Resources — RADICAL HOUSING NETWORK

Questions to ask of Mayoral and Greater London Assembly Candidates 2021

2020 was an extraordinarily challenging year. We hope you will agree that politicians are responsible both for London's state of preparedness at such times of crises as well as the city’s ability to seize upon opportunity to improve life for Londoners going forward. Here at Radical Housing Network and Fuel Poverty Action we see this upcoming election as an opportunity to re-balance some inequalities in our London community with better and more transparent policies and processes thereby ensuring a strong, vibrant and working London for the foreseeable future. With this in mind we provide some relevant research and background to our thinking as well as some questions for your consideration.

We would be grateful if you could answer the questions and return to us via email at . With thanks for your time and should you be elected we look forward to working with you.

Radical Housing Network

Fuel Poverty Action

Environment, accountability and democracy

The Grenfell Tower tragedy and Croydon bankruptcy have demonstrated just how vulnerable Londoners are when politicians put corporate profit above people's safety and security, get too close to developers, or speculate with the people's money and resources. These political failures as well as lessons learned from the COVID-19 pandemic sound alarm bells that politicians must heed. Scientists are now warning of more pandemics to come and serious implications for Londoners of climate change. Right now, in London, there are planning approvals for 500+ high-rise buildings but research suggests that those already built have denied Londoners access to needed housing by leaving at least 125,000 homes in London without anyone living in them. Others of these new builds have been rented out as AirBnbs and short-term lets for a quick profit. All this while London councils are spending over £700 million pounds on insecure tenancies for 80,000 children and 57,000 families. (Data from Action For Empty Homes, Pretty Vacant, April 2020)

Q 1: Are you committed to the restoration and maintenance of social housing estates in London rather than their demolition?

Q 2: Do you accept that demolition of social housing estates destroys communities, family and other support networks, and often leads to displacement of working-class people, including those who care for the city and its residents, in favour of expensive housing, or even buildings left empty as financial investments? Accordingly, will you avoid "regeneration" policies and support refurbishment and improvement of existing estates?

Q 3: Do you accept that in demolishing a council estate and rebuilding it with private, openmarket flats on the new site, the council has sold a public asset into private hands limiting future public options for the location in the future? If so, are you committed to policies that maintain public land in public hands?

Q 4: Will you support policies which hold elected officials accountable when their policies fail the local community, as for instance, they have in Croydon and at Grenfell Towers in Kensington and Chelsea?

Q 5: Will you support empowering and resourcing representative, democratic tenants and residents’ associations?

Q 6: Will your support for others’ policies and any of your own policies respond to the fact that environmental damage due to C02 emissions comes from carbon embodied in buildings (old and new)? These embodied carbons include the carbon dioxide or greenhouse gas emissions associated with the extraction, manufacturing, transporting, installing, maintaining and disposing of construction materials and products such as stone, concrete, glass, steel and huge quantities of plastics and in the case of demolition and rebuild apply to both the original building, the demolition process and the construction of the new building?

Q 7: Will your policies and support relating to demolition and rebuild respond to the fact that demolition and construction wreaks havoc on local air quality, generates noise pollution and often morphs gardens and tree-filled green spaces into plants in pots?

For an exploration of the pollution caused by demolition, see: https://www.london.gov.uk/sites/default/files/ad_52_anne_power_- _does_demolition_or_refurbishment_.pdf

Costs of refurbishment

Action For Empty Homes estimates in London there is growing vacancy in retail and commercial space and “that the combined numbers of long-term empty homes, second homes, short-term-let investments and a possible smaller stock of genuinely foreignowned buy-to-leave empty investments are likely to exceed 125,000 residential properties.” See https://www.actiononemptyhomes.org/Handlers/Download.ashx?IDMF=9b2b756ec708-4d74-9027-3b2f5808f1d1

Q 8: In light of this, would you support the re-allocation of empty or underused buildings or buildings in a state of disrepair for conversion into social rent properties? If not, what policy do you endorse to deal with the current need for low-rent property in London?

Q 9: Would you be prepared to support or propose a policy of rent control for London?

Q 10: Do you agree that a home is not affordable if you can't afford to heat it?

Housing Density and green space

As has been demonstrated by the recent pandemic, the overburdening of health services and overcrowding of Metropolitan Open Land costs lives and impacts negatively on the quality of life for those who live and/or work in London. Robert Jenrick as Secretary of State for Housing Government and Local Communities has taken the position that density on new building sites should be 'optimized' and Opportunity Areas extended and grown. The Mayor's London Plan, before the Secretary of State's amendments, supported density restrictions on new developments to protect precious resources such as the NHS and schools from becoming overburdened and unable to deliver during a crisis whether it be flooding or a pandemic.

Q 12: What is your position on Metropolitan Open Land, public green spaces, and building density in London?

Q 13: Where utilisation of empty properties for housing people in need is not considered possible, would you support the building of new council properties, to a good standard in locations which protect green spaces?

Q 14: Do you agree that public money should only be used to support provision of public and democratically controlled social housing?

Below is Burning Pink’s Reply

Dear Radical Housing Network/ FPA,

Thank you so much for reaching out to me here at Burning Pink. Indeed, 2020 was yet another year of crises amongst decades of crises - and as usual, politicians are managing to turn these catastrophes into either money making opportunities or as opportunities for yet more political point scoring as they continue to commit mass murder. It’s time to move away from these tired old political tropes and push towards the better world that we know can exist.

Radical Housing Network and Fuel Poverty Action are certainly working hard to address some of the dreadful inequalities in London, and your questions show your meticulous attention to detail. All your excellent research and background information looks like exactly the kind of material that should be deliberated by the people of London at people’s and citizens’ assemblies to sort out these problems that time and again are never really solved by party politics. Of course, in a legally binding citizens’ assembly, there would be representatives from all parties, but we truly believe that people who have been kept ignorant of the true facts will, after deliberation and listening to experts, come down on the side of truth and morality. We at Burning Pink very much look forward to a relationship with you and would like to invite you to talk to us so that we can hear more about what you are doing.

How about a zoom call/meeting where we can talk? Get back to me and let's start the conversation.

Best wishes

Valerie

BELOW IS THE GREEN PARTY RESPONSE

Dear Radical Housing Network,

I apologise for the delay in replying. My answers are as follows.

Q 1: Are you committed to the restoration and maintenance of social housing estates in London rather than their demolition?

Yes. Demolition must always be a last resort, not only because of the disruption that it causes to residents' lives, but also because it is a cause of air pollution and does nothing to help to reduce carbon emissions as climate breakdown demands. 350,000 Londoners are living in fuel poverty and we need a huge transformational programme of retrofit as part of a Green New Deal for London. This will place at its heart refurbishment and maintenance of existing supply. Just like reduce, reuse and recycle, we need to follow similar principles with our housing stock and avoid demolition.

Yes. There are examples all over London where communities that have been built over decades have been dispersed all over - sometimes not even in London anymore, let alone in the same neighbourhood. This exacerbates social problems and leaves us with a big question of who London is for. I will support refurbishment and improvement of existing estates over 'regeneration', although the ultimate say should always be with the residents, in a transparent and clear balloting process. If Sian Berry were elected as Mayor, she will always prioritise social housing, appointing a social housing commissioner, who will be a social tenant themselves, to engage in democratic and deliberative processes to amplify the voices of social tenants. As a London Assembly Member, she pushed the current Mayor to ballot estates for demolition. It is unacceptable that 34 estates were pushed through for demolition during the consultation period. If she becomes Mayor, she will make sure that, where estates still exist, they will be balloted. You can read more on p.52 of https://www.sianberry.london/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/SIAN_BERRY_LONDON_2021_HOUSING_Manifesto_Chapter_FINAL_web.pd

Q 3: Do you accept that in demolishing a council estate and rebuilding it with private, open market flats on the new site, the council has sold a public asset into private hands, limiting future public options for the location in the future? If so, are you committed to policies that maintain public land in public hands?

Yes. It is unacceptable. This is one reason why right to buy has been disastrous for our social housing stock. It is too often then sold on to private landlords. We need more social housing, not less. By voting for the Green Party at the Mayoral and London Assembly elections, you will not only be maintaining public land; we will be looking at ways to be more imaginative with it too. For example, Greens will put power back into the hands of Londoners by setting up a People's Land Commission. When local people find plots of land which are not being put to good use and would be suitable for small scale developments, we will endeavour to provide the funding to put these ideas into action. You can read more on p.59 of https://www.sianberry.london/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/SIAN_BERRY_LONDON_2021_HOUSING_Manifesto_Chapter_FINAL_web.pdf

Yes. Holding other elected officials accountable through various mechanisms, such as scrutiny meetings, is integral to the role of a London Assembly Member. In particular, transparency of decision-making processes is vital. Please see p.84-85 for Green Party policy on fire and home safety: https://www.sianberry.london/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/SIAN_BERRY_LONDON_2021_SAFE_HEALTHY_CITY_Manifesto_Chapter_FINAL_web.pdf

Q 5: Will you support empowering and resourcing representative, democratic tenants and residents’ associations?

Yes. Please see p.107-108 of https://www.sianberry.london/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/SIAN_BERRY_LONDON_2021_POWER_Manifesto_Chapter_FINAL_web.pdf

I will take on casework for the Assembly where appropriate. I am really proud that my fellow candidate, Zack Polanski, has been working with tenants on the ground, really listening to their needs and concerns. He and one of Lambeth's Green Councillors, Pete Elliott, have been visiting estates and finding out what they want from the Mayor. On a more personal note, I am a leaseholder with a well-known housing association and, a few years ago, worked with fellow leaseholders to compel the housing association to reduce a major works bill by about two thirds, so I know how important it is for residents to be able to work together for the common good.

Yes. Please see p.10-13 and p.26-27 of https://www.sianberry.london/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/SIAN_BERRY_LONDON_2021_GREENEST_CITY_Manifesto_Chapter_FINAL_web.pdf

Yes. This is partly addressed in my answer to no.1, and I would add that the Green Party understands the need for residents to have access to good quality green spaces. You can read more on p.22-24 of https://www.sianberry.https://www.sianberry.london/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/SIAN_BERRY_LONDON_2021_HOUSING_Manifesto_Chapter_FINAL_web.pdf

Yes. Where empty buildings can be converted into good quality social housing, as a priority, then Greens will do so. However, it is important to note that it will be on a case-by-case basis. We need to be very careful about too much deregulation, as we do not want to create the slums of the future. Please see p.53 for our ideas on how to create new council and low-cost rented homes from existing housing: https://www.sianberry.london/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/SIAN_BERRY_LONDON_2021_HOUSING_Manifesto_Chapter_FINAL_web.pdf

Q 9: Would you be prepared to support or propose a policy of rent control for London?

Yes. Please see p.49-51 of https://www.sianberry.london/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/SIAN_BERRY_LONDON_2021_HOUSING_Manifesto_Chapter_FINAL_web.pdf

Q 10: Do you agree that a home is not affordable if you can't afford to heat it?

Yes.

Q 11: Do you agree that it is the responsibility of landlords and developers, not tenants, leaseholders, or part-owners, to ensure that buildings are safe from both fire and cold, and that residents should not be expected to pick up the costs or to live in danger when this responsibility has failed? Will you press for and implement policies in line with this principle.Yes. We need to end the cladding scandal. It is not just cladding, though; internal defects are also a problem. We need to be building quality homes in the first place that are safe. The responsibility must lie with developers and local authorities where something has been missold. A lot of these homes were sold to key workers and it is unconscionable that they now have to pick up the bill. Far too many Londoners still live in dangerous blocks, unable to sell or move while facing enormous bills for work. This is a true scandal and I will be a clear and loud voice for residents in making sure Government and building owners cover all the costs of making homes safe. The Building Safety Fund must cover all buildings regardless of height and internal defects, not just cladding.

Q 12: What is your position on Metropolitan Open Land, public green spaces, and building density in London?

Please see p.17-24 for Green Party policy on MoL and public green spaces: https://www.sianberry.london/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/SIAN_BERRY_LONDON_2021_GREENEST_CITY_Manifesto_Chapter_FINAL_web.pdf Regarding building density, we believe in the efficient use of space, but are against overcrowding. Sufficient infrastructure for the number of residents is essential too.

The priority will always be to refurbish first, but yes.

Q 14: Do you agree that public money should only be used to support provision of public and democratically controlled social housing?

Yes. I will do what I can to ensure that grants for new homes are not used for unaffordable shared ownership or 'affordable' rent, but reserved for new council homes, social housing, and community-led housing, with smaller grants available for London Living Rent homes. The grants will be provided on a sliding scale depending on the number of bedrooms, in order to increase the level of family housing provided.

Please do not hesitate to get back to me with any further question. Thank you for your work!

All the best,

Dr Pippa Maslin

Green Party London Assembly candidate for Merton and Wandsworth

BELOW IS TUSC'S REPLY TO THE QUESTIONS ASKED. APRIL ASHLEY IS STANDING ON THIS PROGRAMME IN THE GLA SEAT FOR SOUTHWARK AND LAMBETH.

1. The Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition (TUSC) fully supports the restoration and maintenance of public housing estates and oppose all demolition unless it is necessary for health and safety reasons. Then and only then should it take place and it should be replaced by modern, safe eco-friendly housing with like for like numbers of dwellings as before. Any such demolition should be done in conjunction with the wishes of the people living there and with the full right of return, so as to maintain family and community networks.

2. The demolition of public housing is clearly being used to break up working class communities and to impose 'gentrification' in formerly working class areas. It is a cruel policy that harms families and takes no regards of the needs of the working class community that remains in an area. Housing regeneration, in its modern sense, is a con trick to favour the wealthy.

3. Public land should remain in public hands. Once it is lost it will not be used to benefit working class communities and their housing needs.

4. We fully support all local councillors and officials being held to account for their actions in failing communities that live in public housing. What happened at Grenfell was a tragedy that should never have happened especially as the local community were warning of problems arising. Any decisions about public housing should involve local communities and building worker trade unions to the fullest extent.

5. The tenant's movement is a movement without the real resources to fully function. We fully support that movement being given the resources to carry out their role and demand that tenants and residents should be at the heart of all decisions made regarding public housing. Tenant representatives should be democratically elected to represent their communities on all bodies making decisions about public housing.

6. The building of eco-friendly homes is a key plank of TUSC's housing policy, which is why decent, no cost spared maintenance of public housing is important as well. Estates across London are being bulldozed when an eco-friendly approach would maintain these estates and make full use of the resources that went into building them. Any new build should utilise all the most up to date environmental standards and create well paid green jobs to maintain them for a full and useful life.

7. If any demolition is required the local community should be fully involved in the decision making around it, the timing of the demolition and even the necessity of the demolition. If a building can be saved and converted that should be the first point of call. Too many working class communities have lost decent homes only for them to be replaced by soulless tower blocks. Any demolition should only be allowed to take place with the highest environmental and health and safety standards in place. These should be acceptable to the local community and the trade unions involved in the building sector. All green spaces should be preserved and maintained.

8. All unused buildings and housing should be taken into public ownership with compensation on the basis of proven need. It should then be converted into public housing or socially useful spaces or units for local communities.

9 We fully support the re-introduction of legally enforceable rent controls, to end the scandal of a growing rentier class exploiting people with ridiculously high and unaffordable rents. Alongside this should be rent agreements that are long term and no deposit required.

10. We live in a cold climate. If you cannot afford to heat a home it is clearly unaffordable in our view.

11. Property developers and landlords should be legally responsible to ensure that all their homes are fire safe, insulated and warm and decent homes fit to live in. If they cannot legally guarantee this they should be refused planning permission or be blocked from being landlords. However the way forward is to have a programme of mass public housing building informed by the needs and involvement of local communities with direct input from the trade unions representing those who work in the building sector. This would provide decent homes that are publicly controlled and therefore would become a pole of attraction to build more public housing that is decent, affordable and safe. Society needs to move away from a property owning mentality to providing the highest standard public housing. That is the only way to solve the housing crisis.

12. All public land and green spaces should remain so and be properly maintained for the whole community. All legislation allowing builders to reduce living space in new homes should be rescinded and replaced with guidelines that give more space to home dwellers. What space people need in modern day UK should be decided by the people and communities who will be living in those homes - and not wealthy politicians who live in mini mansions. And where required the green belt should be built on to solve the housing crisis. Only 7% of land in the UK is built on so there is room to expend onto the green belt if required.

13. There clearly is not decent homes to accommodate the UK's growing population so a programme of mass public housing building is urgently required. Obviously green spaces within cities must be protected, which is why green belt land can be utilised.

14. Public money should be for public housing and how that is spent should be decided upon democratically by tenants, communities, building worker trade unions and democratically elected working class representatives. As socialists we believe that the full involvement of working class communities is critical for the success of public housing projects and to provide homes that people actually want to live in. In the Militant and socialist led Liverpool City Council of the 1980s 5,000 new homes were built involving the wishes of local communities. Their wish was for decent homes with gardens back and front and this was the kind of housing that was provided. TUSC stands in that radical, socialist tradition.

BELOW IS THE LIBERAL DEMOCRATS’ RESPONSE

Thank you for your email and for all that the Radical Housing Network and Fuel Poverty Action do to improve the quality of life for Londoners. This response is on behalf of the Liberal Democrat Candidate for Mayor, Luisa Porritt, and our full team of London Assembly candidates. We agree that London is at a crucial moment. With Covid-19, Brexit, and the climate crisis we need big ideas and urgent action. We need new challengers at City Hall ready to make the most of generational opportunities. The Liberal Democrats’ plan to take London forward is a plan for homes, jobs and clean air. We believe that some form of homeworking is here to stay and that unused office space in the centre of London could be used for high quality, genuinely affordable, zero carbon homes. To do this, we need careful regulation and a Mayor able to work with councils, landlords and the government. Imagination is what is need to tackle our housing crisis – they have created Homes in the Heart of the City in other cities like Rotterdam – with the right leadership and creativity we can do it in London too. There are over 25,000 empty homes in London – a number which has gone up under the current Mayor. With dedicated resource at City Hall we can get empty homes back into use and providing truly affordable homes for Londoners. We can also end homelessness with the right leadership. Using a Housing First model like that in Finland and making sure that those who are homeless are given the holistic support which they need.

Turning to your specific questions:

Q 1: Are you committed to the restoration and maintenance of social housing estates in London rather than their demolition?

It is not in every part of London a simple either/or situation – but far more does need to be done restore and maintain social housing estates. There are also strong environmental grounds that buildings should normally be improved/restored – and not merely knocked down and rebuilt.

Liberal Democrats across London have campaigned to support existing communities and raised questions about the actions of often Labour led councils in regeneration projects which price out existing residents. In Lib Dem run Kinston Council we have worked with the community to regenerate the Cambridge Road Estate and made sure that the project only goes ahead with support from existing residents in an estate wide ballot.

We are open to working with private and public partners, but existing public facilities should always be maintained.

Both Croydon and Kensington & Chelsea councils (a Labour and Conservative boroughs) have seriously failed their residents. They should be held accountable by the electorate and people should think very carefully how they vote in next year’s borough elections. Liberal Democrats also believe in making local government more accountable – a good start would be electoral reform.

Q 5: Will you support empowering and resourcing representative, democratic tenants and residents’ associations?

Yes, very much so. Too often their voice is not properly heard. At the same time developers are highly resourced. There needs to be a levelling of the playing field.

Yes - improving the energy efficiency of existing buildings is also vital. Social housing could also play a far greater role in generation of solar energy and delivering green roofs. Retrofitting also created green jobs.

Q 7 Will your policies and support relating to demolition and rebuild respond to the fact that demolition and construction wreaks havoc on local air quality, generates noise pollution and often morphs gardens and tree-filled green spaces into plants in pots?

There needs to be far better enforcement of building sites, especially to minimise the levels of air pollution they create, but more widely instead of demotion and then rebuilding there are many occasions when existing buildings can be made greener, without all the carbon and other environmental downsides from demolition.

Costs of refurbishment

Yes we need a proper Empty Homes Agency and a Mayor committed to getting empty homes back into use.

Q 9: Would you be prepared to support or propose a policy of rent control for London?

The first priority must be to ensure that a far higher proportion of newly built homes are of real social rent. In terms of the private sector there is much more that needs to be done to tackle rogue landlords and there is a case for extending licensing schemes. The issue of risks to buildings by cladding also needs to be addressed.

Q 10: Do you agree that a home is not affordable if you can't afford to heat it?

Yes

Yes – this principle is at the very heart of the campaign by Inside Housing and other campaigners to tackle the cladding crisis, which we support 100%.

Housing Density and green spaces

Q 12: What is your position on Metropolitan Open Land, public green spaces, and building density in London?

Defending Metropolitan Open plan and actually extending the number of public green spaces is vital. Improving access to some existing green spaces is also important. Highlight the CPRE campaign to deliver new open spaces. New quality housing instead of some offices in central London could deliver good homes, without density concerns.

Yes

Q 14: Do you agree that public money should only be used to support provision of public and democratically controlled social housing?

There are different definitions of democratically controlled social housing but we agree with the general principle. We also support housing co-operatives.

Best wishes,

Rachel-lee Mackenzie (She/Hers)

London 2021 Campaign Team