London will make half as much progress on waiting lists as rural areas based on current SAHP funding, says think tank

The government’s flagship £39bn social and affordable housing programme (SAHP) will make significantly less progress against waiting lists in London than in rural areas, according to a think tank.

New research from the Centre for Cities says current funding under the scheme will deliver new social homes equivalent to just 18% of the capital’s priority housing waiting list, compared with 46% in rural areas.

The think tank is urging the government to weight future funding towards cities and to give mayors greater power over funding.

In its report published today (Thursday), entitled ‘Rewiring council housebuilding’, Centre for Cities recommends increasing London’s share of the existing funding pot by around a third and suggests that the government align its fiscal rules with its European peers to enable greater investment in public corporations.

It also recommends giving councils the flexibility to use market-rate development to fund more council housebuilding, as well as liberalising minimum space requirements for single-person, one-bedroom flats and raising heigh limits on single-staircase buildings. 

“The government has rightly committed serious money to social and affordable housing and this is in an incredibly tight fiscal context,” said Ant Breach, director of policy and research at Centre for Cities.

“It now needs to make sure that money is targeted where housing need is greatest and where new homes can do most to support economic growth.

“Based on current plans, rural areas will build enough new social homes to make more than twice as much progress against their priority waiting lists as London. That doesn’t make sense when London has the most severe housing pressure in the country.

“London’s acute housing shortage is holding back economic growth. Historically, London has been the engine of growth for Britain. That is less true in recent years and housing is one of the capital’s biggest constraints.”