Affordable housing delivered by borough

What does this graph show?

In the London Plan in 2008/09, a target for new house-building was set for all of London, and divided up across the 32 boroughs. This target was to build at least 30,500 new homes a year, half of which should be "affordable". It was envisioned that of these, 70% would be in the social rented sector and the remaining 30% in the private rented sector.

Targets varied from borough to borough. The annual target for all new build housing (half of which was to be affordable) in Newham was 3,500, and 3,100 in Tower Hamlets. Richmond's target was 270.

The graph shows the proportion of the target that each borough has delivered in the three years since the report. In some cases, the target has been exceeded, and for presentation is presented as 100%.

In the majority of boroughs, greater progress has been made towards the target for intermediate housing than towards the target of social housing. 17 boroughs have met or exceeded their targets for affordable intermediate housing, compared to only three meeting the target for social housing.

Two boroughs that exceeded their targets for intermediate housing did not even build a quarter of their required social housing (Wandsworth and Hackney). This clearly represents a policy decision, to concentrate new building of affordable housing in the private sector.

13 boroughs did not reach 50% of their target amount of new build social housing between 2008 and 2010. There is no obvious geographical pattern to this. The two boroughs that delivered the lowest amount relative to their targets, Greenwich and Barking & Dagenham, are in the Outer East & North East.

Unsurprisingly, those boroughs with lower targets got closest to meeting them. Hounslow's total annual target of 445 was less than a quarter of the target Greenwich was required to meet.

All of this is retrospective, and the recent London Plan contains no annual targets for
local authorities. Rather, it suggests that boroughs work on their own targets that will
contribute towards an overall total for London of 13,200 new affordable homes each year. The balance between social housing and "intermediate" (shared ownership) in this has shifted too, from 70:30 to 60:40.

Within this, and nationwide, the nature of social housing is changing. Previously lifetime tenancies were available at social rents, which did not reflect the market value of the property. It is intended that lifetime tenancies be abolished and social rent be replaced with "affordable rent", which will charge rates at up to 80% of the local market value of the property regardless of the income of the household. Inevitably, these market rents will be much higher in London than elsewhere. Moreover, the difference between social rents and market rents will be greatest in London.

Additional information

There are official statistics on housing waiting lists which can provide an indication of overall demand for social housing. The variation between boroughs is so great that one must assume that they are not all compiled in the same way. There are, though, interesting things to note.

Waiting lists for social housing in Newham especially but also Tower Hamlets are far larger than in any other borough. In Newham, the waiting list is equivalent to 35% of all households in the borough. In Tower Hamlets it is 25%. The London average is 11%.

Waiting lists are longer in the Inner East & South (Newham, Tower Hamlets, Haringey and Lambeth are among the eight boroughs with the longest lists) than the Inner West. They are longer in the Outer East & North East than Outer West & North West or Outer South.

What this suggests is that in addition to the housing shortages in the "rich" Inner West, there is more substantial mismatch between demand and supply in other boroughs as well. According to Shelter's Local Housing Watch data, it would take Newham almost 40 years to clear its waiting list at current rates of construction. This is not only because it has the highest proportion of households on waiting lists, but also because its rate of letting to new social tenants is so low.

Find out more about housing and homelessness in London.

Data used

Monitoring reports of the London Plan via London Tenants Federation

Indicator last updated: 27 January 2012