King’s Speech

Lord Best Excerpts

Wednesday 20th May 2026 Lords Chamber

[Lord Best (CB)]

My Lords, my contribution today considers the housing aspects of the King’s Speech, and I will echo some of the points made by the noble Lord, Lord Young of Cookham. I declare my housing interests as listed in the register, including chairing the Northern Housing Consortium’s Renew initiative to boost local economies through housing-led regeneration.

There are three Bills in the King’s Speech that relate to the ongoing acute shortages of decent affordable housing. These Bills complement the Government’s efforts, currently thwarted by adverse market conditions, to secure the building of 1.5 million new homes in this Parliament. Although the Government’s Homes England programme of £39 billion for new social housing over the next decade represents the largest input of funding for the sector since 2010, a lot more still needs to be done. All three new Bills are very welcome. I offer a comment on each.

First, the commonhold and leasehold reform Bill will address key aspects of the current leasehold system, which is in desperate need of radical change. The Bill’s main omission is the absence of sufficient action to improve the performance of managing agents of blocks of leasehold flats and weed out the worst operators. The Housing Minister has promised requirements for mandatory qualifications, but, sadly, the Government have not brought forward measures to create any code of practice to raise standards enforced by a proper regulator of property agents.

Secondly, the remediation Bill—the so-called Grenfell Bill—will tackle the slow speed to date of the removal of unsafe cladding, the cost of which should fall on those manufacturing it and specifying its use. This saga has, to date, taken almost 10 years to find resolution, with work on unsafe cladding in high-rise buildings being completed on only a third of known cases. We must hope, as the noble Lord, Lord Young, mentioned, that the new legislation supported by the noble Lord, Lord Roe, and the building safety regulator, which he chairs, will finally fix the crisis, and that those who have behaved appallingly—and, it seems, criminally—will be brought to justice.

Thirdly, the Social Housing Bill will continue the Government’s attempts to boost the amount of social and affordable housing against the backdrop of 176,000 children in temporary accommodation where their health and well-being are suffering so badly. Among that Bill’s measures are important extra support for domestic abuse survivors to remain in their homes and greater protection of precious existing social housing from further loss through right-to-buy purchases. We would have over 2 million more social homes but for the sales under that giveaway scheme. Some 40% per cent of the homes sold are now in the hands of private landlords charging up to three times the previous council rents, with the cost falling largely on the taxpayer. No wonder few local authorities have been building new homes when they have known that these can be bought cheaply and sold on by their occupiers. That would be like trying to run the bath with the plug out.

However, I see a big omission from the Social Housing Bill in the absence of any reference to the regeneration of existing outdated social housing stock, not least the worst of the 1960s tower blocks and prefabricated buildings. Little Awaab Ishak, who died from the effects of mould growth, lived in substandard 1960s social housing. Tougher regulations now require social housing providers to take more urgent action and a sensible settlement has been agreed for annual rent increases, but rental revenue will not stretch to paying for serious renewal and replacement. This urgent need for regeneration matches the necessity to build new homes and deserves more government attention.

The three Bills take us in exactly the right directions. I commend them, with the proviso that I foresee that there might be some useful, modest amendments for your Lordships to consider in due course.