In August last year the Spencer*family, mother and five children of school age, were living in two basement rooms in North London. Sewage leaked into the rooms, they used = sink in an outside ares and shared a ¥.C. with the tenants from two other 'flats' in a six-roomed house, This hovel cost the outrageous rent of £5. 10. Od per week, The Spencers did not possess a rent book and the 'landlord!' or one of his ‘friends' collected the rent, either late in the evening, or in the middle of the night. It was a Furnished ‘flat! and the ‘landlord! called from time to time to take some of the furniture away - and also to demand extra payment for its use.
When a letter was sent to the 'landlord' by a social worker helping the family, it was returned with a message saying he was shortly “leaving the country". Later when a Notice to Quit arrived at the house for a person unknown, it was discovered that the ‘landlord! was not the owmer of the property at all. The real omer was then located and whilst the social worker was trying to negotiate tenancy rights for the Spencers a bill for electricity arrived at the house. As this was also addressed to a person unknown, and the tenants’ rents covered their share of electricity, the fiains supply was eventually disconnected and the Spencers lived by candlelight.
In February of this year the the Spencers were allowed to move from their insanitary conditions in the basement to two gas-lit rooms at the top of the same house and their rent was reduced to £2. 10. Od. An improvement, but, still deplorable conditions in which to expect a family to live. The Electricity Board condemned the wiring in the house and the owner would not have any repairs done whilst the house was occupied!
Meanwhile the "landlord' returned in April, removed some more furniture, demanded money from the tenant on the ground floor and when the tenant refused he was beaten up and his window was smashed,
Finally, the Public Health Department placed a 'Closing Order! on the house and the Spencers were received into a Reception Centre for homeless families. (It is estimated that there are about 1,500 homeless families in London at present.) The families in the Reception Centres are the casualties of our so-called Welfere State which has failed to provide an answer to the housing shortage. In the area where the Spmcers lived, slum property is bought for between £3,000 and £6,000, it is then modernised and sold for anything up to £16,400. Faced with facts like these and various pressures, subtle and otherwise, placed upon tenants to give up their slum houses, is it any wonder that working-Class people are apathetic and social workers sceptical and angry?
Who are the homeless? They are very likely to be victims of the 1957 Rent Act which the Tories introduced and is still with us under the Labour Government, A London County Council survey showed that 60% of the families admitted to welfare =sccomodation were evicted from property not subject to rent control, In other words, they are the direct result of the 1957 Rent Act. The father of the family is likely to be a steady manual worker earning about £14 per week, he is about 30 years old and is married with two or three children, * This is genuine family but the name is fictitious,
Homelessness continued/
The Milner Holland report has admirably documented the case for rent eontrol and security of venue” all the present Government has been able to produce is the Protection Eviction Act, 1964. This Act does not give complete security of tenure, but only enables County Courts to delay evictions up to 12 months, Families are still being evicted,
The nationalisation of urban land and the building industries, are obviously fundamental issues to be faced by any socialist government wishing to plan a revolutionary housing programme. The nationalisation of urban land and the building industries need to be dovetailed into a comprehensive plan for housing, which will end the land and rent racket and for the first time enable a realistic plan to he launched,
As an immediate step to alleviate the housing problem and to ensure security of tenure to millions of households, the Government should pass an Act directing local authorities to mmidpalise all private rented dwellings (possession to be made possible by financial aid from the central government where necessary). Ministry grants with such a plan would also enable local puthorities to greatly improve some of the slum property which they would take over, Then, for example, the Islington Borough Council, would be able +o take possession of the rat-infested Beaconsfield Buildings, which has been likened to a Sicilien tenement blinck. The Csumeil could then demolish the buildings or carry out the alterations and repairs that are so desperately needed,
This should be followed by the nationalisation of urban land and the building trades, including the firms who produce the vital materials which are so often in short supply and yet from which such enormous profits are made. To gain the confidence of the workers in the industries and to ensure maximum efficiency, workers!’ control is essential,
The municipslisation of private rented ‘Gwellings and the nationalis— ation of urban land and the building industries, would lay the foundation for a programme which would relieve a great deal of suffering. Overcrowding, inadeouate housing and “homelessness are often the cause, directly or indirectly, of a variety of mental, physical and social illnesses, Mental iliness, marital discord and deliquency, for example, are somtimes produced or exacerbated by such tonditions. Housing effects people's health, their development and, in turn, the general health of the community and, therefore, 44 should be a social service. ‘The Government that accepts this premise will need to be bold and reyolutionary.