Housing Day 2014

So, today is Housing Day.  But what does it mean and why should this be any different from the many different 'days', 'weeks' and 'years' that are aimed at drawing our attention to a range of worthy subjects? For instance, did you observe the 'International Talk Like a Pirate Day' on September 19? Or the 'Hug a Drummer Day' on October 10th. No? Well, neither did I to be honest. So why should we be celebrating Housing Day today? Well, the short answer is that it matters. Now don't get me wrong, the many aspiring Captain Bluebeards across the land would have clearly been in deep water if they hadn't donned their eye-patch and parrot and Aaarrggghhhed! whenever appropriate or possible last month. And why not hug a drummer? Often the butt of musician's jokes which imply their lack of musical ability and a tendency for drooling. If anyone deserves a hug it's a drummer, and who am I to deny them. Yes, to those who have very specific points of view, a national day is just the ticket. It raises the profile of many good, and some bizarre, causes, and it matters to them. 

Housing on the other hand, matters to everyone. Even if you are happily housed in a warm and secure home, with hot water, central heating, a cat curled up on the rug, and enough bedrooms for everyone in the household (perhaps even a spare for when granny comes to stay), it is likely that you will either know somebody, or be related to somebody, who has a housing problem. Perhaps this is a son or a daughter who should really have flown the nest by now, but is stuck in the family home, which whilst providing the usual creature comforts, does not really promote those feelings of independence and privacy that those of my generation enjoyed at that age. But it might not be too easy for young Jane or John to leave. The cost of housing is rising. Mortgage deposits are high. Private rents are going up. So-called affordable rents are out of reach of many on low or average pay. The shortage of housing at a genuine affordable price, either to buy or to rent, has led to a generation who have been unable to begin their independent lives. And worse than this, the problem of homelessness continues to blight our 'civilized' country. 

Sadly I am old enough to remember the screening of Cathy Come Home in 1966. The plight of Cathy and her young family touched a national nerve at the time. Homelessness shouldn't have been happening in the 'swinging sixties', when the welfare state was still attempting to provide help from 'cradle to grave'. Cathy's story made people angry. Angry that people were being punished for no fault of their own, leading to appalling treatment by officials and bureaucrats who were supposedly responsible for 'helping' people, but were often intent on breaking up families rather than providing genuine assistance. But, surely we have moved on from all that. We are living in 2014 not 1966. Things must be better than they were. The answer to that is yes they are, but perhaps some housing problems are different, whilst some are much the same. Several pieces of legislation have served to improve housing over the years, but yet, despite the advances that have been made, there are still constant reports and articles about the 'housing crisis'. 

So, what is this crisis? There is a crisis around the supply of housing in general, and the supply of genuine affordable housing in particular. Social housing - or housing that has been built with assistance from a meaningful public subsidy to ensure its affordability - is almost a thing of the past. Increasing private sector rent lines the pockets of private landlords with housing benefit, who, due to the lack of adequate regulation, are free to let and evict at will, thus adding to the crisis.

But Housing Day should be about the positives. We all know the problems, so what are the positives about social housing? Really, they shouldn't need stating, but sometimes stating the obvious is necessary. The benefits of good quality housing have often been explained. The benefits to good health, good education and to general wellbeing have all been evidenced many times. The savings to other purses of providing decent housing have also been calculated. And yet, here we are today, still arguing the case.

Going back to basics, a decent home is a right that we should all have. A home that is safe, warm and dry. A home that doesn't require you to have three jobs to enable you to pay for it. A home that should be an achievable aspiration for us all, not just the few who have been lucky enough to inherit. A home that is not blighted by inadequate neighbourhood facilities, such as health services, decent shops, and good schools. A home that is not overcrowded and has space for children to play and flourish, space for older people to relax, and space for families to grow together. I don't think this is too much to ask, given the relative wealth of this country. Wealth that our parents, grandparents and great-grandparents all contributed towards. And that also goes for many of our immigrant communities. The historical contribution towards the accumulated wealth of this country by many people from abroad should not be ignored. 

There are very strong moral arguments for state intervention in the provision of decent housing for all. Equally, there are strong economic arguments, which seem to hold more sway in today's market-driven society. Social justice is something we should all be striving for, but the plight of the modern-day Cathy's poses some very challenging questions. Let us continue to make our case and to make sure that housing is an important issue in the forthcoming election.

New ASB Legislation...continued.

The Anti-Social Behaviour Crime and Policing Bill is currently being debated within the House of Lords and will soon become law. The Bill contains provisions for changing the legal framework for dealing with anti-social behaviour. New legal orders will be introduced which will replace ASBOs and housing injunctions. New injunctions known as Injunctions to Prevent Nuisance and Annoyance (IPNA), will come into force and will be the main tool, apart from possession, which remain in place, for social landlords to use. Whilst there are similarities between the current s153 housing injunctions and the new IPNAs, there are also some key differences as well.

A debate has begun around one of the differences that may arise, depending on whether an amendment is accepted. Currently, those applying for housing injunctions against ASB perpetrators only require evidence on 'the balance of probabilities' that the action has taken place. This is a normal requirement for civil law remedies and has been defined as: "The balance of probability standard means that a court is satisfied an event occurred if the court considers that, on the evidence, the occurrence of the event was more likely than not." In re H (Minors) [1996] AC 563 at 586

One of the amendments to be considered by the House of Lords relates to whether, under the new  legislation, it will be necessary for claimants to prove 'beyond reasonable doubt' that the perpetrator's behaviour was anti-social. This is the evidence standard that is normally required in criminal cases.

There is clearly a need to keep a sharp eye out for this one, as if the burden of proof does change to the criminal 'beyond reasonable doubt' standard, it will certainly make it much more difficult for social landlords to obtain injunctions against those who carry out anti-social behaviour in their areas. When injunctions were first introduced, it provided a valuable alternative tool for dealing with ASB which did not involve possession. If it becomes more difficult to prove ASB in a court, then possession will return as the main remedy for addressing the problem of ASB. Does anyone really want that to happen?

Supporting Scrutiny

With tenant-led scrutiny now becoming more established, and some very positive outcomes being reported, one question that I have regularly heard posed is how tenants should be supported in carrying out scrutiny reviews. Support can come from various sources, but is usually provided by officers and/or by an independent advisor. For scrutiny panels to be able to operate without support they need to have skills, experience, resources and confidence to succeed. Providers who set up a scrutiny regime without ensuring that these are in place could be accused of setting tenants up to fail. Whilst there may be some (hopefully very few) providers who would willfully set out to do this, despite having a negative view of scrutiny, I would hope that the majority of social housing organisations would make some positive attempt at making sure scrutiny is a success.

So, can support be provided by a landlord without jeopardising the independence of the scrutiny panel? Clearly, it is a matter of determining how that support will be provided and ensuring that the input is genuine support and not taking over the leadership and responsibility from the panel. Perhaps this is where independent support can be useful. Independent tenant support emerged as a vital aspect of the stock transfer process, providing advice and guidance to tenant groups and information to the wider tenant body, on the often confusing and tortuous route through officialdom and bureaucracy. So, does tenant-led scrutiny also require this input from independent advisors? Well the answer has to come from tenants themselves. Each scrutiny review is different, and it should be up to tenants who are involved in the process to determine whether or not they should have support which is outside the organisation. Clearly, there should be a constructive partnership which emerges, with tenants, officers, and if required, independent supporters, working together towards shared aims around improving services.

What should the support be aimed at? Again, this should depend upon the skills and experience of the tenants involved. It might be support to enable panels to select certain services for review, or assisting in developing a project plan for a review. Support may be needed for locating the source of evidence, or in the drafting or writing a report. The key aim in all the support that is provided should be to build the skills and experience of the tenants who are involved in scrutiny. Those providing support, from without or outside the organisation, should aim to reduce their input as those skills and experiences develop.

Whatever the source and the type of support that is provided, everyone involved should make sure that the overall outputs and outcomes from the review are tenant-led, and are seen to be tenant-led. This can be a challenge in itself, but certainly not beyond the wit and means of all those involved in scrutiny.

New Anti-Social Behaviour Legislation

The Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Bill is currently making its way through the Parliamentary process. When the Bill is passed and becomes law, there will be far-reaching changes to the ways that social landlords and other agencies, deal with incidents of anti-social behaviour. The promise by the Coalition to abolish ASBOs will be kept, and many other orders and legal remedies will also be removed, and replaced by new orders. These changes are designed to reduce the numbers of legal orders that are available to tackle ASB and to streamline the remedies that can be used. Also, with a nod to localism, the Government intend to introduce a 'community trigger' which will place duties on enforcement agencies to deal with incidents of ASB.

In short, the Bill proposes the introduction of the following:

• A new Criminal Behaviour Order
• Injunctions to Prevent Nuisance and Annoyance
• New Dispersal Powers
• Comunity Protection Notices
• Public Space Protection Orders
• Closure of Premises Orders
• New Grounds for Possession of Secure and Assured Tenancies for ASB

As the Bill progresses through Parliament, we will be highlighting any important discussions and amendments to the Bill.

It is important for social landlords to be fully aware of the implications of the new legislation and for front-line housing officers and ASB teams to prepare for these changes.

Once the legislation has been passed, Learning4Housing will be providing open access and in-house training workshops which will highlight the changes and the new approaches that will be needed to meet the legal requirements.

Training will also be provided for tenants and board members, as they will also have important roles to play in making the most of the new legal framework.

For more information, please contact David on 07986 246406 or at david@learning4housing.co.uk