---

Housing and Regeneration Bill

I fully accept that, and it is the background to the point I am about to make. Given the huge and swelling extent of unmet housing need, it is crucial that the funding of public rented housing—in particular the levels of management and maintenance allowance and the major repair allowance—is wholly adequate. It clearly is not at present. A new Government report out this month, ““Self-financing of council housing services: summary of findings of a modelling exercise””, astonishingly states that current allowances undercut"““basic investment needs by 43 per cent. over 30 years””." Coming from an official Government report, that is a staggering statement: the funding provided for council housing is little more than half of what is needed—that is official. The report was published by the Department for Communities and Local Government, and it also states that"““anticipated levels of future subsidy…are not sufficient to maintain a sustainable level of housing services within the HRA””—" housing revenue account—"““subsidy system.””" That is also a remarkable statement. This shortfall in allowances is what is driving councils to privatise their homes in defiance of the wishes of their tenants—and against the wishes of most of the councillors as well. It also means that many local authorities cannot meet the Government's decent housing standard, and that many who can at present will be unable to sustain the standard in the longer term. Other amendments in the group, notably new clause 1, protest at the bullying and blackmailing of tenants into stock transfer by some councils—and by quite a lot of landlords—but that will continue to happen unless the basic management allowances are substantially raised along the lines set out in new clause 8. That is my basic case. Perversely, the net funding trail is going in the opposite direction. Council rents are rising faster in order to close the gap on private rents in the locality. Ideologically, that turns the whole purpose of council housing on its head. Council rents are even rising higher than expenditure, so that tenants are paying what amounts to a tax to the Treasury, which works out at some £180 million this year—a parliamentary answer of 18 December last year even suggested that the figure could rise to £900 million a year by 2022. That is on top of the £1.5 billion taken each year from council housing revenue accounts, ostensibly to pay back historical debt. That, again, is odd because tenants do not own the stock and it is difficult to see why they should be burdened with having to service the debt. New clause 8 is about justice for tenants. It would require the Secretary of State to calculate the housing revenue account subsidy needed to ensure that local authorities can properly ““manage, maintain and repair”” their homes and"““acquire, rehabilitate and build new housing””" so as to be able to meet"““the need for affordable housing within their respective areas.””" That moderate, reasonable and measured request is long overdue and it is now incumbent on the Government to commit to that position. If they do not, I intend to support new clause 8 in tonight's Divisions.