Social housing and the curious case of public opinion

Published by 24publishing for 24dash.com in Housing and also in Central Government, Communities, Local Government, Tenure

A lot of column inches have already been devoted to the Policy Exchange’s ‘Ending Expensive Social Tenancies’ report published yesterday, so I’ll be brief.

The scale of the coverage was such that it bagged spots on Radio 4’s Today Programme, Newsnight and Channel 4 News – something that probably hasn’t happened since Newham announced plans to export families to Stoke, another controversial, and not to dissimilar proposal.

These often prioritised stories send the moral compass of individuals spinning – is it right to house people in expensive areas, should large families get high levels of housing benefit, should a social home be time-limited? etc.

Thus it was no surprise to see a whole chapter in the Policy Exchange’s report revealing so-called public opinion backing their proposals – presumably why the plans to sell off expensive social housing drew responses from both No 10 and Grant Shapps.

Policy Exchange told us how 73% of all voters believed people should not be offered council houses that are worth more than the average house in their local authority area. Its report also revealed how 60% believed people should not be offered council housing in expensive areas. The backing of the report’s proposals to sell off expensive social housing was also likened to the popularity of the housing benefit cap.

Public opinion is a curious thing. When it comes to social housing it’s exasperating. Housing associations and councils are often left frustrated by local people who don’t want social housing built in their towns and villages. They’re also the ones bemoaning the lack of affordable homes for their children to buy or rent in their local area. For first-hand evidence of this, just read the letters page of any local newspaper.

So what conclusions can we draw – that public opinion is flaky, not to be solely trusted or relied upon and is often pre-determined by the question?

If the Policy Exchange had posed the following questions to the voting public – things would probably have turned out to be very different.

“If you and your children were forced to join the local housing register, do you think you should be housed in a cheap area or an area above the median house price?”

Or,

 “If you could no longer afford private rents and were forced to join the waiting list, do you think you and your family should be housed in properties at the bottom rung of the housing ladder?

I could go on.

What you can’t take away from the Policy Exchange is that it’s an idea of boosting cash to build homes – something not coming from the Government, or anybody else, unless you believe institutional investors are falling over themselves to invest in social housing.

Due to the diversity of the country, no single policy will work in Hull like it will in Hillingdon – Affordable Rent being a case in point. In some parts of the North West the old social rent is actually higher…work that out!

Public opinion is important, but it relies on empathy, and thus, a well-rounded debate. Empathy that not everyone’s a scrounger, that social housing serves those with aspiration and that it provides a safety net for people during a time in their lives where they might bloody well need it – and be grateful of it.

The Government, I think, could be doing more to balance this debate. It has so far done an excellent job of stigmatising the sector with its benefit bill talk and feckless tenant jibes – so let’s hear both sides of the argument, and then we might get some true public opinion.

Ross Macmillan is the deputy editor of 24housing