Supported Exempt Accommodation: Birmingham

Tahir Ali Excerpts

Wednesday 11th February 2026 Westminster Hall

[Preet Kaur Gill (Birmingham Edgbaston) (Lab/Co-op)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Lewell. I thank the hon. Member for Birmingham Perry Barr (Ayoub Khan) for securing this debate.

Since I was elected in 2017, issues with supported exempt accommodation have been persistent in parts of my constituency. When supported housing works, it changes lives: it helps prison leavers turn a corner, helps people get off the streets, and helps those battling addiction or mental illness rebuild their lives. But in Birmingham the system is not just being abused; it is broken. Supported housing provision in Birmingham has tripled since 2018. Today, nearly 33,000 people live in 11,200 supported exempt properties, and the cost has risen to almost £400 million—about half the entire country’s exempt spending. The council is clear that that level far exceeds local need, yet the sector continues to expand at pace.

In September 2024, I secured a Westminster Hall debate on this topic. I was very pleased to hear the ambition of the newly elected Government to finally get a grip on the wild west sector, but unfortunately progress has been slow, and we are here again. Many people who enter supported accommodation do so because they have nowhere else to turn. Public funding is there to give them safety, stability and a pathway to independent living. When it works, it saves lives and money. As the National Housing Federation reports, quality providers save the public purse approximately £3.5 billion annually by alleviating pressures on the NHS, social care services and the criminal justice system. As I have seen time and again in my constituency, however, bad actors have been allowed to exploit the system and profit from the neglect of people who are suffering.

[Tahir Ali (Birmingham Hall Green and Moseley) (Lab)]

I thank my hon. Friend and constituency neighbour for giving way. She is making a very important point about rogue providers. The council needs to be given the necessary regulatory powers and all loopholes need to be closed if we are to make supported accommodation effective in neighbourhoods. Does she agree that it is not simply about the money? The rogue providers who exploit vulnerable people have to be acted on very quickly.

[Preet Kaur Gill]

Yes, absolutely. We are here to talk about when we can expect the regulations, and I look forward to hearing from the Minister.

In 2021, I worked with the council, my local police inspectors and north Edgbaston residents to shut down Saif Lodge. That example makes the case for why regulation is needed. I carried out a spot check with the police and was appalled to find 25 residents with one support worker, and no staff on site at weekends. The conditions were filthy and cramped. Prostitution, drug use and other antisocial behaviour had become routine. It was the first case in the country of an exempt property being shut down, but it took more than a year, with the matter before the courts. That really makes the case for why regulation is so important. Saif Lodge was a symptom of our system.

I want to thank many campaigners, but in particular I thank Jane Haynes at Birmingham Live and Nick Hall, a constituent of mine who wrote an excellent piece in Central Bylines for which he spoke to many residents in north Edgbaston living in exempt accommodation. He told me that one 42-year-old man said that he feared for his health and doubted that he will reach 50. Another said:

“It is safer to live in a park than in the provider’s rooms.”

Since then, West Midlands police has publicly highlighted links between the exempt sector and organised crime gangs, money laundering, fraud and drug dealing. The impact on the community is real. One constituent, a veteran who served for 36 years, recently told me that he plans to sell his home and leave the area because the property next door had suddenly been converted into exempt accommodation without any consultation. He fears that the rogue providers have no care for those they support or the local areas they set up shop in.

We cannot continue like this. In the last Parliament, I campaigned for a new regulatory system for supported exempt accommodation that would introduce minimum standards of support, update housing benefit rules to define care and supervision requirements, and give councils the power to manage local provision and act swiftly against rogue operators, yet we are still waiting for the new regulations to be introduced under the Supported Housing (Regulatory Oversight) Act 2023.

In July 2025, the previous Minister for Homelessness stated that they aimed to publish the Government’s full response to the consultation on these measures after the summer recess. In response to my written parliamentary question, the current Minister for Local Government and Homelessness said on 13 January this year that the response would be published “as soon as possible”. I hope the Minister responding to the debate will update us on when we can expect to see the Government’s response to the consultation so that we can get on with bringing in these crucial regulations.

I thank the Minister for Local Government and Homelessness for visiting my constituency to see for herself the diverse accommodation available. I also welcome the steps taken by the Government and Birmingham city council to date. Birmingham city council has set up a specialist team to tackle antisocial behaviour and crime, and to improve property standards. I am grateful to the Government for extending the supported housing improvement programme with an additional £1.5 million for Birmingham. Since the team was set up, over 9,000 of the most severe hazards, such as severe mould and fire risks, have been removed. It has issued 48 community protection orders against antisocial behaviour and £8.8 million has been saved by refusing unjustified housing benefit claims.

Birmingham city council also set up its own quality standard programme, but voluntary schemes cannot replace statutory oversight. So far, only 15% of providers have successfully achieved gold, silver or bronze accreditations. The council’s actions starkly evidence the need for regulation of the sector. The Minister will be aware that the SHIP funding ends in March 2026 and the council is bridging the gap with the homelessness prevention grant. Only clear regulation will give the council the tools it needs to manage local provision effectively.

I welcome the Government’s publication this week of the statutory guidance for local supported housing strategies. The local strategy will be an important step in mapping current and future provision. Proper processes will be formulated for referrals, and housing teams will work with colleagues in health and social care to deliver a much better co-ordinated system, but we must go further.

Local authorities are still saying that without new regulations to define minimum standards of support and empower councils to crack down on exploitative providers, vulnerable people and taxpayers will continue to be ripped off. The statutory guidance is an important first step, but it will not fix the problem that my constituents are facing today unless we move at pace to bring in these regulations.

None of that is intended to dismiss the many excellent providers that deliver high-quality support every day—many of them are doing a really good job; they play a crucial role and change lives—but the sector has also attracted landlords who see vulnerable people as a source of income rather than a responsibility. Without firm oversight, those operators undermine good practice, exploit residents and damage our communities.

Everyone agrees that people fleeing abuse, leaving prison or care, or battling mental health and addiction deserve somewhere safe that they are connected to and that truly helps them rebuild their lives. Our communities deserve to feel safe and taxpayers deserve to know that their money is protecting people, not enriching those who exploit them. The stories of fear, failure and sometimes outright abuse are heartbreaking. We cannot look away any longer.

--- Later in debate ---

[The Minister for Housing and Planning (Matthew Pennycook)]

It is a pleasure, as always, to serve with you in the Chair, Ms Lewell. I congratulate the hon. Member for Birmingham Perry Barr (Ayoub Khan) on securing this important debate, and thank him for his clear and comprehensive account of the challenges of poorly managed, and in particular non-commissioned, exempt accommodation in his constituency.

I also thank other hon. Members who have participated in the debate, including my hon. Friends the Members for Birmingham Hall Green and Moseley (Tahir Ali) and for Birmingham Edgbaston (Preet Kaur Gill). My hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham Edgbaston, along with my right hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham Ladywood (Shabana Mahmood) and my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham Selly Oak (Al Carns), have championed this issue for, in some cases, many years. I remember the debates about it in the previous Parliament.

Members will have noticed that I am not the Minister responsible for supported housing. The Minister for Local Government and Homelessness, my hon. Friend the Member for Birkenhead (Alison McGovern), is currently in the main Chamber updating the House on changes to local government finance. I will obviously do my best to respond to the various points raised by the hon. Member for Birmingham Perry Barr and others, but I know that the Minister for Local Government and Homelessness will be happy to follow up with any Member in relation to specific issues of concern. I have no doubt that she will be more than happy to meet the hon. Gentleman and, indeed, his constituents, should that be appropriate, to discuss matters in more detail.

In general terms, let me reassure Members of two things. First, the Government take incredibly seriously the need to ensure that all individuals who benefit from supported housing live in safe and decent accommodation and get the support that they need to get back on their feet and improve their lives. As we have heard, in many cases these are very vulnerable individuals who need support if they are to get their lives back on track.

Secondly, we remain firmly committed to addressing exploitation and profiteering at the hands of rogue exempt accommodation operators. Understandably, that has been the focus of the debate. As the Liberal Democrat spokesperson—the hon. Member for Woking (Mr Forster) —and others noted, there are lots of high-quality providers out there. There is also, as the shadow Minister—the hon. Member for Broxbourne (Lewis Cocking)—rightly argued, huge unmet need in this area. That is why, as Members will know, at the spending review the Government announced £39 billion for a new 10-year social and affordable homes programme. We want to see new supply of supported housing in England come through that new programme in greater numbers. Although we did not set any numerical targets or ringfence budgets for that programme, it has been designed with the flexibility necessary to ensure that those types of accommodation that require higher grant rates can come through the new programme in the appropriate numbers.

We are also providing wider support for the supported housing sector. We announced £159 million, through the local government finance settlement for 2026 to 2029, for support services in supported housing. We are working with targeted local areas and officials are confirming allocations with those areas in the coming days and weeks.

I recognise not only that Birmingham has significantly more supported exempt accommodation than anywhere else in the country—the hon. Member for Birmingham Perry Barr rightly said approximately 31,000 individuals are housed in around 11,000 units—but that it faces acute challenges in respect of unsafe and poor-quality supported housing. I think it was mentioned earlier, but the Local Government and Homelessness Minister recently met the leader of Birmingham council and Members representing a number of Birmingham constituencies to discuss the ongoing problems that Birmingham faces.

It is worth my saying a few general remarks about supported housing. It helps those who need extra support to live as independently as possible in the community, and that support can take many forms. Some individuals may need supported housing for a short time while they recover from a period of crisis; for others, supported housing is a home for life, helping them to live independently outside of institutional settings. The Government fully appreciate that there have been real issues in parts of the supported housing market. Over recent years, far too many residents have been placed in inappropriate accommodation or dangerous situations, with little to no support.

As we have heard today, the impact of unsafe, poor-quality supported housing on residents, their families and communities should not be understated. Increased antisocial behaviour resulting from poorly managed housing and knock-on impacts for wider services such as the NHS and the police are frequently brought to the Department’s attention. Communities in a number of areas across the country have been blighted by these problems, but we know, as I have said, that the issue is most prevalent in Birmingham. Let me be very clear: that state of affairs is intolerable. It cannot be allowed to continue, which is why the Government are taking action.

Action has been taken prior to and alongside the legislation that the previous Government supported and that we have been taking forward. The supported housing improvement programme has been in place in Birmingham since 2022, and before that the supported housing oversight pilots resulted in real improvements—I think the hon. Member for Birmingham Perry Barr made that case in his speech. The multidisciplinary teams that have been established in the local authority, across housing enforcement, adult social care and housing benefit teams, have strengthened understanding and allowed targeted action to take place.

Although the programme will end in March, the lessons learned and the actions taken by Birmingham city council should now be firmly embedded. We are ending that funding as we work towards the implementation of the Act and, thereafter, local authorities will charge fees for the administration and enforcement of licensing in particular going forward. We have not cut off all funding with a view to having no replacement; there is work alongside our intentions to roll out the legislation.

Let me turn to that legislation, which has rightly been the focus of much of the debate. I remember it going through the House when I was the shadow Minister. We should commend the hon. Member for Harrow East (Bob Blackman) on his private Member’s Bill, which the previous Government supported, and on all his work on the wider homelessness agenda. That legislation was a response to long-standing concerns about the quality of non-exempt supported accommodation, its oversight and the value-for-money questions we have heard about today.

Despite there being many excellent supported housing providers, regulation in this area is absolutely needed. The Government are working to introduce the necessary measures to improve quality and oversight as soon as possible. I am happy to tell Members that we intend to implement the Act in stages over the coming months, and I will provide some more detail on the different elements of the Act that we intend to take forward, and the timescales. It should be said that local authorities can and should still use their existing enforcement powers to take action against poor-quality accommodation as we do so.

I am pleased to say that, this week, we have allocated £39 million in new burdens funding to local authorities, including Birmingham, to start work on their local supported housing strategies. Those strategies ask local authorities to assess their current supply of supported housing, and to estimate their unmet need and future demand. They must then set out how they will meet them. The first strategies are due to be completed by 31 March 2027, and statutory guidance to support this work was published earlier this week.

The Liberal Democrat spokesman challenged me on the advisory panel. I can assure him that it has not been forgotten about. We are moving forward with its establishment. The chair will be officially appointed imminently and the panel will be officially convened. As the hon. Gentleman knows, the panel will then advise the Government on the implementation of the Act as a whole and consider what further support the supported housing sector needs going forward. We are taking that part of the Act forward.

As has been mentioned a number of times, the Government have also consulted on our proposals for supporting housing licensing and new support standards. We did that last year, and I know that a response has been anticipated for some time. It will be published as soon as possible. I well understand the urgency that Members from across the House have expressed. We will publish the new national supported housing standards along with guidance, so that residents, providers and local authorities know the standard of support we expect.

We will consult on licensing regulations later this year, giving stakeholders an opportunity to comment on the regulations before they are debated in Parliament. This is really important, and it goes to the point about high-quality providers that several Members made. We need to ensure that we introduce the licensing scheme in a way that is both proportionate and effective, so that the expense of bearing down on the rogue providers and operators does not penalise high-quality providers. Local authorities will receive new burdens funding to establish their licensing schemes, and we will monitor the licensing schemes to ensure that they are having the intended effect.

The Government are committed to implementing the measures in the Supported Housing (Regulatory Oversight) Act and to giving local authorities the powers they need to tackle the problems evident in supported housing in Birmingham and across England. The progress that has already been made is worth noting, and we want that to continue. We want councils like Birmingham to make use of their existing powers. I think my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham Edgbaston mentioned some of the progress made under SHIP in Birmingham. SHIP and the previous programme received a total of £6.5 million in funding, and that has rightly generated huge amounts of benefit: £8.8 million of housing benefit spend was prevented; the number of cases where support was deemed to be inadequate has dropped from 33%; and we are seeing the proportion of inspected properties that meet the decent homes standard rising from 44%. Progress has been made, but the regulatory framework that the Act introduces does need to be brought forward.

[Tahir Ali]

Given the delay in the Act coming into force, would the Minister consider issuing interim guidance so that local authorities can get on more swiftly with some of the changes that they have been asking for for a very, very long time?

Waste Collection: Birmingham and the West Midlands

Tahir Ali Excerpts

Wednesday 21st January 2026 Westminster Hall

[Wendy Morton]

My hon. Friend hits the nail on the head. We are talking about the UK’s second largest city. I really worry about its reputation and about the distinct lack of political leadership. Our mayor seems to want to wash his hands of the issue. I try and try to raise the matter in this House, much to the annoyance of Mr Speaker, but I know that there are residents across Birmingham, and friends of mine, who find this deeply frustrating. They pay their council tax, and do not get this most basic of services.

[Tahir Ali (Birmingham Hall Green and Moseley) (Lab)]

Does the right hon. Member agree that it was under the previous Government that unelected commissioners were imposed on Birmingham city council by a previous Conservative Secretary of State, Michael Gove? Since that day, it has been run by unelected commissioners. She is trying to blame the political leadership, which in effect is held to ransom by the commissioners. Is she saying that it was the wrong decision to impose unelected commissioners on Birmingham?

[Wendy Morton]

No, I am not. The reason why the commissioners were put in place was that Labour-run Birmingham city council was failing. That is why the commissioners came in. I am saying that we are facing a lack of political leadership.

I try to raise this issue in various fora, but nobody seems to want to get it resolved. What bothers me most is that there are residents who pay their council tax and who need a voice. They need somebody to stand up alongside other Birmingham MPs and councillors and say, “It is time to get this fixed.” The other reason why I am standing up on this issue is that I have constituents who work in the sector. They are being impacted, as are the peripheral parts of my constituency, as in the case of my hon. Friend the Member for Bromsgrove (Bradley Thomas). It is my constituents who have to pay the extra cost for the extra fly-tipping. That cannot be fair.

The net result of cancelling recycling is that the already poor figure of 22% has plummeted to just 15%. There are major fly-tipping hotspots right across the city; when bins go uncollected for months on end, fly-tipping respects no borders. In Pheasey Park Farm ward, which borders the Birmingham city council area, we have seen a constant uptick in people crossing the border to fly-tip.

In all of this, the point about the consistent lack of political leadership keeps cropping up. Where has the Labour Mayor of the West Midlands been through all of this? Nowhere. As recently as 18 December, he said on Radio West Midlands:

“I don’t employ the workforce”.

He also said:

“I have done all I can.”

To be honest, to the outside world that does not appear to have been an awful lot—that is my reply, Mr Mayor.

The mayor may not employ the workforce—I get that—but he knows the reputational damage that is being done not just to Birmingham but to the wider west midlands. As the most senior elected politician in the region, he should have been far more proactive and visible in ensuring that a resolution was found, or in encouraging people to get round the table to sort the situation out. Does anyone believe that had Andy Street still been the Mayor of the West Midlands, he would not have moved heaven and earth to ensure that the escalation of the strike was stopped, and the dispute resolved, at the earliest opportunity? I am pretty damn certain that he would have done so.

Ministers in the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, some of whom were appointed as far back as September of last year, have responded to me and others in the House, but it appears that they have not even held meetings with the leaders of Birmingham city council so that a resolution can be moved towards.

--- Later in debate ---

[Richard Burgon (Leeds East) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms McVey. I am a trade unionist and a Unite member. Before I was a Member of Parliament, I was a trade union lawyer, and like my hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool West Derby (Ian Byrne), in my many years as a member of the trade union movement I never came across anything like this.

Back in 2009, the then Conservative-Lib Dem-Green-run Leeds city council tried to take up to a third of the pay away from Leeds refuse workers. What flowed from that was a strike by GMB and Unison members against that swingeing, unfair pay cut that lasted for three months—the longest continuous dispute in Yorkshire since the miners’ strike. That dispute ended successfully for the workers. What we have here is a dispute that has lasted for 10 months, and from the outside people are wondering why on earth it has not settled. But we know why.

A ballpark figured was agreed, but the leadership of the council, and, crucially, the commissioners—unelected, of course—stepped in to block that deal, so the strike continues, with all that means for the workers and the residents of the fine city of Birmingham. We need to put it very clearly on the record that to expect refuse workers, drivers and loaders doing an important job to accept a pay cut of up to £8,000—which can be up to a quarter of their wages—is simply unacceptable.

I know, of course, the history of Birmingham city council as a Labour council. However, if Labour colleagues and trade unionists stepped back from that background, more and more colleagues would be speaking out against it. One of the mottoes of the trade union movement is “an injury to one is an injury to all”, and that applies whichever party’s leadership is running the council.

I pay tribute not only to the striking workers, because it is not easy to go on strike and people do not do it unless it is a last resort—whatever the newspapers and right-wing politicians might say—but also to the agency refuse workers who are now on strike.

[Tahir Ali]

Does my hon. Friend agree that the narrative played out by the leadership of the council is that the dispute will have a huge impact on equal pay? If that is the case, just as Unite has published the KC’s advice, should the council not show the public its own advice so that we can all see what it has received?

[Richard Burgon]

My hon. Friend, himself a diligent and passionate Birmingham MP, makes a very important point. I agree with him that, if the council leadership or the commissioners have that legal advice, they should indeed publish it, because the advice of Unite’s King’s counsel, Oliver Segal, is very clear and runs contrary to the representations made by the other side.

We know what the block is. We know the awful position faced by workers in Birmingham—a pay cut of up to £8,000. We know the awful situation faced by Birmingham residents. It seems to me that this is a matter for all trade unionists across the country, who want to see a fair resolution to the dispute. It is so frustrating to see that it was so close, but was scuppered, it seems, by the leadership of the council and by the commissioners.

What can unblock that blockage? What can see things return to how they should be, and what can result in a fair resolution for workers and residents? Only intervention from the Government can do that. If the commissioners are blocking the deal, the Government should get involved, unblock that process and help to fairly end this dispute. That, I think, is what the public want and what trade unionists want.

I want to finish by paying tribute to members of Unite the union who have been on strike since March. They will not like the inconvenience that is inevitably caused by strikes to local residents, because they live there too. Too often, when people talk about trade unionists and workers, they talk about them as if they are not local residents themselves—and they are. Those Birmingham residents should not be asked to take pay cuts of up to £8,000. They cannot afford it, especially in this cost of living crisis. They are right to step up to the plate to defend their working terms and conditions and pay, not just for themselves but for others. This is not a dispute to try to get a pay rise; it is about defending pay at a time when people need it more than they have done for decades because of the cost of living crisis.

I pay tribute to those people and to trade unionists from other trade unions who have shown real solidarity with these workers, in the best traditions of the labour and trade union movement. I hope the Minister, when she responds, can give us some hope that the Government will intervene and bring a fair end to this dispute.

[Preet Kaur Gill (Birmingham Edgbaston) (Lab/Co-op)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms McVey. I thank the right hon. Member for Aldridge-Brownhills (Wendy Morton) for securing this debate.

Birmingham is the city where I was born and raised, and the one that I have had the privilege to represent for the past eight years. It is a proud, resilient city of hard-working families, students, older people, businesses and communities who care deeply about the place they call home. Yet for more than a year, those communities have been living with a broken waste collection service: overflowing bins, rising fly-tipping and streets that do not feel clean or safe. These are not minor inconveniences; they are public health risks, environmental hazards and a source of stress for many families, for those with mobility challenges, for older residents and for everyone who cares about their neighbourhood.

Last year I wrote to the council, urging it to declare a public health emergency, and it did so. That declaration allowed the Government to provide logistical support and for waste to be collected. But the reality is that the dispute has dragged on for far too long, and residents are paying the price. We need to be honest about how we got here. Years of Conservative austerity and underfunding of local government hollowed out councils such as Birmingham, with nearly £1 billion of funding having been cut since 2010, the workforce halved, services that people relied on stretched and resilience stripped away.

On top of that, historical equal pay liabilities—some dating back decades—have placed immense pressure on the council’s finances. Those pressures are not abstract numbers. They shape whether residents get their bins emptied, whether streets are clean and whether public services can function effectively. That context matters, because it explains why any solution now must be sustainable. It is about fairness: fairness for women in being paid the same as men, and fairness for the citizens of Birmingham in knowing that their money is being spent on the services they need.

Let me be clear about my position: I am on the side of Birmingham’s residents. I am not here to take sides between the council and the union, or to attack anyone involved. My concern is the people who live, work and raise families in our city, and who depend on a clean and reliable waste service. I support the transformation of Birmingham’s waste service because, before the industrial action began, I regularly received complaints from constituents about missed collections. Residents and businesses deserve a service that is modern, reliable and in line with other major cities.

[Tahir Ali]

I thank my hon. Friend and constituency neighbour for giving way. On fairness of pay, does she agree that we should not be equalising downwards, but that women’s pay should be equalised up to what men are paid?

[Preet Kaur Gill]

Prior to coming to this place, I worked for the city council for many years. I saw the impact of equal pay liabilities, and how they cripple public finances and the very services that the last Labour Government invested in. Children’s services were decommissioned and youth services were stripped away, and many of my communities do not want to see our city council’s public finances go in the same direction. That is why the council must take legal advice, and the right steps, to agree and come to a settled negotiation.

The council does now have a plan for transformation, including a new fleet of council-owned vehicles, changes to how services will be monitored and a phased roll-out of a new collection model from June 2026. But transformation cannot mean endless disruption, and it cannot come at the cost of reopening equal pay liabilities, which would put the council back into crisis and risk hundreds of millions more being taken away from public services—this is taxpayers’ money that we are talking about.

Our Government also have a role to play. Having raised the issue of fair funding for Birmingham with Ministers, I was pleased to see that the local government finance settlement will increase the council’s core spending power by more than £650 million over the next three years. Ministers must now also hold Birmingham’s commissioners to account; they must bring both sides back to the table and reach a negotiated settlement. Leadership and accountability are required at every level.

Next week, I will meet directly with Unite workers to hear their perspective, to understand the challenges they face and make sure that their voices are a part of any solution. Let me be clear that residents, not politics, must be the priority. My message to all parties is simple: “Enough is enough. It is time to return to the table in good faith. It is time for negotiation, compromise and delivery.” The council, the commissioners, the workers and the union leadership all have a responsibility to make that happen. The Government must ensure that the conditions are in place for a settlement to succeed, alongside holding commissioners to account, and secure agreement, not stalemate.

Birmingham is a proud city, and its people are patient, but that patience has been tested long enough. It is time to end this dispute and restore a reliable waste service that puts residents and businesses first.

Birmingham: Waste Collection

Tahir Ali Excerpts

Tuesday 22nd April 2025 Commons Chamber

[Jim McMahon]

Let me be clear: over the past few weeks, photographs have been taken of the houses of union officials, and the same trade union has used photographs of the homes of the council leader and cabinet members. Neither of those things is okay. This is already a fraught dispute. It requires the good faith of all parties, and negotiation through being in the same room and talking through the issues in the interests of the workers and the people of the city of Birmingham. Our hope, and our expectation, is that, although what has happened has happened, a line is drawn and we can move forward in good faith.

[Tahir Ali (Birmingham Hall Green and Moseley) (Lab)]

I refer to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests. The crisis over bin collections in Birmingham has dragged on for far too long, and my constituents have suffered significantly as a result. While I understand the financial pressures on the council, clearly it is unreasonable to expect any worker to accept a pay cut. Will the Minister commit to taking all steps possible to encourage good faith negotiations between both parties, so that a fair deal can be reached and this vital service can be restored without any further disruption?

[Jim McMahon]

I do not think there is a single example—although I am prepared to be corrected—where equal pay has not had winners and losers on the edges. That is an element of equal pay that we have to accept. The envelope is not limited, so the books have to balance.

On the issue of how the WRCO role is being changed and whether workers need to lose pay, the council is offering a sideways move in the street scene division on the same grade 3, which will mean no loss of income. It is offering workers a move to an equivalent grade 3 role even if training is required, and it will provide that training. It is also offering LGV driver training, so that loaders can upgrade to being a driver, which carries a higher payment than their current role.

Non-commissioned Exempt Accommodation

Tahir Ali Excerpts

Wednesday 23rd February 2022 Commons Chamber

[Tahir Ali (Birmingham, Hall Green) (Lab)]

I would like to begin by thanking my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, Ladywood (Shabana Mahmood) for her excellent contribution and for securing the Westminster Hall debate a few weeks ago, and by noting the work done by the late Jack Dromey, the former Member for Birmingham, Erdington, on the issue of exempt accommodation in Birmingham.

As the Minister is no doubt aware, Birmingham has seen the largest increase in exempt accommodation outside London, with housing benefits claimants linked to the sector increasing to around 21,000. Birmingham City Council has done a great deal of work investigating and attempting to tackle this issue, but an overall lack of regulation from the Government is creating a massive influx of exempt accommodation in Birmingham, for the reasons set out by previous speakers.

Exempt accommodation often appears in residential areas without any community consultation. Neighbours wake up to find exempt accommodation established in their street and before long reports of anti-social behaviour, drugs, prostitution, exploitation and other serious issues emerge. I have been approached by many constituents across Birmingham Hall Green who are concerned with the significant increase in this type of accommodation in their local areas. Some residents have even reported being threatened with physical violence by tenants of exempt accommodation. That is why I applaud the efforts of local campaigners, councillors and parliamentary colleagues from across Birmingham who have worked so hard to secure an inquiry into exempt accommodation, which is now being undertaken by the Levelling Up, Housing and Communities Committee. I sincerely hope that the Government take note and pay close attention to that inquiry. It is evident that certain landlords are taking advantage of the current system to set up housing without providing any support to tenants, security for neighbours, or accountability for the social issues which may arise.

The serious reform of exempt accommodation is therefore necessary, with increased regulation across the sector. A fundamental part of that change must be to establish meaningful community consultation on this issue, so that residents are no longer ignored about what happens on the streets in their neighbourhoods. Those residents suffer the brunt of the problems associated with exempt accommodation, so they should have the greatest say in whether exempt properties should be established in their neighbourhoods. Residents need to be heard. Their views must be taken into consideration and more regulation is needed.

Furthermore, we need to see tougher regulation of exempt accommodation by a social housing regulator that can perform a fit and proper person test, and give local authorities the power to reject exempt accommodation in specific areas because of over-saturation.

Supported Exempt Accommodation

Tahir Ali Excerpts

Wednesday 9th February 2022 Westminster Hall

[Tahir Ali (Birmingham, Hall Green) (Lab)]

Will the Minister give way?

[Eddie Hughes]

Time is rapidly running out, but I will give way. Before I do, I just want to say that I completely understand the case that is being made by Opposition Members. I share their frustration and have a genuine, dedicated intention to tackle the issue. This will not be the last opportunity to discuss the matter. I look forward to discussing it outside of this Chamber.

[Tahir Ali]

I thank the Minister for giving way. Does he agree that councils across the country need regulations so that they can take action against rogue operators? My hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, Edgbaston (Preet Kaur Gill) mentioned that she was successful in closing down a rogue operator in her constituency, but that it then opened up in a neighbouring constituency. Councils need the powers and regulations to shut them down permanently.

[Eddie Hughes]

The best way to conclude would be to say that we certainly will not rule out the use of legislation if that proves to be the most important tool that we could deploy. Hopefully we will learn from the pilots when we have the final report, so that we understand which interventions work best and can develop future models that include them.

Question put and agreed to.