ao link
Twitter
Facebook
Linked In
Twitter
Facebook
Linked In

You are viewing 1 of your 1 free articles

Right to Buy round three: the sector must resist the latest attempt to sell off social homes

With history set to repeat itself for the second time, Tom Murtha calls on the sector to fight back against the latest Right to Buy extension farce

Linked InTwitterFacebookeCard
Robert Jenrick speaks at the Conservative Party Conference (picture: BBC)
Robert Jenrick speaks at the Conservative Party Conference (picture: BBC)
Sharelines

With history set to repeat itself for the second time, @tomemurtha calls on the sector to fight back against the latest Right to Buy extension farce #ukhousing

Right to Buy round three: @tomemurtha calls on the sector to reject the government’s latest attempt to extend the Right to Buy #ukhousing

Karl Marx is reputed to have written that history repeats itself the first time as tragedy and the second time as farce. When I read about the government’s proposal to introduce a ‘right to shared ownership’, I couldn’t help but think: I’ve been here before.

In fact, this is at least the third time that a Conservative government has tried to extend a version of the Right to Buy to housing associations. The first ended in defeat in 1981. The second ended in tragedy in 2016. I hope the third will prove to be a farcical proposal, in keeping with many other current government policies.

The 1980s were a time of conflict between the housing association sector and the Conservative government led by Margaret Thatcher. Much of it was focused on the government’s desire to reduce funding and extend homeownership at the expense of rented homes.


READ MORE

Peabody to halt purchase of ‘large site’ following shared ownership announcementPeabody to halt purchase of ‘large site’ following shared ownership announcement
Shared ownership Right to Buy ‘will worsen housing crisis’, sector bodies warnShared ownership Right to Buy ‘will worsen housing crisis’, sector bodies warn
Shared ownership Right to Buy: a gimmick that will not help tenants or landlordsShared ownership Right to Buy: a gimmick that will not help tenants or landlords

I was working for the National Housing Federation (NHF) at the time. I helped organise the campaign to stop the inclusion of charitable housing associations in the statutory Right to Buy for council tenants. Although passed by the House of Commons, the measure was halted and finally defeated in the House of Lords.

The argument was simple. Housing associations should not be forced to part with assets for the benefit of those already housed today at the expense of those needing homes tomorrow. The government also tried to switch schemes for rent to shared ownership. The NHF opposed this as well and the government reversed the policy, influenced partly by a period of civil unrest in 1981.

In 2015 the Conservative government introduced another proposal to extend the Right to Buy to tenants of housing associations. This was initially met by an outcry from the housing sector. I wrote then that I hoped that the proposal would be resisted and defeated as it had been in 1981. The tragedy is that it was not.

After a general election and covert negotiations between the government and the NHF, it was announced to great fanfare that the sector would be entering into a ‘voluntary’ arrangement to extend the Right to Buy.

It was claimed at the time and subsequently that this heralded a new relationship between the sector and the government, culminating in the then prime minister’s speech to the National Housing Summit in 2018 receiving a “standing ovation”.

In my view these warm words saw very little real action. Yes, the sector received a few crumbs off the table but those suffering the full brunt of austerity saw no benefit at all. In fact, the number of homeless people and those living in poor conditions, the people who housing associations were set up to help, continued to rise. And as recent research has shown that many housing associations have continued to exclude these people.

“The argument that was made in 1981 is as valid today. Housing associations should not be forced to part with assets for the benefit of those already housed today at the expense of those needing homes tomorrow”

So what are we to make of the current proposal? Is it as farcical as it appears to be? Or will it result in real change? And what will happen to the so-called voluntary extension that appeared to be withering on the vine? The answer is: we don’t know.

There is new leadership in the sector that appears to be more willing to challenge the government. Many have already pointed out that the shared ownership proposals are a legal and financial minefield. I am pleased to see that there is talk of a further loss of social rent homes and that the proposal perpetuates the myth that ownership is good and rent is bad.

The proposal must be resisted. It seems to me that the argument that was made in 1981 is as valid today. Housing associations should not be forced to part with assets for the benefit of those already housed today at the expense of those needing homes tomorrow.

Will the leaders of today have the fortitude that was shown by our leaders in 1981 and campaign rigorously until the government withdraws this proposal and recognises that the real need is to invest in social rent homes? I hope so. But I was confident that the sector would resist in 2016, only to be disappointed.

I hope that my faith in our new leadership is justified. As Marx warned us, the second repeat of history is doomed to end in farce. The best bet for the sector is fighting to stop it happening at all.

Tom Murtha, founder member, Social Housing Under Threat (SHOUT); and former housing association chief executive

Linked InTwitterFacebookeCard
Add New Comment
You must be logged in to comment.