Homelessness: Government Policy (Hansard, 16 April 1985)

§ Lord Grimond
My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question standing in my name on the Order Paper.

§ Lord Skelmersdale
My Lords, Local Authorities have specific duties towards the homeless under the Housing (Homeless Persons) Act 1977. It is for them to decide, in the light of the guidance we have given them, how to fulfil these duties and how to use the housing investment resources available to them.

§ Lord Grimond
My Lords, is the noble Lord aware that that seems to me to be a slightly academic answer? Is he not aware that homelessness is one of the greatest human tragedies in this country? Is he aware that it is costing the local authorities millions of pounds a week to house these people? Is he aware that it is impossible to ask young people to go about seeking employment when they can neither get accommodation nor pay for it? As the noble Lord is putting the blame on the local authorities, would he not consider allowing them to use all the proceeds from the sale of council houses for either reconditioning accommodation or building new houses? Would he not also consider freeing the tenancy laws so that more tenancy accommodation can be offered?

§ Lord Skelmersdale
My Lords, yes. I can at least agree with the noble Lord, Lord Grimond, that this is the greatest human tragedy. As I outlined in my original Answer to the noble Lord, Parliament has given to local authorities specific duties on homelessness. My own view is that it would be inappropriate to allow local authorities to use all their capital receipts when they have vast numbers of empty local authority houses which have been out of use for more than a year. Countrywide, there were 25,300 properties empty for more than a year. As I said yesterday; 9,000 of these were in London.

§ Lord Shinwell
My Lords, is it reasonable for the Minister to pass the buck to the local authorities when the local authorities have had their grants reduced and are being asked to accept the responsibility for expenditure, etc? Will he take note of this? We very often complain about the absence of human rights in other countries. That was the subject of a debate quite recently in your Lordships' House. I know that concerns the Government, as it does every one of us. In those circumstances, are not other countries entitled to refer to the absence of human rights when almost 100,000 people in this civilised country of ours are homeless?

§ Lord Skelmersdale
My Lords, for a start I would take issue with the noble Lord's figures. The fact that 100,000 people are homeless at any one moment does not mean that the problem of homelessness is of that extent. By definition, once people have been found houses by a local authority they disappear from the figures that have been quoted by the noble Lord. But equally, of course, other people come in; so it is a constantly changing situation. So far as passing the buck to local authorities goes, Parliament gave a specific duty to local authorities in this respect. All that I am doing is reminding the House and them of it.

§ Lord Graham of Edmonton
My Lords, will the Minister not accept that the best way to house the homeless is to enable councils to build more houses? Against the background of an appalling situation—the Minister is well aware that 1,200,000 families are on waiting lists, that 1,100,000 houses have been declared unfit for habitation and that there are 80,000 homeless families, one third more than in 1979, every year—why do the Government persist in reducing the HIP allocations and curtailing the ability of councils to spend their own money?

§ Lord Skelmersdale
My Lords, it sounds a very easy answer (does it not) to allow councils to build more and more houses. But the figures I have given for empty properties and properties empty for more than one year would only be added to by building these houses. In regard to reducing the capacity of local authorities to spend money on housing, I would point out that from 1979 to date such spending has been reduced by 26 per cent. I might remind noble Lords opposite that in their last period of Government it was reduced by 45 per cent.

§ Lord Orr-Ewing
My Lords, yesterday my noble friend gave figures showing that in London there were 30,000 empty council houses. Surely something can 600 be done to make these more available. Can he not encourage the local authorities? Can he not now start looking again at the Rent Acts which have been very inhibitive and which have encouraged the under-use of housing? Many people with large houses in which rooms are available will not let those rooms to people in need of housing because they fear that they will never get possession of the house again. Is it not time to start to release this potential which is unused and which would be welcome to those who are currently homeless?

§ Lord Skelmersdale
My Lords, yes; of course it is. I hope that I made the point yesterday. As to releasing dwellings that might be available in the private sector, perhaps I may say that I was interested to learn recently of a scheme in Camden where the council is starting to do just this. I am not sure that everything about the scheme is absolutely perfect but certainly the council is working hard to alleviate the problem.

§ Lord Avebury
My Lords, will the noble Lord not agree that the fact that dozens of people are sleeping rough under Charing Cross arches and along the Embankment Gardens is a crying scandal and indicates the total failure of local authorities in London to deal not only with the problem of homelessness generally but with the particular question of homelessness among people with multiple problems? Will the noble Lord and his colleagues in the Department of the Enviroment call a meeting of all central London local authorities so that concerted action can be taken not just by the local authorities but by the Government and the local authorities together, with the guidance of which he speaks given to them, and finance made available to them, to solve these awful problems?

§ Lord Skelmersdale
My Lords, we are dealing with individual people. I know that there are some critically homeless people such as those living under the arches who do not fit into what the Establishment regards as a proper life. As to the idea of a meeting, yes; I should be perfectly happy to recommend the summoning of such a meeting. However, with such activities as the Government's hostels scheme, which has given 11,000 extra places in the last five years, I am not sure whether it would achieve very much. But I shall certainly look into the idea.

§ Lord Rhodes
My Lords, can the noble Lord assure those who work in this field in Manchester that our work will not be hindered by the abolition of the Greater Manchester Council?

§ Lord Skelmersdale
My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Rhodes, asked me exactly this question in different words yesterday. I said then that the answer was, no. I am now able to say that the answer is still, no, because there is no reason why the boroughs should not provide exactly the same funds as the Greater Manchester Council is now providing.

§ Viscount Massereene and Ferrard
My Lords, would my noble friend not agree that many of the people we see sleeping rough under the arches and along the Embankment refuse to go into hostels? I have known 601 gentlemen of the road, if that is the right way to describe them, who will not go into a house. They do not want a house. How are you going to force them into a house if they do not want to go into a house?

§ Lord Skelmersdale
My Lords, I am grateful to my noble friend for expanding on a point that I have just made.

§ Lord Blyton
My Lords, is the noble Lord not aware that a while ago a Minister of the Government said that people should get on their bikes if they wanted to look for work? Does the noble Lord not think that he should now tell them, in the light of the homeless figures, to take a tent with them?

§ Lord Skelmersdale
I am sorry, my Lords; I am not sure that I got the drift of the noble Lord's question. However, I made the point yesterday that it does not take a long period for people to find out whether there is work available for them in a particular area.

§ Lord Graham of Edmonton
My Lords, will the noble Lord accept that I am not raising a party political point? Twice, yesterday and today, he has drawn attention fairly to the thousands of council owned properties that are left unlet for a year. As someone, like many noble Lords, who has served on local authorities, will the noble Lord accept from me that no council deliberately gainsays the ability to raise rent from property that is lettable? Will the noble Lord not give an undertaking to look especially at the problems that inhibit a council making fit properties that it is currently not letting? Surely he will find that one of the main reasons is that money needs to be spent and that councils are being inhibited in getting that money through the HIP allocation of the Government.

§ Lord Skelmersdale
My Lords, I readily acknowledge the experience of the noble Lord, Lord Graham of Edmonton, as regards local councils. However, I am sure he will agree that local government is a matter of priorities. It cannot be a matter of good priority if these houses are left empty for so long.

§ Lord Wells-Pestell
My Lords, have the Government considered making inquiries of the voluntary housing associations in this country to see how many more houses they can build at the speed with which they do build them if they had more Government financial support?

§ Lord Skelmersdale
Yes, my Lords, I do not have the list in front of me, but there are at least nine research projects being carried out on exactly the sort of issue to which the noble Lord has just referred.