This report traces trends in the development a comprehensive housing and homelessness legislation and policy.

University Degree Law

0021710

UNIVERSITY OF EAST LONDON

DEPARTMENT OF SOCIOLOGY AND ANTHROPOLOGY

UNIT TITLE: SO224; SOCIAL POLICY IN BRITAIN (REPORT- 2500-3000 WORDS)

CHOSEN AREA: HOUSING; HOMELESSNESS

AGENCY: SHELTER; CAMPAIGNING ORGANISATION

INTRODUCTION

This report traces trends in the development a comprehensive housing and homelessness legislation and policy in three phases:

In the post 2nd World War period
Post 1979 after Thatcher’s victory
Post New Labour in 1997.

The report will describe trends in tackling ‘race’ equality in housing. The report will continue to analyse the work done by Shelter, a homeless charity, illustrating how much their work has changed over time. The report will then explore how Shelter’s policy unit remains responsible for ensuring that Shelter’s campaigns are supported by credible proposals for changes in housing policy and practices at national and local levels. The report will enquire about any strategies Shelter currently employs to address race inequalities within the organisation.

BACKGROUND

Daly (1996) argues that we should understand homeless from a contextual perspective and explores how homelessness emerged during the 1980s as a public policy dilemma. “As interpreted in policy and programmes, definitions determine who receives assistance, the amount, type of provided and by whom” (Daly, 1996: 1). The beginning of state intervention and the development of housing law and policy as we know it today can be traced back to the days of the Poor Law and workhouse provision. It was not until the National Assistance Act 1948, that the “Poor Law was abolished and even then only in name, for many of the practices of social exclusion, stigmatisation…were less easily confined to the dustbins of history, none more so than in the treatment of homeless families” (Lowe, 1997: 22). The 1948 National Assistance Act continued to view homelessness as a result of vagrancy, alcoholism, destitution, pauperism and unwillingness to work In essence the act did not create a comprehensive, national framework for dealing with the problem and so ‘legitimate homelessness’ was the result of a ‘natural’ disaster such as floods and fire and the act only required local authorities to provide temporary accommodation to legitimate persons. “Indeed, the statutory provision was designed only to deal with homeless families in the narrowest sense of being actually ‘roofless’…The post-war shortage of dwellings was estimated at something over 2 million, and the next two decades were spent in a political ‘numbers game’ trying to reduce this huge back-log” (Lowe, 1997: 23).

POST-WAR PERIOD

Between 1945 and 1977 there was so much principal housing legislation (20 to be precise), most notably Rent Acts1957, 1965, 1968, 1974 (Malpass and Murie, 1994: 66). As early as 1915 the state had intervened directly in the housing market with the imposition of rent control and from 1919 to the late 1960’s, there was a drive to build council houses and to subsidise private building especially at the time when ‘homes for heroes’ was the slogan. For the most part of the 1950’ and 60’s local authorities still used sex-segregated Poor Law hostels and traditions for homeless families and the typical stance of the local authorities “towards homeless people was negative, unhelpful, ignoring, uncaring, moralistic, stereotyping and rejecting…The historical and bleak picture for the homeless began to change only following the Rent Act in 1957” (Somerville, 1999: 30). The act provided for the relaxation of private sector rent controls and this in turn led to a sharp increase in homelessness due to evictions by landlords. The government had changed its approach to local authority rents and urged adoption of ‘realistic’ (i.e. higher) rents. But people could identify with the evicted families because they were part of the mainstream population and as a result, public sympathy for the homeless started developing. The screening of “Cathy Come Home” in 1966 shocked the public who wrongly thought that local authorities were re-housing homeless families. “Even so, homelessness did not become a national political issue in its own right until the slum clearance programme of the 1960s were contributing to the rise of homelessness by displacing people” (Somerville, 1999: 30-31). “Cathy Come Home” led to voluntary campaigns, such as Shelter and CHAR, being set up to publicise the issue and plight of the homeless. Unfortunately public sympathy and media attention were not, by themselves, enough to produce a policy change and it was only the 1977 Housing (Homeless Persons) Act in particular that presented a clearer picture. This Act placed a duty on local housing authorities to provide accommodation for homeless households in certain priority need groups. It is only fair to say that it was only in it that ‘homelessness’ became defined as a distinct term and this raised the profile of homelessness as a political issue (Hutson, 1999). Housing Act 1977 recognised homelessness as a structural phenomenon by addressing the problem with the provision of housing for families, couples and individuals who became homeless. However, because the 1977 act was passed at a time when the previous, older explanation of homelessness as an individual choice still held some sway it still contained strong residual elements which reflected this. Essentially then the act could not go all the way in accepting that social and economic factors were largely to blame for homelessness because the popular conception of scroungers was still too strong (Pleace at al, 1997). The 1977 Act therefore was limited in that:

Firstly it only re-housed people who were victims of circumstances that are ‘natural’ in their essence and fire, flood, disability and pregnancy are mentioned as key indicators of legitimate priority need
Secondly, if you were not naturally vulnerable and are a victim of the market, for example, unemployed, and were not in priority need but threatened with homelessness, the local authority only had a duty to advice and assist with housing
Thirdly, it reinforced the idea of ‘deserving poor’ with this status being given to those whose homelessness was unforeseen, ‘natural’, and therefore outside their control.

...

This is a preview of the whole essay

Firstly it only re-housed people who were victims of circumstances that are ‘natural’ in their essence and fire, flood, disability and pregnancy are mentioned as key indicators of legitimate priority need
Secondly, if you were not naturally vulnerable and are a victim of the market, for example, unemployed, and were not in priority need but threatened with homelessness, the local authority only had a duty to advice and assist with housing
Thirdly, it reinforced the idea of ‘deserving poor’ with this status being given to those whose homelessness was unforeseen, ‘natural’, and therefore outside their control.

POST 1979

Since 1979 a movement towards privatisation has been underway. According to Malpass and Murie (1994: 97) housing policy in the period since 1979 has moved through four different phases:

In first phase the policies worked out in Opposition in the late 1970s were vigorously implemented with little modification.
This phase was followed by a period of consolidation in housing policy and financial deregulation which proved subsequently to have major implications for the housing sector
In the third phase, following 1986-7, there was a ‘fundamental and much needed review of housing policy’ with new measures to achieve deregulation of the private rented sector
In the fourth phase of policy these new initiatives were overwhelmed by economic problems and unplanned and unexpected problems in the housing sector competed with the progress of implementation of the earlier policy packages.

The 1977 Act was later consolidated as part III of the 1985 Housing Act but the government launched a review of homeless legislation in the late 1980s. hoping to find dissatisfaction and when it did not, the government reacted by narrowing the definition of homeless so that having a ‘roof over your head’ was no longer counted as homeless (Somerville, 1999). ”Since 1990 (the NHS and Community Care Act) the British government has pursued a mixed economy of care models (in health, housing, education and community care) which encourages a quasi-market relationship between statutory authorities (‘financial providers’) and voluntary organisations (‘providers’)” (Daly, 1996: 208). In January, 1994 a government consultation Green Paper proposed that local authorities could accommodate homeless families in the private rented sector. There was the development of large percentage of ‘fast-track’ priority homeless households. Most households in temporary accommodation waiting to be housed were in Bed and Breakfast, a notoriously unsuitable form of accommodation, for example, impact on health and educational attainment. There was also concern that homeless households were being offered poor housing that waiting list applicants had turned down. “Between 1977 and 1994, the annual acceptances of homeless households by local authorities have more than doubled from 60,400 in 1980 to 124,600 in 1994” (McLaverty et al, 1996: 35). McLaverty et al conclude that homeless households are likely to face difficulty in gaining entry to the private rented sector for purely financial reasons (such as meeting advance payments, deposits). Some changes between 1977 and 1994 therefore made it inevitable to the reformation of homelessness legislation and they “can broadly summarised as the processes of centralisation, depoliticisation and deregulation” (Somerville, 1999: 35). The 1977 Act, later incorporated into part III of the 1985 Act, remained largely intact until 1996 when the Conservatives introduced what was dubbed “Cathy get lost” Act. The Green Paper (1994), despite almost overwhelming opposition and criticism to it formed the basis for part VII of Housing Act 1996. Lowe (1997) identifies three lines of argument the government used to support its decision:

Most houses particularly in London went to homeless households
Homelessness was a ‘fast-track’ route to permanent housing
The actual number of the ‘roofless was relatively low

POST NEW LABOUR

Under the changes local authorities only had duty to accommodate homeless people for two years. Several groups previously classed as ‘in priority need’ were also removed. An important change involved an inquiry into ‘eligibility’. It was therefore not enough merely to be homeless. Ineligible people included “people from abroad and not entitled to social security payments…Asylum seekers or their dependants are also not eligible if they have any accommodation, however temporary, available in the UK. Part VII of Housing Act 1996 makes it clear that the aim is to deprive statutorily homeless household of immediate access to council housing” (Lowe, 1997: 30-31). This is an historical throw-back to the punitive attitude of the Poor Law workhouses. New Labour pledged to repeal the 1996 Act but instead amended it. The Homelessness Act 2002 amends Parts VI and VII of the Housing Act 1996 which sets out the current legislative framework for assisting homeless people and allocating social housing. The main changes are:

All local authorities have a new duty to carry out and publish five-year reviews and strategies to tackle and prevent homelessness.
Repeals 1996 Housing Act’s time-limited housing rights for homeless households. Unintentionally priority homeless must now be given a suitable in the short term until they find settled accommodation. Reforms to strengthen the homelessness safety net.
‘Priority need’ groups to be extended to include 16 and17- year olds, care leavers, former soldiers and ex-prisoners who are vulnerable (by regulation).
New stronger duty to provide advice and assistance to non-priority homeless households.
Reforms to the framework for allocating social housing with greater choice
New national homelessness strategy to be implemented.

These changes are expected to significantly alter the homelessness landscape as local authorities will now be required to take a long term, strategic approach to addressing homelessness in all its forms especially in the prevention. This will mean that local authorities should be able to work with other departments and agencies in developing a multi-agency response to homelessness in their area. The reforms, over time, according to Shelter, should change the way that homeless services are delivered with a shift of focus from crisis management to strategic response based on early intervention and the development of support services structured to assist those who have been re-housed to sustain their new homes () 04/03/04.

HOUSING, HOMELESSNESS and ‘RACE’ EQUALITY

According to Burrows, et al (1997) although there is no accurate information on ethnicity between 1960 and 1970, data on place of birth throws some light on ethnic origin and “The surge in homelessness among ethnic minority groups (including those of Irish decent) which began in the 1960s, became a major feature of homelessness” (Burrows et al, 1997: xvi). The concept of power, control, information and access to social benefits are related. Homeless people must know how to gain entry into a maze of services in order to secure their entitlements. Harrison and Davis (2001) explore the theme that there is difference within difference and that difference is regulated. “In reviewing housing experiences we must look not only beyond a simple black/white divide, but also beyond assumptions about broad distinctions between (say) Asians and African/Caribbeans. There have been marked differences between various minority ethnic communities “in terms of household size/structure, tenure patterns, dwelling types, amenity levels and density of occupation” (Ratcliffe, 1997: 130, cited in Harrison and Davis, 2001:141-142). According to Homeless pages, there is vast amount of evidence that people from Black and minority ethnic groups disproportionately face housing problems and homelessness. Many also live in poor housing and overcrowded accommodation. Higher levels of unemployment, low incomes and discrimination all make finding accommodation more difficult. Harassment from landlords, neighbours and other local people in some areas are also problems for significant numbers of black people (). 04/03/04

There has been a rather long history of Irish people facing discrimination and difficulties finding accommodation in Britain. Statistics from some of Shelter’s recent surveys and research estimate that

One in ten of the people sleeping rough on the streets of Greater London are Irish
Almost a quarter of day centre users in London are Irish
Irish people make up ten percent of winter shelters

Shelter’s detailed fact sheet on ethnicity and housing looks at the early experience of the minority ethnic population to date. It explores also explores the housing experience of single and young people, women and asylum seekers. Its main points are:

Minority ethnic households are over represented among homeless households accepted by local authorities. They also have tended to be allocated the worst quality housing in the least desirable areas.
Minority ethnic groups have a high level of ownership but this does not mean they have high employment status or better living conditions. Some live in very poor quality housing and in overcrowded conditions especially among Pakistani and Bangladeshi families. They tend to be concentrated in inner city areas. It has been suggested that some minority ethnic groups, especially Indian households are gaining access to better quality housing but this does not mean that discrimination in the housing market is a thing of the past (Ratcliffe, 1997 cited in ). 04/03/04.

In 1997, the Runnymede Trust published a report that documents the historical persistence of anti-Semitism in British society and culture. The CARF (Campaign Against Racism and Fascism) prides itself as Britain’s only independent anti-racist and anti-fascist on-line magazine documenting resistance against racism and fascism. More recently asylum seekers and refugees in severe housing need have dramatically increased and as we have already acknowledged, they may not be eligible for emergency housing if homeless. For some of these reasons, a number of services have been developed specifically for these groups as a response to high incidence of homelessness amongst them. “The Threshold Project research into hidden homelessness in 1990 showed that over half of those surveyed were women, nearly two-thirds were under 25 and over half were of African, African-Caribbean or Asian origin” (Boulton, 1993: 137).

SHELTER

In post-war Britain people could not actively press their grievances against local authorities with any realistic hope of success, but grassroots voluntary advocacy organisations, notably Shelter and CHAR were established in the mid-1960s. Shelter was launched on 1st December 1966 by five church housing associations. Its “formation coincided with the nation-wide showing of a television film, ‘Cathy Come Home’ (programme that showed the plight of a homeless family) which galvanised public sympathy for homeless individuals” (Daly, 1996: 83). Although the issue of homelessness had sprung to the public’s attention, the pressure groups and organisations were not yet sufficiently experienced or sophisticated to devise policy alternatives or legislation. The formation of the homeless charity Shelter added impetuous to a broader campaign to give homeless people more rights.

Over the years Shelter’s workload and schedule has not only substantially increased qualitatively but quantitatively too. The day after its launch shelter took out a full page advertisement in The Times, showing a child in a slum kitchen with the slogan “Home Sweet Hell”, and the public responded by donating £50,000 in the first month. The 1970s saw an increase in homelessness and the start of cuts in council house building and Shelter played a crucial role in the 1977 Housing (Homeless) Act. During the 1980s Shelter expanded establishing schemes dealing with various aspects of housing but the decade was dominated by lobbying against Government moves to reduce protection for vulnerable people. The 1990s witnessed mortgage repossessions quickly become one of the big homelessness issues. In 1998, Shelter launched Shelterline and is currently deeply involved in discussion on the internet at .

Shelter’s practical work includes:

Running over 50 Housing Aid Centres
Shelterline, a free national helpline open 24 hours a day, 365 days a year.
Innovative ‘Homeless to Home Projects’.
The Street Homelessness Project which works with local authorities
The National Homelessness Advice Service
Homework, a project that seeks to prevent homelessness
Training on up-to-date housing law and information
Campaign work (). 04/03/04

Almost all voluntary sector organisations engage in some sort of publicity, education, fundraising, or advocacy. “There are, though, a few groups whose primary mission is to serve as advocates on behalf of homeless people. Their work includes research, litigation, lobbying, political action and public education to inform people about homelessness and housing conditions” (Daly, 1996: 195). Shelter is adept at statistical and qualitative research designed to focus public attention on housing and living conditions. Shelter conducts surveys, publishes periodicals (such as ‘Roof’ and ‘Shelter net’), produces documentaries for TV and provides visual and statistical information for the press. Shelter can be classified as multi-functional because it acts as a watch dog to hold agencies accountable, to ensure that public bodies perform according to mandate and that people’s entitlements are honoured; on a regular basis it provides testimony to legislative committees and public hearings (Daly, 1996).

Shelter is an equal opportunity employer who is not only clear about the policy but is also aware of detailed monitoring and follow-up procedure such policies involve and above all recognise that we live in a multicultural society.

CONCLUSION

The act of defining homelessness in public policy frames the response by government and the voluntary sector. Homeless people represent heterogeneous populations. Those who need help range from individuals and households who simply require temporary financial assistance to persons in need of long term care. In housing, there clearly is a role for voluntary organisations, such as Shelter, with an understanding of local problems and needs of the people. Shelter, the National Campaign for Homeless People, is perhaps the best-known advocacy group which has been operating since 1966 and has an established reputation for conducting research and public campaigns on a variety of subjects and is a successful lobbyist for homeless people. Statutory services are often described as narrow in perspective and unwilling to understand the difficulties faced by black voluntary sector providers. Voluntary agencies, however, are heavily dependent on government funding.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Burrows, R, Pleace, N and Quilgars, D (eds) (1997) Homelessness and Social Policy, London: Routledge

Daly, G (1996) Homeless: Policies, Strategies and Lives on the Street, London: Routledge

Fisher, K and Collins, J (eds) (1993) Homelessness, Healthcare and Welfare Provision, London: Routledge

Goodwin, J (1995) Locked Out, Roof, 23 (4): 25-29

Harrison, M (1995) Housing, ‘Race’, Social Policy and Empowerment, Hants: Avebury

Harrison, M with Davis, C (2001) Housing, Social Policy and Difference: disability, ethnicity, gender and housing, Bristol: Polity Press

Hunt, N and Coyle, D (eds) (1996) Welfare and Social Policy: Research Agendas and Issues, London: UCL

Hutson, S and Clapham, D (eds) (1999) Homelessness: Public Policies and Private Troubles, London: Cassell

Malpass, P and Murie, A (1994) Housing Policy and Practice, London: Macmillan

Shelter (1994) Access to Local Authority and Housing Association Tenancies, a consultation paper: Shelter’s response, London: Shelter

Shelter (1995) Housing White Paper: Shelter briefing, London: Shelter

Shelter (1989) Campaign Against Poverty, London: Shelter

04/03/04

. 04/03/04

This report traces trends in the development a comprehensive housing and homelessness legislation and policy.

This is a preview of the whole essay

Document Details

Related Essays

Address the relevance of current legislation in its relation to the problem...

Children's views, needs, wishes and feelings are at the heart of national l...

Local Authority Statutory Obligation to People who are Homeless. To what ex...

To what extent was the New Deal a turning point in the development of Nativ...