Memorandum by John Grooms (AH 27)
`My third point concerns successful housing—the
bedrock of independent living. How can you have any control and
choice in your life unless you can get around and in and out of
your own home, let alone others? . . . Urgent action needs to
be taken as the housing industry has ignored the needs of disabled
people for far too long.'
Baroness Wilkins
Queen's Speech Debate, 25 May 2005
SUMMARY
Disabled people are facing a housing crisis.
Within this submission John Grooms identifies elements of this
crisis from the difficulties which disabled people have in accessing
financial capital to enable them to buy a house, to the drafting
of local authority housing strategies and the increasing shortage
of social housing. The Government's emphasis on pursuing policies
to promote homeownership will further reduce the opportunities
which disabled people have for living independently in a house
which is accessible and adapted to their needs.
John Grooms calls for the countywide adoption
of the "London Plan" approach where all new housing
is built to Lifetime Home Standards with 10% to the higher wheelchair
standard. It is only by adopting this approach that the marginalisation
of disabled people from housing will be addressed.
JOHN GROOMS
John Grooms Housing Association (JGHA) is one
of England's leading specialist providers of wheelchair standard
housing with more than 1,200 properties in management. JGHA works
closely with its sister charity, John Grooms Charity (JGC). JGC
is a leading provider of care homes for disabled people, accessible
holidays and other services. Our mission is to enable each disabled
person with whom we work to achieve a level of independence equal
to his or her potential. Collectively we refer to ourselves as
John Grooms
INTRODUCTION
1. "Home" for many disabled people[61]
is not the liberating and enabling experience that most non-disabled
people take for granted. A disabled person living with a chronic
illness or impairment (physical, emotional or cognitive) can encounter
restrictions in their home environment that condition their lifestyle
or inhibit their social inter-actions with other people.
As Scope describe: ". . . the style and
standard of an individual's housing reflect social and economic
status and have a direct bearing on health, well-being and social
opportunities" (2001: p2)
2. It is an issue which the Prime Minister's
Strategy Unit (PMSU) acknowledged in its landmark report, Improving
the Life Chances of Disabled People, published earlier this
year and which set out a 20 year strategy—or `ambitious
vision' (p3)—to improve the life chances of disabled people.
The report describes how disabled people are failed by the social
housing sector despite their disproportionate reliance on it.
However, due to disabled people's poorer socio-economic status
they are, on average, unable to access the private housing market.
3. Within this submission; John Grooms will
demonstrate that the Government's policy focus on promoting home
ownership in its various guises, while politically popular with
the majority of people, will only serve to further exclude disabled
people from being able to live in an adapted and fully accessible
house. To address this housing crisis we recommend that the "London
Plan" approach is adopted in the provision of all new housing.
The London Plan states that all new housing— market and
social—is built to Lifetime Home Standards[62]
(LHS) with 10% of the stock to the higher wheelchair standard
or easily adaptable to it.
What is the scale of the housing problem facing
disabled people?
4. There are no definitive statistics to
draw on which demonstrate the housing crisis facing disabled people.
The ones which do exist are often widely drawn, from different
sources, over different timescales and with varying sample sizes.
While this lack of comprehensive data hinders the development
of progressive evidence based housing policy, it is clear that
a severe problem exists.
5. The latest survey of English Housing
by the ODPM (ODPM 2005) estimated that the number of people in
England with a medical condition or disability requiring specially
adapted accommodation was 1.4 million. Almost a quarter (23%)
of this total (350,000 people) were people living in housing that
was unsuitable for their needs.
6. These findings reflect a national survey
carried out by Scope, reported by Lamb and Lazell (1994 cited
by Barnes et al 1999: p120). This found that only 29% of
disabled people living in private households thought that all
the adaptations they required had been carried out to their dwelling
place.
7. Of a similar nature were the findings
of a survey for the Greater London Authority in 2002 (GLA 2002)
which identified the housing problems facing disabled people,
particularly wheelchair users. The GLA survey found that:
— 6% of households in London included
someone with a physical disability;
— 2% of households (56,000) included
someone who used a wheelchair;
— 13,000 people lived in inaccessible
housing and needed a wheelchair standard house;
— 20% of wheelchair users lived above
the first floor; and
— 29% of people with a disability wanted
to move within five years.
8. It is likely that similar figures will
be found across the country even allowing for different socio-economic
circumstances. Research published by John Grooms, and based on
research in the early 1990's by the Housing Corporation, indicates
that countrywide there is a shortage of 300,000 fully wheelchair
accessible properties to meet current and projected housing need.
(Ackroyd 2003).
9. The Social Exclusion Unit recently quoted
the Housing Corporation's estimate of the shortage as 330,000
(SEU, 2005: p149). What ever the true figure, demand is bound
to increase in the future due to the twin demographic pressures
of growing numbers of disabled people and a growing elderly population—both
factors that are indicative of increased wheelchair use.
10. It is John Groom's experience that local
authority housing strategies across the country will either ignore
the need for wheelchair accessible housing, only do so in woolly
terms, give a lower than realistic estimate of local demand given
national figures or will rely solely on Disabled Facilities Grants
(DFG) to alter unsuitable properties.
11. We also find that a number of other
"minority" groups seem to be given a higher priority
when it comes to the production of appropriate housing. "Minority"
groups include homeless people, Gypsies and travelling people,
BME groups and housing for older people. While these groups must
not be ignored, John Grooms feels that their housing needs should
not be met at the expense of disabled people.
12. John Grooms recommends that all local
authorities should be required to demonstrate an inclusive approach
by cross council work between planning, housing and social services
departments when developing their housing strategy. They should
also be required to include other stakeholders such as occupational
therapy departments, hospital discharge administrators, access
groups and local disability charities.
13. Unless new housing developments fully
integrate the needs of disabled people from the outset of the
planning and design process for new housing, an inclusive environment
will not be created. Such an element must be at the heart of any
truly sustainable community. The new planning regulation requiring
an access statement to be submitted with each planning application,
as part of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, is a
welcome move to address this issue. However its application needs
to monitored to ensure that truly accessible communities are created.
SOCIAL HOUSING—THE
"SPECIAL NEEDS"
PROVIDER
14. [63]As
Balchin (1995) describes, in a modern and complex society such
as the UK, the market would normally supply people with a choice
of goods and services. In housing, given perfect market conditions,
this would deliver a choice between renting and buying. However
due to market imperfections and the decline of the private landlord;
this choice has been removed. Consequently, as Balchin observes:
"On the scale required only the provision of local authority
housing can ensure that most households who cannot or do not prefer
to buy are supplied with housing at a rent within their means."
(1995: p5)
15. While it is not true to say that all
disabled people are unable to purchase their own property, they
are more likely than non-disabled people to be social renters.
With the growth in the number of private market houses in the
UK, due to population and household growth, so the reliance of
disabled people on the social sector has grown.
16. This reliance was commented on by Stewart
et al (1999) in their analysis of housing construction
and housing finance data. In 1981 (looking at tenant heads of
household) Stewart et al found that 4% of council tenants
and 3% of housing association tenants were categorised as "permanently
sick or disabled". In 1995 these percentages had risen to
9% and 8% respectively. The shift is significant because: ".
. . the social rented sector has become the `special needs' provider".
(1999: p13).
17. In other tenure types the proportion
of permanently sick or disabled heads of household has remained
the same or lower. Barnes et al found that: "British
disabled people and their families are twice as likely to live
in property owned by local authorities as their non-disabled peers."
(1999: p120). It is a situation which contributes to the social
marginalisation of disabled people.
18. It is doubly worrying due to the steady
decline in completed houses in the UK (registered social landlord
and local authority) from a high point in 1995-96 (41,516 houses)
to the latest figures from 2003-04 of 18,577 (ODPM 2005a). Private
house building has shown a 9.5% increase to 171,490 in the same
period—its highest level for 15 years. Unless there is concerted
Government action to build more social rented houses, increasing
numbers of disabled people will face increased difficulties finding
a house which fully meets their needs and gives them the freedom
to live their lives.
Why can't a disabled person buy a house?
19. Government policy in the 80s and 90s
focussed on turning the UK into a nation of home owners. Home
ownership was made as financially attractive as possible with
the emphasis that it was the ideal and normal housing option.
Such was the change that the aspiration of a "property owning
democracy" is one which is now accepted across the political
divide.
20. As a consequence in the 1980s and 1990s
home ownership increased by 17%. The Office of the Deputy Prime
Minister (ODPM) confirmed the trend when research found that 71%
of households in England are owner occupiers, 18% are social renters
and 11% private renters. (ODPM 2005) With the growth in home ownership
so the " . . . allocation of owner occupation is driven by
the ability to pay, not by measures of need" (p371). Yet
for disabled people securing access to sufficient capital in order
to purchase a house is increasingly difficult due to the operation
of the market.
21. As the PMSU report observed, the income
of disabled people is on average half of that earned by non-disabled
people. The Disability Rights Commission (DRC) also note that
only 50% of disabled people of working age are in employment compared
to 81% of non-disabled people (DRC 2005: p 19). These factors
combine to lessen the credit worthiness of disabled people in
the eyes of financial institutions and so diminish their opportunity
of securing a mortgage.
22. The disadvantage is then compounded
by the reliance of mortgage lenders on the insurance industry
rather than income support or other state financial aid to guarantee
mortgage repayments (a situation which has explicit Government
support). As Easterlow et al note ". . . life insurance
which can be an essential component of mortgage borrowing and
which often contains prohibitive exclusion clauses for people
with health problems as well as for people with insecure labour
market positions" (p374).
23. Under these circumstances, a disabled
person seeking access to finance will be forced to rely on "unconventional
lenders" with high charges and interest rates. This increases
the cost of borrowing for property, reducing available finance
and forcing households in this position down market in their search
for a house.
24. As a consequence disabled people, due
to their low incomes and health problems, are forced into marginal
properties in poor condition that are the least healthy to live
in. As the DRC observe ". . . disabled people are more likely
to live in poverty and are over represented in deprived areas"
(2005: p 4 - 5)
DISABLED PEOPLE—NOT
A LARGE ENOUGH
MARKET
25. Private builders do not think of disabled
people as a sufficiently large market to build houses speculatively
for. As the DRC (DRC 2004) explain, citing Professor Rob Imrie,
research reveals that private house builders have very little
knowledge of disabled people and regard them as a minority concern.
Drake (1999) cites a statement from the House Builders Federation
(HBF) that dismisses the housing problems encountered by disabled
people as "not severe" (p82). In the view of the HBF;
if a disabled person had an access problem it ". . . would
be reasonable to expect that he or she would be assisted over
the threshold by the host" (Drake: p82)
26. Accessible private rented housing is
almost non-existent (Scope 2001). This was also observed by Harrison
and Davis (2001) who found that as the social sector was where
most barrier free houses were located, disabled people where consequently
obliged to look there for suitable housing.
NEW SOCIAL
HOUSING AND
DISABLED PEOPLE
27. Given the importance of the social sector
in providing housing for disabled people, it is disappointing
to note that the main funder of social housing in the UK, the
Housing Corporation, has specified in its Corporate Plan 2005-08
that only 23% (2005: p44) of new funded houses in 2004-05 will
be built to meet Lifetime Home Standards. (LHS).
28. The advantage of the LHS is that it
recognises the need for flexibility, adaptability and accessibility.
This allows occupiers to remain as the house can be adapted to
meet their changing housing needs over their lifetime. The standard
is also high enough to meet the needs of most disabled people
without alteration. Therefore more houses built to LHS would enable
more choice for disabled people. This attribute is a key plank
of the new Disability Equality Duty which the Housing Corporation,
registered social landlords and local authorities have to comply
with from December 2006.
29. The paucity of acknowledgement of the
housing needs of disabled people is unsurprising given its absence
in the ODPM's five year housing plan, "Sustainable Communities:
Homes for All". Except for a small re-announcement of the
existing Disabled Facilities Grants budget the housing needs of
disabled people were ignored.
30. The ODPM strategy was launched five
days after Angela Eagle MP (then Minister for Disabled People)
launched "Improving the Life Chances of Disabled People"—the
Government's 20 year strategy for disabled people as noted earlier.
Within the report it notes that, "Improving the suitability
of new-build and renovated homes for disabled people would also
help reduce future public expenditure on housing adaptations,
equipment and care services." (PMSU, 2005: 62). Does one
side of Whitehall speak to the other side?
31. John Grooms recommends the adoption
of the Lifetime Home Standard into Part M of the Building Regulations
so as to represent a minimum standard for all new housing. The
Lifetime Home Standard is already the minimum standard for all
social housing in Wales and Northern Ireland, it should be applied
in England.
LIFETIME HOME
STANDARD—"VISITABLE"
BY WHEELCHAIR
USERS NOT
"LIVEABLE"
32. While the LHS is a good basic minimum
it is still only "visitable" by a wheelchair user, not
"liveable". It only allows wheelchair access to the
ground (or entry) floor, a living area and toilet. John Grooms
defines a house as "liveable" for a wheelchair user,
if he/she can use it as reasonably and flexibly as a non-disabled
person. Within a wheelchair standard house design features and
white goods are designed and installed with the wheelchair user
in mind. This will maximise the lifestyle choices of the wheelchair
user who will live in the house.
33. Wheelchair standard homes will generally
require a larger footprint than general needs housing—a
factor which will obviously need to be considered when planning
future housing development. While including wheelchair housing
within a scheme will reduce the number of houses that will be
built, and will cost more per housing unit, [64]this
needs to be set against the policy initiative of the Disability
Discrimination Act that seeks to ensure that disabled people have
the same range of choices, opportunity and control as non-disabled
people.
34. To ensure that housing meets this policy
priority John Grooms recommends the adoption of the "London
Plan" approach for all regional housing strategies. The London
Plan states that 100% of all housing (both private market and
social rented sector) are built to Lifetime Home Standards with
10% of this new housing stock to the higher wheelchair standard
or designed to be easily adapted.
CONCLUSION
35. Due to their reliance on the social
sector, disabled people face increased problems seeking an accessible
house that meets their housing needs. This trend will continue
unless there is concerted Government action to tackle the recommendations
detailed in this submission. Until this is done disabled people
will be increasingly forced into unsuitable houses and marginalised
from society.
61 See Appendix One for an explanation on why we cite
disabled people as one group. Back
62
Lifetime Standard Homes incorporate 16 design features which
help ensure that the house is flexible, adaptable and accessible.
For more information visit www.lifetimehomes.org Back
63
For paragraphs 14-23 we draw on Easterlow, Smith and Mallinson
(2000) except where noted. Back
64
John Grooms estimates a wheelchair standard house costs an average
of 30% more to produce when compared to a general needs house. Back
| 
