A continuing issue in Brent, as in other London boroughs, is the precisie defintion of what is 'affordable' rent (often defined in planning applications as 'up to 80% of market rent' recognised as unaffordable for most ordinary families). This article highlights the issues regarding 'social rent'. First published at 24housing.co.uk.
“The Mayor says that London Affordable Rent is social rent, but seven London boroughs disagree,” said Burnham.
Though named in the initial campaign claim, Hammersmith & Fulham said it had still to respond to the FoI.
-->
With this week’s welter of housing announcements out of
London, evidence has emerged of the boroughs being sharply divided over Sadiq
Khan’s rent policy.
Campaigners have seized on data released under FoI they
say shows that, for new council homes, the Mayor has agreed higher rents than
the capital’s Council tenants have ever paid before – and in five boroughs yet
higher unspecified rents have been agreed.
Responding to the claim, the Mayor’s Office said Khan
specifically defined London Affordable Rent to have rent caps based on social
rent levels – enabling money from national Affordable Rent programme to be
spent on social rent level housing in the capita.
But seven other Boroughs seem to have have defied the
Mayor’s policies.
With government funding, Khan has launched a £1bn
programme ‘Building Council Homes for Londoners’, for new council-built homes
in London – over 14,000 homes are to be built with the first round of funding.
The snag campaigners have caught onto has the Mayor
promoting his London Affordable Rent (LAR – or ‘Mayor’s Rent’) which is £50 pw
higher than standard council rents.
“Compared to an average London Council rent of £105.87 pw,
the current London Affordable Rent rates applied to London’s stock mix produce
an average of £158.85 pw.
So the average uplift is +£52.98 weekly, or +50.0%, all
plus service charges,” says Paul Burnham, Secretary, Haringey Defend Council
Housing.
The figures show:
·
Bedsit £150.03 instead of £82.93 (£67.10 more,
+80.9%) London Stock 18,643
·
One-bed £150.03 instead of £92.61 (£57.42 more,
+62.0%) London Stock 118,090
·
Two-bed £158.84 instead of £105.29 (£53.55 more,
+50.9%) London Stock 137,511
·
Three-bed £167.67 instead of £120.49 (£47.18
more, +39.0%) London Stock 100,012
·
Four-bed £176.49 instead of £138.76 (£37.73
more, +27.2%) London Stock 14,656
·
Five-bed £185.31 instead of £153.03 (£32.28
more, +21.1%) London Stock 1,926
·
Six or more bedrooms £194.13 instead of £165.70
(£28.43 more, +17.2%) London Stock 447
“The Mayor says that London Affordable Rent is social rent, but seven London boroughs disagree,” said Burnham.
According to Burnham’s interpretation that’s Haringey,
Kensington and Chelsea, Camden, Hackney, Greenwich, Southwark, and Waltham
Forest.
The City of London, which owns council housing stock
mainly in Inner London but outside the Square Mile, makes the list too.
“It gets worse, the Mayor has agreed that six boroughs can
set rents for 1,166 homes at new, higher levels above what we were told were to
be the Caps for Mayor’s Rent, said Burnham.
“We do not know why the Mayor has agreed this, and whether
or not these rents are supposed to be Affordable of Intermediate – we have sent
an urgent message to the GLA to find out,” he said.
The five even higher-rent boroughs are said to be Sutton
(16 homes), Tower Hamlets (375), Brent (124), Barking and Dagenham (156) and
Harrow (273).
Though named in the initial campaign claim, Hammersmith & Fulham said it had still to respond to the FoI.
GLA reports recognise higher social and affordable rents
as a leading cause of poverty for lower income households with children, and
people with low and uncertain incomes.
“But by his actions the Mayor is undermining Council
Social Rent which is the gold standard of rental affordability.
“Decisions about rent policy are made by people who do not
have any idea of the household expenses and family budgets of working class
people,” Burnham said.
A spokesperson for the Mayor’s office said the Mayor is
“very pleased” by the response to his Building Council Homes for Londoners
programme, which will see councils build more than 11,000 homes at social rent
levels.
“The national Government allows affordable rent to be up to
80% of market rents – a level the Mayor does not consider to be genuinely
affordable to Londoners on low incomes in most parts of the capital.
“He specifically defined London Affordable Rent to have
rent caps based on social rent levels, enabling money from national Affordable
Rent programme to be spent on social rent level housing in the capital,” the
spokesperson said.
Supporting its argument, the Mayor’s office released
additional information showing:
·
Building Council Homes for Londoners allows all
boroughs to set rent levels for the c.11,000 referred to above at or below
London Affordable Rent caps, which includes social rents
·
London Affordable Rent is based on 2016 formula
social rents and is only offered on new lets
·
Current average council rents on new lets are
higher than current average council rents which include rents set historically
GLA grant allocation by housing tenure
Key
LAR – ‘Mayor’s Rent’, London Affordable Rent ‘at
benchmark’.
SR – Social Rent.
LAR/SR homes – rented homes not yet allocated by
tenure.
LLR – London Living Rent.
LSO – London Shared Ownership.
LLR/SO – intermediate homes not yet allocated by
tenure.
Boroughs with all social/affordable rent as London Affordable Rent
Barnet £8,700,000. Total
87.
LAR 87.
Lewisham £37,700,000
Total 384.
LAR 384.
Sutton £6,500,000 Total:
81.
LAR 65, LAR homes (above benchmark rent) 16.
Redbridge (funding from Right to Buy receipts) Total 400.
LAR 400.
Tower Hamlets
£13,000,000 Total:
675.
LAR 300, LAR homes (above benchmark rent) 375.
Croydon £61,288,000
Total: 888.
LAR 141, LAR/SR homes 326, LLR/SO homes 421.
Brent £65,610,000 Total
817.
LAR 572, LSO 121, LAR homes (above benchmark rent) 124.
Ealing £99,352,000 Total
1,138.
LAR 934, LLR 71, LSO 133.
Hounslow £63,252,000
Total 741.
LAR 657, LSO 84.
Barking & Dagenham
£25,338,000 Total: 565. LAR 228, LSO 156, LAR homes
(above benchmark rent) 181.
Havering £24,046,000
Total: 282.
LAR 215, LSO 67.
Wandsworth £12,452,000 Total: 174. LAR 22,
Intermediate home ownership 2, 83 LAR/SR homes, LLR/SO homes 67.
Hammersmith & Fulham £15,308,000 Total: 251. LAR 115,
LSO 13, LAR homes (above benchmark rent) 123.
Harrow £32,144,000 Total: 618. LAR homes (above benchmark
rent) 273, LAR/SR homes 307, LLR/SO homes 38.
Newham £107,476,000 Total: 1,123. SR 1,056 [we think that
all of these rented homes are in fact LAR], LSO 67.
Boroughs with all social/affordable rent as Social Rent
Camden £30,800,000
Total: 308.
SR 308.
Greenwich £32,600,000
Total: 588.
SR 588.
Kensington and Chelsea
£33,600,000. Total: 336.
SR 336.
Hackney £45,556,000
Total 949.
SR: 502, LSO 447.
Haringey £62,858,000
Total: 848.
SR 567, LLR 232, LSO 49.
Waltham Forest
£25,518,000. Total 293.
SR 232, LSO 61.
City of London
£14,880,000. Total 156.
SR 146, LSO 10.
Southwark £89,494,138
Total: 926.
SR 891, LSO 35.
Boroughs with both Social Rent and London Affordable Rent
Enfield £18,108,000
Total: 571.
LAR 392, SR 44, LSO 61, LAR homes (above benchmark rent) 74.
Islington £24,200,000
Total: 465.
LAR 407, SR 58.
Hillingdon £11,678,000
Total: 347.
LAR 40, SR 86, LLR 20, LSO 201.
Kingston £67,844,000
Total: 713.
LAR 75, SR 590, LSO 48.
1 comment:
I know the following (because I was involved in the planning consultation, as a supposed expert on the work of the architect, Ernest Trobridge):
When the City of London Corporation sought to redevelop the former Camden Road New Church site (Trobridge's first design project, in Islington c. 1908) in 2015, their plans included social housing at affordable rents. The affordable rents they proposed to charge, based on what a normal family would be able to pay in the area, were set at 40% of market rent.
40% of market rent is a much more realistic level of what is an "affordable" rent for ordinary people in current property market conditions.
Post a Comment