Contribution
I primarily want to talk about the first four clauses of the Bill and community-led housing. Second homes exist in Mid Sussex—of course they do—but the scale of the challenge is nowhere near that faced by colleagues in parts of the country that are more frequented by tourists, such as Cornwall in the south-west, Cumbria and so on.
When I think about my constituency, I think about the district as a whole. There are about 2,000 households on the social housing register, and about 100 homes where families are living in temporary accommodation. I am well aware that those are quite small numbers compared with other parts of the country, but when we go out knocking on doors in Mid Sussex and have a conversation about the need for housing and the housing crisis, people in my community often do not realise that even 100 families are in temporary accommodation in our area.
First as a councillor, and now as a Member of the House, I think about what that means for people’s day-to-day lives. I think about the mum and her daughter who spent the first five years of that child’s life sharing a one-bedroom flat in a rural village. I think about the family of six I tried and failed to help, and who were facing eviction about 18 months ago. They were unable to find anywhere suitable for rent either privately or socially, and critically, there was nowhere near the school that the children attended. Too many people are inadequately or insecurely housed in my constituency, as is the case across the country.
Mid Sussex has a mixture of towns, large villages and small hamlets. It is by no means the most rural or largest constituency, but if someone who has an established network of family and friends around them in one area, in that village, is moved to accommodation at the other end of the district, that is devastating. It strains family ties, breaks friendships and support networks, and makes it next to impossible for people to stay in work, or for children to remain in the school where they are settled and happy. For those families who do not have access to a car, or perhaps two cars in a rural area with no buses, it is absolutely awful when somebody cannot find a decent home. For those reasons, we should be doing everything we can to enable people to stay in the place they call home. Community matters, villages matter, being near our family and friends matters, and the Bill goes with the grain of what communities are already trying to do.
In our area, we are lucky to have a network of town and parish councils, and their councillors—particularly the parish councillors—are unpaid volunteers, but they go above and beyond for their communities in a variety of ways. Over the years, I have seen how they have tried, with mixed success, to secure assets of community value for their communities.
When I first moved to Mid Sussex in 2012, it was the time of the neighbourhood plan. I saw my parish council, and subsequently other parish councils, do everything it could in good faith to meet the requirements for neighbourhood planning, only to be told a few years later that the need for local plans trumped that neighbourhood plan, which it believed provided the housing that its community needed, and which the community felt able to support. Those parish councillors were acting on a voluntary basis, and they were acting in good faith.
In the last week or so, we have had the latest examination of the Mid Sussex district plan and, again, these volunteers have worked tirelessly to represent the interests of their communities. Mid Sussex council is currently led by the Liberal Democrats, although we do not have a majority, and it was previously run by the Conservatives. It has actually done what has been asked of it by successive Governments and delivered housing at scale, generally over 1,000 homes a year, 30% of which have been for affordable and social housing. As a council, we have not shied away from building the homes required of us, which is evidenced by the fact that Mid Sussex has the highest rate of population growth across the whole of Sussex.
If last week’s examination were to go ahead, it looks like another 24,000 homes will be allocated, despite them being predicated on having an adequate water supply. Ardingly reservoir, on which the constituency relies for its water, currently contains less than 20% of its capacity. When I talk to residents, they are in disbelief that another 24,000 homes could be provided for, when there has been a hosepipe ban in place for 10 of the last 16 months, and when there is a severe drought, a knackered and leaking pipe network and a reservoir that seems to empty quicker than water down a plughole.