Housing for elderly or disabled persons (Hansard, 18 January 1984)

§ Mr. Craigen
I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.
This new clause is about the continuing problem in Scotland of the lack of suitable housing for elderly and disabled people. It seeks to remove, or exempt, local authorities from the obligation to sell housing stock such as one or two-apartment housing that is particularly suited to the needs of elderly and disabled people.

§ Mr. Henderson
The hon. Gentleman stumbled for a moment, and I suspect that he should have said, "To remove from tenants the right to buy" the kind of houses to which he is referring.

§ Mr. Craigen
I am hardly on my feet before I am interrupted. I am trying to establish in the Minister's mind the importance of the scarcity of accommodation for elderly and disabled people. About one quarter of households in Scotland are now occupied by single people, and the great preponderance of those households are occupied by single elderly people.
It has become politically popular — certainly, it is politically necessary — to refer to the importance of sheltered housing accommodation. I know that in Glasgow there is a substantial waiting list for sheltered accommodation. I think that it runs to about 5,000, but not long ago it was only 3,000, and that was worrying enough. Moreover, the problem is reflected in many other parts of the country.
The great majority of elderly people do not require sheltered housing, but they require suitable and adequate housing. It is important that the housing stock of one-and two-apartment houses should not be so eroded that the limited options available to the local authorities are reduced. We believe that provision should be made in the amending legislation to safeguard elderly and disabled people. I urge the House to accept the new clause.

§ Mr. Henderson
The hon. Member for Glasgow, Maryhill (Mr. Craigen) introduced his new clause in an extremely reasonable manner. It is one that sounds fine superficially, but the more one looks at the proposition that it contains, the more one sees that it would be counterproductive if it were accepted, partly because it would be a restriction of the rights of tenants who had been given rights under the 1980 Act, and partly because one of the great merits of the sale of council houses is that it deals with the very problem to which the hon. Gentleman refers —the need for more accommodation for single persons, particularly single elderly people. The best way to provide resources which otherwise would not be available is by pursuing the sale of council houses with enthusiasm and encouraging tenants to seek to buy their own houses. In that way councils can provide the houses that are needed now, and not the houses that were needed 20, 30 or more years ago. The sale of council houses to sitting tenants is one way of dealing with the problem that the hon. Gentleman seeks to remedy. I therefore oppose the new clause.

§ Mr. Maxton
I support my hon. Friend's important new clause, particularly as it affects Glasgow, part of which I represent. Glasgow has many houses that were built for the single elderly person. However, they are not covered by the present legislation because they are not strictly sheltered housing for the elderly, specially developed for elderly and disabled people. I have quite a lot of one-or two-apartment blocks in my constituency. They are occupied almost exclusively by elderly people, and they are required for more elderly people when the present occupants leave. One block in my constituency, at Dougrie Place in Castlemilk, has an alarm system attached to a nearby old folks' home. In theory, the alarm goes through to the matron or the person who is on duty at the home, and that person phones the doctor. Unfortunately, financial restrictions have meant that the system has never 361 been operated, although it has been installed for some two years. However, those houses do not come under the legislation, and they should do, particularly in view of what was said by the hon. Member for Fife, North-East (Mr. Henderson).
6.30 pm
Glasgow district council has been allowed a capital allocation of £52 million for the coming year. That sum will be available only if the council is prepared to increase rents by the exorbitant amounts that the Government would like to see imposed, and if it fails to do that it is likely to have its capital allocation reduced to £39 million. I have talked to Glasgow district councillors about the matter and it is clear that even with the full £52 million, not one new house will be built; all that money will have to be used for the redevelopment and improvement of the existing stock. Thus, no new sheltered housing will be available in Glasgow.
That £52 million includes the supposed sum that will come from the sale of council houses, but that is a myth. It is said that if one house is sold, another can be built from the money received. If properties that are occupied by elderly people are sold to those people, they are likely to have a long tenancy behind them and, when this measure is passed, they will receive the full 60 per cent, discount. In other words the council will receive only 40 per cent. of the value of the house, and it cannot build a new house at modern values on that basis.

§ Mr. McQuarrie
The hon. Gentleman says that no new sheltered housing will be built in Glasgow next year. Will the housing associations be building any sheltered housing in Glasgow? A special allocation of funds is made to the housing associations specifically for building sheltered housing, and I can hardly believe that not one house will be built by them under the sheltered programme.

§ Mr. Maxton
Some may be built by housing associations but they will not necessarily be available for allocation by the district council to those tenants whom the council believes require sheltered housing. In my constituency two areas have been allocated to the Hanover building association and one to the British Legion Association for sheltered housing, but neither body is able to start building because it does not have the funds. In other words, it is not just a question of the district council not having the funds to do this type of building; even the associations that are specifically there to build such houses do not have the funds to do so.
I was saying that, in the main, for the properties about which we are speaking the district council will receive only 40 per cent, of their value. Equally, in most cases, particularly when dealing with the elderly and retired who are seeking to purchase their homes, the loans that are given to purchase those houses come from the local authority. Thus, the authority does not make a net capital gain on the deal. On the one hand it is selling property at a low price and on the other is having to lend the money to enable people to buy. People over 55 are unlikely to obtain a mortgage from a building society, even though they must seek one in the first instance.
Therefore, it is not true to say that the local authority will get extra capital resources from the sale of council 362 houses with which to build more new properties. Indeed, it can be losing from its stock those houses that are needed desperately for elderly people who cannot afford the rents of bigger houses, who no longer wish to live in bigger houses but who wish to have the protection that is often provided in blocks of flats — even those without any special arrangements — because they are more secure than the normal tenement blocks.
In an area such as Glasgow, which has an ageing population, more and more people require this type of accommodation. It is a disgrace that while the local authority is being forced to sell off its houses, it is being restricted in the amount of capital available and is unable to build new houses to replace them.
I welcome the new clause because it would extend the existing provision and mean that more houses would be available, not just for the few elderly people who can afford to purchase them, but for the large bulk of tenants in council houses who are getting older and who require different accommodation. Further, if these properties are maintained within the housing stock, elderly people will come out of the three, four and five-apartment houses, so releasing them for the younger people who require them. That would make more sense than the blanket sale of council houses that the Government desire.

§ Mr. McQuarrie
I see merit in part of the new clause. I listened with interest to the remarks of the hon. Member for Glasgow, Cathcart (Mr. Maxton) but I should have thought that there was adequate provision for the needs of the elderly in section 1(11) (c) of the 1980 Act, which says: where a dwelling-house is one of a group which has been provided with facilities (including a call system and the services of a warden) specially designed or adapted for the needs of elderly or disabled persons. That means that some elderly persons' houses may not be sold, and presumably that would preclude the right of some elderly people to purchase their houses. It is our intention to give the elderly just as much right as younger people to purchase their homes.
I see some merit in the new clause in relation to the disabled. Where a local authority has provided a house for a disabled person, not only the district council but the social work department of the region will have subscribed to the finance that was necessary to make alterations to the property, such as the building of ramps, the widening of doors and converting the bath into a shower. Such houses should be retained.

§ Mr. Maxton
This is the third time that the hon. Member for Banff and Buchan (Mr. McQuarrie) has got it wrong. We are debating a measure that amends the existing Act, which states that if ramps are built, doors are widened and other alterations are made for a disabled person, that property cannot be sold by the district authority. That provision was inserted in the original measure largely as a result of Opposition pressure. It would not be a bad idea if the hon. Gentleman had a quick look through the Act before making speeches on the subject.

§ Mr. McQuarrie
I take no notice of what the hon. Gentleman says. If he reads the new clause he may get a bit of intelligence into his head because it refers to a dwelling-house … which the local authority usually lets to elderly or disabled persons. I see merit in the proposal because of the inclusion of those words. I assure the hon. Member for Cathcart that I am 363 aware of what the Act says, having read it probably with more understanding than he did. I was a member of the Standing Committee and played an active part in those deliberations. Perhaps the Minister will explain the precise position of houses that are adapted for the disabled. Will they be released for sale or will they be restricted, in the way that the new clause proposes, and not be available for purchase?
If my hon. Friend can give us an assurance that housing for the disabled will be retained, I shall accept that that is what we are looking for. I do not subscribe to the view that the general ratepayers of any local authority, particularly in small local authorities such as mine, should be subjected to the expense of adapting a house for the disabled when that disabled person does not want to purchase the house and ultimately dies, leaving the house available. If the person has not purchased the house, a member of the family could do so. The new clause as it stands would allow the local authority to retain the house and refuse to allow the person to take possession. That is not contained in the Act and that is why I am asking for clarification. If my hon. Friend can give me that clarification there is no need for the new clause.

§ Mr. Allan Stewart
The hon. Member for Glasgow, Maryhill (Mr. Craigen) introduced the new clause in his customary reasonable manner, but as my hon. Friend the Member for Fife, North-East (Mr. Henderson) pointed out, it is sweeping in its effects, as the speech from the hon. Member for Glasgow, Cathcart (Mr. Maxton) made clear. The hon. Member for Cathcart raised a number of related general points, in particular about the capital allocation to Glasgow. The capital allocation takes account of the point made about loans being provided by the authority, that individual authorities' estimates of income from receipts are adjusted to exclude sales where the authority provides a loan. However, in general, 95 per cent, of loans for council house purchases are made by the private sector. We are extremely encouraged by the way in which the financial institutions have risen to the challenge of the opportunity provided by the right-to-buy legislation.
The hon. Member for Cathcart made a second point about rents in Glasgow. He did not make it clear to the House, although no doubt he will have an opportunity to do so, whether he is in the McFadden group or the backbench group that overruled the views of the executive and the officers in that debate.

§ Mr. Maxton
I am on the side of my election agent, Mr. Pat Lally.

§ Mr. Stewart
No doubt the ratepayers of Cathcart will be interested in that information.
As my hon. Friend the Member for Fife, North-East said, the new clause would remove the right to buy from elderly and disabled tenants and from anyone who happens to live in a house that the authority could claim was ordinarily let to the elderly or disabled. For example, someone who had inherited a tenancy from his or her parents would be denied the right to buy under the new clause. As a result, almost all one or two-apartment houses in Scotland might be excluded from the right to buy. As my hon. Friend said, the right to buy gives authorities extra resources to improve their housing stock elsewhere.
My hon. Friend the Member for Banff and Buchan (Mr. McQuarrie) asked me to elucidate the provisions in the 364 existing legislation concerning the stock of sheltered and amenity housing for elderly and disabled people. I am happy to give him the reassurance that he seeks In the 1980 Act, sheltered housing is wholly excluded from the right to buy. If tenants were allowed to buy individual sheltered houses this would undermine the viability of such schemes, which will have been designed as a unit with a warden and services.
6.45 pm
My hon. Friend also asked about special needs housing, adapted housing, for the elderly and disabled, where the house did not form part of a sheltered housing development. The sale of such houses is not of immediate consequence to other tenants, but if such houses have been built and adapted with special features for elderly people, section 4 of the 1980 Act allows an individual authority to impose a pre-emption condition on the sale of such houses, which will allow the council to buy the house back, if it wishes, when it is for sale.
In addition, when an authority receives an application to purchase from the tenant of the house that has been specially adapted for elderly people, it can, as an alternative to imposing a pre-emption condition, make: an application to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State under section 3 A of the 1980 Act for his consent to refuse to sell the house. These provisions are working well; we have received no representations to the contrary.

§ Mr. Henderson
One thing that has emerged from the debate is that, given that the number of houses roughly meets the number of families now, which is different from that in days gone by, there seems to be general agreement in the House that there is still a shortage of accommodation for elderly people. Will my hon. Friend ensure that his Department will look to see whether there are ways to further encourage the private sector, as well as the public sector, to concentrate on this need?

§ Mr. Stewart
My hon. Friend is right, and we have been encouraged by the initiative that the private sector has recently taken — for example, in the provision of sheltered housing for sale. New build housing will provide an important facility and an important type of housing provision, particularly for those who wish to move to smaller accommodation.

§ Mr. Craigen
I know about the demand, in certain areas, for the housing to which the hon. Gentleman is referring, but that is for purchase, not for letting. Has the hon. Gentleman quantified the number of people who are looking for accommodation for rent, as distinct from the numbers who are being catered for by the private buildinger and who want to buy?

§ Mr. Stewart
The hon. Gentleman is right to say that I was talking about new building for sale, which was the point that my hon. Friend the Member for Fife, North-East was making. The present legislation contains adequate safeguards to enable councils to retain a stock of houses for elderly people with special needs in their housing stock.

§ Mr. Craigen
Is the hon. Gentleman giving me a blunt assurance that if we do not press this matter to a Division he will look sympathetically on those applications that he receives from the authorities?

§ Mr. Stewart
We have received 30 applications, of which 10 were withdrawn. I hope that the hon. Gentleman 365 will accept that there has been no great volume of complaints from the local authorities since the passage of the 1980 Act that these provisions are not working well. In that light, I suggest that the new clause is unnecessary and undesirable and I hope that the hon. Gentleman will withdraw it.

§ Mr. Craigen
With those qualified assurances from the Minister, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the motion.