Return to: Home | Politics | UK Politics

Flint on council house row

Caroline Flint

Published 12 February 2008

The housing minister's comments making a link between getting council accommodation and seeking work caused controversy. Here she puts her remarks into context

Last week, I asked a question that has sparked an impassioned debate and inspired many column inches.

That question was whether social housing can be more than a vital safety net for the most vulnerable, but also be a springboard to opportunity. Most controversially, I asked whether it would be right to ask new tenants who can work to sign ‘commitment contracts’ when getting a tenancy, agreeing to engage with job seeking or training in return for better support?

Let’s get something straight. I’m a Labour Minister, intent on building 3 million homes by 2020, and 45,000 new social housing units each year as part of that. I want to see full employment, poverty eradicated; and with £8 billion investment in social housing, our ambition is for every neighbourhood to be a place people want to live; not a place they can’t wait to get out of.

Having been brought up in private rented and council housing, I make no apologies for starting this difficult debate. The level of worklessness on some estates is a stark problem.

The response to my speech has been vocal and varied; from the sneering defeatism of the Conservatives, to the apocalyptic predictions of Crisis and Shelter. But others have contacted my office to say that they agreed that there was more that some of their neighbours could do to help themselves, given the right support.

Contrary to how some opponents have portrayed the debate, I made clear I was talking about expectations for new tenants who can work, not the vulnerable like the elderly, carers or those with disabilities who can’t.

I, for one, am not prepared to accept that there is no more we can do to unlock the talent in these communities.

Today, more than half of working age social tenants aren’t working – more than double the national rate. Among young people, the situation is even worse. The problem is so bad that an independent review described it as a collapse in employment rates among social tenants.

Despite the success we have had in recent years in moving a million people off benefits there are still too many children growing up in Britain today without ever seeing an adult get up and go to work in the morning. This is a major contributor to inter-generational poverty. But it wasn’t always like this.

I have been accused this week of stigmatising council tenants. I couldn’t disagree more. Council housing used to bring people together, giving security to hard working families, living in strong neighbourhoods. Today, many council tenants have the same values: hard-working, supporting their neighbours and families. But there are also estates that are marginalised and overlooked, workless, usually unpopular.

Unless we are honest enough to recognise the stigma that is already attached to some of our most difficult estates, we will never make a difference. And we will fail to give a second chance and a better offer to those residents.

Social housing will always have a strong role in supporting the most vulnerable. I don't underestimate for one minute the challenges that some people face in their lives, or the levels of support they will need to help them into work. But there are also many who are currently unemployed who could find work with the right training and support. With childcare, in-work credits, transitional grants, and personal advisers, there is more help than ever before. It is not social justice to stand by and watch young people getting left behind as the rest of us share in our country’s rising prosperity.

What I want us to consider is whether we can offer new tenants a complete package of incentives and opportunities along with the keys to their new home. In return, is it unreasonable that those who can work, should be actively looking to do so?

A package which might include skills audits, training opportunities and advice on seeking work. In this way, we can make sure that social housing is more than a roof over your head – crucial as that is – but that it helps people gain more control over their own lives.

And for existing tenants, greater prioritiy for those who need to move for work; expanding existing schemes to offer tenants who cannot afford to buy outright, the opportunity to buy a share; how do we give them a stronger voice to drive up standards of local services; and how do we improve links between housing and employment services at neighbourhood level?

Many working in the sector are already deeply concerned about unemployment and are already taking practical steps to tackle it. Like the Notting Hill Housing Trust, which is going to trial a form of “commitment contracts” through their Moving Forward project. New tenants will make a genuine commitment to improve their skills and look for work.

Or like the Foyer Federation Network, which helps ten thousand young people each year. They ask young people to sign a learning agreement in return for a roof over their head. The results are inspiring.

Many social tenants have a real appetite for change and self-improvement. Most say they'd like to own their own home. If we don't support their aspirations, then we are failing to live up to our responsibilities.

Caroline Flint is Minister for Housing

Post this article to

  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • newsvine
  • Reddit

11 comments from readers

Colonel Blimp
12 February 2008 at 17:00

Flint on council house row? Well bring her down sir! It's outrageous to leave a lady on a roof!

Stephen
12 February 2008 at 17:11

Hmmm Labour's Margaret Thatcher. Some people will do anything to get on.

I was brought up in a Council House. My father had retired and my mother did not work. Three kids and a husband to look after plus the cleaning, shopping cooking etc. Lazy mare!

Roland Baker
12 February 2008 at 21:38

Caroline Flint, the Rowan Williams, first of sexual health, and then council housing. There is one law in this country and it applies to everyone. If you claim Jobseeker's Allowance, you are bullied by the DWP and have to beg their permission for every journey out of your house - whoever owns it and whether you rent it or not. Per contra the DWP, from the time of Weasel Hutton, through Hain the Vain and back to 'faking it' Purnell, will not lift a finger to help you get work.

I have a new vision for Britain, unlike Gordon Brown. Take the work to the social housing. How many of those estates were built around major manufacturing industry that has closed and moved to China and India? I would flood the market with jobs so there are plenty to go round. If you create enough of them, even social tenants won't want to be left out when they see that everybody has one! Make jobs as cheap and widely available in the UK as politicians' unfulfilled promises.

There are jobs for social tenants, but most of them are now in China and India and whose idea is that? Those jobs that exist in the UK are not realistically available to social tenants because they have to pay their rent - not bring the wages from those jobs below sustainable standards by living 10 to a house and sleeping in shifts.

antileft
13 February 2008 at 03:35

"My father had retired and my mother did not work. Three kids and a husband to look after plus the cleaning, shopping cooking etc. Lazy mare!"

Maybe your father should have helped a little, allowing your mother to get a job? You know, everyone has to cook, shop, and clean- and taking care of kids CAN be done by a man (believe it or not). "Oh no! Id rather you pay for it with your taxes!" Lazy sods.

mitchy
13 February 2008 at 12:00

Indeed, RB. The DWP has managed to make claiming JA such a depressing and suffocating prospect these days that, god help you if you find yourself out of work, however briefly. Security guards at the door who treat you like a criminal seem to be the norm these days - not exactly conducive to creating a helpful and welcoming atmosphere in which to find work. Personally, I cant see why anyone who can work wouldnt want to these days, dealing with the DWP is enough to make anyone fit to burst with existential angst, or is that the whole idea?

IsThatcherDeadYet
13 February 2008 at 15:18

People in decent jobs don't want any competition, they want the rest of us to do the poorly paid demeaning jobs they won't do. You're just a bully kow towing to the tabloid agenda. There's a lot of people in the real world getting very very angry at being humiliated by the smug and self satisfied.

mitchy
13 February 2008 at 15:54

@IsThatcherDeadYet:

Eh? I'm sorry, I dont understand, are you talking to me?

I was agreeing with RB about the crappy treatment everyone recieves from the DWP, not bullying anyone or kowtowing. I've had more than my fair share of shit jobs myself, and although I've finally got a better one now, it still isnt well paid - just something I enjoy doing, which frankly I count myself lucky for. As far as I'm concerned, everyone has the right to a decent job, and I wouldnt wish a shit one on anyone, because I know how it feels to be demeaned. Perhaps you didnt read my post properly, or you're a bit paranoid. I'm not even sure if your comment is even directed at me, its so wide off the mark.

Pencils
13 February 2008 at 18:19

Great post, Roland Baker, but this was perplexing:

" you are bullied by the DWP and have to beg their permission for every journey out of your house - "

The ' ...permission for every journey out of your house' bit.

I think you may be overstating there, a bit.

Anyway, you can't get INTO council housing unless you have children or are registered disabled. Otherwise, you can put your name on a list, but you'll never get there. So, if you add up the disabled, the single mothers, and all the families, especially in the North, in council estates in areas where there is no work, then I feel the 'reluctant to work' bit starts to unravel.

Sir Robin Wales, Mayor of Newham
15 February 2008 at 15:21

I strongly agree with Caroline Flint’s proposals to link employment and housing.

Every other area of government policy recognises that employment and self-sufficiency are the best ways to help people out of poverty. Housing policy should be no exception.

We have two choices. Either we can stick to the status quo, which, despite the best of intentions, has led to intergenerational dependency and worklessness in some areas. Or we can look at the practical issues stopping people from working and empower them to work. Like Caroline, I believe we must be bold and choose the second course - even if it means the difficult job of challenging people’s attitudes towards finding work.

Housing policy should be used as an engine to drive up aspiration and support people into work and out of poverty and social exclusion. That means we have to provide people with the support to help them into work, but we should also expect people to take their responsibility to find work seriously. The idea of using housing as a way to change people’s attitudes and encourage them to want to find work is a solid step in that direction. This does not however, affect the provision of social housing for those who cannot work.

We need sustainable communities; mixed by class, tenure and ethnicity. Without getting more people in social housing into work, many of those communities will remain uniformly and grimly poor and workless and dependent on the state. No socialist can believe that this is an acceptable outcome for so many of this country’s people.

In Newham we’re already working on this agenda. Our employment service, Workplace, offers a personalised service to our unemployed residents which helps people overcome the barriers they face in taking up employment. At the same time, we work with people to address their housing needs, especially the difficulties of balancing housing benefit with gaining employment.

Change needs to happen. Caroline was right to make such a bold statement. By providing tailored support to individuals and recognising the link between housing and employment, we can help people improve their circumstances.

Sir Robin Wales, Mayor of Newham

RGB
22 February 2008 at 22:07

I have spent the best part of the last week putting togeather a tender submission which will hopefully lead to our local company renovating a portion of 10000 public sector houses with new kitchens and bathrooms in Liverpool over the next 5 years for Liverpool mutual homes . In terms of sustainability the key issue to me is how much of the value generated out of projects like this can and should be recycled within the immediate community. Put simply ,for every £1000 of spent providing these improvements the objective should be for approx £950 to go into the pockets of local people or businesses working on or supplying these initiatives. This is real cash - £150m + and real long term job opportunities that can and should make a difference to the community.Lets be positive about making the most of this opportunity and rise to to the challenge !!

Michael Barratt
23 February 2008 at 11:18

According to the BBC, Caroline Flint the new housing minister has proposed that Council tenants who do not work should seek employment or face losing their homes.

The neo conservatives of New Labour have already introduced even more coercive forms of labour market policy than previous Conservative governments, in an environment where relative wages for unskilled workers have declined over the past two decades. With wages for skilled workers relative to unskilled workers having increased by about 35% during the last two decades.

Previously comparatively well-paid and stable work for blue-collar male workers has been replaced in the new economic sectors by an insecure working environment characterised by temporary contracts, low pay and deskilled work. The result of the growth in those new economic sectors is the appearance of a disenfranchised urban poor. In recent times, the responsibility to pay subsistence wages has in effect shifted from employers to the general taxpayer. With employers paying hourly rates for unskilled labour that are barely sufficient to keep eighteen year olds living at home with their parents. Resulting in family breadwinners paid less than subsistence wages having their incomes topped up by family credits to around the level of poverty.

Although Income support/Job seekers allowance from personal experience are not an easy options, many households find they are financially better off relying upon welfare benefits rather than a combination of wage and family credits, when all factors are taken into account. Especially given frequently poor sick pay entitlements and complexities associated with varying weekly incomes at the subsistence level.

Especially in the South of England, the lack of council housing is such that generally only those with the most need are provided housing and by extension those housed are more likely to be reliant upon welfare benefits system. It is not surprising there is some indifference to the work ethic among welfare recipients given there is little difference in hardship experienced living on poverty level welfare benefits compared with living on below subsistence wages topped up with family credits to the level of poverty.

Ms Flint appears to intend to escalate labour coercion to new heights in proposing that council tenants face losing their homes if they do not find work, often elusive and temporary work at that. Ms Flint and her neoconservative colleagues having failed to coerce sufficient numbers into work for below poverty level pay in frequently precarious employment are attempting to introduce housing insecurity as a coercive weapon. Former blue collar families who have already seen their incomes and standards of living eroded over the years now face having the roofs taken from above their heads.

Ms Flint and her colleagues, rather than yet again kicking the poor in the teeth would be better employed building more council housing to accommodate more mixed communities and addressing rather than exacerbating the present social injustice.

Michael Barratt

Crawley West Sussex

Council tenant

Post your comment

Please note: you will need to login or register before you can comment on the website

Also by Caroline Flint

Read More

Newsletter

Enter your email address here to receive updates from the team

Vote!

Will the Iraq inquiry be a 'whitewash'?

Suggest a question

View comments

© New Statesman 1913 - 2009

Tracker