(1 day, 4 hours ago)
Commons ChamberThis Government are delivering the biggest increase in social and affordable housing in a generation. Our £39 billion social and affordable homes programme will build around 300,000 homes over 10 years, with at least 60% for social rent, backing councils and housing associations to build at scale. The Conservative Government failed to build the homes this country needs. They put homes out of reach for too many British families, allowed homelessness and rough sleeping to double over their 14 years in power and choked off the economic growth that this country needs. This Government will “Build, baby, build” to make the dream of a secure home a reality for everyone in this country.
After a long campaign from myself and constituents, South Tyneside council has eventually agreed to curtail any new houses in multiple occupation, but we remain saturated with them. My right hon. Friend knows that they are no substitute for good social housing, so does he have any plans to strengthen the licensing regime, to close down badly managed HMOs and to deliver better housing?
I thank my hon. Friend for her question and for her petition, which the Department will respond to in the usual way. Planning authorities have the power to limit the number of HMOs within their locality, and they may withdraw a permitted development right in a specific area using an article 4 direction, but we are keeping this policy under review. I am aware of the concerns that her constituents have expressed to her, and those that others have expressed to their own MPs.
Mr Lee Dillon (Newbury) (LD)
The Government’s affordable homes programme will contribute 180,000 social homes over the 10-year period, but Shelter has called for 900,000 homes over that period. Could the Secretary of State tell the House how much he expects social providers to provide on top of the 180,000 to be provided by the affordable homes plan?
The hon. Gentleman will be aware, as I am and as Shelter is, that we inherited a housing crisis from the previous Government, who failed to build sufficient numbers of social and affordable homes. The £39 billion that this Government are investing over 10 years will give us the biggest increase we have seen in a generation. We know that in the long term we need to go further than that, but I hope he will agree that this is a very positive first step.
Ministers are claiming that this is a record amount of funding for affordable housing in South Shields and across the rest of England, but why are they consistently refusing to publish a breakdown of the annual funding under their 10-year programme? Is it because the majority of the cash is backloaded into future Parliaments and then exaggerated by inflation? The small-print prospectus says that the homes must be completed by 2039. That is 14 years away. As with Labour’s house building target, is this not just an exercise in hoodwinking people by promising homes that are never going to see the light of day in this Parliament?
It is ironic that the hon. Gentleman mentioned 14 years, because that is the amount of time his party was in government, and it left us with this crisis, rather than building the social homes this country needs. The £39 billion is a record. It will give us the biggest increase in social and affordable homes that this country has seen in a generation. Conservative Front Benchers should be welcoming that, as we do here. Bids to the social and affordable homes programme will open early in the new year, and we will then start to get those homes built so that people who were denied a decent home under the Conservative Government will get one with this Government.
Patrick Hurley (Southport) (Lab)
Our homelessness strategy will be published soon. Our overall goal will be to prevent homelessness before it starts, saving people from trauma and saving taxpayers the cost of failure. Councils can use our homelessness funding flexibly to meet those needs, including by commissioning Housing First services, which evidence has shown can transform the lives of people with complex needs.
Patrick Hurley
Housing First is a tried and tested, proven intervention to reach those who most need our help, so will the Minister expand on what plans she has to roll out Housing First, especially in the Liverpool city region, to ensure that we work effectively across state agencies and that we support people experiencing homelessness into stable, long-term housing?
I thank my hon. Friend, who has a long-standing record of campaigning for those who have experienced rough sleeping or homelessness. Housing First, as we have discussed, is one way that areas can provide person-centred and trauma-informed support for people with complex needs, which is important in preventing long-term rough sleeping. Areas across England can use flexible funding, including our £255 million rough sleeping prevention and recovery grant, to do so. The Liverpool city region combined authority, which includes his constituency of Southport, received nearly £4 million of funding through the grant this year.
We do need to build more homes, including more affordable homes, but they have to be built in an environmentally sustainable way. Why are Ministers, through the Planning and Infrastructure Bill, taking powers such that any planning application for more than 150 houses, if turned down by the democratically elected councillors, is sent straight to the Secretary of State? Why have local elections and elect people who know their own area to take decisions if they will simply be overruled automatically by someone whose whole mantra is “Build, baby, build and let the devil take the consequences”?
There we have it: in a question about homelessness, we have a Tory MP getting up and asking how he can say no to more homes. [Interruption.]
When we look at the statistics, we see that homelessness and rough sleeping are surging under this Government, with London and the south-east hardest hit where social housing delivery has collapsed under the current Mayor of London. Will the Minister commit to lifting the restrictions that this Government have placed on councils’ use of the homelessness reduction grant, and will she commit to funding councils for the growing impact that asylum seekers are having on homelessness pressures, so that Housing First can become more than just a slogan?
Homelessness and rough sleeping doubled under the previous Tory Government. Our homelessness strategy will be published very shortly. Last week we published our policy statement on the fair funding review, which will stabilise council funding and target it at those areas with significant levels of deprivation. I look forward to the hon. Member’s support in ensuring that councils have the powers they need to ensure that everyone has a roof over their head.
James MacCleary (Lewes) (LD)
Our vision on local government reorganisation is clear: we intend to create stronger single-tier local councils that are better equipped to drive economic growth and improve local public services. The Government’s intention remains for all elections scheduled for May 2026 to go ahead, including East Sussex county council.
James MacCleary
Cuts to adult social care, collapsing support for children with special educational needs and disabilities, roads full of potholes—the list goes on. The Conservatives have failed East Sussex for too long and should be held to account. Another delay would mean that the current administration will have their term extended to six years. Can the Secretary of State give me and residents across East Sussex a clear answer on when we will know if we will have the chance to vote this May?
First, I recognise the circumstances that the hon. Member describes, which were left behind by the previous Government’s approach to local government funding. As I said earlier, it remains the Government’s intention that those elections will go ahead as scheduled, unless there is a very strong justification otherwise. That is what will happen.
The Secretary of State really needs to do better than that. With local government reform not being in the Labour party manifesto and with the Prime Minister last week refusing to rule out further cancellations of local elections, will the Secretary of State now rule out—not “intention” but rule out—cancelling the next local elections, yes or no?
I am sure the hon. Member will be aware that consultations and engagement are going on with local authorities, but the Government’s intention is that all the elections scheduled for next May will go ahead next May.
Here we go again: it is the Secretary of State’s “intention”. I remind him that he actually leads his Department and can set the legislation going forward. He needs to accept that the uncertainty created by this Government in relation to local government reorganisation, on sizes and funding, has meant that leaders have scrambled to meet the ever-changing expectations, with no leadership from this Government. Will the Secretary of State put his money where his mouth is and support the Opposition’s amendment to the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill tomorrow that would ensure that local elections go ahead and that local leaders have the certainty they need?
Perhaps to the Conservatives the word “consultation” means “diktat issued from the centre”, but to me it means listening carefully to the views of those who will be affected. My intention, and my preference, remains for the elections to go ahead on schedule.
Zöe Franklin (Guildford) (LD)
It has been very interesting to hear the back and forth on this question. It is not just about East Sussex, of course; it is about all the councils up for reorganisation. Councils across the country that are due to have elections next year have received letters asking them whether they would consider cancelling them. Will the Minister set out the content of those letters, and will he stand with the Liberal Democrat by backing our amendments, which seek absolute assurances for councils across the country that are putting money into organising those elections?
It does not surprise me that the Conservatives do not understand consultation, but it does surprise me that it is also difficult for the Liberal Democrats. We are engaging with the councils that will be affected. There is precedence for this where elections would result in only a very short term in office. Our intention, and my preference, is for the elections to go ahead. We want to cut the cost of politics, simplify decision making for local people, and deliver stronger economic growth and better public services in every part of the country.
The Government are changing the way we fund local authorities, reconnecting funding with deprivation after 14 years of Tory Governments cutting councils in the poorest places. The vast majority of upper-tier councils will see their income increase in real terms over the next three years. For 2025-26, the local government finance settlement made available up to £577 million for Buckinghamshire council—a 5.7% cash-terms increase in core spending power on the year before.
That is a curious answer, because modelling by the County Councils Network indicates that, assuming there is a punishing 5% annual council tax increase, core spending for Buckinghamshire council will go up by only a below-inflation 2.2%—a real-terms cut. What assurance can the Minister give Buckinghamshire council that it will not find itself with a real-terms cut in spending power as it delivers essential services to my constituents?
As I said in an earlier answer, we made a policy statement on the fair funding review consultation last week. In addition, as I have said, the vast majority of upper-tier councils will see their incomes increase in real terms over the next three years. More details will come as we finalise funding arrangements. The Department will work closely with Buckinghamshire and all other councils to ensure that their finances are stabilised after 14 rocky years.
Callum Anderson (Buckingham and Bletchley) (Lab)
Multi-year funding settlements can help councils such as Buckinghamshire to prepare for the future and ensure the continuity of local services, but that approach was not necessarily applied by the last Conservative Government. In the north Buckinghamshire towns and villages that I represent, there is particular pressure on the economic and social infrastructure that meets rural requirements. Will the Minister set out in a bit more detail how the fair funding review will take all that into account so that residents in my community have the services they need?
I know how important it is for my hon. Friend to champion those towns and villages. He is right to say that the three-year funding settlement for councils will help, including with forward planning. Where we are considering cost pressures—those in adult social care, for example—it will help us to change the way in which services are delivered so that we can support people and ensure that councils across the country, such as Buckinghamshire, have more stable finances in the future.
Maureen Burke (Glasgow North East) (Lab)
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government (Miatta Fahnbulleh)
Glasgow city will receive £1.5 million of Pride in Place impact funding to improve high streets and invest in community spaces and assets. In addition, neighbourhoods across Scotland will receive up to £20 million through our Pride in Place funding to transform their areas. We are working with the Scotland Office to announce the specific neighbourhoods included in phase 2. This is an exciting chance to put power, money and agency in the hands of communities that have been held back for too long, to drive the change that they want to see.
Maureen Burke
My survey of Glasgow North East constituents shows that there is real excitement about the possibility of Pride in Place funding coming their way. From parks and shopfronts to local connectivity, I have been inundated with incredible ideas to transform our corner of Glasgow. Will the Minister commit to giving my constituency bid her full consideration, and will she visit Glasgow North East to see the difference that the investment could make?
Miatta Fahnbulleh
I would be delighted to visit Glasgow North East and am pleased to hear of the local enthusiasm for our Pride in Place agenda and my hon. Friend’s work in supporting this locally and championing her constituency. We are working closely with the Scotland Office on phase 2 of the Pride in Place programme to confirm the specific neighbourhoods and will be announcing that shortly.
Ian Sollom (St Neots and Mid Cambridgeshire) (LD)
Although Tempsford—along with Crews Hill in Enfield and Leeds South Bank—looks like a promising site, no final decisions on new town locations will be made until the strategic environmental assessment that was commenced on 28 September has concluded. Alongside the SEA process, my Department will continue to engage with local leaders to further develop our understanding of how different locations might meet the Government’s expectations of what a future new towns programme can deliver.
Ian Sollom
I thank the Minister for his answer. St Neots is the nearest town to the proposed east coast main line and East West Rail interchange station that would be central to any new town development at Tempsford. Many recognise the opportunities of our area, but my constituents also need clarity, particularly on health and education infrastructure. With multiple local authorities potentially being involved across county boundaries, will the Minister meet me to discuss how, in the event of a new town at Tempsford going ahead, St Neots will be supported and, in turn, how St Neots can support the new town?
I stress again that no decisions have been made or will be made until the SEA process concludes. We have been clear that the next generation of new towns must be well connected, well designed, sustainable, healthy and attractive places where people want to live and, importantly, that they must have the infrastructure, amenities and services necessary to sustain thriving communities established from the outset. I am more than happy to have a conversation with the hon. Gentleman at the point when the SEA concludes and we know the final set of sites that we are taking forward.
Several hon. Members rose—
Just to help Members, let me explain that this is a Cambridgeshire question so I am calling Cambridgeshire MPs, not anybody else. And here is a good Cambridgeshire MP, Daniel Zeichner.
The plans for Tempsford vindicate those of us who have long argued for East West Rail and the plans for the area between Cambridge and Oxford, but can my hon. Friend assure me and the House that this Government will be consistent in their support and will not wobble like the previous Government did, which led to a lost decade for these projects?
We will be consistent. Where we make commitments around large-scale housing development or infrastructure that is required to support it, we intend to bring that forward, and my hon. Friend will know that on Greater Cambridge we are out to consultation on a centrally-led development corporation to take forward nationally significant growth in his part of the country.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government (Miatta Fahnbulleh)
We are providing £1.5 million from the Pride in Place impact fund to enable immediate work in Luton to develop community spaces and revitalise local high streets. Work is already under way on this, and I look forward to seeing the impact it will have locally.
I really welcome the £1.5 million Pride in Place impact funding awarded to Luton, and I have launched a survey with my hon. Friend the Member for Luton North (Sarah Owen) to find out what people want to see improved in our town. Does the Minister agree that local people’s voices must be at the heart of shaping the changes they want to see, and that this Labour Government are putting power and investment back in their hands?
Miatta Fahnbulleh
Yes, I agree 100%. May I just thank my hon. Friend for the work that she is doing to bring the voices of her community to the very heart of this? Our Pride in Place strategy represents a new way for Government to work that puts power, agency and the voice of our communities front and centre. We expect all local authorities in receipt of Pride in Place impact funding to work with their MPs and their community to deliver the change that local people want and to focus on local people’s priorities.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government (Miatta Fahnbulleh)
We are providing £1.5 million from the Pride in Place impact fund to enable immediate work in Slough to develop community spaces and revitalise local high streets. Local authorities must engage with their local MP and their residents. We have made that clear and we will continue to reiterate it.
I have spoken to hundreds of my Slough constituents who are tired of having a high street where they do not feel safe, that lacks essential local amenities and that is devoid of community spaces, so I am delighted that this Labour Government have given our town, which has been neglected for too long, that £1.5 million Pride in Place boost. Does the Minister agree that it is essential that the local council uses that money wisely and that it listens—not only to my good self, but to local residents about their priorities?
Miatta Fahnbulleh
My hon. Friend is completely right to remind us about the neglect of our high streets under the last Government, and to reiterate that it is this Government who are putting power and investment into the hands of our communities to drive change. He is also completely right: local authorities must listen to their communities and ensure that investment is focused on their priorities.
Will Stone (Swindon North) (Lab)
We have taken decisive steps to support councils to invest in social housing, including committing to a new 10-year rent settlement and the launch of our £39 billion social and affordable homes programme. We are very clear that we want to see councils increase the level of social housing.
Will Stone
Will the Secretary of State tell us a bit more about the additional support that the Government can offer local councils, like Swindon, to invest in existing council housing stock, especially in areas like Penhill, with flats that desperately need investment?
The Government are supporting councils to invest in new and existing social housing through the new 10-year rent settlement and our £39 billion social and affordable homes programme. A further £14 million is being provided this year to boost council house building skills and capacity. In addition, the warm homes social housing fund will provide £1.2 billion from 2025 to 2028, and we have committed over £1 billion between 2026 and 2030 to support cladding remediation for social landlords, ensuring equal access to building safety funds.
John Milne (Horsham) (LD)
We are facing a national affordability crisis, but handing out planning permissions like confetti did not bring down prices under the last Government and there is zero reason to expect it will do any better this time. Does the Minister accept that relying on private developers to bring down prices can never work, because they simply stop building whenever prices start to fall?
Respectfully, I wish to correct the hon. Gentleman. The reason we are allocating £39 billion to build more social and affordable housing—the biggest amount in a generation—is precisely to avoid the very scenario to which he refers.
This Government are making a record £10.5 billion investment to deliver the largest flood and coastal investment programme in history. The floods resilience taskforce brings together experts and decision makers from across the UK Government, as well as from non-government and industry organisations at local and national level. The work of the taskforce will be considered as part of our ongoing planning reform programme.
In areas like Mid Norfolk, planning is the key to avoiding developments that cause and exacerbate flooding. In Attleborough, a recent planning application for 350 houses on a floodplain was turned down by the council on the basis that it would cause flooding, but fast-tracked by the Planning Inspectorate on the basis of the Government’s house building targets. The Government’s Planning and Infrastructure Bill contained nothing on flooding, which is why I am introducing a Bill. Will the Minister meet me and cross-party campaigners from affected constituencies—some of my constituents are now wading through sewage after the development I mentioned—to talk about how we can integrate planning with flood prevention?
This Government will maintain the highest levels of flood protection, while taking decisive action to fix our broken planning system and to deliver 1.5 million homes through our plan for change. We will consider whether further changes are necessary to manage flood risk when we consult on planning reform, including national policy relating to decision making, later this year.
Liam Conlon (Beckenham and Penge) (Lab)
Our Labour Government will build the homes that Britain needs and put our country on a path to end homelessness for good, unlike the Tories, who—if people have not heard us say this already today—allowed homelessness and rough sleeping to double. We will publish the child poverty strategy and the homelessness strategy shortly, and both will set out steps to defend families against the risk of getting stuck in temporary accommodation.
Liam Conlon
The number of people in temporary accommodation in my constituency soared during the last 14 years. Hundreds of families in Beckenham and Penge are stuck in unsuitable accommodation for months and years on end, and one in 50 Londoners are now living in temporary accommodation. From speaking to fantastic local charities such as Living Well, as well as local schools and NHS staff, I know that the housing crisis left by the last Conservative Government is also a leading driver of deprivation and inequality. Will the Minister set out what her Department is doing to address that?
That is a very important point: London is a fine city, but we need to ensure that everyone there is housed well. That is why the Labour Government are investing more than £1 billion in homelessness services this year—an increase of more than £300 million. That includes £10.9 million of top-up funding, announced last month, to increase access to support services in areas with the highest number of children in temporary accommodation, like the one mentioned by my hon. Friend. We have to get everybody in this country properly housed.
As the Minister says, we do need that housing. There are some solutions locally, where Education or Health land has become available. Will she undertake to talk to those Department—I can talk to her in more detail about local issues—to ensure that that land can be released as soon as possible, with the prospect of it becoming social housing for local families?
My hon. Friend is an expert in these matters. She knows that the Secretary of State has taken recent steps to make sure that we do build homes, including social and affordable homes, in London. We will certainly work very closely with her, and with the information she mentions, to get homes built.
There are nearly 300 households in temporary accommodation in Somerset, and 120 of them include children. Somerset is spending nearly £3.4 million per year on additional temporary accommodation to help to meet that demand, but it is clear that a long-term solution must be supported. What steps is the Minister taking to increase the number of affordable homes to help address that situation?
The homelessness strategy will be published soon, so the hon. Lady does not have long to wait. She characterises the situation well. We can fund sticking plasters and we can fund help, but in the end we have to get to the heart of the matter: No. 1—build homes; No. 2—make sure that families have enough money coming in to pay the rent. That will be at the heart of our strategy.
With London councils now spending £5.5 million per day on temporary accommodation, it is clear that we need to build more social homes in London. Richmond council has been prioritising sites that it is selling for social housing. As the Member for Hackney South and Shoreditch (Dame Meg Hillier) has just suggested, will the Minister look at incentives for other public bodies—whether it is the NHS or Government Departments—to prioritise for social homes land and buildings that they no longer need and are selling, as I have been campaigning for with respect to the former Teddington police station in my constituency?
I refer the hon. Lady, who asks a very reasonable question, to the response I gave some moments ago. Collectively, we must leave no stone unturned when it comes to available land for housing, particularly in the capital, where we desperately need more social and affordable homes.
I call the Chair of the Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee.
I thank the Minister for outlining those points. The situation is not just isolated to London; many councils are seeing an overspend—still going up—in this really tricky area. Just today, Epsom and Ewell borough council reported an overspend of £500,000, rising to £800,000 by next year. Slough estimates a £22 million overspend on TA; Woking, a £330,000 overspend; Waverley, a £165,000 overspend; and Waltham Forest, a £31 million overspend. That is just on temporary accommodation. This situation is not sustainable financially for councils or taxpayers. What more can the Minister do? Can she speak to Treasury colleagues about the big sticking point: the increase in and freeze on local housing allowance, which is not allowing people to live locally and rent locally?
I thank the Chair of the Select Committee for setting out that, aside from the fact that we care about temporary accommodation because every child deserves the space to play and do their homework, this problem is putting local councils under a financial pressure that is not bearable. We have to get a grip of this situation. We will have more to say about this crucial issue in the homelessness strategy, and I look forward to engaging with the Chair and the whole Committee on it.
Westmorland has 3,500 empty properties—the fifth highest number of any local authority in the country. The council has invested in three additional staff to make sure we bring some of those properties back into permanent use to house homeless people, but what powers could the Minister give the local authority that would bolster its existing powers to requisition homes that have been empty for a long period of time to be used as temporary and emergency accommodation for people in communities like ours?
I thank the hon. Gentleman for his important question. We all want to see empty homes brought into use, and councils already have extensive powers in this area. My job as the Local Government Minister is to make sure that we stabilise councils’ funding so that they are able to invest in that action, but if the hon. Gentleman would like to engage with the Department on the powers he would like to see, our door is very much open.
James McMurdock (South Basildon and East Thurrock) (Ind)
I thank the hon. Gentleman—[Interruption.]
Order. The Minister is answering the question. Please, Mr Law: you could at least wait until she has finished before entering the Chamber.
The Government keep the homelessness code of guidance under regular review, and this will continue once we have published the strategy that I mentioned previously. We will develop further good practice guidance and toolkits to support local government to deliver homelessness services.
James McMurdock
Ministers will be well aware that the maximum period of time for which the most vulnerable people should ever be placed in temporary accommodation is six weeks, but I have seen repeatedly from Labour-run Basildon council a tweaking and gaming of the rules, whereby a single-room bed and breakfast property is incorrectly reclassified as a self-contained unit through the addition of a microwave and a fridge. Vulnerable people, including pregnant women or women with children, are being crammed into one room for periods of time that we recognise as unlawful, essentially because the rules are not strict enough. I do not blame Ministers for that, but I do blame the local Labour council for abusing those rules. What will the Minister do to strengthen things up?
As the Homelessness Minister, my responsibility is to get the homelessness strategy published so that we can look at issues such as those the hon. Gentleman has mentioned, make sure that the guidance is good enough, and—most importantly—get our country’s children out of temporary accommodation and give them a proper roof over their heads.
Chris Vince (Harlow) (Lab/Co-op)
I declare an interest, as I formerly worked for a homelessness charity in Harlow called Streets2Homes. Can the Minister tell me how the increased funding of £1 billion to tackle homelessness will support local authorities—which we have discussed—as well as Streets2Homes and other charity groups to get people off the street and into secure tenancies?
I would be grateful if my hon. Friend would pass on my very best wishes and thanks to Streets2Homes. In the best case, the money we are investing can stop homelessness before it starts through good advice. If a family or an individual do find themselves homeless, support can be in place to get those people into a more stable situation and properly housed. Every penny is worth it, because in the end, long-term homelessness costs the state more.
Graham Leadbitter (Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey) (SNP)
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government (Miatta Fahnbulleh)
Areas across Scotland, including Elgin, will receive up to £20 million of Pride in Place programme funding to transform their areas. Phase 1 places have already been identified, and we are working with the Scotland Office and partners to confirm additional neighbourhoods, which will be announced shortly for phase 2.
Graham Leadbitter
The Government are encouraging towns across the UK to apply for Pride in Place funding, but with the specific exclusion that any town applying should not be located in a UK parliamentary constituency with a phase 1 neighbourhood. Does the Minister appreciate that in my constituency of Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey, this would exclude Nairn from applying because Elgin is already in receipt of funding, despite Nairn being in a different unitary authority and not even being in the same constituency prior to boundary changes? As a further example, it would also exclude Shetland from applying because Orkney already has funding. Does the Minister agree that this exclusion is nonsensical and discriminatory against large geographies, and needs to be changed?
Miatta Fahnbulleh
The big driver of how we are allocating funding is deprivation. We are taking a slightly different approach in Scotland, where we have also looked at other indicators, including health indicators. As I said, we are working closely with the Scotland Office and local partners to ensure we are getting the Pride in Place programme into the areas that need it, and we will be announcing that allocation in due course.
Lloyd Hatton (South Dorset) (Lab)
This Government are determined to end the injustice of fleecehold entirely, and we will publish consultations before the end of this year on how we best implement the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024, on new consumer protection provisions for residential freeholders and on options for reducing the prevalence of private estate management arrangements. We are also committed to ensuring that residential freeholders and leaseholders are protected from abuse and poor service at the hands of unscrupulous property agents.
Lloyd Hatton
At a recent public meeting, people living at the Chesil Reach and Greys Field development in Chickerell told me about the problems they had been facing with the estate management company FirstPort, with large increases to the service charge, little transparency and a failure to fulfil even the most basic obligations. It is all made so much worse because FirstPort is truly terrible at responding to concerns when they are raised by the public. With all that in mind, can the Minister outline what steps are being taken to hold FirstPort to account for its many failings? How can we deliver much stronger protections for everyone living in properties managed by FirstPort?
As my hon. Friend may be aware, in response to widespread concerns raised in a recent debate on property service charges, I met Martin King, managing director of FirstPort, on 17 November. In our meeting, I pressed Mr King and his associates on a wide range of issues stemming from reports of poor service, and I left him in no doubt that in the Government’s view, FirstPort’s performance is not good enough. I intend to write to FirstPort to follow up on the issues raised, and I will happily deposit a copy of that letter in the Library.
Vikki Slade (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (LD)
I was contacted by residents of Canford Paddock, who wrote to me about ongoing unregulated estate fees, which particularly relate to a suitable alternative natural greenspace—SANG—that was a condition of the development, as it is near a site of special scientific interest. The privately owned SANG is in the Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole council area, but is not managed by the council. What protections therefore exist for the residents, who are having to pay for a public site managed by a private developer?
In my opening answer, I referenced the consultation we intend to launch soon relating to protections for residential freeholders from that type of charge, where it is unreasonable. Those provisions in the 2024 Act provide for greater transparency. They allow homeowners on freehold estates to take the estate manager to the first-tier tribunal if unreasonable rent charges are being levied. The hon. Lady and her constituents will have a chance to feed into that consultation very soon.
Brian Mathew (Melksham and Devizes) (LD)
The national planning policy framework sets out a sequential approach to flood risk management, requiring inappropriate development to be directed away from areas at highest risk and providing strong safeguards where development is necessary in these areas. The updates to the framework made in December last year expanded the requirement for development to provide sustainable drainage systems. Statutory guidance accompanying building regulations promotes flood-resilient buildings in flood-prone areas through approved document C.
Brian Mathew
Over the past week, I am sure many of us have seen and felt the proof that our weather is becoming more extreme. That is why it is ever more important to be proactive and forward-thinking in our housing strategy. Does the Minister agree that sites that flood frequently, such as the old golf course in Bradford-on-Avon in my constituency of Melksham and Devizes, should not be included in local plans and not be called upon for development?
I would say a number of things to the hon. Gentleman. First, local plans are tested for their soundness by the Planning Inspectorate. He will appreciate that I cannot comment on individual sites, but I again draw the attention of the House to the strong protections in national planning policy which mean that development that could be vulnerable to flooding should not be allowed in areas of high flood risk.
Tom Rutland (East Worthing and Shoreham) (Lab)
Labour’s Renters’ Rights Act 2025 is the biggest strengthening of tenants’ rights and protections in a generation. From 1 May 2026, 11 million renters in England will benefit from the changes that this Government are making, including an end to section 21 no-fault evictions and preventing unfair rent hikes.
Tom Rutland
In my constituency more than 10,000 residents are renting privately. These families, couples, friends and individuals have too often been the victims of excessive rent hikes, no-fault evictions, substandard conditions, and a private rented sector that benefits bad landlords and disadvantages fair landlords and good tenants. Can my right hon. Friend tell me when the measures in the Renters’ Rights Act will come into effect and give security to my constituents who rent privately?
My hon. Friend is, I know, an outstanding advocate for his constituents. We will deliver our reforms in three phases. On 1 May next year, we will implement reforms to reshape the tenancy system and remove barriers to renting, including abolishing section 21 no-fault evictions, limiting rent increases to just one a year, and outlawing bidding wars. The implementation dates for Awaab’s law and the decent homes standard are subject to consultation. The 11 million renters in England, including those in my hon. Friend’s constituency whom he mentioned, will not forget that the Conservatives and Reform UK voted against these important changes that will benefit renters throughout the country.
I recognise what the Secretary of State has said about protection for those who rent houses, but desperation is the issue for many people who rent their accommodation, and who find themselves in financial difficulties while living—as we heard earlier from the hon. Member for South Basildon and East Thurrock (James McMurdock)—in a small, one-bedroom flat. Will the Secretary of State please speak to the relevant Minister in Northern Ireland, who I think would be the Minister for Communities, about what the Government here are doing, to ensure that we in Northern Ireland can be a focus of attention?
I recognise what the hon. Gentleman has said. The answer is, of course, to build more social and affordable housing, and to increase the supply of housing more generally. I am, in fact, due to meet the relevant Northern Ireland Minister to discuss these matters, and I look forward to that.
Sarah Hall (Warrington South) (Lab/Co-op)
Jo White (Bassetlaw) (Lab)
On Thursday 20 November, the Government published a policy statement setting out our plans for the 2026-27 to 2028-29 multi-year local government finance settlement. Through the settlement, we are introducing a system based on need and evidence. In doing so we will target a greater proportion of grant funding at deprived places, ensuring best value for money for taxpayers.
Sarah Hall
In Warrington we see some of the starkest inequalities anywhere in the country. One area is ranked the 899th most deprived, and the highest position is 33,480th, a gap of more than 32,500. Those vast disparities are masked by population-weighted averages, with Warrington ranking 199th overall and only 43rd in range. Will the Minister ensure that fair funding 2.0 truly reflects vast internal inequalities, so that resources reach the communities most in need?
I admire my hon. Friend not only for standing up for Warrington, but for her command of the statistical detail. The fair funding review will distribute more funds to deprived areas, and, as she has just demonstrated, the distribution is underpinned by granular data from households in lower-layer super-output areas consisting of between 400 and 1,200 people. That means that we can account for pockets of deprivation within more affluent areas. More broadly, I will happily work with my hon. Friend to ensure that we can stabilise Warrington council’s finances, and I will ensure that officials are in touch with the council.
Jo White
Under the last Government, cash-strapped authorities like Bassetlaw district council saw support grants slashed from a 66% funding commitment in 2011 to a 25% commitment in 2024. The compounded damage that this has done to areas like mine can be calculated in multimillions of pounds. Many authorities are on their knees. Can the Minister explain in more detail how they will be able to plan for the year ahead?
I know that my hon. Friend always stands up for her constituency, and that she always will. Under our proposals, shire district councils are expected to see an average funding increase of 2.7% over the spending review period. Across the Department, we will support district councils in that and other ways, and I look forward to discussing the issue in detail with my hon. Friend and her council.
Ben Obese-Jecty (Huntingdon) (Con)
Cambridgeshire fire and rescue service is funded through a formula that relies on population density and sparsity figures from the 2001 census. Since 2001, Cambridgeshire has grown by over 150,000 people and 30,000 new homes, making the service one of the leanest per head in the country. We have effectively built a city the size of Cambridge in Cambridgeshire and given it no further funding. Over-reliance on council tax to bridge funding gaps undermines the core principle of risk-based resource allocation, so what assurances can the Minister give me that the fairer funding review 2.0 will not require the difference to be made up by simply increasing the council tax precept by the maximum?
The hon. Gentleman mentions fire. The Minister responsible and I are keeping this issue under review, and we are happy to hear further from him if he has concerns about it.
Dr Ellie Chowns (North Herefordshire) (Green)
Rural counties like Herefordshire face additional costs in delivering services because of rurality. Extra cost pressures mean that we need another £35 million next year to provide the same services, but it looks like the fair funding review will reduce central Government funding for Herefordshire by £12 million. Does the Minister recognise the extra costs of rurality, and will she ensure that the fair funding review properly allocates the funding that rural communities need to deliver public services in a fair way?
When it comes to rural areas, there are particular challenges for public services. This Government have increased funding for council spending on areas of demand, such as adult social care. We need to make sure that all councils can be financially stable, and can develop the way that they deliver public services, particularly given the challenges that the hon. Lady mentions.
At the general election last year, Labour promised the biggest boost to renters’ rights and protections in a generation. Earlier this month, our historic Renters’ Rights Act 2025 gained Royal Assent, and it will transform private renting for 11 million renters in England. The reforms will be introduced in three phases. The first phase, including abolishing section 21 no-fault evictions, will come into effect on 1 May 2026. Those 11 million renters will never forget that Reform UK and the Conservatives opposed these changes, which will massively benefit renters’ security by allowing them to remain in the homes that they love.
The hospitality industry in South Shields has really struggled over the last year. There are now deep concerns, which I share, about the imposition of a tourism tax. Can my right hon. Friend explain what assessment he has made of such a tax’s impact on beautiful little coastal tourist towns, like mine?
My hon. Friend tempts me to venture into terrain that is properly within the decision-making jurisdiction of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. She only has to wait 48 hours to find out what the Chancellor has decided. I suggest that she ask the Chancellor on Wednesday, rather than me this afternoon.
It will all be on Sky News in between. I call the shadow Secretary of State.
The Prime Minister, the Chancellor and even the Secretary of State himself have said that they will not touch council tax bands in this Parliament. Does he not recognise that a new tax, or levy, revaluation or surcharge, would be a de facto breach of that commitment, and will he therefore rule it out?
Again, much as I would like to comment on matters that are properly for the Budget, the right hon. Gentleman will know that there is a very long-standing convention that prevents me from doing so.
All the Secretary of State had to do was repeat his earlier commitments. He chose not to do so. Labour’s unfair funding review shows that the party is consciously starving well-run councils of money, penalising councils that have kept council tax low and subsidising his political friends in high-spending, wasteful, Labour-run councils. How on earth can the Secretary of State justify this blatant party political decision?
The right hon. Gentleman will remember his former colleagues being caught on video boasting about how they were taking money away from poorer areas, and giving it to wealthier parts of the country that needed it less. Through the fair funding review, this Government are ensuring that funding is aligned with need and with deprivation. That is the right thing to do.
Under our new approach to funding, in places like Luton, which were starved of the resources that they needed for far too long, and for which we can evidence significant levels of deprivation, councils can expect to see the resources that they need in order to help people properly.
Gideon Amos (Taunton and Wellington) (LD)
The Planning and Infrastructure Bill takes smaller decisions away from councillors. Last week’s direction, announced in a ministerial statement, will take big decisions involving over 150 homes, such as the decision on Oldway Road in Wellington, out of the hands of local councillors. Do the Government no longer trust local people to shape communities and deliver the housing that we need?
I say gently to the hon. Gentleman that I think he misrepresents the proposal that has been announced. It is not an automatic removal for all planning applications relating to more than 150 homes; it is simply a referral process, which applies in other situations already, that allows the Secretary of State to call in individual applications.
Gurinder Singh Josan (Smethwick) (Lab)
I recently met representatives of BUUK, a multi-utility infrastructure provider that constructs and operates essential utility assets, and can provide all utilities as a one-stop shop. In view of the Department’s progress on new towns, and the need to rapidly scale up house building, what consideration has the Department given to using innovative delivery models, such as BUUK’s site-wide deployment of utility infrastructure, and thus reducing bureaucracy, streamlining delivery, improving accountability and allowing house builders to get on with building?
I thank my hon. Friend for that question. The Government obviously recognise the importance of ensuring that new housing development is supported by appropriate infrastructure. On the individual company that he references, I will ask my officials to reach out to it directly to discuss its delivery model and find out a bit more about its potential advantages.
Order. We are on topicals, and Members are stretching the questions.
I thank the hon. Gentleman for that question. Again, he will appreciate that, due to the quasi-judicial nature of the planning system, I cannot comment on individual applications. I am aware of the concerns that have been raised by Members from across the House about holding directions, issued in particular by National Highways. He may be aware of the reforms that we are making to the statutory consultation system as a whole, which are now out to consultation.
Michelle Welsh (Sherwood Forest) (Lab)
In my constituency of Sherwood Forest, we have new housing developments, including in Edwinstowe and Rainworth. Does the Minister agree that when these sites are developed, local authorities and housing companies should ensure appropriate infrastructure is put in place, whether that is GP surgeries, schools or shops, because in the past this has not happened, including in Hucknall?
I thank my hon. Friend for that question, and she is absolutely right. Local development plans should address infrastructure needs and opportunities. When preparing a local plan, local planning authorities are under a duty to bring forward infrastructure funding statements. However, we realise that there is more to be done to ensure that we get the right infrastructure built in the right time as a development proceeds.
Andrew George (St Ives) (LD)
I thank the hon. Gentleman for that question, which is topical in that I recently met officials from Cornwall council and Members, including hon. Friends, banging the drum for new homes in Cornwall, in particular social and affordable homes. There is ongoing work, including conversations taking place with Homes England, on how we can better support Cornwall to bring forward the homes it needs.
If it comes forward, Tempsford new town would offer an opportunity to get infrastructure right while building the homes we crucially need, in stark contrast to the chaotic approach to development seen by far too many of my Bedfordshire towns and villages. If it does proceed, will the Minister meet me to ensure we engage on how we can maximise the infrastructure benefits, not just for Tempsford but for my existing communities that are already feeling the strain?
I would be more than happy to meet my hon. Friend to discuss that and other matters of importance to him in his locality. He is a doughty champion for ensuring that, as we bring forward new homes, we get the essential infrastructure and amenities in place as well.
Edward Morello (West Dorset) (LD)
If memory serves, I answered another question from the hon. Gentleman on precisely this topic. He knows, I think, that we are out to consultation on the matter. If he wants to write to me in the first instance with further details about the type of changes he is seeking, I would be more than happy to respond.
Amanda Martin (Portsmouth North) (Lab)
In cities such as Portsmouth, outdated formulas for local authority funding have long failed to reflect real levels of deprivation. I would like to see a Labour Government increase support for children’s services, with a fairer system using up-to-date data. That would make an enormous difference to my constituents. Will the Minister meet me to ensure that funding allocation is being considered for Portsmouth to finally receive the funding it deserves?
Yes, I will very happily meet my hon. Friend. She is an incredibly powerful champion for Portsmouth and I would be very happy to meet her to discuss her council’s funding.
Blake Stephenson (Mid Bedfordshire) (Con)
We recently put forward our response on improving standards. We are looking for an opportunity to take that forward, for the reasons the hon. Gentleman mentions.
Brian Leishman (Alloa and Grangemouth) (Lab)
I have residents from Tillicoultry who have not had access to their homes for two years because of RAAC—reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete. Their lives have been turned upside down. A year ago, the Scottish Government were given the largest settlement figure in the history of devolution, but they have not helped my residents. Will the Secretary of State inform me what discussions his Department has had with regard to residential RAAC with Scottish Government counterparts?
My hon. Friend raises a very important point, and I would be happy to write to him with details of our engagement with the Scottish Government.
Sarah Bool (South Northamptonshire) (Con)
The Conservatives foisted Liz Truss on us as Prime Minister. I am very surprised that they have failed to learn from that disaster. Unfunded commitments they have no idea how to pay for cause only trouble to the economy, including to the housing economy.
Jayne Kirkham (Truro and Falmouth) (Lab/Co-op)
Cornwall has been campaigning for fair funding for years under successive Tory and Liberal Democrat Governments. We are so pleased with the fair funding formula 2.0. There have been some consultation changes, so can the Secretary of State please confirm that they will not disadvantage Cornwall and that we will get the increased fair funding we deserve?
With Cornwall Labour Members of Parliament standing up for Cornwall in this House as they are, I feel assured that Cornwall will be in a much better place. I look forward to working with my hon. Friend to make sure that that is the case.
Alison Griffiths (Bognor Regis and Littlehampton) (Con)
As I made clear in answer to a previous question, strong protections in national planning policy mean that development that could be vulnerable to flooding should not be allowed in areas of high flood risk. Where local planning authorities have approved development in spite of initial objections—for example, from the Environment Agency—they will have had to ensure that the development would be safe through, for example, adequate mitigations.
Jim Dickson (Dartford) (Lab)
I thank the Secretary of State and the Minister of State for Housing and Planning for visiting Ebbsfleet Garden City in my constituency last week. Does the Minister agree that, with an additional 10,000 homes to be built in Ebbsfleet over the next 10 years, to create great places to live we have got to build schools, medical facilities and green spaces—
We fully appreciate the importance of finishing Ebbsfleet Central, and while I cannot pre-empt the Department’s business planning, my hon. Friend can be assured that his championing of Ebbsfleet Garden City will ensure that it receives the support it requires through the new—
Sarah Pochin (Runcorn and Helsby) (Reform)
I am afraid that the hon. Lady will have to write to me and outline which fund precisely she is talking about. I am more than happy to get back to her if she does that.
Perran Moon (Camborne and Redruth) (Lab)
Meur ras, Mr Speaker. The whole of Cornwall, one of the most deprived regions in northern Europe, missed out on Pride in Place funding, which I can only assume was due to the “trusting your neighbour” indicator being treated as a marker of affluence rather than deprivation in the community needs index. Can the Minister confirm that Cornwall will not be disadvantaged because of that in the next tranche of Pride in Place funding?
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government (Miatta Fahnbulleh)
My hon. Friend is always a champion for Cornwall. To confirm, there were two things that drove the allocation: indices of multiple deprivation and our community needs index. For places that did not receive Pride in Place funding, within our strategy there is a whole suite of tools and levers that communities can grip in order to drive the change that they want to see. I hope we will see that in Cornwall.
The Great Ayton allotments group received funding from the community ownership fund last year. As the deadline for disbursing the funds approaches, delays in a related planning application are threatening that funding. I thank Department officials for trying to resolve the issue, and I ask Ministers to support that flexibility, because the project means a great deal to the community of Great Ayton.
Miatta Fahnbulleh
I thank the right hon. Member for raising the important work that has been done in his constituency. We will continue to work with that group, because we want to ensure that all communities have the ability to grip assets and drive the change that they want to see.
Baggy Shanker (Derby South) (Lab/Co-op)
For years, Derby residents have felt the full force of Tory austerity, with many services at breaking point. Does the Minister agree that Derby deserves better, and what can the Government do to ensure that the fair funding review delivers for communities such as Derby?
Councils up and down the country deserve better, especially in great cities like Derby—and with my hon. Friend as their MP, his community will not want for a brilliant champion.
I thank the Minister for Housing and Planning for his constructive meeting last week on the community infrastructure levy. Could he tell the House whether Liberal Democrat-controlled councils such as mine in Waverley should be charging the community infrastructure levy to private householders who do a straightforward extension on their house?
As this is topicals, I do not want to repeat the extensive conversation that the right hon. Member and I have had. He knows that we are making good-faith efforts to resolve the issue and to bring some redress forward for his resident freeholders.
Danny Beales (Uxbridge and South Ruislip) (Lab)
Hillingdon council has applied for exceptional financial support due to years of underfunding under the previous Government and local financial mismanagement. Will the Minister assure me that, as part of our updated funding criteria, councils such as Hillingdon will get more of the funding that they need, and that there will also be improved accountability and management requirements on local councils?
I am considering the issues that Hillingdon is facing, which are really serious and important, and I will be in touch with my hon. Friend soon so that we can discuss them extensively.
Lincoln Jopp (Spelthorne) (Con)
Is Surrey going to get a mayor?
Miatta Fahnbulleh
We are working with all areas to ensure that we are devolving power, whether to strategic authorities or mayors, to make sure that they can grip the economic opportunities and unlock the growth that we did not see under the last Government, but that this Government absolutely want to deliver.
Connor Naismith (Crewe and Nantwich) (Lab)
Cheshire East council area has pockets of severe deprivation, centred largely around my constituency. Under the previous Government, local government funding allocations never really took account of those deprivations. Will the Minister meet me to discuss how we can rebalance funding towards the deprived areas in my constituency that have been left behind for too long?
I will happily meet my hon. Friend—great railway towns like Crewe ought to be invested in. He will have heard from previous answers today that the new measure of deprivation uses fine-grain data, so we can identify those pockets of deprivation, like in Crewe and Nantwich. I look forward to talking with him at length on this subject.
Ian Roome (North Devon) (LD)
In rural areas like my constituency, private renting is very expensive and is unaffordable to many. What is the Minister doing to ensure that more housing is available at social rent rather than market rent, which people can simply not afford?
We are ensuring, through the new £39 billion social and affordable homes programme, for example, that the types of homes that need extra grant funding have that flexibility—that will include rural housing.
What is grey belt, and can the Minister tell us what assessment he has made of the risk it poses to the integrity of the green belt in areas such as mine?
The right hon. Lady continues to ask me what grey belt is; Google is her friend in this instance. I continue to refer her to the planning practice guidance that covers exactly what it means.