The head of a Tayside housing association has welcomed the Scottish Government’s U-turn over a scheme which threatened rent hikes for elderly and disabled tenants.
As The Courier reported last month, the government had planned to force housing associations to pay the first £1000 towards the cost of adapting homes to meet the needs of tenants with mobility problems.
The move was condemned by housing associations across the country, which said the cut in government grants to help keep disabled people in the community was short-sighted and could lead to increased rents and service charges as they would have to find an extra £8.4 million every year.
The government had also planned to remove the small fee paid to housing associations for the administration involved in arranging the adaptations.
Now, however, Alex Neil, the cabinet secretary with responsibility for housing, has ordered a last-minute rethink of the proposal, though an overall funding cut of £500,000 is to remain in force.
Making the announcement on his behalf, deputy director of social housing, Aidan Grisewood, said Mr Neil had “listened carefully to concerns and agreed that we should return to the previous grant eligibility used in 2010-11 to ensure that these crucial adaptations for older and disabled people can proceed.”
Housing associations will still be encouraged, “to make a contribution, if that is practical, to allow more adaptations overall,” he added.
In addition, the government is planning a consultation on the issue to “ensure we are better able to advise ministers on the full impact of any potential grant eligibility changes…”
One of the critics of the cuts was Angus Housing Association director Bruce Forbes, who blasted the proposed move as essentially a tax on all housing association tenants. He revealed the change in the rules could have cost his own organisation £50,000 each year the equivalent of £29 extra from each tenant.
Home adaptations can range from “a couple of hundred pounds” for handrails and the like, to £20,000 for a house extension and, as the money has to be paid out if and when the need arises, it is hard to predict how much will be required from year to year,” he said.
“To be fair to the Scottish Government, in the past it has always managed to find the money for anyone in particular who has a problem and I think that has to be stressed.
“I think that the main thrust of the point that is being made by everybody who was outraged by the previous decision is that the system has to be flexible to stop people being hospitalised on a long-term basis.”
He said reviewing adaptation funding for residents of all housing tenures would “make a lot of sense.”
The change of heart and review were also welcomed by the Scottish Federation of Housing Associations, whose chief executive Mary Taylor said, “The changes to funding, announced with no consultation at the very end of the last parliament, caused widespread anger amongst associations and co-operatives and would have meant that badly-needed housing adaptations could not be carried out.
“That’s why the SFHA wrote to ministers immediately before and after the election urging them to think again. Housing adaptations are a cost-effective way of helping people to stay in their homes for longer, improving their quality of life and avoiding needless and costly hospital admissions.”
The Chartered Institute of Housing Scotland’s David Bookbinder expressed disappointment that the overall funding cut remains.
“The Scottish Government’s response to the challenges of the ageing population is likely to see little or no specialist new build provision for those older people who need it.
“That means adaptations are one of the few achievable ways of meeting needs and at the same time changing people’s lives and making best use of existing stock,” he said.