Programme for Government 2026-30 – The housing bits

On Wednesday, the WG published its Programme for Government 2026-30.  In many ways, this does not tell us anything more than we knew already.  Housing gets its own page, which is good to see, and there is a bold statement of ambition combined with a recognition about high housing costs:

“Whether renting or paying a mortgage, housing costs have a significant impact on household budgets. A safe and stable home is essential for good quality of life and supporting our ambition for a healthier population.”

We get the same stuff as we already knew about – strengthening protection for renters, although a much clearer statement about “fair rents”; the right to adequate housing; 20,000 more social homes; establishing Unnos; retrofitting; and remediation of fire safety defects.  We do need the WG to press the UK government to use the different levers it has retained around local housing allowance and the benefit cap – there was a really pretty depressing piece in The Guardian about the baleful effects of freezing the LHA.

In a way, there is nothing new to see here beyond the shift to “fair” rent, which seems meaningful.  However, what does seem important in this document is a recognition of the interconnectedness of housing and, in particular, preventative health:

“… creating a healthier environment and delivering effective services – such as housing, education and culture – can shape behaviours and improve our overall health. The greatest opportunity lies in preventing disease before it starts or progresses, and in narrowing the wide gaps in health outcomes within communities.”

This chimes with some of the most penetrating questions and discussions at the CaCHE conference in Glasgow.  I have spent quite a lot of time thinking about those questions/discussions.  If we think about some of the most significant advances made to housing rights in the 21^st Century, they have come about as a result of health concerns and the outrageous circumstances which lead to untimely deaths.  These are the sharpest end of the housing conditions issues that we often see (and about which Mel Cant and colleagues discussed at the Masterclasses).  I do wonder whether there is more that should be done in Wales on housing conditions.  Fair enough to say, as the document recognizes:

“Make the renewal of Welsh housing stock a national mission, along with reforms to ensure greater security for renters and increased availability of social housing. Safe and adequate housing is an essential bedrock of health.”

And the document also recognizes the importance of the cultural shift towards embedding a Housing First, trauma-informed and person-centred approach to tackling homelessness.

However, and maybe my position is shifting a little on this, we need more individual rights and better enforcement of individual and collective rights in Wales.  On this, there was another interesting piece in The Guardian about the problems of enforcing Awaab’s Law in England*.  I don’t go as far as some of the comments in that article – imho, nobody goes into housing to do a bad job or to avoid their obligations, but I always return to the Michael Lipsky street-level bureaucracy thesis and the problem of resources.  What I think is different (Lipsky was writing in 1980ish) is the impact of big private money on social housing, and the consequences of financialization.  That probably requires some further research and thought (ie for another day).

*If you are interested in a more academic take, then Rosie Woodhouse’s piece published in Law and Critique is a good place to start.