Memorandum from the Association for the
Conservation of Energy (ACE) (BDH 45)
SUMMARY
While the Decent Homes Programme has
delivered significant improvements in social housing, the thermal
comfort element of the current standard is woefully inadequate
to provide affordable warmth. ACE therefore believes that, post-2010,
a "Decent Homes Plus" target should be set using a much
more ambitious thermal comfort criterion. We endorse the recommendation
of both the EFRA Select Committee[72]
and the Fuel Poverty Advisory Group[73]
that the Government should assess the cost and feasibility of
introducing a SAP 81 standard as the basis of an improved thermal
comfort level for all social housing.
It is anticipated that 95% of the social
housing stock will be "decent" by 2010. However, the
remaining 5% should be tackled as a matter of priorityand
Government should ensure sufficient levels of funding to enable
this to happen.
Following the abolition by CLG of the
national targets for private sector homes occupied by vulnerable
households, we are concerned that there is now no means of enforcing
the Decent Homes Standard in the private sector. Government should
give urgent consideration to regulating the private rented sector
to prevent landlords from renting out F- or G-rated properties.
In the short term, we make a number of suggestions below of ways
in which local authorities can bring about better energy efficiency
standards in the private rented sector through more effective
use of the Housing Health & Safety Rating System.
RESPONSES TO
INDIVIDUAL QUESTIONS
N.B. We have confined ourselves to responding
to questions of relevance to the Association.
What steps should the Government take to ensure
that decent housing standards are met and sustained after 2010?
1. While the Decent Homes Programme has
delivered significant improvements in social housing, the thermal
comfort element of the current standard is woefully inadequate
to provide affordable warmth.
2. As long ago as 2004, the predecessor
Committee to this one concluded in its report on Decent Homes[74]:
"The Committee does believe that the thermal comfort criterion
provided for in the Decent Homes standard is far too low."
3. More recently, the EFRA Select Committee
reached a similar conclusion: "The low level of requirements
set for thermal comfort means that significant scope remains for
improvement in energy efficiency levels. It is clear that the
social sector leads the way in improving SAP ratings, but, given
the likelihood of many social tenants being on low incomes, it
is important to maintain progress and for future investment programmes
to prioritise the improvement of energy efficiency levels."[75]
4. ACE therefore believes that, post-2010,
a "Decent Homes Plus" target should be set using a much
more ambitious thermal comfort criterion. We endorse the recommendation
of both the EFRA Select Committee and the Fuel Poverty Advisory
Group that the Government should assess the cost and feasibility
of introducing a SAP 81 standard as the basis of an improved thermal
comfort level for all social housing.
5. We are concerned that, as 2010 fast approaches,
the Government has still given no indication of what, if any,
form of capital investment programme it is considering to follow
on from the Decent Homes Programme. This continuing silence is
all the more surprising given the Government's stated intention
in their recent consultation on the Heat and Energy Saving Strategy
(HESS) that "the Government will show leadership by ensuring
that social housing will meet or exceed the aims it is setting
for all housing on energy efficiency and low carbon energy".[76]
Where targeted housing fails to reach the Decent
Homes criteria by 2010, how should this backlog be addressed?
6. It is anticipated that 95% of the social
housing stock will be "decent" by 2010. However, the
remaining 5% should be tackled as a matter of priority. Moreover,
Government should ensure that sufficient funding is available
to enable this backlog to be tackled expeditiously. The ongoing
CLG consultation on the reform of council housing finance implies
(at para. 3.32) that the backlog will be dealt with by capital
grant programmes provided by Government. However, further clarification
from CLG would be welcome on this point.
Do the management organisationscouncils,
including via ALMOs, and housing associationsneed to change?
7. It goes without saying that delivering
the remainder of the 2010 Decent Homes Programme and further energy
efficiency improvements thereafter will depend on sufficient funds
being available to management organisations. In this context,
we have two specific concerns:
8. At the end of June, the Homes and Communities
Agency wrote to ALMOs (Arms Length Management Organisations) notifying
them of a planned deferral of funding under the ALMO capital programme
for those ALMOs that have not yet achieved two star status. This
will mean that ALMOs that have not yet achieved two star rating
will be denied planned funding for their Decent Homes Programmes.
The Local Government Association states that this decision affects
11 councils, and will lead to a funding deficit over the next
five years in the region of £970 million. We agree with the
LGA that funding for those ALMOs with planned Decent Homes Programme
activities should be immediately reinstated.
9. Housing associations have been able to
fund the majority of their Decent Homes work on the back of a
buoyant housing market, which saw them benefit from healthy bank
balances as a result of the receipts from shared ownership sales.
This has radically changed as the recession has led to severely
reduced mortgage availability coupled with a collapse in property
values. In addition, housing associations' balance sheets reflect
the value of the property they holdwhich in turn has reduced
the amount of money that they can raise from potential lenders.
All of this means that the flow of money through the system has
all but dried up. This clearly has serious implications for housing
associations' ability to deliver further energy efficiency improvements
post-2010.
What are the implications for decent housing standards
of the Government's proposal, currently out for consultation,
to move to a devolved system of council housing finance?
10. In principle, we agree with the proposed
move to a devolved system of council housing finance. However,
we are concerned that councils' ability to deliver energy efficiency
improvements post-2010 may be hindered if they are burdened with
excessive debt.
11. The current consultation contains the
bold assertion that: "Self-financing would require a one-off
reallocation of housing debt in order to put all councils in a
position where they could support their stock from their rental
income in future."[77]
However, we seek further clarification from CLG on this point,
along with assurances that councils will have sufficient headroom
in their business plans to enable them to deliver further energy
efficiency improvements in their housing stock.
Should minimum acceptable social housing standards
be amended to take account of environmental standards, fuel poverty
and the estate?
12. As already indicated, ACE is firmly
of the view that minimum social housing standards should contain
greatly enhanced thermal comfort standards. Without a new standard
that sets demanding targets for energy efficiency for social housing,
this sector of the housing stock risks falling behind the private
sector in terms of energy efficiency, rather than leading the
way, as apparently envisaged in the Government's HESS proposal
to "show leadership by ensuring that social housing will
meet or exceed the aims it is setting for all housing on energy
efficiency and low carbon energy"[78].
In this regard, we are further alarmed that elsewhere in the HESS
consultation the Government is only proposing to "consider"
identifying "aspirational" standards for energy saving
and emission reductions from refurbishments more generally. It
is time to stop considering and start taking action.
How should the Decent Homes target for private
sector homes occupied by vulnerable people be taken forward?
13. It is important to recognise at the
outset that such a target in fact no longer exists.
14. The 2002 Comprehensive Spending Review
extended the Decent Homes Standard to include all private sector
homes occupied by vulnerable households. CLG defined a "vulnerable
household" as one in receipt of at least one disability-related
or means-tested benefit.
15. The following targets were set by Government
for vulnerable households:
A year-on-year increase in the proportion
of vulnerable private sector households in decent homes.
The 2006-07 English House Condition Survey
should show the proportion of vulnerable households in decent
private sector homes to be more than 65%.
The 2010-11 English House Condition Survey
should show the proportion of vulnerable households in decent
private sector homes to be more than 70%.
The 2020-21 English House Condition Survey
should show the proportion of vulnerable households in decent
private sector homes to be more than 75%.
16. In 2008, however, the Government abolished
these national targets (previously set out in Public Service Agreement
7). This might have had something to do with the fact that the
2006-07 English House Condition Survey revealed the proportion
of private vulnerable households living in decent homes to be
only 58.8% in 2006 and 61% in 2007!
17. Since this time there has been no enforceable
Decent Homes target for the private sector. This is clearly a
glaring public policy omission that needs to be remedied.
18. The other way in which local authorities
can intervene to require improvements in the private rented sector
is by means of the Housing Health & Safety Rating System (HHSRS).
However, enforcement of the HHSRS relies in the main on tenants
complaining to their council about the condition of the property
in which they live. Many tenants are unaware of their rights;
others are scared that their landlord will simply try to evict
them, rather than undertake the necessary remedial works.
19. Local councils have a duty under Part
1 of the Housing Act 2004 to "keep the housing conditions
in their area under review" with a view to taking enforcement
action where necessary. If a council has reason to believe that
a "hazard" exists at particular premises, they must
inspect the premises and may then require enforcement action to
be taken to remove that "hazard".
20. One of the key hazards identified in
the HHSRS is "excess cold". For these purposes, CLG
guidance identifies properties with a SAP rating of less than
38 as being likely to fail the HHSRS on the grounds of "excess
cold".
21. However, as already identified, enforcement
of the HHSRS is piecemeal and haphazard. Recent research by the
Chartered Institute of Environmental Health[79]
has shown that local authorities are not always using the HHSRS
to the best effect. In some cases this is because the energy assessment
required by the HHSRS is quite subjective, leaving council officers
unsure whether the premises in question are in fact suffering
from "excess cold".
22. ACE therefore makes a number of suggestions
for improving energy efficiency standards in the private rented
sector:
In the short term, we believe that councils'
ability to identify excessively cold premises would be greatly
improved if they were to be given access to the data contained
in local Energy Performance Certificates. This would enable them
to identify F- and G-rated properties, which they could then target
for inspection and improvement. In addition to enabling councils
to prevent unhealthy homes, this would help them deliver on their
HECA targets (set pursuant to the Home Energy Conservation Act
1995) as well as their responsibilities under National Indicators
186 and 187.
When premises are assessed under the
HHSRS, an Energy Performance Certificate should be required at
the same time. This would help overcome the problem of subjectivityand
provide useful information for the future.
When premises are improved as a result
of having failed the energy assessment, they should be improved
in such a way as to "fuel-poverty proof" them for the
future. This will require a substantial package of energy efficiency
improvements, rather than just one or two measures to bring the
property just above the SAP 38 threshold. It is arguable that
the HHSRS requires this anyway, since one of the criteria under
the system is that the property should be "affordable".
Furthermore, some energy efficiency improvements will be likely
to be subject to Building Regulations, which would lead to an
even higher SAP rating being achieved.
In the medium term, we believe that the
Government must stop relying on such piecemeal and haphazard interventions
for improving private rented sector housing stock. We believe
that urgent consideration should be given to regulating the private
rented sector to prevent landlords from renting out properties
that are F- or G-rated. Only in this way will the necessary improvements
in this sector be comprehensively achieved.
What lessons can be learned from the Decent Homes
Programme and equivalents in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland?
23. The Scottish equivalent of the Decent
Homes Standard is the Scottish Housing Quality Standard. This
includes an energy efficiency element that requires properties
to achieve a minimum NHER rating of 5 "where technically
feasible". We believe that this is a step in the right direction,
but is not ambitious enough.
24. NHER 5 is not high enough to ensure
adequate levels of thermal comfort; and furthermore "technically
feasible" is defined in such a way as to exclude the installation
of energy efficiency measures that are "disproportionately
costly". "Disproportionate cost" is not itself
defined, which means that certain energy efficiency measures can
be arbitrarily excluded on the grounds of cost. The definition
therefore needs to be reworded and tightened so as to make absolutely
clear which measures are both technically feasible and cost-effective.
September 2009
72 EFRA Committee, Energy efficiency and fuel poverty,
18 May 2009, HC37, para. 95 Back
73
Fuel Poverty Advisory Group, Seventh Annual Report, July
2009 Back
74
ODPM: Housing, Planning, Local Government and the Regions Committee,
Decent Homes, 7 May 2004, para. 49 Back
75
EFRA Committee, Energy efficiency and fuel poverty, 18 May 2009,
HC37, para. 94 Back
76
DECC and CLG, Heat and Energy Saving Strategy Consultation, February
2009, para. 1.52 Back
77
CLG, Reform of council housing finance consultation, July 2009,
para. 4.15 Back
78
Op. cit. Back
79
http://www.cieh.org/library/Knowledge/Housing/Housing%20survey.pdf Back
|