As so many are quick to link the palpable housing crisis to immigration, a comprehensive housing building programme could have conciliatory effects on the nation.

The vast majority of the British public agree that we are in the throes of a housing crisis, but on the face of it housing issues did not play an instrumental role in the decision to leave the European Union.

Housing was not among the 13 top issues cited by voters as reasons for supporting Brexit.

Those who voted Remain were significantly more likely to mention education, poverty and inequality, and the economy as their concerns. Those who voted Leave were significantly more likely to cite immigration. Neither group raised housing as a significant issue.

That being said, opinion research shows that many people perceive immigration as the main contributing factor to housing shortages.

In addition, a majority of the public appear to believe that migrants receive unfair access to social housing, despite there being no evidence to support such a view.

In truth, however, deciphering the true ‘cause’ of the Brexit vote is a fool’s errand, as is attempting to determine the precise role that housing issues played in it. People who voted Leave did so because of a multitude of issues, grievances and motivations What matters now is how their present concerns and worries for the future can be addressed and their hopes realised.

How can housing policy help address people’s concerns and fulfil their hopes for the future?

First, we must address the chronic shortage of genuinely affordable homes across the country. While immigration is seen by the public as a lead cause of the housing crisis, investing in new affordable and social housing generally comes out top in polls as the preferred solution. Research conducted earlier this year by the polling firm Kantar found that affordable housing is now considered one of the most important measures to improve public life in the UK.

It has long been recognised that housing supply has fallen short of demand for decades and it is also the case that we have never met housing demand without a significant contribution from the public sector.

A large-scale investment programme in affordable housing from central government, and freeing local government to build as well, could go a long way to addressing the housing concerns of Leave and Remain voters alike.

Second, just building more affordable homes won’t be enough; people need to feel they have a stake in public housebuilding programmes. There is a popular misconception that immigrants are receiving preferential treatment when applying for social housing. In reality, there is no evidence that this is the case: immigrants are far more likely to live in private rented accommodation. However, as long as many people don’t have access to social housing, perceptions of immigration contributing to the housing crisis may persist.

Rather than immigration, it has been the significant reduction in stock – a result of the Right to Buy and the failure to build – that has made access to social housing much more difficult for many people.

Reversing the decline in public housing stock through a substantial public building programme will help, but there is a case for reviewing allocation criteria to ensure that social housing is available to a wider demographic of people, more in line with its original purpose, rather than being an ambulance service for the most vulnerable alone.

Perceptions of who has access to social housing will only change when a wider group of people begins to benefit, but allocation policies should only be revised as part of a substantial public building programme. Changing allocation policies without a huge building programme will do nothing except disadvantage the most vulnerable.

Third, we must develop housing policy in concert with wider economic and social policy. Housing policy on its own can’t drive economic regeneration in areas that are seen to have been ‘left behind’ and which voted for Brexit. The most important factor in any revival is job creation, but ensuring that industrial policy is closely intertwined with policies to invest in affordable homes, transport and other infrastructure will be crucial to the success of any economic regeneration and rebalancing.

However, investment in affordable housing can be used to boost local economies, businesses and create jobs. Learning from the ‘community wealth building’ approach deployed in Preston, investment in affordable housing should be used to create jobs in a local area by guaranteeing a significant proportion of the investment will be directed towards local builders of small and medium-sized enterprises. Requirements to employ local apprentices and using procurement to benefit business in the local supply chain could also help increase the benefit of these policies and public support.

Fourth, we must recognise that the vote to leave the EU was an assertion of an increased desire for control. This means giving local communities the powers to decide their own local priorities, which in any case will help address the fact that housing markets vary significantly from area to area. At its most basic, this should involve the devolution of investment decisions and planning powers to local authorities.

But reforms should go further: tenants should be represented on boards of housing associations and on local councils to participate in decision-making about housing. In the private rented sector, where arguably tenants have the least say, tenants’ rights must be enhanced so they have far more control over their day-to-day living conditions. This should include longer, and possibly indefinite, tenancies (as have been introduced in Scotland), and support for tenants’ unions to give renters a real voice in the sector.

Housing issues may not be seen as a central cause of the vote to leave the EU, but housing policy can work to address many of the issues that fuelled the vote and help to inspire hope in a better future.

Luke Murphy is an associate director at IPPR and former political adviser to the Labour Party. He tweets at @LukeSMurphy. This piece is taken from Compass’ new report “The Causes and Cures of Brexit.” Read it here.

Comments are closed.