Luck of the draw

Decent homes for all by 2010. That was the Labour government’s big idea for housing - and it remains a responsibility that no social housing provider can dodge.

For many local authorities, meeting the 2010 decent homes target has entailed transferring stock to a housing association or creating an arm’s-length management organisation. But for some councils, these options were never meant to be. Those that were unwilling - or unable - to take measures that qualified them for private investment or government grants have knuckled down and paid for the work themselves.

So how have the authorities which quickly became known as stock-retaining authorities done, and what challenges have these sometimes reluctant landlords faced?

Today there are 114 councils in England managing their stock through traditional housing departments. Collectively they own in the region of 880,000 homes. Around 180,000 - or 20 per cent - of those were non-decent last year, compared with 31 per cent of ALMO stock and 12 per cent of transferred stock. But it is a significant improvement on five years ago, when official figures show almost half retained stock was non-decent.

Data on the decent homes progress of retained stock is patchy. Given that the government expects 5 per cent of homes to fail the standard by the 2010 deadline, some of which will be ALMO-owned, it seems reasonable to assume that a majority of retained authorities will hit the December 2010 target for achieving the standard, with the remainder following later.

Where upgrades have gone ahead, councils appear to have paid for the work through rental income and the major repairs allowance they receive from the Communities and Local Government department. Prudential borrowing is used to a lesser extent.

Epping Forest Council in Essex chose to continue to manage its stock. Alan Hall, director of housing at the council says the introduction of the MRA eight years ago provided his council with a sizeable sum of government money to work with. The council estimates it has spent around £25 million of its allowance on decent homes work in the past five years.

Just 1.5 per cent of the authority’s 6,500 homes are non-decent today, compared with 23 per cent when the standard was set in 2001. That figure should be zero by by April. ‘We’ve focused for many years on making sure that we invest enough money in our stock,’ says Mr Hall. In addition to its MRA contribution, the council has spent more than £6 million of its rent receipts on decent homes.

But other authorities which kept housing in-house warn that meeting the target isn’t necessarily a happy ending to the decent homes story. For example, South Derbyshire Council should bring all its 3,100 homes up to scratch by 2010 but, with the much-maligned housing subsidy system claiming one third of its rent receipts, the authority has just £11.5 million of the £25 million needed for improvements over the next five years. ‘We’re not in control of our own income,’ says head of housing Bob Ledger.

He’s not the only one fretting. Last year the Association of Retained Council Housing found more of the 50 councils it represents were concerned about carrying out long-term improvements than the decent homes target.

While many social landlords - including retaining councils like Birmingham - can boast of moving on to ‘decent homes plus’, for some retaining authorities that’s a tough call.

Tendring Council, also in Essex, has spent £10 million since 2004 on decent homes work. It is on track to meet the 2010 target, with just 212 out of 3,221 properties non-decent today.

Some Tendring tenants are receiving renovations beyond decent homes requirements including new doors, double-glazing and higher-spec kitchens. But Paul Price, director of housing at Tendring Council, says retained councils are less likely to go much beyond the decent homes standard. ‘Without having the additional cash that you get through an ALMO or stock transfer, it’s hard to see how they can do as much,’ he says.

So should councils that did things their own way be applauded for their efforts? Professor Hal Pawson of Heriot-Watt University says the results show there was always a ‘fourth option’ for achieving decent homes.

Many councils managed their stock more efficiently to generate funds and, where transfer ballots fell through, a few have defied the odds - even if they miss the 2010 deadline.

‘Many were motivated by a target and looked for extra ways to find money,’ says Professor Pawson. And all the while tenants retaining a democratically accountable landlord - which could come in handy if predictions of poor future upkeep come true. One thing’s for sure: this story won’t end with the 2010 deadline.

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment