Housing Affordability Working Group minutes: May 2024

 

Attendees and apologies

 

• Professor Kenneth Gibb (Chair), UK Collaborative Centre for Housing Evidence (CaCHE), and Professor of Housing Economics (Urban Studies) University of Glasgow
• Tony Cain, Association of Local Authority Chief Housing Officers
• Shona Mitchell, Home Group
• David Bookbinder, Glasgow and West of Scotland Forum of Housing Associations
• John Blackwood, Scottish Association of Landlords
• Aoife Deery, Citizens Advice Scotland
• Dr Gillian Young, Newhaven Research Scotland
• Dr Madhu Satsangi, School of Social and Political Sciences, Glasgow University
• Helen Shaw, Scottish Housing Regulator
• Colin Stewart, Social Rented Sector representative
• Maeve McGoldrick, Crisis
• Eli Harji, Scottish Federation of Housing Associations
• Edward Pybus, independent social security adviser
• Emma Saunders, Living Rent (observer)

Apologies

• Dr John Boyle, Rettie and Co.
• Prof Angela O'Hagan, Deptartment of Social Sciences, Glasgow Caledonian University
• Sean Baillie, Living Rent
• Callum Chomczuk, Chartered Institute of Housing
• Mike Callaghan, COSLA
• Alice Tooms-Moore, Shelter Scotland
• Bel Ingham, Private Rented Sector representative
• Fionna Kell, Director of Policy, Homes for Scotland

Also in attendance

• Nicole Pettigrew, Scottish Government
• Janine Kellett, Scottish Government
• Andrew Weild, Scottish Government
• Suzie Ewing, Scottish Government
• Amy Nimegeer, Scottish Government
• Emma Nash, Scottish Government

Items and actions

Welcome by Chair, Professor Ken Gibb

The Chair, Ken Gibb, welcomed all members to the call, and advised that he would give a presentation outlining the key points of his report on a shared understanding of housing affordability. Ken stated that, as well as having discussions about the report in the meeting, himself and Scottish Government officials will accept any written feedback on it by Sunday 26th May.

Overview of Ken’s draft report and recommendations to Ministers: Towards a Shared Understanding of Housing Affordability: Short Life Working Group Scottish Government, 2022-24

Ken Gibb gave a presentation on his report which outlined the background of the group, the tasks carried out by the working group, key pieces of research and how he came to his recommendations.

Group discussions on the draft report and recommendation

• there was a consensus that the report had distilled the work of the group very well and brought all the complex topics and findings together in a clear and easy to understand manner
• there was also a general consensus that the choices made were the right ones, such as focussing on tenants and not owners and not including standards and conditions in the definition of housing costs. This keeps things more focussed and less complicated
• there was one working group member who voiced their disagreement with some of the choices made such as the narrow measure of cost of only including rent and service charges in the shared understanding. Their concern was that with this narrow definition housing costs can appear affordable until council tax and energy costs are added, when it then becomes unaffordable
• there were mixed views when discussing whether the level of housing costs as a percentage of net monthly income should be set at 25% or 30% 
• there was a belief amongst some that setting the rate at 25% would mean a number of rents in Scotland would be deemed unaffordable and that 30% might be more realistic
• amongst those who would like to see the housing costs as a percentage of net monthly income level set at 25% there were concerns expressed that, as ‘housing costs’ is not going to include fuel costs or other costs associated with housing, once these are added people will be unable to afford their housing
• group members also expressed their desire for the recommendations to be aspirational as they see the need for a change to the status quo
• some group members were clear that they do not want the group to settle on a shared understanding which enables the system to continue as it is, as the issues within the system are the reason the group came together Therefore, these members would like to see the housing costs level set at 25%
• there was discussion around what an acceptable affordable-rent failure rate would be and what the expectations would be on landlords and regulators in this regard
• members discussed the potential for the shared understanding to have unintended consequences such as an increase in homeless applications due to unaffordability. Not all members believed this would be the case and made the point that we are already seeing a high number of homeless applications due to unaffordability
• some of the group members raised the issue that single person households are more challenged when it comes to affordability and there is a need for more to be done to investigate how their income can be maximised
• there is a desire for a shared understanding which works for everyone and won’t overlook the circumstances of certain groups such as women, young people and migrants
• one working group member said that they would like to see supported and temporary accommodation included in the shared understanding of affordability as people in these types of tenancies are often paying extremely high rents
• it was also mentioned that any economic impact assessment must pay close attention to the interplay between incomes and housing costs and social security. How the work interrelates with the benefits system and how affordability and residual income at different income levels is different for different household makeups will also be important
• the group would like a level of assurance that any recommendations put in place will not be abandoned and that this must be something that will be around for a while and can be monitored over time
• there was a general consensus that how the shared understanding will be used is an important matter to decide
• it was also said that relative poverty is the measure that should be used in these discussions; it is relative poverty that highlights individual circumstances and experiences and how much people can partake in society
• there will be a need for impact assessments to be carried out by Scottish Government, landlords, local authorities and other housing organisations, in particular a Fairer Scotland impact assessment
• regarding the need to operationalise the shared understanding, many are keen that there is a standard income to base this on and believe it should be based on the national minimum wage

Closing remarks, next steps and reflections

• Ken Gibb thanked the working group for what was a fascinating and very focussed discussion. He said that having majority and minority positions within the group is likely to be inescapable but he wants to get to a place where the group has something that can be signed off for Scottish Ministers with a consensus
• Scottish Government officials thanked the group for their time and effort

Action

• group members to get final written comments to Ken Gibb by Sunday 26 May
• Ken will redraft the report