As social rent homes in England fall by more than quarter of a million in a decade, Scotland builds 6 times as many

Leeds is one of the cities in England where the biggest loses of social housing has occurred. Photograph: Gary Calton/The Observer

By Professor John Robertson

‘Affordable’ rent can, be at a rate up to 80% of the market rent for the same property and so, in some places, is far from affordable. ‘Social rent’ is linked to local incomes and thus is truly affordable.

In the Guardian, today:

More than a quarter of a million social rent homes in England have been lost in the last decade, according to analysis of government statistics.

Between April 2013 and April 2023, the number of social housing homes owned by local authorities and housing associations in England fell by 260,464 units, according to the charity Shelter, which calculated the figures. https://www.theguardian.com/society/article/2024/jun/09/social-rent-homes-in-england-fall-by-more-than-quarter-of-a-million-in-decade

From the Scottish Government on 26 March 2024:

In addition to the differences in total affordable delivery between each country, there are also some differences in the delivery of different affordable housing products within the mix of overall affordable housing in each country. For example, in England in recent years there has been a greater delivery of affordable / intermediate rent compared to social rent. Therefore, when looking over the four years to 2022-23, in England there have been on average 4.6 affordable / intermediate rent homes delivered per 10,000 head of population and 1.3 social rented homes delivered 10,000 per-head of population. This compares to a rate of 2.1 for affordable rent homes and a rate of 12.4 for social rented homes in Scotland. https://www.gov.scot/publications/quarterly-housing-statistics-march-2024/pages/housing-supply-including-affordable-across-the-uk/

4 thoughts on “As social rent homes in England fall by more than quarter of a million in a decade, Scotland builds 6 times as many”

  1. Scottish Gov building or renovation 6,000 affordable houses a year. Builders building 17,000. 50,000+ people die in Scotland a year.

    Like

    Reply

  3. O/T The Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) has just published a report on local government finance in England.

    Source: Ogden and Phillips (7 June 2024) How have English councils’ funding and spending changed? 2010 to 2024. Institute for Fiscal Studies report R318.

    As the IFS explains, England’s councils are funded by a combination of (i) grant funding from central government; (ii) a share of business rates revenues; (iii) council tax, as well as (iv) a range of sales, fees and charges (SFCs) for certain services; and (v) commercial and investment income.

    As a devolved matter, the element of council funding – as with funding of all devolved public services – that comes through a direct grant from the Scottish Government is influenced by Westminster’s decisions on the level of funding allocated to local government and to other devolved public services in England.

    The IFS report identifies a number of factors concerning local government finance in England that will have had a knock-on impact on the level of funding available to the Scottish Government (with my emphasis):

    • ‘Taking the period 2010–11 to 2024–25 as a whole, councils’ overall core funding is set to be 9% lower in real terms and 18% lower in real terms per person this year than at the start of the 2010s’
    • ‘During the 2010s, councils’ overall core funding per person fell by 26% in real terms, on average, with higher council tax revenues only partially offsetting a 46% fall in funding from central government.’ Of course it is the latter, the central government funding, that is of significance for Barnett Formula calculations of Scotland’s ‘block grant’.
    • ‘As well as seeing a big reduction in overall council funding, the 2010s therefore saw a big increase in the share of funding received from council tax: from just over a third (36%) in 2010– 11, to more than half (56%) in 2019–20.‘
    • ‘Substantial increases in grant funding ring-fenced for adult social care services (in England) mean that, in contrast to the 2010s, the 2019–24 parliament is set to see the share of funding provided by council tax fall, from 56% in 2019–20 to 53% in 2024–25. However, this will still be much higher than its level in 2015–16 (47%) and particularly 2010–11 (36%).’ The increased reliance on council taxes over direct grant funding from Westminster means that a higher proportion of the funds used by councils in England are NOT coming from a direct grant from Westminster, with a commensurate unfavourable outcome for Scotland’s ‘block grant’.

    The IFS demonstrates the financial pressures on England’s councils as they cope with their funding settlement from Westminster, one that has been inadequate to meet the costs and demands for local services the councils have been facing:

    • In England: ‘Six councils have had to issue so- called Section 114 notices, preventing any new expenditure that is not needed to satisfy a legal duty, and giving councillors three weeks to agree emergency reductions to spending or income-raising measures. In each instance, as well as general spending pressures, there have been other financial issues involved, including a major equal pay claim in the case of Birmingham, and high borrowing and issues related to investments in the other cases’.
    • Also in England: ‘Since 2020, a total of 29 councils have requested and been granted permission to make use of capital funding and proceeds from land and asset sales to help support day-to-day spending. While less drastic than Section 114 notices, the use of such ‘capitalisation directions’ provides evidence of more widespread acute pressure on councils’ finances.’

    Local government funding – yet another road that leads back to Westminster!

    The IFS makes some interesting observations regarding councils’ financial reserves:

    • ‘Perhaps reflecting the increased financial risks from a system with greater reliance on (potentially volatile) local revenue sources, councils (in England) increased their reserves substantially during the 2010s despite large cuts to funding and spending. On average, the increase was approximately 50% in real terms (with the cash figure increasing from £10.7 billion to £18.8 billion between April 2010 and April 2019).

    And to explain this: ‘… councils’ in-year financial reports overestimated the financial effects of COVID-19 by around £4 billion in 2020–21, meaning that councils were able to increase their reserves by around £5 billion (25%). A further £3.5 billion in COVID-related funding was provided in 2021–22, and enabled councils to further increase their reserves by around £2.3 billion (9%). This pattern of increased reserves was also seen in Scotland and Wales.’

    So councils received Covid-related funding that they didn’t spend but squirrelled this away in their reserves account?

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.