'Our homelessness services are under significant pressure'
We are aware that the number of people living in temporary homeless accommodation is at a record high, from reports provided by Glasgow's Health and Social Care Partnership.
Currently, staff at the Health and Social Care Partnership are focusing on supporting people who are living in an emergency situation.
At the moment, the demand for housing in Glasgow is much greater than the housing supply.
There can be a delay of several years before people who are homeless can access a permanent house or flat.
Homeless charities highlight that the cuts by the UK Department for Work and Pensions towards Personal Independence Payment and Universal Credit will lead to a further increase in homelessness.
Decisions by the UK Government in the year ahead are likely to exacerbate our already stretched council services.
The Scottish Government is mitigating the UK Government's Bedroom Tax.
We know that this funding would be better spent tackling the housing crisis and the UK Government should scrap this tax.
There is a Housing Transfer Incentive Scheme in Glasgow which can help release large housing association homes by encouraging people in 'under-occupied' properties with three rooms or more, to downsize.
Tenants can access appropriately sized homes to meet their needs through specific housing support services.
We can welcome the Scottish Parliament's Housing Inquiry by the Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee which has published a series of recommendations to support further collaboration by the Scottish Government with housing providers to deliver a national overarching Housing Emergency Action Plan by the end of this session.
We need the Scottish Government to provide clarity on whether its additional funding for the Affordable Housing Supply Programme budget will ensure that it meets its target of providing 110,000 affordable homes by 2030.
It is vital that housing is a priority and that the Scottish Government considers the importance of increasing the Affordable Housing Supply Programme budget.
There has been significant partnership working undertaken to respond to the housing crisis.
We can welcome the number of housing associations providing lets to tenants who are homeless across Glasgow.
The Scottish Government can explore the opportunities available by increasing social investment in housing.
The capacity of housing associations could be developed to increase the number of homes, especially for families, in our local communities.
There is a need to ensure clarity for housing providers on the intended statutory requirement for homes to meet net-zero standards.
Uncertainty is deterring housing development and this needs to be addressed to help tackle the housing crisis.
We can support the appointment of Màiri McAllan as Cabinet Secretary for Housing to ensure that there is increased focus on tackling the housing crisis and providing energy-efficient homes for the future.
It is vital that the new Cabinet Secretary can use all the powers at her disposal to address the housing crisis we face.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
33 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Our welfare system needs reform, not arbitrary cuts
As the smoke settles from yet another astonishing tyre-screeching U-turn by Kier Starmer on his welfare proposals, the stark reality is that instead of significant savings, we will all now face an extra tax bill of £3bn in the autumn. This U-turn isn't surprising to me because their proposal was a classic panicky short-term Treasury driven cut but in no way genuine reform. I even doubt that the savings would in the longer term have materialised. This is because I believe they were going at it the wrong way. The Covid lockdowns blasted a hole in our welfare system. Since 2020, the number of households where no one has ever worked has doubled. Economic inactivity due to long-term sickness has risen by 800,000. And taxpayers today are shelling out an extra £30 billion every year on sickness and disability benefits, on top of an already bulging bill. Lockdown reversed much of the progress we had made under the transformations of Universal Credit, in part relaxing eligibility rules and assessments for benefits, a leniency that astonishingly continues to this day. But also expanding the 'claim culture', albeit inadvertently, through schemes like furlough. It is easy to forget that by 2019 we had the lowest rate of workless households on record. Clearly, we have to get a grip. But solving this problem will take thought, courage and time. The Government's proposals are rushed in order to be 'scored' by the OBR in time for the Spring Statement. In a panic, the Treasury opted to simply top-slice spending by raising the threshold for disability benefits across the board. This leads to some deeply concerning outcomes. According to the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP), three in four Personal Independence Payment (PIP) claimants with arthritis, two in three with cardiovascular disease, and even a third with cancer could lose support. Yet there is another way, one which focuses on the root causes of the crisis. But that must start with a grown-up conversation about mental health. Monthly PIP claims have more than doubled, driven in large part by a threefold increase in people citing mental health conditions. Meanwhile the majority of people on Universal Credit receiving health-related top-ups now also report poor mental health. Tragically, it is disproportionately young people fuelling this rise, those most likely to suffer the mental and emotional consequences of being out of work. And yet it is the system itself that is driving worklessness and dependency. Of course, PIP eligibility does not require someone to be out of work. Yet five in six recipients are. Taken in the round, once you tot up all the various benefits, the system has tilted towards incentivising ill health rather than supporting recovery. There is another way. New research from the Centre for Social Justice (CSJ) shows that better targeting of mental health benefits – focusing help to those with more serious conditions – could save the Government up to £9 billion. A more humane and sustainable approach to reform would recognise that, for many people with anxiety or depression, ensuring proper treatment is much more compassionate than parking them on benefits and slamming the door to an independent life. First, the government could use the savings to fund a £1 billion investment in NHS Talking Therapies, expanding 1.5 million additional treatment courses. CSJ polling also finds that nearly half the public believe people with less severe conditions should be supported through programmes and services, compared to one in five saying cash. Second, the Government should accelerate the rollout of Universal Support, originally launched by the last Conservative government and now rebranded as Connect to Work. This scheme works with the local charities and community organisations best placed to help people who are furthest from the workforce. These inspirational people are already on the ground, collaborating with employers to tackle the most difficult barriers to work, whether family breakdown, debt, addiction, and poor health. Finally, for the first time, sickness benefit is being brought into Universal Credit as I had designed originally. The DWP now has powerful tools Universal Credit provides. The NHS has made it clear that for depression and anxiety, the largest new claimant group, work is a health treatment. Yet far too many people were left on sickness benefit with no meaningful contact. Many who were off work for health reasons received no time with a work coach at all. Now under Universal credit that can change. The system should be doing more – using AI to free up work coach time – to increase the contact time with claimants and not leaving them parked on the sidelines. Our welfare system needs reform, not arbitrary cuts. I understand the pressure Liz Kendall is under. But short-term fixes risk doing lasting damage. We need a system that treats people with compassion while actively supporting them to recover and return to work. That's how to reduce dependency, control costs, and rebuild lives.
Times
2 hours ago
- Times
Starmer must find it in himself to be a true leader
Prime ministerial authority can end with a spectacular tyre-shredding blowout, à la Liz Truss, or more usually a slow puncture. The latter begins with a series of stumbles, which early on are judged forgivable, but as time passes become less so. Once a prime minister is designated 'accident prone' recovery, in the eyes of the electorate, and his or her party, becomes steadily less likely. Irritation evolves into disillusionment, and disillusionment into contempt. From then on, defeat at the ballot box, or a pre-emptive strike from the men in grey suits, is a matter of time. Sir Keir Starmer has not careered off the motorway trailing smoking rubber, like Ms Truss. But his every appearance is now accompanied by an ominous hiss. Labour's inaugural year was never going to be easy, given the legacy of the Conservative era, but the first anniversary of its general election win this coming Friday will be unusually downbeat. Following a series of unforced errors, typified by this week's humiliating climbdown on welfare reform in the face of a mass uprising by Labour MPs, this government is already looking distinctly ragged. And responsibility for its sorry state must ultimately lie with the prime minister. By his failure to plan for power, by his lapses of judgment, by his lack of grip, Sir Keir has created this mess. • A year on, is the Starmer project doomed or can he claw it back? The Labour leader was never going to be loved for his charisma. His selling point was lawyerly sobriety, his prosecutor's punctiliousness. Yet successive fiascos tell a different tale. Depriving pensioners of winter fuel payments, raising employers' national insurance, ditching the Rwanda scheme while not replacing it with a small boats deterrent, understating the harm of grooming gangs: these were the results of Sir Keir's failure to devise detailed plans for the economy and migration in opposition, to devise a coherent narrative explaining difficult choices, and to practise basic politics in spotting approaching danger. Labour rebels, scenting blood, are looking for a scalp in Downing Street. Rachel Reeves, the chancellor, is the ideal prize for unreconstructed statists; or perhaps Morgan McSweeney, Sir Keir's chief of staff, whose brutal but effective silencing of Labour's left before the election inevitably made him enemies. The case against Ms Reeves, to whom Sir Keir appears to have ceded total control over economic policy, is more plausible than that against Mr McSweeney. Her national insurance hike dealt a huge blow to growth, while her winter fuel and working-age health benefits cuts appeared more the result of panic than part of a detailed strategy for reining in a bloated state. • Meet Brian Leishman, the leftwinger holding Keir Starmer's feet to the fire Yet, the chief culprit for Labour's malaise must be Sir Keir. Great prime ministers ultimately delegate to no one in central areas of policy like welfare reform, which must continue if the public finances are to be rescued. Equally, a leader who ignores his backbenchers, especially after a landslide has produced hordes of naive and ambitious new ones, is asking for trouble. In an interview marking his first year, Sir Keir admitted to presentational errors. But the problem runs deeper. This government increasingly comes across as inept: kneejerk rather than strategic in policy implementation, subject to panic and surrender at the first whiff of cordite. Some £4.5 billion has been shaved off its wafer-thin fiscal headroom by the welfare retreat. Autumn tax rises loom; bond markets grow sceptical; deeper unpopularity beckons. Sir Keir handled Donald Trump well, and mended ties with Europe, but he will live or die on the domestic battlefield. Wage growth is forecast to stagnate; Reform would be the biggest party in an election tomorrow. To survive, Sir Keir must become a dominating personality not a bureaucrat, gripping policy, punishing failure, espousing a vision. He must become what he has never truly reconciled himself to being: a politician. If not, there's always someone else willing to have a go.
Telegraph
3 hours ago
- Telegraph
Labour's industrial strategy is a corporatist, state-led agenda
Within the strategy, the talk is of competitiveness, the answer is intervention. The document acknowledges that firms are concerned about high electricity prices and lengthy waits for grid connections, and the answer is that the current policy is right but can be tweaked. The burden of regulation and the speed of planning are noted as barriers, so let's see if the government's actions back their words in trying to address these. I doubt it on regulation, but I am more hopeful of planning reform, which would indeed make a profound, welcome difference to growth prospects. At their core, industrial policies reflect scepticism about markets and an aversion to supply-side reform. Instead of removing hurdles to growth as supply-side policies would, industrial policies often reflect the lethal combination of politicians driven by a belief that the state drives growth, academics who think they know best and lobbyists. This new strategy is unlikely to improve underlying business conditions. Industrial policy is sometimes presented as a complement to supply-side reform, but more often, it becomes a substitute. One criticism has been that government spending crowds out the private sector, but this strategy hopes that funds directed to the IS-8 will crowd it in. Let's see. There is also something amiss about these eight sectors in that they reinforce the imbalanced nature of the economy. The UK is a low wage economy because half the population work in low paid jobs. Outside London and the South East the numbers employed in these eight sectors is very limited. The UK's approach to such strategies often leans towards tax credits. That remains a focus. This new strategy explicitly mentions the role tax plays in incentivising investment, innovation and growth. It then argues our current approach is competitive. Really? In the 2024 International Tax Competitiveness Index, the UK ranked 30th out of 38 OECD countries and looks more likely to fall, than rise. The last 12 months have been turbulent for the world economy and difficult for the UK. But instead of tax, spend and borrow, what we need is for the UK to save, invest and compete. Gerard Lyons is a research fellow at the Centre for Policy Studies
