Baroness Warwick of Undercliffe (Lab)

My Lords, I speak to Amendments 139A and 140A in this group and link them to 150A in my name in a group discussed earlier today, which dealt with affordable social housing. Together, these amendments seek to ensure that, when strategic planning authorities develop their spatial strategies, they do so on the basis of a full and accurate assessment of housing need, including the needs of all those experiencing homelessness in their area. I am grateful to Crisis and to the National Housing Federation for their detailed and careful briefing on these issues. The context of my amendments is the huge scale of homelessness that people face across the country. Homelessness, including people rough sleeping and households living in temporary accommodation, is high and still rising. The Government’s £39 billion investment to build more social and affordable housing and their commitment to develop a cross-government homelessness strategy are very welcome steps towards addressing homelessness. However, it is important that, for planning purposes, strategic planning authorities consistently calculate the true scale of housing need, especially the need for social housing, homes for survivors of domestic abuse and housing with support, so that the Government’s ambition to build 1.5 million homes translates into homes for those experiencing homelessness. At present, local housing needs assessments are a vital first step in determining how many homes should be planned for. However, the Planning and Infrastructure Bill does not require those preparing spatial development strategies to calculate the amount of housing needed by their population using a consistent assessment of housing need. It also does not require specific breakdowns of the amounts of different forms of affordable housing and housing with support. This risks a range of approaches being taken between different areas and an underestimate of the amount and types of new homes needed. The current calculation, which begins with 0.8% of the existing house stock and adjusts for affordability, is too blunt an instrument; it ignores the reality on the ground in many localities. For example, work by Crisis, Brent Council and local partners revealed that the official rough sleeping count was, at one point, 34% lower than reality. Similar undercounting has been identified by the Women’s Rough Sleeping Census, which shows that women sleeping rough are routinely missed from statistics. The most recent census found over 10 times as many women sleeping rough than had been identified by the official government figures. If homelessness is underestimated, plans will not reflect the full range of housing needs of the population. That means too few homes and too few of the right kinds of homes being built to address homelessness locally. We risk undermining not only the Government’s welcome ambition to deliver the biggest boost to social and affordable housing in a generation but the goal of ending homelessness.