Hike in Wolverhampton social housing rent defended amid anger from opponents

The decision has sparked anger from opposition leaders, who claim the rise will have a detrimental effect on families already struggling to feed their children.

However, the deputy leader of the city’s Labour-led council said the increase being implemented for the 2024-25 financial year was in line with government recommendations.

Labour Councillor Steve Evans, cabinet member for city housing, told this week’s full council meeting that the government had made it quite clear to councils that they had a five-year formula plan.

He added that rents must be calculated using their formula of CPI (Consumer Price Index) plus one per cent.

He said: “Last September CPI was 6.7 per cent. So we are proposing a 7.7 per cent rise. On average, that’s around £6.90 per resident for a week.

"But please bear in mind that 77 per cent of tenants either receive full or partial support with their rent. People have a right to live in a good-quality, safe, warm property.

"They have a right to ensure that damp, mould and condensation is dealt with. People will be aware of Awaab’s Law, where sadly that child’s life was lost.

"Its cost us almost an extra million pounds to deal with, but it’s something that we must deal with, as I’m sure everyone will agree.

"Again, with fire safety, Grenfell brought about legislation change, and again that means extra costs. But there is no price for people’s safety and livelihoods."

Despite the increase, Councillor Evans insisted that rent prices in Wolverhampton would still be below the average in the West Midlands.

He continued: "They will still be below the national average and less than half of what it costs per week to rent in the private sector.

"I am sure people will appreciate that an average of £89 a week is a lot less than £230 to £260 in the private sector. It is difficult, and we have been directed by Government to deliver those minimum standards and safety elements.

“And, of course, they told us to build – and so we should. Also, we should upgrade our existing stock, as some properties are between 70 and 100-years-old.

"We can’t do any of those things – let alone carry out regular repairs or support people with antisocial behaviour problems – without a Housing Revenue Account (HRA) that is functioning.

“We don’t have enough money to do what we want right now, and anything less than 7.7 per cent will make it even more difficult.

"A one per cent lower increase would, without doubt, cost us £38 million over the cycle of the business plan. That would mean 200 less homes or 800 retrofit projects not happening. I do believe we should deliver all of those things and I am sad that the government expects councils to make our tenants pay for them.

"It’s their formula – you only have to look at nearby Dudley, regardless of political colours. They came out early and said ‘we will be following the government’s formula’ – CPI plus one per cent – as have virtually every other council in this country.

"It is not wrong to want to build homes, and it’s not wrong to want to provide good, safe, modern houses for our people, but I do think it’s a little bit wrong to put the burden on councils."

Councillor Evans added that the Government "should have done more to help".

He said: "Every time we ask the Government to invest and support our infrastructure and services, they say ‘what are you doing to raise money? We’ve given you the directive, so get on with it’.

"They had a five-year plan and thankfully this is the fifth year. I certainly hope that they’re not in place to deliver the next formula plan.

"I hope we have a change of Government that invests in infrastructure and services, and allows councils – regardless of political colours – to deliver good, modern, safe social housing."

Leader of the city’s Conservative Group, Councillor Wendy Thompson, said: “Councillor Evans said we don’t have enough money to do what we want.

"Well, you have only had £2.3 billion worth of government support to do the infrastructure. So, if £2.3 billion isn’t enough then I can tell you that there are an awful lot of councils that would have liked that amount of money.

“When it comes to housing, our group believes very much that everybody should be decently housed, and for that we don’t mind what sort of housing it is. When local authorities want to get involved with housing, they should have the right standards, and this means a good standard of repairs if they are required and that they are done efficiently.

"And yet, every councillor in this chamber will have had complaints about housing repairs. We have got 22,000 properties and in Wolverhampton we’ve got 70 per cent Band A properties out of all the housing. That isn’t – on a social and economic level – a good variation of property.

"We understand about the 7.7 per cent, but I have to tell you that that is only a recommendation from the Government. That doesn’t mean to say you have got to do it. And 7.7 per cent is still over inflation."

Councillor Thompson went on to say that an additional £7 a week was a lot of money for families in the city who may already be "struggling to feed their children".

She continued: "For that amount of money, let’s remember that it is only 25 per cent who are paying it. That is approximately 5,000 households. Also, people still find it very difficult to contact Wolverhampton homes."

Councillor Bhupinder Gakhal, cabinet member for visitor city, put his weight behind the proposed rents increase.

He said: "This is a difficult report, but an excellent report and I fully back this. As for government recommendation – we’re only doing what other councils across the country are doing. 7.7 per cent; let’s not forget what this is delivering for the people of Wolverhampton – much better homes.

"Many residents in this city are struggling, but this plan will deliver a better environment and safer. cleaner houses. Look at the transformation in Heath Town – that is there because of the HRA.

"There is also the improvement works being carried out on our high-rise estates. I fully endorse this."

Moving the report, which was seconded by Councillor Louise Miles, cabinet member for resources, Councillor Evans said: “I look forward to the opposition’s support in making all housing fit for purpose in 2024 and beyond.

"Here’s to another 100 years of social housing." The report was carried.