Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
17 Jan 2007 : Column 289WHcontinued
Now, in the same areas, houses have been built, and the For Sale signs are up again, but house prices are 100 times what I have stated. It is hard to find many houses priced at less than £100,000. We are now witnessing the opposite end of the process: as there has been large-scale demolition of certain types of housing, such as traditional terraced houses, and as private and social landlords, through housing associations, have given up propertiesand sometimes in the period of decline housing associations were very bad landlordsthere has been a shrinking of the market for privately rented and affordable housing. That has now become a major issue. As house prices
have shot up, and new people have come into parts of my constituencypeople who change the area in a positive way and are welcomed almost universally by the existing populationwell defined pressures, of the kind that we have already heard about this morning, have begun to be exerted on housing stock.
My particular concern is that it is vital, particularly somewhere with the level of destruction suffered by east Manchester in the past, that regeneration should entail the retention of the existing community, and should build on strong community links. A difficulty in that approach, of course, involves the generations. If the succeeding generation is forced to look outside the area of regeneration for homesif those people must look for affordable housing outside Manchester, in Tameside, the next local authority along, or further afield, the very communities that should be part of the regeneration process are being broken up. There is a flaw at the centre of what we are trying to do if we cannot begin to wrestle with the question of affordable housing.
As other hon. Members have done, I make a direct plea to my hon. Friend the Minister to consider the need for a massive increase in the amount of social housingaffordable rented accommodation. I have no objection to the private rented sector, which works well in parts of my constituency, although we, like everywhere else, still have problems with the difficult and unpleasant landlords. Nevertheless, we need affordable social housing, and it must be high on the agenda for all of us.
I want to touch briefly on another aspect of housing policy, which my hon. Friend the Member for Bolton, South-East also mentionedthe right to buy. That is of course intimately connected with the question of how we maintain social housing in a proper social housing stock. As my hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield, Attercliffe (Mr. Betts) said, it is ridiculous if in his city, as in mine, more housing is being lost through the right to buy than is being gained through new build or the conversion of property into affordable social housing. We must make sure that the affordable housing stock grows, for those who need it.
The final matter I want to deal with lies beyond the Ministers Department, so I hope that she will be able to listen to it and report back. This again affects big parts of the north of England. Regeneration is taking place and huge sums of public money are being invested, but one of the problems is that the private contractors are not always respectable partners.
I am sure that I will raise this issue at greater length in future, but I mention it now. In my constituency, Lovell is being used. I recently met residents of an estate where it is the private contractor for a private build new estate. A lot of public money has gone into making this possible. The problem is that Lovell has consistently breached the planning permission that had been given, the contractual agreements that it reached with those to whom it sold properties and all the agreements that ought to have been contractually tied by Government moneys going into that sort of investment.
If we fail to control these large contractors in this generation and we allow them to run rings round local authorities and other public bodies, particularly the new residents moving into an area, we undermine the future viability of those housing estates. We must get a
contractual grip and ensure that where public money is invested in large-scale developments, the contractors know that their performance will be measured not simply by those at the bottom endthose who move into the homesbut by those all the way up to central Government, who will insist that there is a contractual price to pay when contractors do not deliver the job and the housing that they have undertaken to build.
Andrew Miller (Ellesmere Port and Neston) (Lab): I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Bolton, South-East (Dr. Iddon) on securing this debate, and I thank my colleagues for being so co-operative on the time available that additional speakers might have a chance to make a contribution.
In an intervention, my hon. Friend the Member for City of Chester (Christine Russell) made a point about house prices in Chester, part of which is included in my constituency. The area of Chester, Ellesmere Port and north-east Wales is the fastest growing economy in the countrya fact that is not always appreciated down in London.
My hon. Friend the Member for Stafford (Mr. Kidney) was right that there is huge diversity within the north-west and his own area, the midlands. The situation creates an enormous number of pressures in the rapidly growing economy around my constituency. Five wards in my constituency are among the poorest in the country, whereas two or three are among the richest. That diversity and the lack of a homogenous housing structure in the region means that we need flexible solutions.
I make a plea to the Minister to examine the evidence that was adduced when our hon. Friend the Minister for Local Government made a visit a few months ago to open a refuge for women suffering from domestic violence. He examined some of the imaginative housing solutions that we have found, but we have been constrained because of the way money is held back from our community. Part of the problem in Cheshire is that its pockets of real need are diluted by its affluent parts, so the flow of money from the Housing Corporation, for example, does not reflect the needs of the community. I urge the Minister to examine closely how moneys are allocated in areas such as mine, and, indeed, in the whole of the region, to see whether a more equitable solution is possible.
My local authority has been very imaginative. Some 15 years ago, our late, good friend Derek Fatchett, came to open the first renovated homeone of the old, concrete stock, Waites homesthat had had a £20,000 makeover to make it good for another lifetime of a house. That was an incredibly good piece of value for money. Interestingly, at the time, the Government office in the north west did not think it was good value for money; it thought that the best idea was to destroy communities and put people in little boxes. We have overcome that one and the work in question has almost come to a conclusion.
However, pockets of such housing still need urgent work. It is being held back simply because the revenue and capital relationships do not work and do not allow our local authority to continue with the work necessary.
I visited some women in a house on Eccleston avenue recently and listened to the problems that they were facing as a result of living in properties that still need urgent repairs. The work cannot be undertaken because of the perverse way in which the formula impacts on my community.
I urge the Minister to seek the flexible solutions that will enable local authorities, working with the Housing Corporation, to meet the needs of our local communities. The communities involved are very different. Let us compare my constituency with those of my hon. Friend the Member for City of Chester and my right hon. Friend the Member for Birkenhead (Mr. Field). The Victorian housing stock in Birkenhead and Chester includes a huge number of large properties that have been converted into flats and maisonettes. Such housing simply does not exist in newer communities such as mine. There cannot be a simple, homogenous solution; we must have flexibility. I hope that ideas such as mine can be taken on board in the search for a solution.
New pressures are starting to emerge as a result of the success of the local economy. Some of the demographic information upon which my county council has been working to develop its strategy will prove to be flawed. When all that is taken into account, local residents, particularly those in poorer communities, will be left in a much more difficult situation unless there is active Government intervention.
I find it deeply disappointing that the Opposition parties, which are vying for seats in the north of the country, cannot find a Back Bencher to contribute in this debate. I hope that the media pick that up, because it is a disgrace. It is a reflection on the kind of Opposition who we have got.
Mr. George Howarth (Knowsley, North and Sefton, East) (Lab): I, too, congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Bolton, South-East (Dr. Iddon) on securing this important debate. The number of my colleagues from northern constituencies who have taken part emphasises the increasing importance of the issue.
I want to make four quick points in the brief time available to me. Most people would consider the Knowsley part of my constituency to be urbanand it largely isbut my constituency contains quite a large rural part in Sefton. It is not uncommon for new houses in Knowsley to cost in excess of £200,000, although that is not an average figure. Such a situation would have been inconceivable a few years ago. That partly reflects the success of the local economy, but it has implications for affordability, which is becoming an increasing problem.
Parts of Seftonfor example, Ince Blundellin my constituency, probably have average house prices of about £400,000. It is impossible for some people to get a foot on a rung of the housing ladder in such places. Because of those pressures, the housing picture has changed dramatically in the recent past.
I have concerns about private landlordsseveral hon. Members have mentioned their role. There are some very good private landlords, but a number of private landlords in my constituency are using the
system purely to launder drug money. We need stronger controls on private landlords to deal with that serious problem.
It is estimated that 35 per cent. of those on waiting lists are in northern England, yet the areas Government allocation for affordable housing is only 11.4 per cent. That statistic shows why it is necessary to have this debate, which has been a good one.
Mr. Dan Rogerson (North Cornwall) (LD): I, too, congratulate the hon. Member for Bolton, South-East (Dr. Iddon) on securing this debate, and on framing it so well, highlighting the problems faced by his constituents, and exploring in more detail the wider issues in the north and midlands. He focused on problems with the right to buy, its impact on housing stock and its continuing influence as house prices in the north and midlands begin to catch up with the huge increases in the south.
The hon. Gentleman made a clear case for achieving higher numbers of new units, which is crucial. Many organisations are doing excellent work. As we go into Westminster tube station, we see Shelters advertisement. Shelter campaigns tirelessly to make the point that the Government must achieve new units, and I pay tribute to its work on that.
Hugh Bayley: The hon. Gentleman will be aware that housing revenue account rules require local authorities with older housing stock and, therefore, lower historic debt levels, as in York, to transfer resources to areas with higher debt levelsfor example, in London and Manchester. Does he agree with City of York council that that is wrong, and would Liberal Democrat councils in areas that benefit from such transfersfor example, Stockport, Islington and Kingston upon Thamessupport City of York council and their Liberal Democrat colleagues if they argued for change by putting forward a proposal to the Local Government Association.
Mr. Rogerson: The position taken by my Liberal Democrat colleagues in the south is a matter for them, and I would not seek to dictate what they do. The way in which the housing revenue account operates disadvantages some councils, and I shall return to that later. I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for giving me the opportunity to make that point.
Kitty Ussher (Burnley) (Lab): If the hon. Gentleman cannot speak for his council colleagues in York, perhaps he can speak for those in Burnley. I understand that they will propose a move from resettlement grants to loans, without increasing the value available to constituents who are forced to move when their houses are compulsorily purchased, even when the housing price is rising dramatically, I am glad to say, in my constituency, thereby leaving my constituents much worse off. Does the hon. Gentleman support that?
Mr. Rogerson: I have not had the opportunity to consider the situation that the hon. Lady describes, but I am grateful to her for bringing it to my attention. I am sure that I shall have the opportunity to raise it with my council colleagues.
The hon. Member for Bolton, South-East referred to community land trusts. We heard how the Conservative party has recently discovered that policy and been converted to it. It has been my partys policy for many years. The hon. Gentleman also referred to the work in my constituency in Cornwall where the Liberal Democrat-controlled council has been working to deliver the first schemes by that route.
I pay tribute to hon. Members who highlighted the problem of affordable housing throughout the midlands and the north. We must ensure that those regions receive fair support in tackling it. Plain figures do not suggest that problems in the north are as great as those in the south-east and south-west, but, as with all statistics, they hide individual cases and the situation is getting worse in some local communities. I could talk about the rise in the number of second homes in some parts of the north-west, Yorkshire and other areas. I pay tribute to the work of my hon. Friend the Member for Westmorland and Lonsdale (Tim Farron) in drawing that to the attention of the House and the Government.
Tim Farron (Westmorland and Lonsdale) (LD): Does my hon. Friend acknowledge that my constituency has the largest gap in the north and midlands between low average incomes and high average house prices? The percentage of our council property that has been sold off during the past 20 years is the largest in Lancashire and Cumbria. Should those factors not be taken into account when allocating funding for new housing and particularly new social housing?
Mr. Rogerson: I certainly agree with my hon. Friend. The situation in his constituency reflects that in mine and those of my hon. Friends in Cornwall, where there is a particular problem with second homes. We were shocked during a recent Adjournment debate on the Barker review when the then Conservative Front-Bench spokesman referred to the great contribution that second homes make to the local economy. I am sure that his constituents would question that assertion.
Mr. Kidney: Local authorities can keep the proceeds of council tax on second homes and spend it locallyfor example, on community land trustsbut they must send the proceeds of council tax on empty homes to central Government. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that both should be treated the same?
Mr. Rogerson: The hon. Gentleman makes a good point, and I am sure that further work is needed. A great deal of work is going on with empty dwelling management orders, and my party supported the Government when the legislation was introduced. I hope that local councils will take up that opportunity of dealing with the problem of empty homes.
The Government are failing to meet housing needs in the north and midlands. The right to buy has decimated council housing stock. Under the Thatcher Government, 350,000 council houses were built during their first eight years, but during the first eight years of the Labour Government only 3,000 were built.
The right to buy has left councils with far too little stock, but the Governments framework is forcing councils towards stock transfer. Those who want to
deal with the commitment of their tenants to remain within council ownership are facing huge pressure to move away from that. The Government have failed to resolve that problem.
Dr. Iddon: Will the hon. Gentleman state what the current Liberal Democrat policy on the right to buy is?
Mr. Rogerson: My partys policy, as hon. Members have mentioned, particularly the hon. Member for Sheffield, Attercliffe (Mr. Betts), is that councils should be given more flexibility to raise the threshold and to lower the discount. In many parts of the north, buying council houses is becoming unaffordable, even with the discount. That is obviously having an effect on the number of right-to-buy applications. We believe that councils should have the opportunity to decrease the discount to help to deal further with that problem.
Numbers on housing waiting lists are rising sharply, and that leads to pressure. The Government are seeking to tackle the problem of temporary accommodation by ensuring that councils can no longer use bed-and-breakfast accommodation, but that gives rise to another problem: where can people go? My hon. Friend the Member for Leeds, North-West (Greg Mulholland) highlighted to me a family who were living in a tent in a friends front garden because that was the only accommodation available.
The Government said that they want to give more power to local authorities, but we see little evidence of that happening in practice. Councils must be encouraged to use the planning laws at their disposal to require developers to build more affordable housing in new developments. The hon. Member for Stafford (Mr. Kidney) referred earlier to section 106 agreements. There was a debate in the House earlier this week about the Governments proposed planning gain supplement. My party does not believe that that is the way to go because centralising the system may reduce local flexibility to deal with such issues.
Great work is being done in Liberal Democrat-led South Shropshire council in the west midlands on affordable housing issues and to ensure that more accommodation is provided in rural areas where incomes are low and house prices are high. In other areas, such as that of my hon. Friend the Member for Harrogate and Knaresborough (Mr. Willis), only one planning application for an affordable home has been successful. That illustrates the size of the problem. We need more support for local councils to be able to deliver the affordable housing that their communities need.
I have had the opportunity to visit Newcastle and to see the Liberal Democrat councils work on the housing market renewal programme. It has successfully involved the community in delivering that. I was impressed with the quality of some of the new housing.
Dr. Blackman-Woods: I understand that the whole of that housing scheme was delivered to the Liberal Democrat council by the previous Labour Administration. It was part of the going for growth initiative.
Mr. Rogerson: My opportunity to speak to local people showed how much they valued the Liberal Democrat council-led process in involving them in the future of their estates.
Hugh Bayley: The hon. Gentleman said that the housing revenue account
John Cummings (in the Chair): Order.
Mr. Rogerson: I apologise Mr. Cummings. I did say that, but given the time now, I shall write to the hon. Gentleman.
I shall return to the issues. The Liberal Democrats have policies to tackle the second homes issue and to encourage the use of empty dwelling management orders. We want to strengthen planning gain for local communities through a tariff system, and we support strongly the initiatives to use community land trusts and mutual trusts to deliver housing for local people.
Many organisations have pointed out that through the comprehensive spending review, the Government have an opportunity to deliver a step change in social housing investment. We hope that they do so in the next few months.
Next Section | Index | Home Page |