenda. We fear that if our views are not heard, the mistakes of the past will undoubtedly be repeated.


 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2004
Prepared 7 May 2004