How should the state treat social tenants on higher incomes?by Ben Rogers / June 26, 2013 / Leave a comment
Politicians often become closely associated with controversial policies that they have helped introduce. No surprises there. But poor Frank Dobson is heavily associated with a policy he has had next to no role in creating or maintaining – although it is one he does support. The Camden MP and his wife – a university lecturer – have happened to live in a council flat in a handsome Edwardian mansion block not far from the British Museum for many years.
Every time anyone raises a question about whether it’s fair that higher earning council or housing association tenants get to enjoy a home for life at a sub-market rent, Dobson’s name comes up.
It has to be said, however, that Dobson’s name does not come up that often – the general assumption has been that he and the few other well known higher earning social tenants, like Lee Jasper, Bob Crow and Baronness Udin, are very much the exception to the rule. Social housing is allocated on the basis of need. So don’t most people who live in it need it?
By and large they do. Half of social renting households have no earned income, due to disability, age, or unemployment, and a further 25 per cent have such low earned income that their already heavily subsidised rent needs to be supplemented with Housing Benefit. Yet a new report, published by Centre for London, suggests that around 16 per cent of all London council and housing association households – around 116,000 households in all – have an income of above the London average wage of £27,000 a year.