---

House-building Programme

My Lords, I am going to concentrate on the social effects of the Government’s house-building programme. For millions of us, our housing determines what kind of lives we can lead. It determines whether we can get in and out of our homes, go to work or to the shops, whether we can look after ourselves, wash or go to the loo, and whether we can fulfil our social roles—put our children to bed, feed our families, attend a family function or even visit a dying friend. You need spend only a short time in a spinal injuries unit if you want a rapid lesson in the crucial part that housing plays in our social policy. The lottery of what kind of home you happened to be living in when you met your accident has stark effects. One person will go straight back home, rejoin their family and get on with their lives. Another will never see their home again—they face living in an institution for an intolerable length of time while the soul-destroying search for accessible housing goes on, uprooting their families or, for some, losing their families altogether. That is the rapid lesson, but it is one which we learn more slowly and more obstinately as we grow older, as we find that we cannot quite manage the steps at the front of the house or the stairs to get up to the bathroom and to bed. But we now have a chance to make a sizeable impact on the accessibility of our housing stock if we take decisive action and I urge my noble friend the Minister to ensure that this is kept at the forefront of our housing policy. The Deputy Prime Minister announced in his July 2002 statement, echoed in the communities plan, that there was potential for 200,000 homes to be provided additional to the current plans by 2016. However, recent research published by the Town and Country Planning Association, titled Housing the Next Generation: Household growth, housing demand and housing requirements, by Alan Holmans with Christine Whitehead, pointed out that the number of households can be expected to rise by about 3.5 million between 2001 and 2021. That is an increase of around 175,000 households per annum. It is said that the new building is also required to replace dwellings that are demolished, such as in regeneration areas, and to improve housing conditions by meeting the backlog of unmet housing need. For instance, in relation to disabled people, the ODPM 2005 survey of English Housing 2003–04, states that 1.4 million disabled people in England are in need of specially adapted accommodation. Of this total, nearly one quarter—320,000 disabled people—are currently living in unsuitable housing. The report concludes that in total we are going to need upwards of 200,000 new homes per annum. But the research also found that the single biggest factor in the projected increase in the number of households—between 25 and 30 per cent—was the fact that people are living longer. Given the strong correlation between ageing and impairment is not enough simply to build 200,000 new homes per year. We will need to build 200,000 accessible lifetime homes per year. Moreover, we need more wheelchair accessible homes. Already, according to research by the John Grooms housing association, there is a countrywide shortfall of 300,000 wheelchair homes and again this will augment significantly in the years to 2021. However, if the Government would follow the GLA’s lead and ensure that all the new houses in the growth areas and indeed elsewhere are built to the lifetime homes standard, with at least 10 per cent built to be wheelchair accessible, the impact would be profound. As I hope I have made clear, for disabled people accessible housing means independence, better health and the ability to compete for jobs in the open labour market on a more level playing field. Such a transformation in the lives of disabled people and their families will have economic as well as social benefits. As the Prime Minister’s Strategy Unit report, Improving the Life Chances of Disabled People, points out:"““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. Adopting lifetime homes standards would save, on average, £1,100 per dwelling on the cost of major adaptations while the average cost of building a three-bedroom, five-person house to lifetime homes standards was calculated to cost an additional £100 to £300 per dwelling, in 1997 prices. This was calculated to be a total saving of £39 million per year on major adaptations. Further savings would also be made in terms of expenditure on minor adaptations and equipment, care services, hospital stays and temporary residential care. Lifetime Homes Standards apply to all age groups, including children and elderly people, so the potential savings would be significant””." The future demand and the potential cost savings are clear, but where is the sense of urgency? The Government have yet to make building to the lifetime homes standard mandatory. New housing schemes will in due course need to be accompanied by access statements, demonstrating how access to the development for disabled people has been addressed. But I am aware that there are serious concerns that the new regime will not interpret access widely enough. A commitment was also given during the passage of the latest Planning Act that the Government would revise Part M of the building regulations, which currently require only ““visitability”” standards, but again disability organisations are concerned that there appears to be an insufficient sense of urgency. And this is not just a building regulations issue; it is critically also a planning issue and we need to see this reflected in the Government’s planning policy statement on housing, which should also specify a minimum of 10 per cent of new housing to be wheelchair accessible. I know that my noble friend the Minister will be concerned that progress is made, and made rapidly, and I hope that she will be able to give the House an assurance that these issues will be expedited and that her department understands the urgency of the matter. If we do not address these issues now, the consequences will be grave. The Government’s house-building programme has come under attack from those who simply reject any responsibility towards the homeless and those in housing need, preferring to retreat into their nimby comfort zone, and from those who think it will inevitably eat up the greenbelt and spell ecological disaster. I believe that both are equally misguided. We cannot run away from housing need—that would indeed be a social and economic disaster. Instead, we need to face up to what needs to be done and build all the new homes that need to be built. We need to build them all to the lifetime homes standard, with a specific proportion fully wheelchair accessible, and ensure that the new developments have the necessary infrastructure, investment and social mix that will enable them to thrive. We could deliver the active, inclusive, safe, well designed and built, well connected, thriving sustainable communities that the Government have made the central goal of their house-building programme. That is a vision that disabled people would really think was worth fighting for. And if the Government embrace inclusive housing as the way of the future and take all the necessary steps to deliver new homes that are accessible and adaptable, they will find the disability movement a powerful ally in defending and delivering the sustainable communities plan.