Matthew Pennycook
MP for Greenwich and Woolwich · Labour · United Kingdom
“It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Dame Siobhain. I congratulate the right hon. and learned Member for Kenilworth and Southam (Sir Jeremy Wright) on securing this debate.”
“I will address the right hon. and learned Gentleman’s specific question in due course. Before I do so, I want to put on the record the policy in relation to villages. He can rest assured that I will address the point; if he is unsatisfied, he is more than welcome to intervene again. A number of hon. Members mentioned villages.”
“I will say two things in respect to that, and I will come on to detail how the approach works in relation to decision making very shortly. In general terms, developers can make whatever claims they like about any particular site across the country; it is for the local authority to assess whether, in its view, that site constitutes grey be…”
“and learned Gentleman’s point about what is likely to constitute grey-belt land. Let me directly address his other two specific points. Is this a significant policy? Absolutely, and it has been judged as much by the Office for Budget Responsibility and other external commentators. Is it deliberate? Absolutely. We want, as the right hon.”
“Where authorities may wish to restrict development in villages for other reasons, a range of tools are available, such as conservation areas or normal development management policies. On the right hon.”
“We have to put in place policies that, through the decision-making route, allow homes still to be brought forward in that interregnum, but then we have to push heavily to drive towards universal plan coverage. At that point, the protections are in place.”
The complete record
Every one of 5,181 lines we hold for Matthew Pennycook, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 104.
“The Bill supplements those efforts. It builds on the funding and regulatory certainty that we have already given the sector, and it supports the five-step plan we published last summer to deliver a decade of renewal for social and affordable housing.”
“It was for those reasons that the Government committed in our manifesto to delivering the biggest increase in social and affordable house building in a generation, prioritising the building of new social rented homes, enhancing protections for existing and new build social housing, and supporting councils and housing associations to make a greater contribution to affordable housing supply. In the 26 months we have been in office, we have faithfully sought to honour those commitments, making the biggest long-term investment in social and affordable housing in recent memory, vigorously prioritising social rented housing, rebuilding the capacity of councils and housing associations to borrow and invest in new and existing homes, reinvigorating council house building, and taking initial steps to better protect existing stock.”
“I beg to move, That the Bill be now read a Second time. Good housing is the foundation of a flourishing life. Decent, safe, secure and affordable homes provide a platform for families to live, grow and build a better life. They make for stronger, healthier and happier communities. Everyone—and I mean everyone—deserves to have one. Yet, as we all know, far too many families in need across the country are languishing on social housing waiting lists, struggling in the private rented sector or in expensive temporary accommodation as a result, and driving up rents and the housing benefit bill in the process. At the same time, the ability and willingness of councils to invest in the building of new social rented homes has been undermined by the steady and significant loss of existing stock through the right to buy scheme.”
“In the other place, peers sought to persuade the Government to set criteria for rural designation in regulations, and we have committed to amending the Bill to enable that.”
“The Bill delivers the broader set of reforms necessary to put in place a fair and sustainable right to buy scheme for the future, informed by the feedback we received in the public consultation that ran from November 2024 to January 2025. Key measures in the Bill include increasing the right to buy eligibility requirement from three to 10 years, amending percentage discounts to better align with new maximum cash discounts so that long-standing tenants benefit from the largest reductions, and exempting newly built social homes from sale under right to buy for 30 years. The Bill also exempts homes from sale under right to buy in areas designated as rural, given that homes in those areas are extremely difficult and expensive to replace.”
“However, we need to radically reform the right to buy in order to reduce the significant outflow of stock that has taken place since discounts were drastically increased by the coalition Government in 2012, to incentivise councils to build, and to attract broader investment in council housing. As hon. Members will know, we have already acted to reduce maximum right to buy cash discounts, to increase the cost floor protection period, to ensure—as I just said to my hon. Friend the Member for Bradford East (Imran Hussain)—that councils keep 100% of right to buy receipts, and to allow council to combine those receipts with developer contributions and grant funding.”
“Let me provide further detail on each objective in turn, starting with the measures designed to better protect existing social housing stock and incentivise the building of more social homes. At the heart of the Bill are comprehensive reforms to the right to buy scheme. In addressing them, I emphasise that we are not abolishing the right to buy—I know and respect the fact that some right hon. and hon. Members object to that decision on principle—but the Government remain firmly of the view that social housing tenants who have lived in and paid rent on their homes for many years should retain the opportunity to purchase them at a reasonable discount.”
“My hon. Friend is right: we absolutely need to give local councils flexibility. We have already helped councils to build their capacity. We have, as I will mention later, allowed them to keep 100% of right to buy receipts. We are considering everything we need to do to move the dial when it comes to house building, to build on the steps that we have already taken. The Bill has three core objectives: first, to protect much-needed housing stock and thereby incentivise the building of more social rented homes; secondly, to create a fairer tenancy system with greater protections for tenants who are victims of domestic abuse; and thirdly, to reduce unnecessary bureaucracy and give providers greater regulatory certainty so that they can invest in new social and affordable homes with confidence.”
“To put it more simply, instead of vainly watching the loss of precious social homes massively outpace their building, we will, for the first time in decades, build considerably more than we are losing thanks to this Labour Government and this Bill.”
“Further to that point, we are also taking equally important steps to ensure that councils are in a better position to buy any disposals—by raising the gap on grant funding for acquisitions, for example. Taken together, those measures will fundamentally alter the trajectory of social housing supply. Between April 2012 and March 2024, there were over 124,000 council right to buy sales, with fewer than 48,000 homes replaced in the same period. Under the previous, pre-reform baseline, we could have expected to see an approximate net loss of another 26,000 council homes between 2026 and 2036. Following the implementation of this Government’s right to buy reform package, including the measures in the Bill, we instead expect to realise a net gain of around 18,000 homes in the same 10-year period.”
“I am sure that we will have ongoing discussions about that and other issues. The hon. Gentleman may wish to hone his private Member’s Bill—the Homes and Planning Bill—so that it focuses on this issue among others. As I said at oral questions on Monday, I recognise the strength of feeling in the House on disposals. I want to ensure that every opportunity is taken to retain homes in the social housing sector. The new disposal notification requirements in the Bill, which I will address later, will maximise opportunities for social housing providers to buy and retain social homes, but housing associations remain independent organisations, responsible for their own asset management decisions. Yes, we are looking at what more we can do to protect much-needed social housing stock, but there are limits to the extent to which we can go.”
“There can be good reasons why private registered providers sometimes choose to dispose of social rented homes, and we do not propose to prevent them from doing so, but when a social home is to be sold, councils and other social housing providers should have the opportunity to consider whether they are interested in purchasing it. Legislation to provide them with that opportunity will prevent homes from being lost to the private market when they do not need to be.”
“There is lots I agree with in what my hon. Friend said. We want to see councils once again directly delivering homes at scale. We also want councils working in far closer partnership with housing associations to increase the number of homes that are built and managed by local authorities. The point my hon. Friend made about his local authority is on the record for people in his area to see. In addition to introducing comprehensive reforms to the right to buy, the Bill will require private providers of social housing to notify the relevant local authority and other social housing providers in their area before they sell a social home, which is relevant to the point the hon. Member for St Ives (Andrew George) made.”
“On the issue of disposals, having listened carefully to the debate in the other place on this matter, we have committed to introducing an amendment to extend the window of time that must pass between notification and the sale of a property to give councils and other providers more time to consider whether homes can be purchased and retained in the social housing sector, which we want to see.”
“It is disappointing to hear that my hon. Friend’s local authority is not interested in any way in trying to bring those homes back under local authority control. As I said, there are limits to what we can do. Housing associations remain independent organisations. I am sure that hon. Members will be aware of the risks concerned with the steps the Government might take on reclassification, but we are exploring what more can be done to protect much needed social housing stock. As I said, it is just as important that we ensure that those councils and other providers that do want to buy—there are plenty of them—are in a position to do so.”
“Indeed. That is precisely why we are introducing the notification window: we want to give local authorities and other providers the maximum opportunity to bring those homes back under their control. It is just as important that they are able to do so in practice. There are other issues affecting local authorities. A number of my hon. Friends in oral questions at the start of the week spoke about pressures on housing revenue accounts. All those issues are bearing down on the ability of councils to buy homes. We are looking at reforms to this area, not least the cap on acquisitions.”
“This is an utterly unacceptable state of affairs, and through the Bill, we will end it, as part of our Department’s ongoing efforts to deliver the Government’s unprecedented commitment to halve violence against women and girls in a decade.”
“I will make a bit of progress, because there are a lot of Members who want to speak, but I will come back to my hon. Friend later. I now turn to the Bill’s second core objective: increasing protections for tenants who are victims of domestic abuse. No one should be forced to remain in an unsafe situation because they fear becoming homeless, yet last year about 15,000 households in England had to find a new social home as a result of domestic abuse. Existing legislation provides scant protection for social housing tenants who are victims of domestic abuse and who wish to remain in their current home without their abuser. Landlords can evict perpetrators, but only in cases where the victim has already left. That means that all too often victims are forced to choose between staying in danger or losing their home.”
“I know that there is interest in this issue in the Chamber. There is certainly interest in the other place about it. I assure my hon. Friend that we appreciate fully that survivors of domestic abuse with debt can face barriers when applying for social housing. We continue to believe that guidance is the best route to resolving this issue, but we have been clear in the other place, and I am happy to reiterate it in this Chamber, that if that guidance proves insufficient, we do have the option of making regulations to amend the relevant legislation.”
“My hon. Friend knows that I have the utmost respect for her and all that she has done to make women and girls safe. In response to the points made by my hon. Friends the Members for Uxbridge and South Ruislip (Danny Beales) and for Birmingham Yardley (Jess Phillips), the Government have committed in our national plan to end homelessness to address this issue. There is consensus on that point. I am more than happy to make it clear that, if the guidance is not effective and does not have the intended effects that we all want to see, we will not hesitate to pursue changes through regulations. My hon. Friend has my commitment on that.”
“As well as repealing provisions from the 2016 Act, the Bill reforms the outdated housing consents regime, which can be time consuming and resource intensive for councils and often leads to delays in delivering new social and affordable housing. The Bill will streamline the consents process to empower councils and remove bureaucratic impediments that restrict councils’ flexibility in managing their housing stock, while retaining checks and protections where appropriate. Did my hon. Friend the Member for Basingstoke (Luke Murphy) want to intervene?”
“This Government will continue to encourage landlords to make the best and most effective use of their homes to meet housing need, but we have no intention of prohibiting lifetime secure tenancies, which provide much-needed security for many households and support social mobility, and so we are removing that policy from the statute book. Thirdly, the Bill will repeal provisions that would have required councils to sell off higher-value vacant housing stock and make annual payments in respect of expected sales to the Treasury. This Government have no intention of implementing this policy and want to see these assets remain for councils to manage and use as they see fit, so we are removing it from the statute book.”
“Member for Rawmarsh and Conisbrough (John Healey)—contains a series of social housing provisions that have never been brought into force. The Bill will repeal the following measures to clarify the statute book and provide the sector with certainty that they will never be implemented. First, this Government have no intention of implementing provisions that would have required councils to charge higher rents to higher-income social tenants, also known as mandatory pay to stay. The policy could have incentivised tenants to reduce work hours to avoid higher rent, so we are removing it from the statute book. Secondly, the Bill will repeal provisions that would have required councils to grant fixed-term tenancies of between two years and 10 years generally to all new tenants.”
“The new powers will apply where the victim is personally connected to the perpetrator tenant and is a current or former occupant of the property. By aligning the approach with the Domestic Abuse Act 2021, the Bill will cover a broader range of relationships, including partners, former partners and family members. The Bill’s third core objective is reducing unnecessary bureaucracy and providing regulatory clarity so that providers can invest in new social and affordable homes with confidence. The Housing and Planning Act 2016—incidentally, the Bill Committee of which I happened to serve on as a young Parliamentary Private Secretary to the then shadow Housing Secretary, now Chancellor of the Exchequer, the right hon.”
“I am not going to give way. Madam Deputy Speaker is glaring at me because I am taking too much time. I know that many Members want to speak. I will try to come back to colleagues as I progress through my remarks. To ensure that victims of domestic abuse can access safe and secure housing, the Bill provides for stronger legal mechanisms to remove a perpetrator from a social housing tenancy and enable victims to stay in their home or move to alternative accommodation as a sole tenant. In response to constructive debate on the subject in the other place, we intend to bolster the discretionary possession ground so that the existence of a relevant protective order can provide the basis for proceedings, rather than evidence that the order has already been breached being required.”
“Or have I caught him unprepared? I was going to give him a chance there. To conclude, after years of marginalisation, this Government have emphatically and unashamedly asserted the necessity and value of social rented homes. They are a crucial national asset to be proud of, to invest in, to protect and to maintain. This Bill will protect precious social homes for future generations and incentivise the building of many more of them. It will give social housing providers the confidence they need to invest in new social and affordable homes, and it will support social tenants who are victims and survivors of domestic abuse.”
“We do not believe a review is necessary as we are already actively considering specific issues that have been raised in debates, including data and long-term affordability for customers, and we will of course consider what more we can do to act on those issues within our wider programme to improve shared ownership.”
“I thank my hon. Friend for her question and her passionate advocacy on behalf of her constituents and others around the country on housing issues generally. On shared ownership, I know the pressures that shared owners face; I see them in my own constituency postbag on a daily basis. We have already taken positive steps to improve the shared ownership model such as introducing new expectations for landlords who bid for shared ownership grant funding to improve fairness and transparency. We are supporting shared owners affected by specific challenges, such as building safety issues. Clause 13, which hon. Members might be aware was added to the Bill in the other place, requires a review of the shared ownership model to be carried out within 12 months of the Bill passing.”
“We are also considering what more can be done to bolster public control of social housing to ensure that it serves and supports those who need it most.”
“I will make some progress. I am immensely grateful to my noble Friend, Baroness Taylor of Stevenage, for the customary skill with which she oversaw the passage of the Bill through the other place and for the extensive engagement she undertook with peers throughout the initial Lords stages. A number of important issues were raised during the debates in the other place and, as a result, my Department is undertaking rapid policy work to determine whether there is a case for strengthening the Bill further in a series of areas. For example, in response to concerns raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Dulwich and West Norwood (Helen Hayes) and the noble Lord Best, we are giving serious consideration to what more might be done to provide greater security of tenure for social tenants who are fleeing violence, including serious youth violence.”
“I will not; I am just about to conclude—apologies to my hon. Friend. I look forward to engaging with hon. Members on both sides of the Chamber in relation to these and other matters as we look to improve the Bill further, and I commend it to the House.”
“The Government do not collect data on how much land within green belts has been formally identified as grey belt by individual local authorities. It is for local authorities themselves to determine whether land in their areas constitutes grey belt, either through plan making or through looking at specific applications. On 27 February 2025, the Government updated green-belt planning practice guidance to support a consistent approach to assessing green belt to identify grey-belt land.”
“I am aware of the case. My understanding is that Shropshire council refused planning permission for the development on the basis that the land was not grey belt and therefore building on it would constitute inappropriate development in the green belt. In general terms, when it comes to determining whether a site is classified as grey belt, the relevant inspector will, at appeal, consider relevant legislation; national planning policy, including the national planning policy framework; planning policy guidance; and any other relevant local development plan policies and material considerations.”
“The new national planning policy framework, published on 17 August, includes a number of new policies designed to increase densification inside settlements, including by encouraging the upward expansion of existing homes and the creation of new dwellings in existing plots.”
“We have not got it wrong: the new NPPF does prioritise urban development and densification. As I have made clear to the hon. Gentleman a number of times, local authorities can justify a lower housing requirement than the figure set by the standard method on the basis of local constraints, such as land availability. It is for local planning authorities themselves to determine whether there are exceptional circumstances that justify the release of green belt, and we fully expect them to first demonstrate that they have fully examined all other reasonable options for meeting identified need for development, including making as much use as possible of suitable brownfield sites and underutilised land.”
“The Government are undertaking a number of pieces of work to look at what more we can do to revitalise our high streets. The Secretary of State and I are looking specifically at what more we can do to arm local authorities with the powers they need to bring empty homes back into use.”
“The shadow Minister is absolutely right that house builders across the country face challenges with viability, not least owing to the implications of the ongoing conflict in the middle east. London has a number of challenges particular to itself that the rest of the country does not face; that is precisely why we brought forward an emergency package with the Mayor of London, specifically to get those stalled sites in the capital moving.”
“Local planning authorities are expected to plan effectively for infrastructure provision through local development plans and infrastructure funding statements. To support them, the Government have strengthened national planning policy in respect of community facilities and public service infrastructure, and we provide direct financial support for essential infrastructure in areas of greatest housing demand through land and infrastructure funding programmes.”
“My colleagues on the Front Bench will have heard the hon. Member’s request on the devolution offer that needs to be made to Cornwall. He cited a case where the developers backed out of their commitments: specifically on developer contributions, I should say that communities rightly expect necessary infrastructure to be provided and any commitments made to be met. Section 106 planning obligations help, obviously, to mitigate the impacts of a development proposal. They are legally binding and enforceable. If he wants to write to me with the particular circumstances of the case, he is more than welcome to do so.”
“As I just said to a previous question, we are looking at what more we can do to give local authorities the powers they need to bring empty homes back into use. My hon. Friend will understand that I cannot comment on specific applications being made, but councils can, through section 106 agreements, seek to negotiate with developers to bring forward the necessary infrastructure and amenities, and affordable housing, on particular sites.”
“I welcome the shadow Minister to the Front Bench on a well-deserved promotion. The previous Government had 14 years to resolve this problem; they did not do so. I say to the shadow Minister honestly—he knows this full well as a former local councillor—that there is no single, simple answer to the problem of getting the necessary infrastructure in place. As I said, we have strengthened national planning policy to ensure that community facilities and public service infrastructure are brought forward. Again, we are strengthening developer contributions. We directly finance land and infrastructure. There is more to be done, and we will do it.”
“The shadow Minister raises a justified point, in that in some cases securing the necessary public service infrastructure is about ensuring that the buildings are brought forward through the relevant developer contributions and other infrastructure funding streams. In some cases, there are other issues, such as workforce challenges in particular. We regularly speak to colleagues in other Departments, including the Department of Health and Social Care, to ensure that we get that infrastructure up front and alongside development.”
“The national planning policy framework contains strong protections for the green belt, making clear that inappropriate development in it should not be approved unless justified by very special circumstances. It is for local planning authorities themselves to set and review green-belt boundaries in accordance with national policy in the NPPF.”
“I fully appreciate the hon. Lady’s concerns about inappropriate development around stations, such as Hersham and Claygate in her constituency. It is right that we seek to promote good development around well-connected stations, outside of settlements or on green-belt land, as those are some of the most sustainable locations for new homes in the country. However, the new NPPF makes clear that development proposals around such stations should not prejudice any proposals for long-term comprehensive development in the same location, and must also be of a scale that can be accommodated, taking into account existing or proposed availability of infrastructure.”
“We recognise that many councils are facing significant financial pressure on their HRAs. The Government have already taken a number of steps to rebuild the capacity of councils to borrow and invest in new and existing homes, including fundamental reform of the right to buy scheme, a 10-year social housing rent settlement and social rent convergence. We will continue to explore further ways in which we might support councils to expand their stock of social homes, including low-cost borrowing options.”
“As I made clear, we have already acted to build capacity in the sector, and will continue to explore further ways in which we might increase the headroom available to councils and housing associations, not least through low-cost borrowing options. With regard to the HRA, we remain of the view that the principle of self-financing is the right foundation, but as I said, we are fully aware of the impact of HRA debt on many councils’ ability to build more and will continue to explore ways in which we might further support them.”
“My hon. Friend is absolutely right about the importance of building more homes in London—I am acutely aware of the housing delivery challenges that the capital is facing. It is really important that a big proportion of those homes are social rented homes and council-delivered social rented homes. I am really pleased that in the early years of the social and affordable homes programme, 30% of the funding will go to London. That will allow London to deliver at least £6 billion of initial allocations, over half of which will be for council housing. However, there is more we need to do in this area, and I am more than happy to have a discussion with my hon. Friend outside the Chamber about what that is.”
“We have made changes to help more councils access an HRA, raising the threshold from 200 homes to 1,000 homes to provide support in that area. Over time, we want to see a deeper partnership and more working between councils and local authorities, but we are giving consideration to what more we can do to ensure there is sufficient public control of private registered providers in an area to meet housing need. We may discuss this issue further on Second Reading of the Social Housing Bill on Thursday.”
“As the hon. Gentleman is hopefully aware, we have already taken action to reduce maximum right-to-buy cash discounts. Through the Social Housing Bill—as I mentioned, it has its Second Reading on Thursday—we are taking further action to increase eligibility and banning the right to buy on new build social homes for 35 years. I hope he can get behind that Bill on Thursday and support it.”
“The definition of “reasonable walking distance” is set out in the glossary of the national planning policy framework. For the purposes of policies relating to land around well connected stations, the glossary makes it clear that it should be considered to be about 800 metres, or about 10 minutes’ walk time if topography, route availability or quality, or physical barriers “would prevent or discourage walking from up to 800 metres away.””