Latest news with #NewEconomicsFoundation
ITV News
3 days ago
- Politics
- ITV News
Moment of truth for Labour on 'cliff edge' housing crisis
For the past 45 years Britain has been on a mission - to sell off as much affordable housing as it possibly can without replacing it. And in that mission, we have been extraordinarily successful. According to the government's own data, the number of social homes - the most affordable housing for rent - has dropped by 25% since 1980, while the population has grown by 14%. We have sold off 1.9 million social homes largely under the Right to Buy scheme, which allows tenants to buy the property they rent at a generous discount. It has transformed the way Britain is housed. When Margaret Thatcher came to power, a third of the country lived in a council house, while the number of people who privately rented was just 10%. Today, that trend has almost exactly reversed - millions more people rent from private landlords at a time when rents are at historically high levels. Thatcher started this trend, and every government since has stuck to the plan - a plan which has proven foolish and short-sighted, and the consequences profound. Today, the number of homeless children in England is at the highest level on record. The number of families stuck in temporary accommodation is also the highest since records began. There are 1.3 million households on a waiting list for a social home. Most will have to wait years to get one, many won't ever get one.I will never forget sitting on the grass in a park in north London with a homeless family who were living in a temporary budget hotel after they were unable to find anywhere affordable to rent. I asked eight-year-old Callis what his dream was - footballer, astronaut, doctor? His response: 'Somewhere to live, and to stay there.' This all comes at an enormous cost. The government spends more than £20 billion a year on housing benefit, subsidising the rent of people who cannot afford to pay it. That has doubled since 1997. The state is spending more on helping people pay unaffordable rents than it is building homes. Those living in a social home are increasingly made to feel they should be grateful for owning one, even if this means living in a run-down, mouldy, damp, or even dangerous home in desperate need of repair. I have spent four years reporting on the crisis in housing conditions, and the state of some of Britain's housing stock is a stain on the country, homes that would not look out of place in a Dickens novel. Complaints too often go ignored. Where else are they going to go? Last week, a report by the Housing Ombudsman found 45% of Britain's social homes were built before 1964. And what happened to those homes that the state decided to sell at a heavy discount? Forty per cent are now private rentals, according to the New Economics Foundation, let out at maximum market price to the same kinds of families who 40 years ago would have rented from the state at a much more affordable rate. It isn't getting better either. Last year, England sold and demolished more social homes than it built. At a time when affordable housing is in desperate need, the country is still in negative equity. Successive governments have prioritised home ownership at the expense of everything else, but that's no longer working out either. The number of homeowners has been in steady decline since the early 2000s. Enter stage left: Rachel Reeves. The chancellor is under enormous pressure to halt five decades of decline and offer up cash to build more social homes, and fast. The Starmer government has promised to build 1.5 million homes by the next election. I can't find anyone across the housing sector who thinks they can achieve that, even with its plans to overhaul the planning system, but if they do, it will only be by building more social housing. The last time Britain built more than 300,000 homes in a year was 1977, when half were built by the state. This, of course, means money. Housing campaigners have been relentless in their lobbying of the Treasury to put money in the pipeline to ensure tens of thousands of new social homes are consistently built every year. The last government committed £11.5 billion to the affordable housing programme between 2021 and 2026, but 'affordable' includes shared ownership and rents at 80% of market value (social rentals are typically at 50%), which the vast majority of people on waiting lists cannot afford. The programme hasn't touched the sides when it comes to social housing delivery. Housing charities want to see billions more on top of that £11.5 billion figure. One chief executive told me an extra £12 billion is needed, but £6 billion would be a good start. An extra £12 billion would allow, charities estimate, around 45,000 social homes to be built each year. Last year, England built 9,866. Across the sector, it is widely agreed that 90,000 are needed each year just to keep up with current demand. 'For too long, governments have allowed thousands of social homes to be lost each year, while funnelling public money into so-called 'affordable homes' which are priced far out of reach for many,' Mairi MacRae, Director of Campaigns & Policy at Shelter, told me. 'The result has been record homelessness, and families, young people, and key workers priced out of their communities. 'Social homes are the only genuinely affordable homes by design because rents are tied to local incomes and are around two thirds lower than private rents…the government must commit to building 90,000 social rent homes a year for ten years.' One major bugbear for campaigners is the reluctance and/or refusal by Labour to say how many of the 1.5 million will be social homes. They want the Spending Review to be the moment where that changes. They want to see targets, and any money accounted for the affordable housing programme must, they say, stipulate how much is specifically for social housing. Matt Downie, chief executive of Crisis, told me: 'The spending review must be an opportunity for investment in new social homes to see homelessness levels come down. 'We need a clear commitment on the 90,000 new social homes required each year and a level of investment that starts the process of delivery to get there. Only then will we tackle head on the huge problem of temporary accommodation we currently face.' My colleague Robert Peston has reported the last few days on a stand-off between the chancellor and the Housing Secretary Angela Rayner, who herself grew up in social housing in Manchester. Before she entered government, she and I talked a lot about the desperate need for social homes, what it meant to her personally to have that safety net as a child and how she wants that for others. Rayner knows all the arguments laid out here, knows the statistics and the stories behind them. She understands them perhaps more than any minister that has ever worked in government. She is now in that age-old battle with the bean counters at Number 11, who, for decades, whichever party has been in charge, have not stumped up the cash to build houses. The country is now paying an enormous cost. In economic terms, building social housing is a smart use of public money. It is infrastructure that will last decades and in the medium to long term would save money, reducing that big housing benefit bill while dragging families out of poverty and unhealthy homes that are making them sick. Britain has undergone a 45-year experiment. By every measure, it has failed. Even the last Conservative government and its Housing Secretary, Michael Gove, said the failure to build social homes has been a mistake. There is now a political consensus on the need to end the experiment and build. Charities warn Britain is on a cliff edge. Refuse to intervene and the government risks ever-rising homelessness and councils going bankrupt trying to house those without anywhere to live. Wednesday's spending review has become D-Day for the housing market and for millions of families with nowhere to go.
Yahoo
02-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
DWP accused of 'misleading' universal credit and PIP claimants over welfare cuts
The government has used a 'misleading' accounting trick to assess the impact of its welfare cuts on ill and disabled people, meaning 100,000 more people will be plunged into poverty than its figures suggest, researchers have claimed. In March, the government announced sweeping cuts to benefits payments for claimants in the UK, sparking widespread criticism from campaigners. These included limiting the assessment criteria for PIP and freezing incapacity benefits for those claiming universal credit. According to the government's own impact assessment published by the department for work and pensions, the measures would push up to 250,000 people into poverty, including 50,000 children. It also said some 370,000 people currently on disability benefits would lose on average £4,500 per year in 2029/30, as a result of the changes. Chancellor Rachel Reeves said the benefits cuts would save the government £4.8bn and said she was 'absolutely certain' the welfare reforms would not push people into poverty, claiming the changes would result in more people being in work. However, analysis from the New Economics Foundation (NEF) seen by Yahoo News shows that cuts to PIP and the incapacity benefit element of universal credit will take almost £2bn more out of the welfare budget for ill and disabled people than the government claims. It says that, in fact, up to 340,000 people face being pushed into poverty once the cuts are rolled out - 100,000 more than the government figure. The impact assessment was published alongside Reeves' spring statement on 26 March. Crucially, according to the NEF, it included the potential impact of plans announced by the previous Conservative government to reform the work capability assessment (WCA) announced in autumn 2023. This policy would have changed the WCA to make it harder for people to qualify for a higher rate of universal credit on the basis of illness or disability. This would have saved the government £1.6bn and potentially pushed 100,000 people into poverty. These proposals were ruled unlawful by the High Court in January 2025. However, Labour has been accused of including in its spring statement assessment that it has effectively "spent" £1.6bn by scrapping potential savings that never existed - and, at the same, downplayed by 100,000 the number of people projected to be pushed into poverty. "To put it another way, using this phantom policy to offset the scale and impact of actual cuts happening in the real world is akin to suggesting that you should feel better off because your boss had thought about cutting your wages but then decided against it," the NEF said. After the NEF made revised calculations, it estimated the full scale of the cuts by 2029-30 will be £6.7bn, not £4.8bn a year by 2029-30. Tom Pollard, head of social policy at NEF, told Yahoo News: "Although the government may need to account internally for its decision not to proceed the last government's proposed changes to the work capability assessment, it is misleading to suggest that this materially offsets the scale and impact of actual cuts the government plans to implement. "Ill and disabled people will feel no tangible benefit from a potential cut not being taken forward, but the £6.7bn of cuts that are due to take place will have a very real impact on their lives - potentially pushing an additional 340,000 people into poverty by the end of this parliament. "The government claims this will be mitigated by more people moving into work, but has not yet been able to produce an assessment of the likely employment impact of their planned reforms." Other groups have been similarly critical of the government's approach. The Joseph Rowntree Foundation came to a similar conclusion as the NEF. However, it has estimated that up to 400,000 could be plunged into poverty in total - even higher than the NEF. Iain Porter, senior policy adviser at the JRF, posted on Bluesky: "The 250k net poverty rise in impact assessment is extra to an assumed 150k rise that previous Conservative plans would have created - even they never happened. But DWP has assumed that increase was already on the books and added to it. Real poverty impact is 400k." James Taylor, Director of Strategy at disability equality charity Scope, warned that "the full extent of the government's catastrophic welfare cuts are being laid bare." Scope has been supporting disabled people losing out on benefits like PIP after the government said it would be limiting the assessment criteria to restrict the number of people who can claim the benefit. He told Yahoo News: 'Massive cuts to disability benefits are worse than first thought, and will lower the living standards of disabled people and push even more into poverty. "It is obvious these cuts are simply about saving money and not by the "moral" desire to get more people into work. "The government needs to listen to disabled people and understand the catastrophic impact these decision will have on their lives." A DWP spokesperson told Yahoo News: 'Helping people into good work and financial independence is at the heart of our Plan to Change, but the broken social security system we inherited is failing people who can and have the potential to work, as well as the people it's meant to be there for. 'That's why we're delivering a £1 billion employment support package to break down barriers for disabled people into work. We're also rebalancing universal credit payment levels, so the benefit's main rate rises permanently above inflation for the first time, in a boost for low-income families. 'The OBR will give their assessment on the labour market impacts of our package at the autumn statement, having already concluded 730,000 people are forecast to be receiving the new lower rate of UC health.'
The Independent
25-03-2025
- Business
- The Independent
Reeves offers £2bn affordable housing boost ahead of sweeping cuts to public services
Thousands of new homes in England will be built as part of the biggest boost in social and affordable housebuilding in a generation, the government has said. Chancellor Rachel Reeves vowed the £2 billion in grant funding to deliver up to 18,000 new homes in England will go some way to 'fixing the housing crisis'. The funding is described by the government as a 'down payment from the Treasury' ahead of longer-term investment in social and affordable housing expected to be announced later in the year. The government expects at least half of the 18,000 would be social homes, as charities urged that the 'vast majority' should be for social rent amid record highs in homelessness across the country. The announcement on Tuesday comes a day ahead of the spring statement, in which the Chancellor is expected to announce spending cuts for some government departments, having already unveiled cuts to welfare – which have proved unpopular with Labour backbenchers – and amid reports the digital services tax – a levy on big tech companies – could be slashed in order to stave off American tariffs. The housebuilding boost is aimed at helping to fulfil the government's pledge to build 1.5 million new homes over the next five years. Last year, experts at the New Economics Foundation said 90,000 social homes would need to be built by as early as 2027/28 to meet the Government's target and that by the final year of this parliament, ministers would 'need to go beyond this and deliver 110,000 new social homes to ensure 1.5 million homes are built', amounting to a total of 365,000 social rent homes over the next five years to hit the target. The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government said thousands of new affordable homes will start construction by March 2027 and be completed by July 2029. They said the funding will also 'unlock development and opportunity' on sites that are ready and waiting for construction to begin in locations including Manchester and Liverpool. The chancellor announced the plans on a visit to an affordable housing site in Stoke-On-Trent with deputy prime minister Angela Rayner. Ms Reeves said: 'We are fixing the housing crisis in this country with biggest boost in social and affordable housebuilding in a generation. 'Today's announcement will help drive growth through our Plan for Change by delivering up to 18,000 new homes, as well as jobs and opportunities, getting more money into working people's pockets.' Her cabinet colleague Ms Rayner said: 'Everyone deserves to have a safe and secure roof over their heads and a place to call their own, but the reality is that far too many people have been frozen out of homeownership or denied the chance to rent a home they can afford thanks to the housing crisis we've inherited. 'This investment will help us to build thousands more affordable homes to buy and rent and get working people and families into secure homes and onto the housing ladder. 'This is just the latest step forward in delivering our Plan for Change mission to build 1.5 million homes, and the biggest increase in social and affordable housing in a generation.' The number of households on local authority waiting lists, or registers, for social housing in England stood at 1,330,611 in 2024 – the highest figure in a decade. The previous highest figure was 1,370,410 in 2014. The government cautioned that the figure for those on waiting lists is likely to 'overstate the number of households who still require social housing at any one time'. It said this is because some households can be recorded on more than one council's list and registers are reviewed at varying times to remove those who no longer require housing. Figures published last month showed that both the number of households in temporary accommodation – a form of homelessness – and the number of children in this situation were at record highs. The number of children in temporary accommodation hit 164,040 as of the end of September – up 15% in a year and is the highest since records for this measure began in 2004. The number of households in temporary accommodation was also at a record high of 126,040, having increased 16% in a year. Matt Downie, chief executive of housing and homelessness charity Crisis, said Tuesday's announcement is 'hugely welcome' and hopefully 'signals the beginning of a social housebuilding programme that will radically shift this country's response to homelessness, putting housing at the heart of the solution'. He urged the Government to 'ensure that the vast majority of the initial 18,000 homes are for social rent so that people facing homelessness can access them'. This plea was echoed by Shelter which said the funding is a 'positive step' but that it is 'vital that the majority of this funding is directed towards social rent housing, not expensive alternatives that won't help struggling families'. The charity's chief executive, Polly Neate repeated their call for a commitment to build 90,000 social homes a year, saying this vow was come in the June Spending Review. She added: 'This is the Government's moment to prove it is serious about tackling the housing emergency. Without a major funding commitment to 90,000 social homes a year for ten years, homelessness will keep spiralling, and millions will remain trapped in unstable, overpriced housing.' But Conservative shadow housing secretary Kevin Hollinrake said without cutting the numbers of people crossing the Channel in small boats, there was 'simply no way for the government to stop every single home built with this funding from simply coping with the population growth from illegal migrants, many of who might not even have left Calais yet'. He added: 'Only the Conservatives under new leadership will take action to stop illegal crossings and prevent millions from gaining access to social housing.' People in the UK illegally are unable to apply for social housing. Those who have been granted asylum can apply, but the Chartered Institute for Housing has said their lack of a 'local connection' means they have less chance of securing a social home than longstanding UK residents. Meanwhile, Ms Reeves said she does not 'recognise' reports ministers may means-test free school meals for young children as part of the cost-cutting drive across government and insisted the digital services tax was 'hugely important'. Ahead of the spring statement, the prime minister told BBC Radio 5 Live on Tuesday that he wanted to 'take some money out of Government' and was looking 'across the board' at where to make spending cuts. Sir Keir insisted the government had made 'record investments' at last October's budget and that the statement would not 'alter the basics' of public spending. He and the chancellor face a difficult fiscal situation, as Ms Reeves has repeatedly said she will not budge from her fiscal rules, which rule out borrowing to fund day-to-day spending. This has led to mounting pressure over how to balance the books – by raising taxes or cutting spending – amid disappointing growth figures and higher-than-expected borrowing. Although the chancellor is expected to announce a series of spending cuts on Wednesday, she has faced calls from some quarters to raise taxes on the richest instead. The charity Oxfam is among those calling for a 2% wealth tax on people with assets worth more than £10 million, saying a YouGov poll of 2,257 people showed 78% would back such a move, while 77% would rather see higher taxes on the rich than cuts in public spending.
Sky News
25-03-2025
- Business
- Sky News
Thousands of new homes to be built across England in £2bn plan announced by chancellor
Thousands of new homes in England will be built as part of a £2bn plan to boost social and affordable house building, the government has said. Up to 18,000 new homes are set to be delivered, which Chancellor Rachel Reeves said would go some way to "fixing the housing crisis". Charities said the "vast majority" of new homes should be for social rent amid record highs in homelessness across the country. The funding is described by the government as a "down payment from the Treasury" ahead of longer-term investment in social and affordable housing expected to be announced later in the year. The government expects at least half of the 18,000 would be social homes. But charities have called for the "vast majority" to be for social rent as homelessness hits record highs across the country. The government has pledged to build 1.5 million new homes over the next five years. Tuesday's announcement comes a day before the spring statement, in which the chancellor is expected to announce spending cuts for some government departments, having already unveiled cuts to welfare. The cuts - which have proved unpopular with Labour backbenchers - come amid reports that the digital services tax - a levy on big tech companies - could be slashed in order to stave off American tariffs. Last year, experts at the New Economics Foundation said 90,000 social homes would need to be built by as early as 2027/28 to meet the government's target. By the final year of this parliament, ministers would "need to go beyond this and deliver 110,000 new social homes to ensure 1.5 million homes are built", the foundation said, amounting to a total of 365,000 social rent homes over the next five years to hit the target. 2:55 The chancellor announced the plans on a visit to an affordable housing site in Stoke-On-Trent with deputy prime minister Angela Rayner. Ms Rayner said: "Everyone deserves to have a safe and secure roof over their heads and a place to call their own, but the reality is that far too many people have been frozen out of homeownership or denied the chance to rent a home they can afford thanks to the housing crisis we've inherited. "This investment will help us to build thousands more affordable homes to buy and rent and get working people and families into secure homes and onto the housing ladder." The number of households on local authority waiting lists, or registers, for social housing in England stood at 1,330,611 in 2024 - the highest figure in a decade. The previous highest figure was 1,370,410 in 2014. Matt Downie, chief executive of housing and homelessness charity Crisis, said Tuesday's announcement was "hugely welcome" and hopefully "signals the beginning of a social housebuilding programme that will radically shift this country's response to homelessness, putting housing at the heart of the solution".
The Guardian
17-03-2025
- Business
- The Guardian
Starmer urged to introduce wealth tax instead of cutting disability benefits
Good morning. 'You want me to cut £1bn. Shall I take £100 each off 10 million people, or £1,000 each off 1 million people?' The former Tory chancellor Ken Clarke is credited with coming up with this explanation of what big number spending cuts actually mean, but every chancellor has probably thought the same. Tomorrow the government is expected to announced disability cuts said to be worth at least £5bn. You can work out the maths. That is more than three times as much as the £1.5bn saved by cutting the winter fuel payment, the single policy decision that as done more than anything else to make the government unpopular. So it is not hard to work out why Keir Starmer is facing Labour turmoil over this decision. (To be fair, the winter fuel payment was an immediate cut. The figures briefed about how much money the government wants to save by cutting disability benefits seem to refer to savings by the end of the decade. But we don't know the details at this point. Last week the New Economics Foundation, a leftwing thinktank, claimed that cuts could be worth as much as £9bn by 2029-30.) Hard facts might be in short supply this morning, but comment isn't. With 24 hours to go before one of the biggest announcements of the Keir Starmer premiership, lots of people are staking out positions. Here are some of the key developments. Diane Abbott, the Labour leftwinger and mother of the Commons, has said urged the government to impose a wealth tax as an alternative to cutting disabilty benefits. In an interview on the Today programme, asked what she would do instead, Abbott replied: I would introduce the wealth tax. If you brought in a wealth tax of just 2% on people with assets over £10m, that would raise £24bn a year. That's what I would do. This is broadly similar to what the Green party was proposing at the last election. Andy Burnham, the Labour mayor of Greater Manchester, has joined those expressing concerns about the plans. In an article for the Times, he says: I would share concerns about changing support and eligibility to benefits while leaving the current top-down system broadly in place. It would trap too many people in poverty. And to be clear: there is no case in any scenario for cutting the support available to disabled people who are unable to work. He says Greater Manchester's Live Well initiative is a model for how people who are ill can be supported back into work. Abbott has said that opposition to the government's plans for disability benefit cuts is not just coming from the left. In her interview on the Today programme, she said she agreed with what Burnham is saying, and she said she also agreed with Ed Balls, who said last week that cutting benefits for those most in need was not something Labour should be doing. Abbott, Burnham and Balls were three of the candidates in the 2010 Labour leadership contest. A fourth, Ed Miliband, is also reported unhappy about the cuts, although as a cabinet minister he has not spoken out publicly. Emma Reynolds, a Treasury minister, has said the government is 'for the time being not going to come forward with a wealth tax'. She said this in an interview on the Today programme, when asked if the government would be following Abbott's advice. Reynolds said the government had already raised taxes affecting wealthy people. Reynolds urged Labour MPs and others to wait for the details of the plans before coming to a verdict on them. In comments implying the final proposals might not be as draconian as some of the pre-briefing has implied, she said: Some colleagues are jumping to conclusions about our plans before they've heard them. So I just urge them to be patient. When it was put to here that she was saying some of their concerns might be addressed when they read the actual proposals, Reynolds said there had been 'a lot of speculation about what we might or might not do'. She said there would always be a safety net for those most in need. She said: We'll set out further details, but the severely disabled and the most vulnerable will always get support, and there will always be a safety net. The Resolution Foundation thinktank has said that the government's proposed disability cuts are likely to fall disproportionately on the poor. In a statement it says: The government is reportedly focusing on cutting incapacity and disability benefits to stem rising spending and support more people into work. But while the system needs reform, Ministers appear to be focused on cutting personal independence payments (Pip) – a benefit that isn't related to work. The foundation warns that cutting Pip by £5bn in 2029-30, for example by raising the threshold to qualify for support, could see around 620,000 people losing £675 per month, on average. The Foundation adds that 70 per cent of these cuts would be concentrated on families in the poorest half of the income distribution. Here is the agenda for the day. 9.30am: Rachel Reeves, the chancellor, is meeting the heads of regulatory agencies in Downing Street to discuss their plans to boost growth. Later Reeves is recording broadcast interviews. 11.30am: Downing Street holds a lobby briefing. Noon: Nigel Farage and other Reform UK MPs hold a press conference to make what they call 'a special announcement'. 2.30pm: Liz Kendall, the work and pensions secretary, takes questions in the Commons. After 3.30pm: David Lammy, the foreign secretary, is expected to make a Commons statement about Ukraine. After 4.30pm: MPs start debating the remaining stages of the children's wellbeing and schools bill. 5.35pm: Kemi Badenoch gives a speech at the CPS's Margaret Thatcher Conference on Remaking Conservatism. Other speakers earlier in the day include George Osborne, the former chancellor, who is doing a Q&A at 3.35pm. Early evening: Keir Starmer meets Mark Carney, the new Canadian PM, in Downing Street. If you want to contact me, please post a message below the line or message me on social media. I can't read all the messages BTL, but if you put 'Andrew' in a message aimed at me, I am more likely to see it because I search for posts containing that word. If you want to flag something up urgently, it is best to use social media. You can reach me on Bluesky at @andrewsparrowgdn. The Guardian has given up posting from its official accounts on X but individual Guardian journalists are there, I still have my account, and if you message me there at @AndrewSparrow, I will see it and respond if necessary. I find it very helpful when readers point out mistakes, even minor typos. No error is too small to correct. And I find your questions very interesting too. I can't promise to reply to them all, but I will try to reply to as many as I can, either BTL or sometimes in the blog. Share
