Social Housing Bill [HL]

Lord Davies of Brixton Excerpts

2nd reading
Monday 1st June 2026 Lords Chamber

[Lord Davies of Brixton (Lab)]

My Lords, it is a pleasure to take part in this debate, and I welcome the opportunity to follow the noble Baroness’s additional points, which need to be taken on board. I will provide a general welcome to the Bill, particularly the changes it makes to the right to buy, but I will also use this opportunity to highlight the relationship between housing tenure and the quest to provide all pensioners with an adequate income.

On the sale of social housing, I am sorry that my noble friend the Minister is not present, because I was going to say some nice things about her introductory speech. It was a powerful and effective speech which came from the heart, but with clear policy content. I almost felt like, as they do in the Commons, leaping to my feet and waving the Order Paper. It was exactly the sort of thing I want to hear from the Front Bench, and I thank her very much indeed for the way she presented the Bill. I also agree with much of what else has been said by my noble friends.

I am a long-term opponent of the right to buy. I respect my noble friends who take a broader view of the issue, and I accept that this is a fight where we have to accept what is being proposed on the mechanics of right to buy. I was impressed by the contribution from the noble Lord, Lord Young of Cookham, and his exposition of the justification for the right-to-buy process. The important point that he missed from his exposition, the one that does not get mentioned, is that this is fundamentally a political project on the part of the Conservative Party. It was an attempt to social engineer in the belief that it would have an adverse effect on support for the Labour Party. This is clearly a fact. In Westminster, they were caught out—and they paid the price. I was around as a local councillor at the time, with a large quantity of council housing in my estate, so I was aware of the debates that took place. It is undeniable: the political pressure for this policy was about social engineering to try to disadvantage the Labour Party. Noble Lords should not try to deny it.

It not only failed to obey the law in that particular case, but it also had a destructive effect on social housing. It also had a destructive effect on the finances of local government—the net effect on its finances was adverse. Most importantly, it had an adverse effect on the social housing stock. The end result has not been more owner-occupation; the proportion of houses owned by owner-occupiers is in long-term decline now. Instead, we are seeing this shift to expensive, low-quality private rented accommodation, much of which is ex-council stock and should be available to social renters. So let us be honest about the nature of right to buy.

I want to put this into the context of the specific issues affecting pensioners. Two weeks ago, the first report of the Second Pensions Commission was published. Much in there is about the nature of people’s tenure and the effect it has on their incomes. There are certain items in the report that are worth highlighting. It finds that

“two key groups with a higher risk of poverty are those without private pension income”—

no surprise there—

“and renters (particularly in the private sector)”.

It also goes on to tell us that

“the number of non-homeowning pensioners is expected to grow: by 2050”,

the end of its period of remit,

“half of pensioners in poverty are projected to be renters”.

The problem is particularly acute in the private rented sector, so the development and expansion of social housing is a crucial element in developing decent, adequate incomes in retirement for pensioners.

I very much hope that the ministerial team will take this on board. It will be worth them and the officials reading what the report says about social housing and the long-term impact it will have on the standard of living of pensioners. The more we are able to develop social housing and offer it at social rents, the lower the level of poverty will be among pensioners. I hope that is an objective we can all support.