§ Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr. McLoughlin.]
§ 10 pm
§ Mr. Greg Pope (Hyndburn)I am grateful for the opportunity to raise the issue of housing in Hyndburn. I am also grateful to the Minister for being here to reply to this short Adjournment debate.
There is no doubt that housing is the most important issue facing my constituents, and I welcome the opportunity to highlight their growing needs. On the surface, my constituency must appear a good example of the ideal of a home-owning democracy, as more than four out of five of my constituents are owner-occupiers. However, the issue is not the level of home ownership, but the quality of those homes. The sad fact is that many houses have become sub-standard, or even unfit for human habitation, for a number of reasons.
First, most of the housing in Hyndburn was created during the industrial revolution. Although it served its purpose at the time by providing a rapidly expanding work force with roofs over their heads, it was built with an eye on the clock and on the purse. Inevitably, corners were cut.
Much of the original housing still remains today, along with the growing associated problems. Some 18,000 of the 35,000 properties in my constituency were constructed before the first world war. Poor original construction has led to widespread problems that are evident in much of the old, terraced housing. The problems include subsidence, due to poor or absent foundations.
The Minister can imagine the difficulties, given the hilly Pennine terrain. The houses suffer buckle walls due to old heavy stone guttering, leaning chimneys and sagging roofs that cause the structures to move out of square. The latter problem has created particular difficulties that can affect entire terraces and make individual action impossible. In addition, structural problems have undoubtedly been compounded by financial restraints.
The relative prosperity created by a thriving cotton industry in Lancashire in the 19th century meant that many people could buy their own cheaply built house for the first time. That must have seemed ideal for many lower-income families who could purchase their own homes and avoid the grip of the rent man. Now, as then, low pay is endemic in east Lancashire. Although most people are more than able to meet their mortgage repayments and other outgoings, few could have foreseen the amount of money that is required to make the essential repairs to properties that are rapidly deteriorating.
My constituents are rightly proud of their properties. When I raised the issue in the House on a previous occasion, the leader of the Conservative group on my local council accused me of insulting people's little palaces. That kind of patronising remark does not take us any further forward. I am not criticising people's home decorating—the home owners are not at fault. I am criticising the structures of those buildings. The longer that essential repairs are left undone, the more serious the problems will become, and the more expensive they will be to remedy.
1236 The decay of the properties was unavoidable, and private sector housing in Hyndburn is in a mess. Some 9,500 homes in my constituency require statutory intervention, as they are considered unfit to live in. A further 5,500 properties require assistance in order to prevent them from becoming unfit for habitation. In all, 15,000 houses require urgent attention. In 1996, 15,000 families in my constituency are living in unfit or sub-standard housing. That is nothing short of a disgrace and a scandal.
Every week in my surgeries, I meet people whose housing situation is desperate. They are unable to remedy the problems themselves or to receive assistance from the local authority. The link between poor housing and poor health is apparent. As Florence Nightingale noted more than 100 years ago:
The connection between health and the dwellings of the population is one of the most important that exists".That was true then, and it is equally true now. Hundreds of millions of pounds must be spent in order to repair defects to about 15,000 properties and to ensure that my constituents have decent housing.No one—certainly not me—expects that amount of money to be made available. However, the fact remains that the funding and resources available to the local authority have been cut in the past few years. Hyndburn borough council now receives only a tiny fraction of the resources necessary to redress the problem. It is clear that many of the 15,000 properties will no longer be standing by the time the council receives anything like the money it requires to repair them.
The Government have placed Hyndburn council in a dilemma. Until now, local authorities have had a mandatory duty to pay housing improvement grants to owners whose properties fail the fitness standard. If one's house is unfit for habitation, one must receive a grant by law. It is not legal for local authorities to institute a queuing system.
However, that does not address the problem in areas such as Hyndburn where the resources do not match the call on those resources. There is no doubt that many people could take the local authority to the ombudsman and force it to pay the mandatory grant. However, the council cannot pay out money that it does not have. If it sought to do so, I am sure that the Minister and other Conservative Members would be the first to complain, and the council would face a surcharge. It is a no-win situation, in which the real losers are my constituents.
The Government are in the process of extricating themselves from the mess by attempting to remove local authorities' mandatory duty to provide home improvement grants during the passage of the Housing Bill, which is presently in Committee. That is all well and good for the Government, but I think that I am entitled to ask where it leaves my 15,000 constituents. They cannot get a grant from the local authority when they are legally entitled to it; how on earth will they get such a grant when that legal requirement is removed? It is important to raise the subject, as something must be done before it is too late.
Some housing is already beyond repair, and houses have been demolished. It is obviously cheaper to repair and extend the life of existing properties than to demolish them and attempt new build.
1237 The local authority is doing all it can. With the money that it has received in recent years, it has launched two successful projects, one in Scaitcliffe and one in East Accrington. The council has shown some ingenuity in progressing its urban renewal programme. The East Accrington renewal area has received priority status since the scheme's inception and considerable improvements have been achieved in the East Accrington area. Many properties have been improved and provided with modern amenities, satisfactory water supplies—there is a problem in east Lancashire with lead pipes—and many other improvements to the structures. Funds can now be freed to target other areas and that is a tangible success.
In some instances, however, the housing is beyond repair. In those circumstances, clearance is the only option. Due to lack of funds, the council cannot afford to do that on the scale that is required. That has caused some areas to become seriously neglected and many houses stand empty. That is a genuine problem, which I hope the Under-Secretary will address.
Some people are caught in a trap. They cannot sell their property, which is falling into disrepair for structural reasons that they cannot afford to remedy. It is impossible for them to sell. In areas earmarked for clearance, clearance blight shows up on any search that is done when the property is put up for sale. People are trapped in decaying properties, and that is a growing phenomenon in my constituency. Privately owned homes are simply abandoned, deserted, and left to fall into rack and ruin.
Hyndburn is an innovative local authority, and it recently submitted a bid for a demonstration project, in partnership with the Portico housing association, which would have provided money for improvements, demolition and new build on vacant land. Sadly, that bid was not successful. Tomorrow, Hyndburn council will submit another bid, in partnership with the Bradford and Northern housing association. If successful, that will provide funds to tackle the growing problem of deserted, empty, privately owned properties. I urge the Under-Secretary to support that scheme when it is submitted tomorrow.
As I said, the vast majority of properties in my constituency are owner-occupied. Council housing forms only a small percentage—less than 12 per cent.—of the total properties in the borough. Many of those council houses are suffering problems. Some improvements have been made, and we have had some successes with the estate action programme, which has now stopped.
In passing, I wish to express my gratitude to the Department of the Environment via the Under-Secretary for the estate action programme in Trinity street in Oswaldtwistle, which has upgraded properties. I also pay tribute to the work done by the residents who campaigned for estate action money, and to Councillor Sheelagh Delaney, who worked tirelessly on that programme.
We still have 850 council houses that require a substantial investment to reach a minimum standard. It will obviously cost of lot of money to ensure that they are brought up to standard and the money is desperately needed. The Government have given no sign that they will be of any assistance. The Government are seemingly content to deprive my constituents of the basic right to live in modern and acceptable housing.
It is a self-evident truth, to anybody who visits Hyndburn or considers its problems, that it faces an extremely serious housing problem which will continue to 1238 deteriorate unless measures are taken quickly. Despite the best efforts at renewal, the number of unfit and sub-standard houses is putting an intolerable pressure on the funds of Hyndburn council. The limited resources mean that houses will deteriorate faster than they can be repaired. Eventually, the only alternative to the short-sighted policy of not providing resources now will be large-scale clearance and demolition.
The problem is not unique to Hyndburn, although it is to east Lancashire. Hyndburn and its neighbouring authorities of Blackburn, Pendle, Burnley and Rossendale are special cases, resulting from a higher percentage of home ownership, history of low earnings and a poorly constructed housing stock, with the majority of properties having been built before the first world war. Those factors taken together should indicate to the Department that east Lancashire is a special case, which I hope the Minister understands. Decent housing should be available to all, and that right is currently denied to many of my constituents.
§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Environment (Mr. James Clappison)The hon. Member for Hyndburn (Mr. Pope) has raised some important issues relating to housing generally and to Hyndburn in particular. I am pleased to have the opportunity to explain Government policies to assist with the problems that the hon. Gentleman described.
There are a number of policies relating specifically to housing renovation grants, including proposed reforms, that will be of assistance in meeting some of the problems that the hon. Gentleman outlined.
I understand the hon. Gentleman's concerns about the condition of private sector housing stock in Hyndburn, given the historical context. There is a long tradition of owner-occupation in Hyndburn, as elsewhere in north-east Lancashire, and the numbers of people owning their homes are significantly above the regional and national averages. Home ownership in Hyndburn is about 80 per cent. The majority of those homes were built before 1919 in Hyndburn's industrial heyday, to house workers employed in local mills. Those properties were built with one eye on the clock and one eye on the purse. It is not surprising that many are deteriorating. That is the legacy of Hyndburn's industrial past.
While it must remain a fundamental principle that home owners are primarily responsible for repairing and maintaining their own properties, there is a long-standing tradition of Government assistance for private sector renewal in particular, for helping owners whose houses are unfit and who cannot afford the necessary repairs. The Government remain committed to that principle. The forthcoming Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Bill seeks to create a grants framework within which the work of renewing areas of unfit private housing can take place. We are certainly maintaining our commitment to the tradition of helping private sector home owners of the type that the hon. Gentleman described.
The stated aim of the Government's housing policy is to bring a decent home within the reach of every family. In view of the hon. Gentleman's comments, I draw his attention to our plain commitment to do so in last year's White Paper "Our Future Homes", which took stock of how far we had progressed towards that aim and set the context for the next decade.
1239 We can take the availability of housing capital resources as a starting point. They remain substantial, and housing investment programme allocations for 1996–97 will amount to £1.217 million, which is a good outcome for housing under the current financial constraints. There are a number of other sources of grant for local authorities. They will be able to bid for £30 million under the housing partnership fund, which is aimed principally at bringing empty properties back into use, and £60 million is available under cash incentive schemes to help tenants move from social housing to owner-occupation.
In addition, in 1996–97, local authority housing will benefit from £260 million for estate action programmes—the hon. Gentleman fairly drew attention to the assistance that housing in Hyndburn has received from the estate action scheme—and £89 million is available for housing action trusts. Both housing action trusts and the estate action scheme are part of the single regeneration budget.
In addition to those sources of grant, in 1996–97, more than £1 billion is available to housing associations under the Housing Corporation's approved development programme. Public resources alone will be unable to cope with the ever-increasing demand for capital investment in housing, and, increasingly, local authorities will have to be innovative in seeking to attract additional resources into housing, principally from the private sector.
The Government are committed to the continued provision of social rented housing at affordable rents. "Our Future Homes" emphasised the Government's continuing commitment to improve the condition of social rented stock and to diversify its ownership through voluntary transfer to new landlords. That positive process has resulted in many improvements, especially for tenants.
The Housing Bill includes measures to introduce new types of social landlord, who can bring in private finance to improve their estates and to keep rents affordable. That will enable a wider range of non-profit landlords, such as local housing companies, to provide social housing. Local housing companies would offer a new way for local authorities to attract private investment into social housing, and they could take on existing social housing through transfers.
As I have said, transfers provide clear benefits to tenants. Their new landlord is in the private sector. Unlike local authorities, that landlord can borrow outside the constraints of the public sector borrowing requirement. Investment in repairs and improvements can be made while rents remain affordable, because the price paid for the properties by new landlords takes account of both their present condition and the investment that is needed. Repairs can be carried out and the debt repaid within affordable rent levels.
Hitherto, most transfers of the type that I have described have been in shire districts, although most "problematic" estates are in urban areas. A new estates renewal challenge fund has been established to help specifically to improve large-scale, poor-quality council estates by facilitating their transfers to housing associations and to other new landlords such as local housing companies.
Such transfers may be difficult without additional financial support to offset negative valuations that require an injection of capital through the housing authority or 1240 direct to the new landlord to enhance the value of the stock, so that it is a long-term, viable proposition, or to offset poor asset cover where the value of the property is insufficient to provide cover for the borrowing that the new landlord would need to take on. Some public investment may be required before or after transfer.
The new fund is substantial. It will be worth £314 million over the next three years. Local authorities have been invited to bid for resources in 1996–97, and, although that timetable may be too short for some authorities, I ask them to consider working up bids for future years. In addition, I urge all authorities, as part of the annual housing investment programme bidding process, to consider whether the estates renewal challenge fund might help them to deal with their problematic council estates.
The hon. Gentleman drew particular attention to the problem of serious disrepair and unfitness in private housing stock. As I have said, much of Hyndburn's housing is characterised by rundown terraced housing built many years ago, sometimes to dubious standards. According to the local authority's own figures, some 9,500 properties are statutorily unfit for human habitation—about 30 per cent. of the total private stock in Hyndburn. That leaves some owners unable to repair and maintain their homes. Clearly, in those circumstances, the case for selective clearance needs to be carefully considered by the local authority.
The hon. Gentleman mentioned two renewal areas in Hyndburn, first in west Accrington and more recently at Scaitcliffe. Those renewal areas have encouraged a comprehensive and focused attempt to deal with rundown housing. Both areas demonstrate the benefits of proactively targeting resources to specified capital grant on an area basis, rather than responding reactively to unsolicited applications for grants pepper-potted around an area.
There must be realism about the resources that will be available to deal with these issues.
However, the public purse is limited in what it can afford. There is no ducking the conclusion that demand for grants under the Local Government and Housing Act 1989 has far outstripped the available resources. Hon. Members should consider that that Act introduced and promoted a strategic and an area-based approach to investments and to improvements. In particular, it promoted the creation of renewal areas that local authorities, such as Hyndburn, have established where possible.
The Act instituted a coherent range of grants aimed at inadequate housing occupied, in the main, by poor people. It also introduced a grant to give systematic help to disabled people. These provisions have provided a considerable amount of help to poor people and to disabled people. Most importantly, they have offered local authorities help to implement renewal strategies for targeted areas to ensure that the available resources achieve impact and give value for money. Judging by the description that the hon. Member gave of some areas in Hyndburn, this approach could be valuable.
Practical experience of operating the regime has, in some respects, been less than a total success. It has provided local authorities with a good range of tools for tackling renewal. However, mandatory grants have proved difficult to control and predict. That is the feature to 1241 which hon. Members should pay particular attention. The applications for grants have come from all areas, not necessarily the target area within which the local authority is seeking to achieve results through concerted action.
Individual grants have often led to a pepper-potting of improvements, to a loss of impact and, most crucially, to an undermining and slowing down of progress on area-based activity by pre-empting limited specified capital grant resources. Because of the inability to direct the flow of applications, some authorities have attempted to prioritise them.
The Government's commitment to helping poor people in inadequate housing to repair and maintain their homes is undiminished, but the regime within which that process takes place has to recognise that resources are necessarily constrained, and that there is an overriding need that it should support area-based renewal. In other words, local authorities must have the flexibility and freedom to use resources to best effect without being hampered and frustrated by unsolicited demands for grants that, by law, they have to meet.
That is the background against which I invite the hon. Gentleman to see the Government's proposals. These proposals seek to reform the renovation grants system for home owners and landlords in a way that will leave local authorities such as Hyndburn free to act strategically in key areas.
§ Mr. PopeI am concerned about the Minister's argument about local authorities being hampered by people making unsolicited applications for home 1242 improvement grants. No one wants to see a return to pepper-potting, which was a waste of public money. However, a mechanism must be put in place for people who live in terraces that are in an appalling state of disrepair but do not fall within the renewal area. I am all for targeting resources, but I hope that the Minister has something positive to say to thousands of my constituents who do not live in renewal areas but live in poor housing.
§ Mr. ClappisonThe new system has been widely welcomed, and it will enable local authorities to act strategically. The Government propose to simplify the rules to the group repair schemes, which will allow the flexible implementation of them. The rules will also apply to flats. Local authorities will also be able to continue to give help for minor repairs, improvements and adaptations through home repair assistance to the elderly, infirm and those on means-tested benefits. That will simplify and replace the minor works assistance scheme.
The hon. Gentleman mentioned the competitive scheme in Hyndburn. However, he will be aware that £3 million has been allocated to Lancashire through that scheme. The Government propose a number of policies and programmes that will specifically be of assistance to his constituents and will deal within the constraints we all face with the problems he described. Local authorities will be able to act strategically and to help many private sector owners, particularly those who are poor or disabled, to meet the needs for repair that the hon. Gentleman has described.
§ Question put and agreed to.
§ Adjourned accordingly at half-past Ten o'clock.