Branch Secretary :

Housing Associations could implement right to buy 'voluntarily'

Housing Associations told to agree right to buy extension within six working days 'volunatrily'


Housing minister Greg Clarke has made housing associations an offer they cannot refuse: they have to ‘voluntarily’ agree to ‘right to buy’ in exchange for which they escape the fate of nationalisation followed by privatisation.  The deadline for this acquiescence is next Friday, just six working days from Clarke’s announcement.  No time for consulting tenants and communities, and actually not enough time for boards to consider the full implications but indications are that they will accept the deal which was brokered by their trade body, the National Housing Federation.


The government gets an extension of right to buy without a battle in Parliament.  It is not clear if other moves the housing associations have lobbied for such as freedom to choose their own rent will be granted. 


But how did a Conservative government come to be threatening nationalisation?  The immediate cause was the policy of extending ‘right to buy’ to officially independent organisations as we explain here.  This triggered a review of the status of Housing Associations and their debt.  By Prime Ministers questions last week, Cameron was referring to associations as part of the public sector.  That would mean that their outstanding debt of £60 billion would be added to the PSBR.  The ‘most obvious’ solution according to the ‘Policy Exchange’ think tank was to nationalise the housing association sector and then sell it off.   


The National Housing Federation will claim this as a triumph because it preserves the independence of associations.  But it is at the price of collaborating in dismantling social housing.  What right do housing association boards have to agree to sell off assets accumulated over the years by public investment?  Housing developments given permission by local authorities on the basis that they were socially balanced with an agreed percentage of social rent will be transformed; are associations going to consult on that? 


It appears that housing association right to buy will be funded through the sale of local high value local authority homes, devastating council provision, but the National Housing Federation seems happy to sign up to this without protest.  Even if compensation is paid to replace housing association homes sold, it is highly unlikely that the replacements will be the equivalent of social rent homes. Replacement is more likely to be part of the government’s ownership agenda or homes let at the misnamed ‘affordable rent’.


The role of associations in this needs to be noted.  Last year Genesis Housing sponsered a report from 'Policy Exchange' calling for the creation of 'free' associations; effectively fully privatising and deregulating associations.  The report was complied with the asstance of CEOs of other unnamed associations on Chatham House terms. This year Genesis announced they were pulling out of the development of social housing and reviewing the tenure of their existying stock - other associations have announced they considering similar steps.


In the past groups such as the National Housing Federation were seen as defenders of social housing; no longer!  Jeremy Corbyns housing policy calling for more council housing absolutely reflects the needs of the homeless and badly housed – which can now include young professionals.  It is an approach that could be massively popular but the Labour movement and community and tenants organisations will have to fight for social housing.  We certainly can’t look to what was once called the housing association ‘movement’ although any associations that decide to join the defence of social housing would be welcome.



Before Posting

We welcome debate and discussion on our website, but we also want an open, respectful, inclusive space in which forms of abuse or personal attack will not be tolerated. Comments will be moderated and will be removed if they are found to be unduly offensive. You should also be very careful in posting information about your employer. Employers do visit the website and if you think a comment could get you into trouble for releasing confidential or sensitive information, or for bringing the employer into disrepute, please do not post it. It remains your individual responsibility to ensure that what you post is appropriate. Please therefore just give a moment's thought to what you are saying. The types of comments that are likely to be moderated are:

  • Personal abuse or attacks on an individual.
  • Information which breaches another person's right to confidentiality.
  • The use of offensive language, including swear words, or language which is racist, sexist, or otherwise breaches equalities standards.
  • Anything that might place the Branch or the wider union in legal jeopardy.
  • Adverts or information which is posted for commercial gain.

* Name
* Email (will not be published)
* field is required