Welcome for housing pledge - but is it too late for some?
Danielle has moved four times in the last nine months with her three children.
They became homeless after receiving a section 21 "no fault" eviction order from their landlord, and since then their local council has placed them in a shared house, as well as in hotel rooms.
Despite the government's promises to fund more affordable and social housing, Danielle told the BBC she doesn't expect a council house to become available "any time soon".
In Wednesday's Spending Review, Chancellor Rachel Reeves announced her plan to deliver the government's manifesto pledge to build 1.5 million new homes this parliament.
The government committed to spend £39bn across 10 years for social and affordable housing in England - a move described by many social landlords and housing charities as a game-changer.
Many parts of the country currently face an acute shortage of affordable and social housing. London's social housing waiting lists are at a 10-year high, according to analysis of government data by London Councils published earlier this year.
The government says this investment, amounting to an average of £3.9bn a year, will be "significantly higher than what the previous government spent on affordable housing, which was an average of £2.3bn per year".
Affordable housing is a wide-ranging category which includes properties let at rents of no more than 80% of local market rates, as well as shared ownership homes and social rent properties which are set at about 50% of market levels.
More detail - including where the homes will be built, who will build them, and how much funding will be allocated to building socially rented homes - is still awaited.
Seven ways the Spending Review affects you
What has the chancellor has announced? The key points
Watch: Where the money is being spent
Danielle says the government's announcement feels "too late" to help her family now - but she hopes it means better chances for her children in the future.
For her a permanent home "would be everything, everything".
"It's security for my children, it's to know that we are never going to be put in a position like this again."
Being moved every few weeks has been extremely disruptive.
"It's been awful, absolute hell, it's turned all of our lives upside down. My children are constantly having to readapt."
She has now been moved to temporary accommodation 18 miles from their school.
"My children have to be up so early, at 5am, and then are expected to give 100% at school."
You could almost hear the sigh of relief from social landlords when the billion-pound housing investment was announced.
Many had warned that without significant funding and certainty, the government would never reach its housebuilding target.
The government has also guaranteed how much social landlords will receive in rents over the next 10 years, meaning housing associations can plan how much they have to invest in building.
Kate Henderson, head of the National Housing Federation, described the announcement as "transformational" and "the most ambitious Affordable Homes Programme we've seen in decades".
Charlie Trew, head of policy at Shelter, agrees this is a "a really big moment" for the sector, but said the government needs to set a "clear target" for exactly how many social rent homes are planned.
"The issue with so-called 'affordable housing' is that often it's not affordable at all and priced out of reach of people on low incomes," Mr Trew told the BBC.
Shelter analysis shows that in more than four in 10 local authorities in England, a one-bed "affordable rent" home is "unaffordable for an individual on low pay", Mr Trew added.
For this reason, he said it was important for the government to set a social rent target that would "focus this funding on social rent so that the cash delivers genuinely affordable social rented homes with rents tied to local incomes."
Meanwhile, housebuilders said that while the announcement was good news in the long term, they were hoping for a boost now for the wider housing sector - such as a reintroduction of the help-to-buy scheme.
Neil Jefferson, CEO at the Home Builders Federation, said that a year into the new parliament, housing supply and investment were "still lagging well behind where they should be".
"This will likely persist until government grapples with the challenges being faced by prospective first-time buyers trying to get on the housing ladder," he said.
'Constant stress': Families tell BBC of life in limbo due to housing crisis
Key points at a glance from the Spending Review
Rachel Reeves outlines boosts for NHS and housing
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Crime will be the next immigration. Politicians will be punished for it
It's hard to shake off the sense that Britain is creeping towards lawlessness. Low-level crime is on its way to becoming legalised, whether officially – in the case of cannabis – or not – as with shoplifting. Public faith in the police is collapsing as many serious crimes like burglary and assault routinely fail to be solved, and sometimes even go uninvestigated, while 'speech crimes' trigger the full wrath of the law. Too many neighbourhoods are becoming hotbeds of anti-social behaviour, with begging prolific and buildings defaced by graffiti. True, Britain is cash-strapped. But it's the fusion of chronic underinvestment with liberal idealism which is so toxic. Disorder is being normalised, criminals treated as victims, the rule of law eroded. Though politicians remain convinced that crime is a second-order issue, it could eventually prove the Labour Government's undoing. My own local area in west London is disintegrating. It started with a clutch of beggars congregating outside the Tesco after Covid. Now they are joined by dishevelled women selling 'washing powder' and bare-footed addicts. For the most part, they are a nuisance rather than dangerous. Like many women in the city, when I walk the streets, I get the surreal feeling of being neither safe nor unsafe. With the crime rate in my area surging by a third since 2019, and several of my neighbours recently burgled, that may soon change. When I expressed my concerns to police and crime commissioners this week, they echoed Mark Rowley's complaint about a lack of funds. Some say they find Rachel Reeves's claim that she is hiking police spending by 2.3 per cent each year exasperating. A view prevails in Westminster that crime is a non-issue. Its proponents point to statistics that suggest it is at its lowest level on record. They think that technology is rendering crime a relic of the past, with their favourite example, carjacking, now largely a fool's errand thanks to security device innovation. They think that any ongoing problems pertain to a tiny number of chronic offenders. Meanwhile, Left-leaning criminologists insist that conservatives' fears that 'soft' policing could drive up crime are prejudiced. Crackdowns are said to be 'counterproductive', alienating 'disproportionately-targeted' minority groups. Such framing overlooks the risk that unrecorded crime is quietly climbing, as law-breaking becomes such a regular occurrence that some victims don't bother to report it. Other kinds are probably not being picked up properly by polling. Even more worrying is the Leftist view that, if there is a specific issue with chronic offenders, it's the consequence of too much law and order rather than too little. Keir Starmer's prison guru, James Timpson, thinks Britain is 'addicted' to sentencing. Sadiq Khan has backed 'partial' cannabis decriminalisation, amid claims that policing the drug harms more than the substance itself. The way in which the Left tries to romanticise these criminals is if anything becoming more strident – we are told that in the wake of austerity and Covid, certain law-breakers are, deep down, troubled souls. Shoplifters and fare dodgers who are allegedly 'struggling with the cost of living' are the latest group to which any 'compassionate' society should turn a blind eye, the Left insist. This myth threatens to shake the foundations of our society by undermining the sacred principle that we are all equal under the law. There is only so far we can fall down this rehabilitation rabbit hole before triggering a crime surge. Labour is adamant that the Michael Howard school of tough sentencing has failed. It has opted to release offenders early and ignore our rotting prison estate. This is a terrible mistake. Even if prison isn't working in the sense that it isn't preventing ex-convicts from reoffending, policymakers should not use this as an excuse to avoid punishing those who break our laws. The answer to our failure to rehabilitate is not to allow criminals to escape punishment. In the most important sense, prison almost always 'works' by preventing somebody who is locked up from stealing or assaulting other people. True, rehabilitation can sometimes work wonders. I have spoken with ex offenders who have been transformed by such programmes. One woman, Sonia, told me of how the support of one charity helped her evade the 'revolving door back to prison'. But resource-intensive, bespoke rehabilitation is tricky to scale. In austere times, the temptation to roll out rehab on the cheap could prove overwhelming, and will end in failure. As veteran probation expert Mark Leech told me: 'There are prisoners that have done the courses so many times they could deliver them better than the tutors who deliver them.' Chasing a utopian ideal, with no idea how to make it work, let alone on a tight budget, is flirting with disaster. Efforts by some criminologists to discredit the policing approach known as 'broken windows' could also end badly. This concept, which clamps down on low-level crime such as graffiti and drug-taking on the basis that tolerating 'minor' disorder leads to a culture that promotes much more serious crime, helped flatten a vicious crime wave in 1990s New York. It has been trashed in recent years, amid complaints it is racist and based on 'bogus' evidence. I disagree. Broken windows could once again be a vital weapon against certain serious crimes, such as sexual offences. Police officers on the front line certainly seem to think so: as Matthew Barber, PCC for Thames Valley, says: 'You won't find many hardened criminals who didn't start doing things at a young age before getting steadily out of control. Fix those basics and you'll prevent an awful lot more serious crime down the road.' Though Labour politicians may be in denial, a slow-burning crisis is unfolding. There is a widespread sense of malaise, that law is breaking down. In Red Wall towns, Labour's 'levelling up' projects are being undermined by anti-social behaviour. In the cities, alarm at gang violence, as well as muggings and burglary, may yet nudge professionals to the Right. Labour's inability to tackle crime could cost it dear. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Rachel Reeves 'a gnat's whisker' from having to raise taxes, says IFS
Rachel Reeves is a "gnat's whisker" away from having to raise taxes in the autumn budget, a leading economist has warned - despite the chancellor insisting her plans are "fully funded". Paul Johnson, director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS), said "any move in the wrong direction" for the economy before the next fiscal event would "almost certainly spark more tax rises". 'Sting in the tail' in chancellor's plans - politics latest Speaking the morning after she delivered her spending review, which sets government budgets until 2029, Ms Reeves told Wilfred Frost hiking taxes wasn't inevitable. "Everything I set out yesterday was fully costed and fully funded," she told Sky News Breakfast. Her plans - which include £29bn for day-to-day NHS spending, £39bn for affordable and social housing, and boosts for defence and transport - are based on what she set out in October's budget. That budget, her first as chancellor, included controversial tax hikes on employers and increased borrowing to help public services. Chancellor won't rule out tax rises The Labour government has long vowed not to raise taxes on "working people" - specifically income tax, national insurance for employees, and VAT. Ms Reeves refused to completely rule out tax rises in her next budget, saying the world is "very uncertain". The Conservatives have claimed she will almost certainly have to put taxes up, with shadow chancellor Mel Stride accusing her of mismanaging the economy. Taxes on businesses had "destroyed growth" and increased spending had been "inflationary", he told Sky News. New official figures showed the economy contracted in April by 0.3% - more than expected. It coincided with Donald Trump imposing tariffs across the world. Ms Reeves admitted the figures were "disappointing" but pointed to more positive figures from previous months. Read more:Chancellor running out of levers to pullGrowth stats make for unpleasant readingYour spending review questions answered 'Sting in the tail' She is hoping Labour's plans will provide more jobs and boost growth, with major infrastructure projects "spread" across the country - from the Sizewell C nuclear plant in Suffolk, to a rail line connecting Liverpool and Manchester. But the IFS said further contractions in the economy, and poor forecasts from the Office for Budget Responsibility, would likely require the chancellor to increase the national tax take once again. It said her spending review already accounted for a 5% rise in council tax to help local authorities, labelling it a "sting in the tail" after she told Sky's Beth Rigby that it wouldn't have to go up.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Rachel Reeves 'a gnat's whisker' from having to raise taxes, says IFS
Rachel Reeves is a "gnat's whisker" away from having to raise taxes in the autumn budget, a leading economist has warned - despite the chancellor insisting her plans are "fully funded". Paul Johnson, director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS), said "any move in the wrong direction" for the economy before the next fiscal event would "almost certainly spark more tax rises". 'Sting in the tail' in chancellor's plans - politics latest Speaking the morning after she delivered her spending review, which sets government budgets until 2029, Ms Reeves told hiking taxes wasn't inevitable. "Everything I set out yesterday was fully costed and fully funded," she told Sky News Breakfast. Her plans - which include £29bn for day-to-day NHS spending, £39bn for affordable and social housing, and boosts for defence and transport - are based on what she set out in October's budget. That budget, her first as chancellor, included controversial tax hikes on employers and increased borrowing to help public services. Chancellor won't rule out tax rises The Labour government has long vowed not to raise taxes on "working people" - specifically income tax, national insurance for employees, and VAT. Ms Reeves refused to completely rule out tax rises in her next budget, saying the world is "very uncertain". The Conservatives have claimed she will almost certainly have to put taxes up, with shadow chancellor Mel Stride accusing her of mismanaging the economy. Taxes on businesses had "destroyed growth" and increased spending had been "inflationary", he told Sky News. New official figures showed the economy contracted in April by 0.3% - more than expected. It coincided with Donald Trump imposing tariffs across the world. Ms Reeves admitted the figures were "disappointing" but pointed to more positive figures from previous months. Read more: 'Sting in the tail' She is hoping Labour's plans will provide more jobs and boost growth, with major infrastructure projects "spread" across the country - from the Sizewell C nuclear plant in Suffolk, to a rail line connecting Liverpool and Manchester. But the IFS said further contractions in the economy, and poor forecasts from the Office for Budget Responsibility, would likely require the chancellor to increase the national tax take once again. It said her spending review already accounted for a 5% rise in council tax to help local authorities, labelling it a "sting in the tail" after she told Sky's Beth Rigby that it wouldn't have to go up.
