Only 2.5% of private rentals in England affordable on housing benefit, study finds
Only 2.5% of private rented homes in England were affordable for people on housing benefit last year, with charities warning that more people will be pushed into rent arrears and homelessness as a freeze on the benefit takes effect.
From Tuesday, housing benefit rates will be locked at current rates until 2026, affecting 5.7m households on low income which rely on it to cover rent.
Research from the homelessness charity Crisis and the campaign group Health Equals found fewer than three in every 100 private rental properties listed in England were affordable for people on housing benefit between April and October 2024.
This figure is down from 12% in 2021-22. Over the past decade, rents in the private sector have risen by 45% in England.
Crisis said people on low incomes could be forced to sleep rough or pushed into poor quality temporary accommodation because of the growing gap between housing benefit and the cost of rent.
Matt Downie, the charity's chief executive, said it was becoming an 'impossible situation' and that the freeze represented a real-terms cut. 'Housing benefit is supposed to cover the lowest third of rents in the private sector. We are currently nowhere near that,' he said.
'There is no doubt that today's freeze on housing benefit will lead to rising homelessness. It also risks completely overwhelming local authorities who are already struggling to cope with the demand for support, and will leave more people stuck in unfit temporary accommodation that damages their health and wellbeing.'
The research found that, across Great Britain, 2.7% of private rented properties were affordable, and that households on housing benefit were being forced to find, on average, an additional £337 a month for a one-bed, £326 for a two-bed and £486 for a three-bed home.
Downie urged the government to reverse the benefits freeze, saying it would 'undermine their efforts' to end homelessness and pile further pressure on local authorities, which spent £2.3bn a year on temporary accommodation for homeless families in 2023-24.
In the 12 months to February 2025, average rent in England rose to £1,381. Meanwhile, 126,040 households in England are now in temporary accommodation, including more than 164,000 children – the highest levels on record.
In the autumn budget, the chancellor, Rachel Reeves, announced that the local housing allowance (LHA) – the localised rates that determine how much housing benefit claimants are entitled to – would be locked at current levels until 2026.
LHA rates have been frozen periodically since 2016 – former Conservative governments froze it for seven out of 12 years, before increasing rates last year.
Crisis and Health Equals said rising rents were pushing more families into poor-quality homes, often beset with problems such as cold and damp, adding that the financial impact of poor housing was costing the NHS an estimated £1.4bn a year.
Paul McDonald, the chief campaigns officer at Health Equals, said: 'When people are forced to move house, sofa surf, live in temporary accommodation or cold, mouldy and overcrowded conditions, their health and wellbeing suffers. In the UK thousands of lives are already being cut short by up to 16 years by factors like poor quality and unaffordable housing.'
A government spokesperson said: 'We have inherited the worst housing crisis in living memory with rent levels unaffordable for far too many.
'We're building 1.5m homes to improve affordability for renters and helping those on the lowest incomes pay their housing costs by extending the household support fund and maintaining discretionary housing payments. Alongside this, we recently announced a £2bn investment for up to 18,000 new social and affordable homes, while our renters' rights bill will fundamentally reform the private rented sector by empowering tenants to tackle unreasonable rent hikes.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
Time to face the harsh realities of spending orthodoxy
Labour came to power fatuously parroting the word 'change' and yet has shown itself to be the same old tax and spending party it has always been. What it meant was a change of party in office not a change of direction. Not only have taxes gone up but so-called protected spending is set to rise despite record debt levels. Yet if ever a public policy has been tested to destruction surely it is the notion that the NHS will improve if only more money is thrown at it. Even Sir Keir Starmer and Wes Streeting, the Health Secretary, are on record as saying that higher health spending is not the answer to the endemic flaws in the health service and yet another £30 billion is to be announced for the next three years on top of the £22 billion handed over after last year's general election, much of which went on pay and showed nothing in the way of productivity improvement. No mainstream politician is prepared to acknowledge that the problem with the NHS is the fact it is a nationalised industry with all the inherent inefficiencies associated with such. Most other advanced economies in Europe and elsewhere have social insurance systems which work better. But the insistence in Britain of cleaving to the 1948 'founding principle' that treatment should be free at the point of delivery has become a quasi-religious doctrine that few dare challenge. Only Nigel Farage has questioned the wisdom of continuing with a system that patently fails to achieve what others manage to do but has been noticeably quiet on the subject recently because Labour will exploit it mercilessly to see off the Reform threat. Telling people that they will have to pay for something they have always had for free is even more difficult when political parties are prepared to see the health system get worse rather than reform it. The same is true of welfare. Taking benefits from people, even when they are payments introduced just a few years ago like the winter fuel allowance, is hard if the reasons are not explained and the issue is 'weaponised' by opponents. Yet unless the welfare budget is brought under control it will bankrupt the country. If change is to mean anything then we need politicians finally to understand the extent of the country's difficulties and make decisions accordingly. Will we see that from the Chancellor on Wednesday?
The Guardian
3 hours ago
- The Guardian
The winners and losers in Labour's first spending review
When Rachel Reeves publishes the government's spending review on Wednesday, the stories the Treasury will want to tell are the energy, transport and other infrastructure projects that will get a share of the big boost in capital funding – £113bn. They will argue that cash, freed up by the change to the fiscal rules in the budget, could only have happened under Labour and was opposed by the Tories and Reform. But the capital spending cannot stop expected cuts in day-to-day spending, meaning extremely tight settlements for departments, with savings expected from policing budgets, local government, civil service cuts, foreign aid, education and culture. Treasury sources said they would still spend £190bn more over the five-year parliament than the Conservatives' spending plans – meaning more than £300bn will be distributed among departments. Real-terms spending will grow at an average of 1.2% a year over the three years that the spending review period covers, a significant drop from the first two years when it will be 2.5%. Even that figure does not tell the full story because of the disproportionate boost being given to defence and the NHS – and has led the Institute for Fiscal Studies to warn that the spending commitments will require 'chunky tax rises' in the autumn, when coupled with other expected priorities such as restoring the winter fuel allowance to more pensioners and action on child poverty such as ending the two-child benefit limit. Here are some of the key offers from the spending review – and the rows over cuts. The biggest row of the spending review has been between Reeves and the home secretary, Yvette Cooper, over policing, which one source describes as being a 'huge headache'. Cooper has brought out the big guns to make her case, first with a letter from six police chiefs who warned that without more funding the government would not meet its manifesto promises on crime. Sir Mark Rowley, the head of the Metropolitan police, and other senior police officers have also written to the prime minister to warn him that investment was need to prevent some crimes being routinely ignored. It is understand the policing budget will not face real terms cuts but the level of spending is still under discussion. The Home Office is under strain as a major spending department that is key to some of the most ambitious manifesto pledges – including halving knife crime, police recruitment, reducing violence against women and girls as well as dealing with monitoring offenders who will be released earlier due to sentencing changes. The other major spending review row is over deep dissatisfaction from Angela Rayner – the deputy prime minister and housing secretary – with the level of funding for social homes in the spending review, making her one of the last remaining holdouts in negotiations with the Treasury over departmental spending settlements. The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government has been battling for more funding for the affordable homes programme as well as trying to preserve cash for local councils, homelessness and regional growth initiatives. The Treasury had previously put £2bn into affordable housing, described as a 'down payment' on further funding to be announced at the spending review, which Reeves said would mark a generational shift in the building of council homes. However, the next phase of funding has caused a major rift with Rayner – and more so because capital spending on infrastructure such as housing is meant to be a priority. The environment secretary, Steve Reed, is said to have been holding out for a big capital injection to fund flood defences. The autumn budget said the government was facing significant funding pressures on flood defences and farm schemes of almost £600m in 2024-25, and that those schemes would have to be reviewed for their affordability. Sources at the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) confirmed a post-Brexit farming fund would be cut in the review. Labour promised a fund of £5bn over two years – from 2024 to 2026 – at the budget, which is being honoured, but in the years after that it will be slashed for all but a few farms. The energy secretary, Ed Miliband, had a long fight to keep cash for a major programme of insulation, which was a key part of the government's net zero strategy. However, there are reports suggesting other schemes could be scaled back to protect the insulation programme. At the October budget, Reeves announced £3.4bn over three years for household energy efficiency schemes, heat decarbonisation and fuel poverty schemes. The government responded to concerns expressed at the time calling the sum the 'bare minimum' and promising a spending uplift at the review. Miliband's department is expected to get significant capital investment in energy infrastructure including nuclear – with the government poised to give the go ahead to the Sizewell C nuclear plant. The chancellor has already announced £15bn in transport spending across the north of England, funds which she said fulfil promises made by the Conservatives to the country but which the party had no way to pay for them in its own plan. Wes Streeting's department is set to be one of the big winners of the spending review and it will lay the groundwork for the NHS 10-year plan, which will be published imminently after the spending review. The department will get one of the biggest boosts to funding as others face real-terms cuts. The funding for the plan prioritises three key areas, moving care from hospitals to communities, increasing the use of technology, and prioritising prevention. No 10 and Streeting hope that the 10-year plan will contain major commitments and a positive story that the government will finally be able to tell properly on improvements to the health service – though any good news could be scuppered by the ballot for strike action by resident doctors. Still, Streeting's department was one of the last to settle formally with the Treasury due to negotiations over drug prices, though departmental sources downplayed any specific row. Any child in England whose parents receive universal credit will be able to claim free school meals from September 2026, the government has said. Parents on the credit will be eligible regardless of their income. The government says the change will make 500,000 more pupils eligible. A Department for Education (DfE) source said it was the best measure outside welfare changes to address child poverty and that the education secretary, Bridget Phillipson, had consistently fought to protect school food programmes through each round of spending negotiations. But schools budgets will be squeezed. Teachers will get a 4% pay rise next year, with additional funding of £615m. But schools will still have to fund about a quarter of the rise themselves – a total of £400m from their current budgets. Phillipson has tasked the DfE with finding savings in schools budgets, such as energy bills. Savings will also come as the government is removing public funding for level 7 apprenticeships, which has drawn criticism from skills experts. The justice secretary, Shabana Mahmood, was one of the first to reach her settlement to allow her to announce a £4.7bn plan to build three new prisons starting this year, part of a 'record expansion' as the government attempts to get to grips with the prison crisis. The early announcement was essential because it came alongside an announcement that the government would put a limit on how long hundreds of repeat offenders can be recalled to prison amid Whitehall predictions that jails will be full again in November.
Daily Mirror
4 hours ago
- Daily Mirror
Warning as Nigel Farage's No2 plots brutal cuts 'worth more than NHS budget'
Nigel Farage's No2, Richard Tice, has said he is plotting to slash public funding to 35% of GDP - which would wipe out a massive £275billion amid questions about Reform's NHS plans Nigel Farage's "reckless" economic plans would see the entire NHS, armed forces, police and criminal justice budgets wiped out, startling new analysis shows. Comments by the Reform leader's No2 indicate the party wants to slash £274billion from government spending - more than five times Liz Truss's unfunded tax measures. Richard Tice, who is tipped as Mr Farage's choice for Chancellor, is accused of planning a dangerous "game of roulette". The brutal analysis comes after Mr Tice hinted during a podcast recording he would take an axe to public spending, without saying what services he would cut. He told the Politics Inside Out podcast last week he would like to see the size of the state reduced to just over one-third of GDP with public spending down to 35% of GDP. This would see a savage £274 billion cut from government budgets, based on current GDP figures. Chief Secretary to the Treasury, Darren Jones, said: 'Reckless Richard Tice would play a game of roulette with Britain's finances that would mean chaos, cuts and decline. ' Nigel Farage has spoken openly about how Reform would finish NHS funding through general taxation in favour of expensive healthcare insurance. 'Now whilst Farage announces more spending commitments, Tice shoots the breeze about choking off the funds for vital frontline services. 'They can't tell us how any of this would work. We only know that it would lead to devastating cuts to our public services and provoke another financial crisis just like Liz Truss 's mini Budget." Budget settlements from official Treasury figures in 2024 showed the public cash awarded to the NHS amounted to £188.5 billion. The Ministry of Defence receives nearly £54billion, the Home Office gets over £20billion while Ministry of Justice funding comes in at almost £12billion. Public spending is currently around 45% of GDP. Mr Tice told the podcast, hosted by former Labour MP Jonathan Ashworth: "At 35% of GDP, things were working more. No one was saying back in the mid-nineties, to my recollection, the NHS is bust and broken and needs fundamental reform.' It comes amid serious questions about how Reform plans to fund the NHS. In April Mr Farage declared: "I do not want it [the NHS] funded through general taxation. It doesn't work. It's not working." Labour analysis has shown that Reform's previously announced £80billion of unfunded spending commitments could lead to an increase in mortgage payments for the average family by an eyewatering £5,500 a year - with increased borrowing pushing up interest rates and bills. It comes after Tory frontbencher Chris Philp, who was Chief Secretary to the Treasury when Ms Truss announced her disastrous mini-Budget in 2022, also voiced alarm about Reform. He told the BBC's Laura Kuenssberg that Nigel Farage's team wants to go even bigger on unfunded tax cuts.
