It’s no secret that housing and homelessness is at the top of many local authority agendas. The unprecedented spike in the use of temporary accommodation (TA), at a cost of £1.7bn last year, is driving a coach and horses through many local budgets. As we approach the local government settlement, and at a time when most local authorities are preparing budgets for the next financial year, the choice before the Westminster government is clear.
In Eastbourne, the costs of TA have tripled in three years, and are forecast to rise advocate still. Almost £4mn of our core budget of £14mn is now being spent on TA. These numbers are unsustainable. We are not alone. Although the increased costs and demands of social care and inflation brought Nottingham to the brink, it was the spike in TA costs that tipped them over the edge. Without urgent extra funding, scores of local authorities will be unable to present balanced budgets and will be forced to submit S114 statements.
We’ve been doing our bit. Our housing team work hard to maintain tenancies; to use discretionary housing payments to keep families in their home; to incentivise landlords to remain in the market; to impede homelessness before it happens. We have built social housing in each of the last five years, delivering high-quality homes on brownfield sites for families on our waiting lists. But our range of options are now exhausted.
The government must wake up to this. Before long, a wave of S114’s will be submitted, and local government, with its provision of essential services, will cease to exist as we know it. Families who rely on these services will be cast aside less than 12 months before a general election.
Led by Eastbourne and the District Council Network, a cross-party group of 119 local authorities recently asked the chancellor to uprate LHA reclaim rates; commit to enhance funding for discretionary housing payments and homeless prevention funds; conduct a full review of the policy environment that is driving private landlords from the sector and forcing rents ever higher, while simultaneously disincentivising the building of social homes by local authorities and registered providers. We are still waiting for an answer. These 119 local authorities have spoken with one voice. The chancellor must act unless he wants the chaos of multiple S114 declarations on his hands.
Peter Diplock
Councillor, Cabinet Member for Housing and Planning, Eastbourne Borough Council, UK
