Shapps defends fixed-term tenancies against Shelter report
The housing minister has defended government plans to implement fixed-term tenancies after a homeless charity released a report which showed similar schemes were not working abroad.
Shelter commissioned a report, Security of tenure in Social Housing: An International Review, which looked at how fixed-term tenancies were faring in countries such as Australia and Canada.
One of the key findings of the report showed that less than 1 per cent of fixed-term social tenancies in New South Wales, Australia, had been terminated since the plan was implemented in 2006.
Current government proposals would remove security of tenure and give landlords the ability to offer fixed term renewable tenancies with a minimum of two years were faring.
Mr Shapps said: ‘With some 4.5 million people on social housing waiting lists, it’s clear that not only do we need more homes, but we also need a complete overhaul of the system, to one that offers much more flexibility than the current ‘one size fits all’ approach.
‘Our proposals – unlike Australia – are about flexibility, not prescription and social landlords will have the freedom to allocate more flexible tenancies based on local need, but of course retaining discretion to offer tenancies on a lifetime basis.
‘The new Affordable Rent scheme will also offer landlords the freedom they need to offer a range of solutions to people’s housing needs, while being able to raise extra rents to invest in house-building. It also ensures that as many people as possible benefit from this valuable resource.’
The DCLG said that feedback the department received showed that the vast majority of new tenancies will be provided on longer terms, particularly for vulnerable households or those with children.
The department also argued that the flexibility will enable landlords to create positive incentives for tenants by renewing tenancies or give longer tenancies for employed people or those who contribute positively to their neighbourhoods.
Related Files
Security of tenure in Social Housing: An International Review
PDF
, size 0.33 Mb
Have your say
You must sign in to make a comment
Readers' comments (7)
Chris | 07/06/2011 1:25 pm
If the vast majority of tenancies will continue to be offered on longer terms, where is the gain in flexibility the Minister claims?
This remains simply a means to further cleanse areas socially at a whim, force the poor to subsidise the poorer, and maximise the proitability of the private sector rent.
Adding layers of administrative burdens on landlords, and adding layers of ownership and agents between tenant and housing authority increases costs and reduces value.
At best the Shapps recipe is for disaster, or simply for fruitcake.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
gordon thompson | 07/06/2011 2:15 pm
Shapps was never likely to agree with the report was he. After all, it flies in the face of his own dogma - and there is nothing as blind as a small man who thinks he is right in the face of overwhelming facts which show he is wrong.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Chris | 07/06/2011 2:22 pm
For those who believe that Shapps is being bold and innovative - grabbing the nettle so to speak - have a look at this debate from 1956. The parallels are astonishing in a Tory Government looking to stiffle social housing and introduce differential renting, favouring the private sector, and preserving the 'good areas' from the development of workers housing. The extremism of the primary mover should give all cause to think about the pedigree of our current leaders too.
For a trip down memory lane, and as a reminder that Tories have before put one face to the electorate only to about face when elected, have a read of: http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/commons/1956/feb/15/housing-subsidies-bill
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Batman | 07/06/2011 2:56 pm
There are other areas that the Government could be more usefully looking at first, especially how efficiently landlords are managing their assets. We have fallen into the trap of the TSA says we must relet a home within X weeks so so long as hit that target we are performing well. We all know what nonsense this is, and we all know that far too many homes are empty that could be brought back into use, before we start creating different levels of tenant which will be socially divisive and an administrative nightmare. Lots of form filling but no extra homes. Shapps should sharpen his pencil, and those landlords who have had the cheek to bid for development funding but are not already managing to a good standard and making the best use of their assets should be denied funding to develop
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Dr Xavier | 07/06/2011 3:11 pm
Flexibilty this? Choice that?
Look Mr Schapps people just want security and safety. Try listening to people.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Bonola . | 07/06/2011 3:42 pm
"The department also argued that the flexibility will enable landlords to create positive incentives for tenants by renewing tenancies or give longer tenancies for employed people or those who contribute positively to their neighbourhoods."
Interesting thought but, how on earth are you supposed to quantify positive contribution and write a policy that covers this sufficiently without opening yourself up to legal challenges? This would seem to undo the work of CBLs in terms of being open and transparent
There are many reasons that this policy is unpalatable which is why we won't be using FTTs.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
MBPB | 08/06/2011 1:48 pm
Shelter's International Review seems clear enough but Mr Schapps is not going to listen to proven research if it means undermining his plans to weaken tenants rights. It's his baby after all!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment