The right to a home for life: a debate that runs and runs

Back in 2004, his strategy unit looked at proposals that council tenants’ historic right to a home for life could be ended. A report by the unit blamed long waiting lists on the social renting and housing benefit system, which it said handed tenants ‘effective property rights’.

At the time, sources close to the unit suggested it wanted to float the idea of fixed-term contracts as an alternative to lifetime tenancy agreements. But it was in 2006 that the debate really gathered momentum, with academic Professor John Hills looking at the issue as part of his government-commissioned review of social housing in England. When his review was published in February 2007, he said that for social housing to fulfil its potential ‘new approaches’ were needed.

‘We need to move beyond an approach where the key function is one of rationing and trying to establish who is not eligible for social housing to one where the key question is, “how can we help you afford decent housing?” and “here are your options”,’ the report said.

But the report added that there was a powerful argument for social housing to provide sub-market rents which would ‘avoid the disincentives that are implied by means-tested systems of assistance’.

‘The threat that a tenancy might end, or rent increase, if someone’s circumstances improved would be an unhelpful disincentive to move towards economic independence,’ it states. But it goes on to suggest that tenants should be given more support and options, including information on low-cost homeownership.

The debate was given new vigour earlier this year by former housing minister Caroline Flint, when she suggested that tenants should risk losing their homes if they failed to look for work.

Social housing applicants could be made to sign commitment contracts when given a home, she said, and ‘social housing should be based around the principle of something for something’.

The idea proved controversial, with the Northern Irish, Welsh and Scottish governments all distancing themselves from the idea.

Margaret Beckett, Ms Flint’s replacement, is yet to set out her views on social housing tenants’ rights.

But in the meantime, the Chartered Institute of Housing has waded into the debate with its idea that there should be a ‘substantial shift’ away from static tenancies for life.

Whether Gordon Brown backs the idea during his time as prime minister should become much clearer with the publication of the housing reform green paper later this year.

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment