Local responses to central state restructuring of social housing provision in rural areas

Journal ¢~fRural Studies, Vol. 14, No. 2, pp. 167-184, 1998 © 1998 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved Printed in Great Britain 0743-0167/98 $19.00 + 0.00

Pergamon PII: S0743-0167(97)00055-7

Local Responses to Central State Restructuring of Social Housing Provision in Rural Areas Paul Milbourne Countryside and Community Research Unit, Cheltenham and Gloucester College of Higher Education, Swindon Road, Cheltenham GL50 4AZ, UK

This paper examines local impacts of recent central state restructuring of social housing provision in rural areas. Positioning such changes within a context of wider discussions on local government restructuring and regulation theory, attention is focused on some key local responses to social housing restructuring in two areas of rural Wales in the early 1990s. In this section of the paper consideration is given to the increasing residualization of the local social housing sector, changing systems of social housing allocation and management, and the localized mediation of central state restructuring of social housing through different housing agencies. ©1998 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved

Abstract - -

ferocity of this attack on the social housing sector by central government has led certain commentators (Murie, 1982; Saunders, 1984) to suggest that collective housing provision now needs to be viewed as representing merely a transitional phase between different forms of private housing provision, while others (for example, Spencer, 1995; Stoker and Mossberger, 1995) have located social housing decine within a wider context of regulation theory and emerging post-Fordist systems of welfare provision in 1990s Britain.

Introduction

Local Authority activity in housing introduced a new element into the landscape of the village which is now taken for granted. (Rogers, 1976, p. 94) While few researchers of British rural housing would disagree that post-war housing legislation up to the late 1970s was characterized by state intervention in the housing markets of all but a few rural areas, it is clear that, over 20 years after this statement was made, council housing may no longer represent a lasting aspect of the rural housing scene. Indeed, within four years of Rogers' chapter appearing in an edited volume on rural planning problems, the first major piece of housing legislation introduced by the recently elected Conservative Government - - the 1980 Housing Act - - was receiving Royal Assent. This Act signalled the start of a widespread assault on the council rental sector of the housing market, which, to date, has included a large-scale sell-off of local authority (and more recently housing association) properties to tenants, dramatic cuts in council housebuilding programmes, transfers of council stock to other social landlords, and a generally more restricted role for the local authority as an enabler rather than provider of social housing. Indeed, the

While central state restructuring of social housing provision has been the subject of a large number of studies over recent years (Balchin, 1995; Cole and Furbey, 1994; Doling, 1993; Power, 1993), relatively few have been grounded at the local level, and fewer still have considered local outcomes in rural spaces. However, it can be suggested that these wider processes of restructuring have impacted differently on particular rural spaces, reflecting historical patterns of social rental provision, local state political structures and housing policies, the nature of local (private) housing markets, the mix of agencies able to provide new forms of social housing, and so on. This paper focuses on these local outcomes of central state social housing restructuring in areas of rural Britain, and in 167

168

Paul Milbourne

particular on the Housing Acts introduced by the Thatcher governments over the 1980s. It begins by providing a brief historical overview of changing social rental housing provision in rural Britain, and locating such changes within a wider context of local government restructuring, political economy and regulation theory. Local outcomes of social housing restructuring are then examined in the second part of the paper by drawing on research conducted in two districts of rural Wales in the early 1990s. Here attention is focused on changing local levels and geographies of social housing provision, the residualization of the council housing sector, restructuring of social housing management and allocation systems, and the mediation of central restructuring of social housing through key local agencies. Changing social housing provision in rural areas 1919-1979: 60years of state intervention

The historical development of social housing in rural areas can be seen as closely linked to general patterns of housing change initiated, in the main, by central government legislation. Although rural local authorities possessed powers under the 1890 Housing Act to provide rental properties, the tenure situation in rural Britain at the end of World War I remained overwhelmingly dominated by the private rental sector (Rogers, 1976). Such domination though, began to change during the inter-war period, as the introduction of several pieces of housing legislation initiated a large-scale intervention by the local state into most rural housing markets. Rogers (1976), for example, has reported that some 164,000 properties were constructed by local authorities in rural England between 1919 and 1943 - - representing one-fifth of all new properties built - - which raised the social rental sector's share of these housing markets to around 10% of all provision by the end of this period. While the bulk of this inter-war housing legislation was concerned to address general housing issues and problems, associated mainly with inadequate housing conditions, attention was also directed specifically towards problems of poor housing conditions and tied accommodation in rural areas. This limited concern for sets of rural problems, however, became largely subsumed within wider programmes of urban reconstruction introduced by the 1945-1951 Labour administration (Rogers, 1976), although Phillips and Williams (1984) have suggested that additional subsidies continued to be paid on new public house building schemes in rural areas. Indeed, while the urban-focused nature of post-war central state housing policies cannot be

denied, council provision did become an established part of housing markets in almost all urban and rural areas in the immediate post-war period. Such state intervention continued through the 'consensus years' of the 1960s and 1970s, with macro-economic policies associated with successive Conservative and Labour administrations concerned with increasing levels of owner-occupied and public sector housing as central to their housing policies.* By the late 1970s, though, a growing number of housing researchers working in rural areas began to highlight problems associated with social housing provision in particular parts of the British countryside. Shucksmith (1981), for example, reported that, even with such widespread state intervention, levels of public housing construction in many rural districts had tended to remain well below the national average over the post-war period (see also Clark, 1982; Dunn et al., 1981), as a result of central government policies - - with housing funding favouring those higher density construction schemes characteristic of urban areas, and the 1947 Town and Country Planning Act restricting the vast majority of both public and private housing developments to a small number of key settlements in rural areas. Newby (1979), though, has suggested that it has been the nature of local political structures that has led to these lower rates of social housing provision in rural Britain, with the domination of conservative councillors resulting in a lack of political will to raise taxes for council housebuilding programmes,* while links with landowning and agriculture amongst certain councillors meant that they were also reluctant to weaken their power bases within local housing markets as landlords of tied accommodation. This said, Dickens et al. (1985) have highlighted how, in rural areas such as Norfolk, earlier this century, the establishment of social housing was actually initiated by landowners who were concerned that a shortage of suitable rental accommodation in the county would be detrimental for agricultural production. However, both the *Balchin (1995) has reported that rates of owner-occupation expanded from 29-55% between 1953 and 1979, and local authority provision from 25-32% over the same period. However, it should be noted that the emphasis switched to providing an increased provision of privately owned properties throughout this period, and this was particularly the case with Conservative government policies. tHoggart (1993), though, has highlighted how the differential between urban and rural authorities in terms of public sector housing constructions has reduced considerably since the late 1980s, since council house building programmes have been reduced dramatically in all geographical areas in the post-1979 period, thus removing the influence of local politics on levels of council housebuiiding.

Social Housing Provision in Rural Areas Newby and Dickens et al. studies have pointed to the ways in which central state policies have become mediated through different local agencies, resulting in very different housing outcomes in different rural areas. Differential (urban-rural) local outcomes of central government policy have also been highlighted by Phillips and Williams (1982a,b) in relation to the distribution of council housing in many rural areas. Drawing on a study of council housing in rural Devon undertaken in the 1970s, they have suggested that a number of local factors can influence the allocation of such accommodation in rural areas. Firstly, the spatial distribution of social housing in many rural areas is characterized by concentrations of provision in a small number of larger settlements which has meant that opportunities to enter the sector are more restricted in village locations. Furthermore, Phillips and Williams have suggested that the composition of local political structures plays an important part not only in determining the nature and scale of council house provision, but also in influencing policies towards homelessness and particularly definitions of intentional homelessness. A third local specificity has concerned the allocation of local authority housing in those rural areas which are characterized by large numbers of agricultural workers who are treated preferentially outside of standard systems of allocation.

The post-1979 period: the forced retreat of local state housing intervention By the early 1980s, new housing research agendas were beginning to emerge, linked mainly to the impacts of central state restructuring of social housing provision. Following the election of a Conservative administration in 1979, committed to policies aimed at increasing levels of competition, deregulation and privatization, and reducing levels of funding of the welfare state, social housing witnessed an increasingly widespread assault on its previously assumed integral position within housing programmes. New housing agendas were dominated by the goal of increased property ownership, with the key tenets of the early Thatcherite housing legislation characterized by: ...the reduction of council stock, the expansion of owner-occupation, the decrease in capital spending by, and housing subsidies to, local authorities, and the maintenance of mortgage tax relief. (Cole and Furbey, 1994, p. 197) The first piece of housing legislation introduced by the 1979-1983 Thatcher Government - - the t980

169

Housing Act - - involved the large-scale sell-off of council homes to tenants at substantially reduced prices. By 1987, in excess of one million local authority properties had been sold in Britain, a figure which represented more than one-sixth of the 1980 stock (Cole and Furbey, 1994). In addition to tenants being given the right to buy their homes at a generous discount, central government also began to cut back on the financial resources and powers which enabled local authorities to intervene within housing markets. Authorities were prohibited from spending capital receipts accrued from sales on the construction of new social housing, and their housing role was reduced by the Housing Act (1988) from that of provider to one of enabler of social housing. Responsibility for providing new social housing was placed solely with housing associations, with increased levels of government funding provided through the Housing Corporation,* although the overall level of central funding for social housing was reduced substantially. In numerical terms, restructuring of the social housing sector resulted in an absolute reduction in public expenditure on housing of some 60% in real terms between 1979 and 1994, and a relative fall from 7-2% in housing's share of the public expenditure budget over this same period (Balchin, 1995). While such central state restructuring has impacted on social housing provision in all parts of Britain, two particular sets of local outcomes have been highlighted in rural areas - - the impacts of Rightto-Buy sales in villages in 'popular' areas of the countryside; and the limited ability of smaller housing associations active in many rural areas to provide social housing as set out in the 1988 Housing Act. During the run up to the 1980 Housing Act receiving Royal Assent, concern was expressed by several important rural organizations that Rightto-Buy sales could remove the entire council housing stock from many smaller villages where stock levels were relatively low and alternative housing opportunities more difficult. An amendment to the Act was subsequently introduced t which allowed rural authorities to restrict sales in certain designated (tourist) parts of the countryside by awarding them powers to re-purchase ex-council

*Tai Cymru provides funding to Welsh associations and housing associations in Scotland receive finance from Scottish Homes. *While the politics behind the introduction of this amendment have not been examined by researchers, this particular example of lobbying may provide an illustration of the power held by a small number of influential rural agencies in Britain.

170

Paul Milbourne

properties. However, relatively few rural authorities were granted such powers of re-purchase, and those that were received no additional central funding. As such, most rural authorities have been powerless to prevent the loss of council housing stock in villages (and towns) within their areas, and a study of early local authority sales in rural Oxfordshire (Beazley et al., 1980) has pointed to (better quality) council houses being purchased by (more affluent) tenants at faster rates in smaller villages than towns. Indeed, historical patterns of provision, in combination with such uneven spatial impacts of sales in the early 1980s led Dunn et al. (1981) to predict an increasing residualization of the rural council sector in many villages and a growing gulf between local authority provision in rural and urban areas. By the early 1990s, research findings confirmed these predictions, with the Department of the Environment (1993) reporting that the average level of council provision in rural authorities was around half that recorded in urban areas (10.7% compared to 21.8%), while Cloke et aL (1994a,b) have highlighted a similar level of local authority provision - - 11% - - in studies of 16 areas of the English and Welsh countryside. It is also far from clear how effective housing associations have been in providing social housing in rural areas. With the historical urban roots of the association sector, and economies of scale associated with new schemes, larger housing associations have tended to be restricted to urban, and particularly, metropolitan areas in Britain. Hoggart (1993), for example, has reported that housing association new constructions in rural districts have reamined at around half the level recorded in metropolitan areas over the 1980s. Such low levels of new association provision in rural areas have been recognized recently by the Housing Corporation which has funded 9100 association properties specifically in areas of rural England between 1990 and 1995 (Balchin, 1994), and by Tai Cymru, which has focused one-quarter of its housing programme and funded around 6000 properties in rural Wales since 1989 (Welsh Office, 1995). While there have been relatively few studies conducted since the mid-1980s which have examined the activities of housing associations in areas of the British countryside, earlier studies have pointed to the flexible (although partial) role performed by such associations in meeting housing needs in the countryside (see, for example, Cloke and Edwards, 1985) and providing support for rural economies (Young, 1987). However, Richmond (1984) has suggested that even those associations operating in rural areas have tended to restrict their activities to larger settlements and the needs of particular

groups, and have also allocated their properties on a somewhat ad hoc basis.

Theorizing social housing restructuring in rural areas: political ideology, changing local governance and regulation theory The processes of restructuring of the social housing sector outlined thus far within this paper have been subject to considerable discussion over recent years concerning the factors underpinning such changes and the position of social housing within wider systems of welfare provision and political economy. While clearly such discussion has been focused on national and, indeed, international processes of restructuring, it can be suggested that the issues raised have important implications for the study of social housing restructuring in areas of rural Britain. A number of studies have examined (historical) processes of social housing provision in Britain from a political economy perspective (see, for example, Dickens et al., 1985), although it has been the staged withdrawal of the state from the provision of social housing (and other welfare services) that has sparked considerable debate over recent years. In the early 1980s, Murie (1982) and Saunders (1984) suggested that public housing in Britain needed to be viewed as a transitional phase of provision between different forms of private housing. Each proposed a three-fold periodization of housing in the twentieth century, with the early years dominated by the private market and particularly the private landlord, and state intervention limited to the regulation of the market. The failure of the private market to provide adequate and affordable accommodation for workers, though, in combination with pressure from working-class organizations, produced a socialized mode of consumption in which the state provided essential elements of consumption, such as housing: The development of council housing...redistributed housing resources in the interests of the working class and has served the interests of capital and the 'social order' by minimising the effects of the restructuring of the private market. (Murie, 1982, p. 35) By the 1980s, Saunders (1984) has argued that in the process of overcoming contradictions between low wages and adequate housing provision amongst the workforce, socialized housing generated a further contradiction for the central state: that between the socialised costs of welfare provision and the availability of government revenues. It is this contradiction which became increasingly manifest through the 1970s in the form of 'fiscal crisis', and the

Social Housing Provision in Rural Areas response has been a marked shift in recent years towards a new third phase in the form of a privatized mode of consumption. (p. 210) While most housing commentators would concur with such a three-fold periodization of British local state housing, more recent debates concerning state intervention in, and withdrawal from, housing markets have focused on the political ideologies associated with successive Conservative governments in the 1980s and early 1990s. Spencer (1995), for example, has suggested that the recent restructuring of social housing provision needs to be understood within a wider context of central state ideologies which have favoured competition, markets and consumer choice; increased control of the local state by central government; and the private provision of welfare services. Indeed, Cole and Furbey (1994) have argued that central government has tended to use the social housing sector as a testing ground for its wider political project of dismantling the welfare state: In this process, the vulnerability of council housing as an insecure foundation of the welfare state -- in terms of its origins, limited coverage, cost and exposure to market processes -- was clearly demonstrated ...housing bore the brunt of the Conservative government attack on the welfare state during the 1980s; and council housing conveniently served as a symbol of the negative features of the public sector -- inefficient, bureaucratic, remote, mismanaged and wasteful. It was a good place to begin a long-term process of structural transformation without provoking intense public resistance. (p. 7) Other authors have located the restructuring of social housing (and other welfare) provision outside of central government policies and within the wider sphere of national and international politicaleconomy. Hoggett (1987), for example, has viewed the Keynesian welfare state as a form of social regulation during a period of Fordist mass production and consumption from the 1930s to the early 1970s, with Cochrane (1994) suggesting that it was 'inflexibly geared towards the output of a few standardized products with economies of scale constantly emphasized' (p. 83). Both Hoggett (1987) and Stock and Mossberger (1995) have proposed that as Fordist modes of production and consumption have become replaced by those labelled as post (or neo-)Fordist, structures of local government have inevitably reflected these changes - - they have become decentralized, more responsive, flexible and informal, with 'learner and flatter' managerial structures providing a more differentiated product. Furthermore, a large number of local government responsibilities have been transferred to a range of private sector and quasi local government organizations which have been viewed by central government

171

as operating more efficiently in economic terms. In the context of social housing provision, Kennedy (1991) has suggested that housing associations provide a good example of such a public-private transfer. Central control of association funding through the Housing Corporation, Tai Cymru and Scottish Homes has meant that central government has been able to influence their activities. Indeed, the reduced level of central state funding, together with mixed public-private funding packages, have acted to produce a social housing market, in which many associations have come to resemble small businesses competing against each other for an ever decreasing level of central funds, with a series of recent mergers producing a small number of 'super' associations able to wield considerable power within the social housing sector. From this perspective then, social housing represents a commercial product, regulated by a quasi-governmental agency, which is manufactured and sold in different packages by different associations. Finally, in this section on the theorization of social housing restructuring, the changing role of the local state in providing key aspects of welfare has been viewed by certain commentators as less concerned with the imposition of restructuring by the central state and more with 'the product of social struggle in an unstable society' (Stoker and Mossberger, 1995, p. 211, my emphasis). Such a regulationist approach has considered the ways in which central state restructuring has resulted from, and been mediated through and contested by, the actions of key agencies at the local level. Indeed, Stoker and Mossberger (1995) have referred to the 'vertical' imposition of central state restructuring of local governance resulting in complex 'horizontal' processes which reflect particular circumstances in different localities. An example of these 'vertical' and 'horizontal' interactions has been provided by Dickens et aL (1985) who have pointed to the ways in which varying local political-economic processes resulted in different levels of social housing provision in different localities in early twentieth century Britain, while the political influence of key rural organizations - - such as those that lobbied ministers during debates on the 1980 Housing Bill - - might be seen as a further instance of such interactions. In the second part of the paper these interactions between 'vertical' and 'horizontal' processes of central state restructuring of social housing provision are investigated within the context of two areas of rural Wales in the 1980s and early 1990s. While providing more recent information on the changing level and nature of social housing provision in the countryside, this section of the paper positions such changes within a wider theoretical context of

172

Paul Milbourne

changing structures of local governance and regulation theory. As such, consideration is given to the ways in which wider processes of restructuring have been mediated through, and occasionally contested by, key local agencies. The remaining parts of the paper therefore explore the following four issues within the two study areas: • changing levels and local geographies of social housing provision; • the localized residualization of social housing; • local state responses to central state restructuring of social housing provision; • changing systems of management and allocation of social rented accommodation.

Local responses to social housing restructuring in rural Wales

The research on which this second part of the paper forms part of a wider study of housing change and conflict in areas of rural Wales in the 1990s (see Milbourne, 1997). In the context of this paper, a key part of the research involved an examination of the changing provision, management and allocation of social housing in these two areas of the Welsh countryside, based on three clear stages of enquiry: • the collection and analysis of 'official' documentation and statistics on the changing levels and local geographies of social housing provision; • semi-structured interviews with housing managers in local authorities and housing associations - which explored managers' perceptions of changes, practices of housing allocation, and problems being encountered in providing social housing; • a survey of 83 current social housing tenants and ex-tenants who had purchased their property under the Right-to-Buy scheme - - which examined the changing characteristics of households and properties remaining within the social sector. Before proceeding to discuss key findings from this research, though, it is useful to provide some brief background information on the two case-study areas included within the research. Within the wider research project mentioned previously, the two study areas of Aberystwyth and Newtown were selected as being indicative of two high growth areas - - in terms of both employment and population totals - located in contrasting parts of rural Wales. The Aberystwyth study area is situated in Ceredigion in the western part of mid-Wales (Fig. 1). The key providers of social housing in the area, at the time of fieldwork, were Ceredigion District

Council,* which managed 1750 properties and four small-scale housing associations, which together controlled 92 units of social accommodation. Settlement structure and provision of social housing is dominated by the university town of Aberystwyth - which represents the main centre of population, employment and social housing provision. The key villages within the study area are located within commuting distance of Aberystwyth, with other smaller settlements lying in the more eastern parts of the area (Fig. 2). The Newtown study area is situated in the eastern part of the mid-Wales, within Powys* (Fig. 1). In addition to social housing being provided by Montgomeryshire District Council and two smallscale housing associations, the Development Board for Rural Wales (DBRW) has been a key player in constructing low-cost accommodation for sale and rent in the area, particularly in Newtown. Settlement structure and social housing provision is dominated by the town of Newtown - - the largest settlement, located in the eastern part of the study area - which has expanded rapidly in terms of housing provision (private and social), population and employment over recent years. Another key settlement and concentration of social housing is the smaller market town of Llanidloes, situated in the west of the area, while smaller villages are located mainly in western and northern parts (Fig. 2).

Changing local levels of social housing provision The central government assault on the social housing sector over the 1980s and early 1990s has resulted in dramatic reductions in council housing provision in each local area, with stock levels falling by slightly less than one-quarter in the Aberystwyth area and by around one-fifth in the Newtown study area between 1981 and 1991 (Tables 1 and 2). By 1991, local authority housing accounted for only 12% of all dwellings in the former area, and 22% in the Newtown study area) While housing associations in each area have received increased levels of funding from Tai Cymru over recent years, enabling impressive rises in stock holdings (the number of association dwellings in the Aberystwyth area *Following local government reorganization in April 1995~ Ceredigion District Council became a unitary authority. tPrior to April 1995, Montgomeryshire District Council had jurisdiction over the Newtown study area. *This higher level of public sector rental properties in the Newtown area relates to the large number of rental properties provided by the DBRW, although, by the early 1990s, its housebuilding functions had been restricted and tenants had been given the right to purchase their properties.

Social Housing Provision in Rural Areas doubled and stock levels quadrupled in the Newtown study area over the 1980s), their impact on these local housing markets has been minimal - making up only 1.6% of all dwellings in the Aberystwyth study area, and 2.2% of housing in the Newtown area. Indeed, in overall terms, the number of units of social rental accommodation declined by 17.9% in the Aberystwyth area and by 14.6% in the Newtown study area between 1981 and 1991. Furthermore, notwithstanding the rising level of association stock, the social rental sector in these areas remains dominated by the local authority,

173

which, in 1991, accounted for seven and ten times the levels of association stock in the Aberystwyth and Newtown areas respectively. With this decline in social housing, it is clear that these local housing markets have become increasingly dominated by the private sector over recent years - - private housing accounted for almost 90% of total dwellings in the Aberystwyth market, and slightly more than three-quarters of all properties in the Newtown area in 1991. The vast majority of this private sector growth has involved owner-occupied

" . iiiiiiiiiiiiiiii i.iiii~ii'.i.iii,iii:i.:iiii.:.iii~i~ii~iiiiiiiiiii(.(~i~i g

" ' ". " .

.'i"

. ".' / " .

.

." " .

. ' . ' ".' "

, . ". ' " ."

. ". . ' . " "

,

" . ' • " , . ."/ ' "

•

." ' , " .' " . ' ." /

~ ...... N e w t o w n ~

' " .' " . . . '. " . " . . . " . ' ."

i'i--ii'i'i'i'"i i'"i-2-1'1i-"i"" i'i'i~'i'"i'i'"i'i'i'i'~'"i'i'i'~&'" i i ' i i:-1i-:: i-i'i:-:-ii:-i-2 ii i i'i+i'i ~ i'i'i i & i i ' i ' ; + i ' ; i i "

-~i:::t

i!!!!!!ii!.".

:iiiiiiiii.~iiiiiii:: .... Aberyst'wyttl i study area :!~

•

. i 2 21.1212112'ii/i121.i12111'12.1....~i'~ .

o

.

•

-"

lo

"-.'.-.-

2o ~o Mdes

•

•

3o ~o

.

.d

lf.

4o

i~i:i~!:i:i:i;i:i:i:i:i:i~!:!:i~i:!:i:i:i:!:!~i:i:i::+:.. ~o ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :;: ::!: :: ;:~.. "

""

" " " ' " " "

" " " " "

' " ' " " ' "

. . . . . . . . . .

' "

. . . .

"-::i:i:i:!:i:!;i:i::;.~.-.-../ .!:!:!:!::

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

:~;:::~:i:i:~:::::~;;:~:::::~;:::~:~:!:i:!~!:~:!:!:i:!:::~::~i~i:::~:~!:i:~:~;:::::::i:::::~:!

F i g u r e 1. T h e l o c a t i o n o f t h e A b e r y s t w y t h a n d N e w t o w n s t u d y a r e a s .

~,

174

Paul Milbourne

housing - - which increased its stock holding by in excess of 50% and one-third in the Newtown and Aberystwyth study areas respectively over the 1980s - - although a growth in certain parts of the private rental sector is also evident. While the two local authorities have continued to provide a small amount of social rental housing in the early 1990s (approximately 7% of total new

builds), their position as the main providers of new social rental accommodation in the local area has been overtaken by housing associations over recent years (Table 3). Indeed, whereas associations were responsible for only 29% and 35% of new social housing completions in the Aberystwyth and Newtown areas respectively in 1985-1986, their share of social housing new builds had risen to 65 and 58% respectively by 1990-1991. However, while

Ceulammaesmawr ¢

Aberystwythstudyarea Aberystwyth/~

Melindwr & Trefeurig

Llanfarian Ystwyth

Llanrhystud Lledmd Llansantffraid

NewtownstudyareC.~.

Figure 2. The distribution of wards in the Aberystwyth and Newtown study areas.

175

Social Housing Provision in Rural Areas Table 1. Changing patterns of household tenure in the Aberystwyth study area, 1981-1991 Year 1981

1991

Tenure

No.

%

No.

%

Owner-occupied Local authority/new town rented Housing association rented Private rented - - furnished Private rented - - unfurnished Private rented - - with job All properties

6095 1804 92 629 855 287 9762

62.4 18.5 0.9 6.4 8.8 2.9 100.0

8203 1375 191 1084 612 167 11,632

70.5 11.8 1.6 9.3 5.3 1.4 100.0

%Change 1981-1991 2108 -429 99 455 -243 - 120 1870

34.6 -24.5 107.6 72.3 -26.7 -41.8 19.3

Source: Censuses of Population, 1981, 1991. this reduced level of recent local authority provision in each area was slightly above average levels for Wales as a whole, local housing associations were providing only about half the national level of new social housing provision (Table 3).

The uneven impacts of social housing restructuring The overall contraction in, and restructuring of, social rental housing provision, have not impacted evenly on localities in each study area. Indeed, while previous programmes of council housebuilding were focused mainly on the main settlements in each area, recent trends of council house sales and housing association programmes have acted to accentuate this gulf in social housing provision between smaller villages and main towns in each area. Council house sales under the Right-to-Buy provisions of the 1980 Housing Act accelerated in the early-to-mid 1980s before settling down at a reduced level towards the end of the 1980s and into the 1990s. Between 1980 and 1990, Ceredigion District

Council had sold slightly more than one-quarter of its housing to tenants in the Aberystwyth area and almost one-third of the Montgomeryshire council house stock had been purchased by tenants in the Newtown study area over this same period (Table 4). Levels of sales, though, have witnessed considerable variation within each area - - ranging from no houses sold in one village to the sale of the entire council stock in another.* Notwithstanding such variations, the general pattern of council house sales would appear to confirm findings from other studies (Beazley et aL, 1980), with the highest proportion of sales taking place in the smaller village locations. Table 4, for example, highlights that in each study area local authority sales were greatest (in proportional terms) in those localities that contained under 50 council houses in 1980. Given the limited local authority new build activity over the 1980s and early 1990s, it is hardly surprising that the overall level, and localized patterns, of decline of the public sector stock have mirrored *In certain communities, rates of sales have been effected by the location of units of elderly sheltered accommodation, which have been excluded from Right-to-Buy sales.

Table 2. Changing patterns of household tenure in the Newtown study area, 1981-1991 Year 1981

1991

Tenure

No.

%

No.

%

Owner-occupied Local authority/new town rented Housing association rented Private rented - - furnished Private rented - - unfurnished Private rented - - with job All properties

4160 2823 58 108 844 308 8301

50.1 34.0 0.7 1.3 10.2 3.7 100.0

6430 2238 222 197 679 295 10,061

63.9 22.2 2.2 2.0 6.7 2.9 100.0

Source: Censuses of Population, 1981, 1991.

% Change 1981-1991 2270 - 585 164 89 - 165 - 13 1760

54.6 - 20.7 282.8 82.4 - 19.5 4.2 21.2

176

Paul Milbourne

Table3. New property constructions in Ceredigion and Montgomeryshire, 1990-1991 Montgomeryshire Wales (%) (%)

Ceredigion (%) Private companies Housing associations Local authorities

80.4 12.7 6.9

83.9 9.3 6.7

74.8 20.1 5.1

Source: Welsh Housing Statistics, 1991, 1992.

those of sales. Between 1981 and 1991, local authority stock decline by 20.7% in the Newtown area and by 23.8% in the Aberystwyth study area, with levels of stock reductions generally greater, in proportional terms, in the smaller rural communities - - over 40% losses in stock were recorded in the wards of Llanfarian and Melindwr and Trefeurig in the Aberystwyth study area (Table 5) and the outlying Newtown area wards of Kerry, Llangurig, Llandinam, Dolforwyn and Berriew (Table 6). As such, the residual local authority housing stock in each area has become increasingly concentrated in the main settlements, with the town of Aberystwyth

Table 4. Council house sales in the Aberystwyth and Newtown study areas, 1980-1990 Aberystwyth area

Number of council properties in 1980 in settlements containing...

No. of settlements

% Sold

No. of settlements

% Sold

10 6 8 1 25

31.1 38.1 22.8 25.5 26.1

10 3 6 2 21

45.4 42.6 38.7 27.0 31.5

< 20 properties 20-50 properties 51-150 properties > 150 properties Total sales Source: Ceredigion correspondence).

Newtown area

District Council

and

Montgomeryshire District Council housing departments (personal

Table 5. The distribution of social housing in the Aberystwyth study area, 1991 Local authority properties

Housing association properties 1991

1991

% of all housing Change in assoc, housing % of provision assoc. all housing in study provision No. in ward area 1981-1991 Aberystwyth 138 Borth 4 Ceulanamaesmawr 3 Faenor 23 Llanbadarn Fawr 7 Llanfarian 0 Llanrhystud 2 Llansantffraid 2 Lledrod 0 Melindwr & Trefeurig 3 Tirymynach 7 Ystwyth 2

3.6 0.5 0.4 3.3 1.3 0.0 0.4 0.2 0.0 0.2 1.2 0.3

72.3 2.1 1.6 12.0 3.7 0.0

63 1 1 21 6 -2

1.0 1.0

1 1

0.0 1.6 3.7 1.0

All wards

1.6

100.0

191

Source: Censuses of Population, 1981, 1991.

Social rental properties

% of all local authority % of provision all housing in study No. in ward area

Change in in local authority provision 1981-1991

Change in social rental provision 1981-1991

No.

No.

%

%

-3 1 7 2

759 35 66 60 55 19 19 61 117 62 76 46

19.5 4.4 9.3 8.7 10.1 4.2 3.9 7.2 9.1 4.9 12.8 7.0

55.2 2.5 4.8 4.4 4.0 1.4 1.4 4.4 8.5 4.5 5.5 3.3

-213 -16 -4 -16 -17 -33 0 -9 -28 -45 -45 -3

-21.9 - 1 5 0 -13.4 -31.4 - 1 5 -27.8 -5.7 -3 -4.2 -21.1 5 6.4 -23.6 -11 -15.1 -63.5 - 3 5 -64.8 0.0 1 5.0 -13.0 - 8 -11.3 -30.4 - 3 1 -z20.9 -42.1 - 4 4 -40.4 -37.2 - 3 8 -31.4 -6.1 - 1 -2.0

99

1375

11.8

100.0

-429

-23.8 - 3 3 0

-17.4

177

Social Housing Provision in Rural Areas Table 6. The distribution of social housing in the Newtown study area, 1991

Local authority properties

Housing association properties 1991

1991 % of all housing assoc, provision in study area

Change in housing assoc. provision 1981-1991

No.

% of all housing in ward

Social rental properties % of all local authority provision in study area

No.

% of all housing in ward

Berriew Caersws Carno Churchstoke Dolforwyn Kerry Llandinam Llangurig Llanidloes Newtown Trefeglwys

1 0 4 7 0 3 1 0 29 175 2

0.2 0.0 0.6 1.4 0.0 0.5 0.3 0.0 2.5 4.2 0.4

0.5 0.0 1.8 3.2 0.0 1.4 0.5 0.0 13.1 78.8 0.9

0 0 - 1 5 - 1 2 1 0 29 127 2

47 107 65 60 39 49 8 5 275 1574 9

9.4 18.6 9.4 11.8 4.7 7.7 2.5 1.9 24.0 37.4 1.8

2.1 4.8 2.9 2.7 1.7 2.2 0.4 0.2 12.3 70.3 0.4

All wards

222

2.2

100.0

164

2238

22.2

100.0

Change in in local authority provision 1981-1991 No.

Change in social rental provision 1981-1991

%

No.

%

-33 -42 -32 -20 -43 -41 -14 -14 -119 -222 -5

-41.3 -28.2 -33.0 -25.0 -52.4 -83.7 -63.6 -73.7 -30.2 - 12.4 -35.7

-33 -42 -33 -15 -44 -39 -13 -14 -90 -95 -3

-40.7 -28.2 -8.2 -18.3 -53.0 -42.9 -59.1 -73.7 -22.8 -5.2 -21.4

-545

-20.7

-421

-14.6

Source: Censuses of Population, 1981, 1991.

accounting for 55.2% of all local authority housing in the Aberystwyth study area in 1991, while 82.6% of council provision in the Newtown area was situated in Newtown and Llanidloes (Tables 5 and 6). This increasing 'urbanization' of local authority housing stock is also evident within the housing association sector. Association building and acquisition activities in each area over the 1980s and early 1990s have been focused predominantly on the three main settlements, with 63.6% of the 99 new units provided in the Aberystwyth area located in Aberystwyth, and 95.1% of the 164 additional Newtown area units provided in the towns of Newtown and Llanidloes (Tables 5 and 6). However, it should be stressed that even in these settlements the housing association sector accounted for less than 5% of all properties. Indeed, in the remaining non-urban wards of each area the impact of association activity has remained minimal - - with five wards recording no association provision in 1991, while in a further l l wards association provision accounted for less than 1% of all housing (Tables 4 and 5). Bringing together these two components of social housing change, it is clear that the dramatic reduction in local authority building programmes, Rightto-Buy sales and the increased provision of housing association properties have not only resulted in an cwerali reduction in social rental housing in all bar two wards, but have also acted to 'urbanize' social

provision in each study area, with the final two columns of Tables 4 and 5 highlighting greater rates of social housing decline in smaller communities.

The residualization of the social housing sector." council house sales and rent increases In an attempt to explore the decline of social housing stock in greater depth, a survey was conducted of 29 ex-tenants who had purchased their properties under the Right-to-Buy scheme and 54 tenants presently residing in the social housing sector.* As such, the survey allows a comparison to be made between some key characteristics of current and ex-tenants and their respective properties in the two study areas. Key findings from the survey would appear to indicate a clear residualization of the social housing stock in each area, not just in terms of the dwindling size of this stock, but also in terms of the types of tenants and accommodation remaining within the social housing sector. As might be expected, it has been those households most able to purchase that have bought their properties, with remaining tenant households characterized by lower levels of income, *This survey of social housing forms part of a wider survey of 400 households resident in the two study areas (see Milbourne, 1997).

178

Paul Milbourne

Table 7. Income, employment and age characteristics of ex- and current social rental tenants in the Aberystwyth and Newtown study areas Ex-tenant

Table 8. Property characteristics of ex- and current social rental tenants in the Aberystwyth and Newtown study areas

Current tenant

Annual incomes (full-time male earners)* < £5000 17.6 £5000-7499 23.5 £7500-9999 5.9 ~>£10,000 52.9

25.0 16.7 41.7 16.6

Socio-economic groups (all workers) professional intermediate non-manual skilled manual semi-skilled manual unskilled manual

13.5 43.2 21.6 10.8 10.8

10.5 36.8 15.8 26.3 10.5

Age(s) of head(s) of household 15-24 years 25-44 years 45-59 years ~>60 years

6.0 32.0 38.0 24.0

11.8 29.4 24.7 34.1

*Note: the number of female full-time workers was too small to be included in this table. Source: author's survey.

Ex-tenant

Current tenant

Property location main town village

17.2 82.8

57.4 42.6

Property size one bedroom two bedrooms three bedrooms four bedrooms

0.0 7.1 89.2 3.6

3.7 37.0 53.7 5.6

Property type detached house semi-detached house terraced house bungalow flat

10.7 67.9 10.7 7.1 3.7

7.4 37.0 33.3 18.5 3.6

Property age pre-1990 1900-1945 1946-1960 1961-1970 1971-1980 1981-present

0.0 7.4 70.4 11.1 11.1 0.0

1.9 9.3 31.5 48.1 3.7 5.6

Source: author's survey. higher proportions of workers in manual occupations and higher percentages of elderly persons than purchasing households (Table 7). Furthermore, Right-to-Buy sales have been concentrated amongst larger, better quality properties located in smaller villages, with over two-thirds of all sales involving three- or four-bedroom semi-detached houses built in the immediate post-war period and situated on smaller estates in villages (Table 8).* The fact that the residual social housing sector is becoming increasingly characterized by low-income and elderly households may well indicate that sales will never again reach those levels recorded in the mid-1980s. Indeed, the survey revealed that around 70% of current social tenants do not want to purchase their properties in the near future, with the main reasons behind this disinclination to buy being a perception that the household would not be able to afford the likely purchase price of, or obtain a mortgage on, the property, and a feeling that the household was 'too old' to change its housing circumstances.

*A similar pattern of sales emerges from an analysis of sales of DBRW properties to tenants which were initiated in the early 1990s, with three-bedroom houses making up 60% of the Board's stock in 1990 but 81% of sales between 1990 and 1991, while fiats and maisonettes accounted for only 2% of sales but 15% of all DBRW housing.

A further aspect of the residualization of social housing in each area has concerned the increasing costs associated with renting such accommodation, which has tended to create difficulties for those tenants who are ineligible to receive housing benefit payments. Indeed, recent central government housing and fiscal policies, aimed at introducing market rents into the social housing sector, have acted to increase average levels of local rents in both the local authority and housing association sectors. Between 1981 and 1991 average local authority rental levels increased by 131%, while housing association rents rose by 69% in the 1985-1991 period. Furthermore, the introduction of mixed funding for new housing association schemes have acted to make average association rent levels more expensive than those in the local authority sector, with mean association rents in the rural counties of Dyfed and Powys being 28 and 14% higher respectively than council rents in 1991 (Welsh Office, 1982, 1986, 1992).

New partnerships of provision: local responses to central state restructuring By the late 1980s and early 1990s, the impacts of central state social housing restructuring on local

Social Housing Provision in Rural Areas housing needs were becoming clear. The number of households registered on local authority waiting lists showed increases over the late 1980s of 13% in the Newtown study area and 19% in the Aberystwyth area. Furthermore, levels of 'official' homelessness increased by more than 250% between 1985 and 1991 in the Aberystwyth study area, and a rise of 600% in households accepted as homeless was recorded in the Newtown study area* (Welsh Office, 1992). Articles in local newspapers began to highlight individual cases of housing need and the failure or inability of the local state to respond to such need. In July 1989, the Aberystwyth area local newspaper ran an editorial on the subject of the local needs for social housing: 'A new buzz term is currently being banded about by politicians and others - - 'social housing'. It presumably lacks the stigma of good, old-fashioned 'council housing' and embraces, we suppose, private-sector rented accommodation too. Whatever our views on this latter-day jargon, it is an expression much in the news at present. Scarcely a single local authority meeting goes by when the acute shortage of social housing is not raised as a vital topic. And however you define the term, one thing is abundantly clear. There is not enough of it'. (Cambrian News, 7 July 1989, p. 24) It was also clear, though, that many local authority councillors and members in each area were equally frustrated by the imposition of this new system of providing such social housing and the restricted role placed on local authority intervention within local housing markets. Two extracts taken from reports of meetings of the Ceredigion housing committee in the period immediately after the 1988 Housing Act becoming law illustrate these localized tensions concerning changing systems of provision: Councillor A: People have been coming up to me wanting to know where they can live. These are young people looking for housing, many of whom have been on the waiting list for a long time. Chief Executive: The Council would love to pursue its former programme of council housing, but the Government has changed the law. Instead of being the providers we are now only to assist in the provision, with housing associations being the main providers. (Ceredigion District Council housing committee meeting, December 1988) We want money to build. We have architects and land we want to build on. But the legislation has got to be passed to allow us to do this. Housing associations are only scratching the surface. We should demand that local authorities get back this house building function *These figures relate to the associated pre-1995 districts of Ceredigion and Montgomeryshire. District-level figures on homelessness were first published by the Welsh Office in 1985.

179

again, with amended legislation. (Councillor B, housing committee meeting, March 1990) Accepting its new role as social housing enabler rather than provider, each local authority over this period began to increase its links with other 'social landlords', and particularly local housing associations, and entered into a series of partnerships in an attempt to meet local housing needs. In a 1991-1992 housing strategy document, for example, Montgomeryshire District Council stated that, while it wished to remain as the main provider of social housing in its area of jurisdiction, the authority also recognized the need to work with other agencies which were 'reputable, locally-based, accountable, have shared objectives with the Council and [form] part of a strategic approach [to the provision of social housing]' (p. 2). Partnerships with local associations in the post-1988 period have usually consisted of the local authority offering parcels of its land, at below market levels, to local associations for new social housing schemes in exchange for nomination rights on a proportion of the newly constructed units. An example of such a scheme, reported in the Aberystwyth local newspaper in the early 1990s, is outlined below. The article also illustrates the smallscale nature of these partnership schemes and the high level of local authority influence over nominations: Land owned by Ceredigion District Council at Blaenplwyf may soon be sold for housing development at below District Valuer's price. CT Plumlumon, the Aberystwyth-based housing association, wants to build four houses, two bungalows and six fiats on councilowned land. Nine units will be allocated to applicants on the council's waiting list and three to people on the housing association list. (Cambrian News, 9 March 1990) Although partnerships between the local authorities and housing associations have resulted in the provision of new units of social housing in each area, the small-scale nature and limited years of operation of the local association sector have meant that most of these local associations possess neither the financial resources nor management experience for them to be involved in larger-scale schemes. Furthermore, interviews with managers of these associations revealed other problems concerning their activities in rural parts of each area. The limited availability and high cost of land for development in many villages, together with the fact that Tai Cymru funding was generally not available for renovating existing properties, meant that the bulk of their activities was focused on larger settlements, and particularly the towns of Newtown and Aberystwyth. More generally, though, interviews with housing association managers revealed that existing levels of central funding from Tai Cymru were inadequate for

180

Paul Milbourne

them to meet local housing needs, while the changing nature of this funding - - with an increased emphasis on mixed public-private funding packages meant that additional costs associated with new repayments schemes were being transferred to new tenants:

-

-

Yes, we are encountering problems developing units at affordable rents with current grant rates from Tai Cymru. (association A) Our difficulties involve having to increase rents on new schemes and maintaining standards of design and specification whilst keeping houses affordable. We also have rising waiting lists, with demand far greater than supply. (association C) Sites are expensive and mixed funding has meant that rehabilitation is no longer an option. Rent levels have risen sharply due to mixed funding and high interest rates. (association D) Finally, in this section on local state responses to central state restructuring, it should be stated that such changes have not merely been imposed on these study areas. Indeed, while it is clear that the two local authorities have been increasingly restricted in terms of the scope of their operations, action has been initiated by each in an attempt to offset (if not reverse) the effects of central government housing policies. In 1989, for example, Ceredigion District Council led a delegation of 12 district councils in rural Wales which called on the Welsh Office to release an additional £100 million of central funds to finance a new programme of council housing building in the Welsh countryside. Although this request proved ultimately unsuccessful, the Welsh Office did release an extra £1 million capital allocation to help rural local authorities purchase properties and land from the private sector in order to meet local rieeds in areas characterized by a high incidence of second homes. This said, one-third of Ceredigion's allocation of £90,000 was expended on the purchase of just a single property. In addition to efforts to secure previous powers to build social housing, each local authority, like others in rural Wales, have actively used (and misused) the planning system in an attempt to provide additional units of social accommodation. In the mid-1980s, for example, Gwynedd County Council overtly challenged existing central state planning legislation by bringing social and cultural considerations into planning decisions on new housing developments. More recently, a Welsh Select Affairs Committee report (House of Commons, 1992/3) has criticized a number of local authorities in rural Wales for granting planning permission on new residential developments in non-designated areas. Indeed, Ceredigion's Director of Planning stated in May

1989 that the Council's elected representatives had acted illegally in that: from time to time permissions have been issued in locations which conflict with national and local planning policy on the basis of what has been regarded as being overwhelming local need. (p. 1) With the introduction of new planning guidance by the Welsh Office in 1989, such permissions for new housing in cases of local housing need were to be permitted, but only on smaller sites adjoining existing settlements. As such, rural authorities were awarded new rights to intervene in the open housing market which enabled them to develop and implement local needs housing policies based on the provision of affordable private ownership, rather than social rental, housing opportunities. In developing such policies, each of the study authorities has considered wider linguistic and cultural factors alongside issues of local housing need. The Montgomeryshire plan, for example, stated that: throughout Montgomeryshire the protection and promotion of the Welsh language and culture will be a proper planning consideration in determining all applications for housing development. (p. 7) Within these local needs land policies, suitable for development outside of designated planning areas was identified by the local authority and negotiations were entered into with landowners. Suitable land was then offered to local building firms, at below market prices, which could then construct houses at lower costs. However, only those households which could satisfy a local residence requirement and also demonstrate a recognized housing need were eligible to purchase such dwellings. The Ceredigion plan further stipulated that such housing would be restricted to those persons aged under 40 years and that dwellings could only be used as a sole residence. New occupants of this low-cost housing were required to enter into occupancy agreements which restricted future sales to those persons who also satisfied these occupancy requirements. As such, these housing needs schemes involved the local authority working with new sets of partners in the private sector, both in the capacity of securing new sites for development and reassuring the funders and builders of such housing of its financial viability. As Ceredigion's Director of Planning suggested: landowners, builders and building societies or banks may be reluctant to either release land, construct or finance the construction of dwellings on these terms. (1989, p. 2) In fact, the power of these authorities to intervene in the open housing market is very much dependent

Social Housing Provision in Rural Areas on the co-operation of these private sector agencies, and the refusal of building societies to lend on properties involved in the Ceredigion low-cost housing scheme forced the authority to remove its original previous ownership restriction.

Changing systems of managing and allocating social housing Given the new powers awarded to housing associations by central government and the sector's growing importance as provider of social housing in each study area, it is important to consider the ways in which systems of management and allocation of social housing operated by local associations compare with those characteristic of the local authority system. Indeed, it has been suggested previously that there exist some key differences between the two systems of social housing activities. Although the issue of management structures was not pursued in any great depth within the research, it is clear that the relatively small scale nature of local housing association operations has meant that the sector is characterized by much more decentralized and flexible structures of management than the local authority in each area. This said, in the early 1990s, Montgomeryshire District Council reviewed its housing management structure and implemented a more decentralized system of management which involved the establishment of six Area Lettings Sub-Committees composed of officials and elected members for these areas. Furthermore, the authority began to experiment with schemes aimed at increasing the participation of council tenants in housing management issues. While associations can be seen as more decentralized and flexible agencies for managing and allocating social housing in these study areas, it remains the case that they are also less accountable to local citizens than the local authority. Each association was managed by a committee of around nine members who served in a voluntary capacity and were drawn from various positions within the local community. However, members were invited, rather than elected, on to these committees, and the Local Government and Housing Act (1989) restricted representation of local authority officials or councillors to a maximum of 20%. Furthermore, these committees played a relatively minor role in the day-to-day operations of associations, with decisions on allocations taken solely by members of staff, and only reviewed on a general basis by committee members 'to ensure that tenancies have been made in line with laid down policy'.

181

Such processes of allocation contrast with those practiced by the two local authorities. Here, although waiting lists were managed by housing department staff, decisions on individual allocations were taken by a group composed of both officers and elected members, with this group able to award up to 8% of available points to applicants which it deemed as 'particularly deserving cases'. Indeed, in the case of the Montgomeryshire allocation system, the allocation group possessed additional powers in deciding on tenancies: Allocations will normally be made to the applicant with the highest number of points whose family is suitable for the accommodation. However, the Area Lettings Sub-Committee shall have discretion to select any applicant from the 10 highest pointed applicants in Llanidloes, Machynlleth, Newtown and Welshppol, and the 5 highest pointed applicants elsewhere, should they judge...that the applicant in question has the greatest need of housing...the Area Letting Sub-Committee shall [also] use their judgement to determine priority amongst applicants with equal points. With the exception of one association, social rental housing managed by each authority and association was available to all groups experiencing housing need who had been resident in the local area for a minimum period (usually 2 years), although recent reductions in council stock and the relatively small amount of association properties meant that the points system operated by each association and local authority took on a greater role in deciding allocations. Indeed, local authority managers suggested that these factors acted to discourage certain groups - - young single people and childless couples were two groups cited - - from applying for council accommodation. An analysis of the points system operated by the two local authorities, in fact, reveals an allocation system which places much greater emphasis on factors concerning environmental health - - such as overcrowding and the lack or sharing of key facilities - than on those of income levels and the availability or affordability of other housing options in the local area. Table 9, for example, highlights that the factors of overcrowding and inadequate amenities together account for 37 and 43% of all points respectively in the Ceredigion and Montgomeryshire allocation systems, while financial considerations only feature to a minimal degree in Montgomeryshire (and here only a maximum of 2 points are available). Furthermore, while each system utilizes a common set of eight factors which award points to applicants, it is clear that the relative weightings attached to these factors mean that applicants with similar characteristics will have different probabilities of being re-housed by the two authorities. For example, the Montgomeryshire system allocates a

182

Paul Milbourne Table 9. A breakdown of the points system operated by Ceredigion and Montgomeryshire housing departments Maximum number of points awarded Ceredigion No.

Commonalities Overcrowding on bedroom standard Statutory overcrowding Shared facilities Inadequate or lacking facilities Local connection Family separation Discretionary power Tied tenancies Differences Property in bad state of disrepair Period on waiting list Children in fiats Applicants in caravans Financial circumstances Applicants leaving care Medical points Maximum number of points available

Montgomeryshire %

No.

%

6 10 5 5 5 5 5 5

1.6 16.4 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2

6* 5 I0 27 25 10 10 10

4.5 3.8 7.6 20.6 19.1 7.6 7.6 7.6

5 10 0 0 0 0 0 61

8.2 16.4

100.0

0 0 3 2 3 10 10 131

2.3 !.5 2.3 7.6 7.6 100.0

*Based on 3 children sharing with adult(s). Sources: Ceredigion District Council and Montgomeryshire District Council housing departments.

maximum of 19% of all available points for the length of residence in the district compared to upto only 8% of points in Ceredigion. While local associations also award the vast majority of points to those applicants who are living in accommodation characterized by inadequate physical conditions, account is also taken of issues of the availability and affordability of other housing options within the local area. One association stated that it aimed to cater for those 'young people setting up home for the first time', with consideration given to 'the affordability of other solutions to the [applicant's housing] problem [and] the possibility of obtaining an alternative property'. A similar situation existed with association C, which assessed: an applicant's ability to find alternative accommodation whether the applicant has priority on the local authority waiting list, the applicant's ability to purchase suitable alternative accommodation, or secure shared ownership property

Conclusion

This paper has explored local impacts of, and responses to, central state restructuring of social housing in rural areas generally, and within two particular parts of the Welsh countryside over the 1980s and early 1990s. In doing this, it has attempted to position social housing changes within a context of wider discussion on local government restructuring, political ideology and regulation theory. Indeed, the paper has highlighted the ways in which social housing has been used by successive Conservative governments over the 1980s as a 'testing ground' for their attempts to 'roll back the welfare state', while drawing on.a regulationist perspective, it has also considered how such central policies have been mediated though, and in certain cases contested by, the actions of different clusters of housing agencies at the local level.

--

with another association, B, attempting to restrict its accommodation to those who were considered to be in 'low-income' households, by discriminating against 'applicants in well-paid employment or with a large capital sum after property sale', and advising such applicants on their remote chances of being re-housed by the association.

It is clear that central state restructuring of social housing has impacted directly on these, and other, areas of the British countryside over recent years, with local housing authorities no longer able to intervene directly within the local housing market through new housing constructions, and local housing associations forced to compete in an increasingly market-driven financial environment. The social housing sector has become increasingly residualized over the 1980s and early 1990s, and it can be suggested that, with historically lower levels

Social Housing Provision in Rural Areas of council housing provision in rural areas, together with the more recent restricted activities of smaller rural housing associations, the degree of social housing residualization in areas of the countryside is now much more pronounced than in many urban housing markets. A second aspect of residualization identified within the paper relates to the changing composition of households and stock within the social housing sector. As Right-to-Buy sales have been dominated by younger, more affluent tenants purchasing the larger, better quality social properties, so the gulf has widened between those households reliant on this restricted pool of social accommodation and those able to enter owner-occupation. Furthermore, this trend has been accentuated by recent rises in social rental levels, associated with changing central funding mechanisms, which have acted to exclude many low-income households who are ineligible for state benefits on grounds of (un)affordability. A final component of social housing residualization, and one which can be seen as particularly characteristic of many rural districts in Britain, concerns the increased spatial residualization of social housing provision which has taken place over the 1980s and early 1990s. Indeed, the paper has highlighted how past and present patterns of social housing provision, together with recent Right-to-Buy sales, have resulted in an 'urbanization' of the residual social stock, with households resident in many of the smaller villages in each of the study areas faced with limited opportunities for entering the social housing sector. Alongside a consideration of the residualization of the social housing sector, the paper has also explored the different ways in which central housing policy has been mediated through key housing agencies at the local level. It has highlighted how the two main social landlords - - local authorities and housing associations - - have experienced sets of problems in responding to their new positions within the social sector. The two local authorities in the study areas have attempted to maximize their more restricted roles through the increased use of partnerships with housing associations and other private sector agencies, while local associations have been forced to rely on these local authorities in order to secure development land at below market levels. Indeed, it can be suggested that, in these two rural areas at least, the local housing authority maintains a powerful position as both enabler and (indirect) provider of social housing opportunities. As a greater number of agencies have become involved in providing social housing in these study

183

areas - - including the local authority, housing associations, landowners, building firms and building societies - - so routes for potential tenants into the social housing sector have become much more differentiated. In fact, the paper has pointed to a wide range of procedures in operation which determine which groups of the local population can enter these different components of the social housing sector - - differences in the composition of groups allocating social housing, in the weightings attached to criteria such as 'localness' and 'affordability' within allocation procedures, and in the role played by the private sector in influencing local needs housing policies. In addition to this local mediation of central policy, the paper has also considered the role of these housing agencies in contesting the outcomes of central government social housing restructuring in rural areas. At a national level, attention has been focused briefly on the role played by the 'rural housing lobby' in securing amendments to national housing and planning policies, while the Welsh study has highlighted tensions amongst local authority officers and councillors concerning their restricted powers, efforts to secure previous levels of powers and resources through the lobbying of central government, and the use and misuse of the land-use planning system in an attempt to meet local housing needs. It remains to be seen how the processes of central state restructuring of social housing outlined in this paper, and explored within the context of two areas of rural Wales, have impacted on, and been mediated through and contested by social housing agencies in, other parts of the British countryside. Acknowledgements - - The research on which this paper is

based was funded by a University of Wales studentship. I would also like to thank the editor and two anonymous referees for their constructive comments.

References

Balchin, P. (1995) Housing Policy: An Introduction. Routledge, London. Beazley, M., Gavin, D., Gillon, S., Raine, C. and Staunton, M. (1980) The sale of council houses in a rural area: a case study of South Oxfordshire. Working Paper No. 44, Oxford Polytechnic, Department of Planning, Oxford. Clark, G. (1982) Housing and Planning in the Countryside. Wiley, Chichester. Cloke, P. and Edwards, G. (1985) Cymdeithas Tai Dyffryn and local authority housing provision in mid Wales. Working Paper No. 8, Department of Geography, Saint David's University College, Lampeter. Cloke, P., Goodwin, M. and Milbourne, P. (1994a) Lifestyles in Rural Wales. Welsh Office, Cardiff (unpublished).

184

Paul Milbourne

Cloke, P., Milbourne, P. and Thomas, C. (1994b) Lifestyles in Rural England. Rural Development Commission, London. Cochrane, A. (1994) Whatever Happened to Local Government? OU Press, Buckingham. Cole, I. and Furbey, R. (1994) The Eclipse Of Council Housing. Routledge, London. Department of the Environment (1993) The 1991 English House Condition Survey. HMSO, London. Dickens, P., Duncan, S., Goodwin, M. and Gray, F. (1985) Housing, States and Localities. Methuen, London. Doling, J. (1993) British housing policy: 1984-93. Regional Studies 27(6), 583-588. Dunn, M., Rawson, M. and Rogers, A. (1981) Rural Housing: Competition or Choice. Allen & Unwin, London. Hoggart, K. (1993) House construction in nonmetropolitan districts: economy, politics and rurality. Regional Studies 27(7), 651-665. Hoggett, P. (1987) A farewell to mass production? decentralisation as an emergent private and public paradigm. In Decentralisation and democracy, eds P. Hoggett and R. Hambleton. Occasional Paper 28, SAUS, Bristol. House of Commons (1992/3) Welsh Affairs Committee Third Report, Rural Housing 2. HMSO, London. Kennedy, R. (1991) London: World City moving into the 21st Century. HMSO, London. Housing Act (1988) HMSO, London. Local Government and Housing Act (1989) HMSO, London. Milbourne, P. (1997) Housing conflict and domestic property classes. Environment and Planning A 29, 43-62. Murie, A. (1982) A new era for council housing. In The Future of Council Housing, ed. J. English. Croom Helm, London. Newby, H. (1979) Green and Pleasant Land? Hutchinson, London. Phillips, D. and Williams, A. (1982a) Local authority housing and accessibility: evidence from South Hams,

Devon. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers NS 7, 304-320. Phillips, D. and Williams, A. (1982b) Rural Housing and the Public Sector. Gower, Aldershot. Phillips, D. and Williams, A. (1984) Public-sector housing in rural areas in England. In The Changing Countryside, eds G. Clark et al. GeoBooks, Norwich. Power, A. (1993) Hovels to High Rise: State Housing in Europe Since 1850. Routledge, London. Richmond, P. (1984) Alternative tenures in rural areas: the role of housing associations. In The Changing Countryside, eds G. Clark et al. GeoBooks, Norwich. Rogers, A. (1976) Rural housing. In Rural Planning Problems, ed. G. E. Cherry. Leonard Hill, London. Saunders, P. (1984) Beyond housing classes: the sociological significance of private property rights in the means of consumption. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 8, 202-227. Spencer, K. (1995) The reform of social housing. In Local Government in the I990s, eds J. Stewart and G. Stoker. Macmillan, London. Stoker, G. and Mossberger, K. (1995) The post-fordist local state: the dynamics of its development. In Local Government in the 1990s, eds J. Stewart and G. Stoker. Macmillan, London. Shucksmith (1981) No Homes For Locals. Gower, Aldershot. Welsh Office (1982) Welsh Housing Statistics, HMSO, London. Welsh Office (1986) Welsh Housing Statistics, HMSO, London. Welsh Office (1992) Welsh Housing Statistics, HMSO, London. Welsh Office (1995) A Working Countryside for Wales. HMSO, London. Young, R. K. (1987) Housing Associations: their role in the rural context. In Rural Housing In Scotland: Recent Research and Policy, eds R. MacGregor, D. Robertson and M. Shucksmith. Aberdeen University Press, Aberdeen.