Tag Archive for 'EU citizen'

EU citizens and social housing

Published
by
NL
on 29 May 2007
in Housing law
. 0 Comments

Head of Legal had an interesting post in response to my post on Hodge’s outburst (the ramifications of which rumble on, including the BNP noting gratefully that they win whether the ideas become policy or if they are not carried through. Unfortunately true. Well done Margaret).

EU workerHead of Legal, I think, suggested that Directive 2004/38 (pdf) overrode most of the current restrictions on EU citizens being workers or workseekers in order to have benefit and housing entitlement. In particular, he suggested that they would be entitled during the first 3 months in any case and also when not workseekers, because they retain the right to reside if they become incapable of work or become vocational students. (Apologies for any misrepresentation).

I’ve had a quick look at the Directive and I’m not so sure that it does change matters much. Taking it point by point:

1. Right of residence for initial 3 months. This is given by Art 6. But Art 24(2) allows a derogation from the general rule such that there is no social assistance for this 3 month period. England has indeed made such a derogation - see Allocation of Housing and Homelessness (Eligibility)(England) Regs 2006 SI No 1294. So, there is no housing eligibility for anyone whose only right of residence is via Art 6.

2. A right of residence longer than 3 months is provided for in Art 7. The right of residence is only for workers or self-employed, or self-sufficient or self-sufficient students only (plus family members). Art 7 provides that workers remain workers if:

  • a) Temporarily unable to work through illness or accident;
  • b) Subject to involuntary unemployment after one year employment and are registered jobseekers;
  • c) Subject to involuntary unemployed after a fixed term job of less than a year or during first 12 months and are registered jobseekers - this lasts for no less than 6 months (but not necessarily any longer. The UK says 6 months);
  • d) Are in vocational training related to previous employment.

These get housing assistance, pretty much as before. The vocational training point is interesting, but won’t cover many people. I suspect that it won’t extend to much in the way of studentdom. There could be some clashes on this. It is also worth noting the ‘temporarily’ in a).

I suspect that ‘training v student’ aside, the only issues may be how long is ‘temporary’ in a) and the length of time that can be spent as a workseeker in b) before losing worker status. On the latter, see R (ex p Mohamed) v Harrow LBC [2005] EWHC 3194 (Admin), which said 15 months was too long. (I think this was probably decided before any implementation of the directive, though).

3. Head of Legal raises equal treatment under Art 24. This is of course the case, but Art 12(2) provides that the right of residence remains subject to being a worker/self-employed/self-sufficient. Equal treatment applies to those who qualify. But the self-sufficient are, by definition, not entitled to housing or welfare assistance.

Head of Legal could well be right that there won’t be much checking of a right to residence generally, but there usually is on applying for benefits and certainly is when seeking housing assistance from the local authority. Until a full right to residence is gained under Art 16 (5 years residence), the qualifications to entitlement I set out in the ‘Hodge’ post pretty much stand, in my suddenly rather unhumble opinion, with some changes in the details.

The qualification on illness or accident in Art 7(a) does mean that an EU citizen receiving Income Support may be entitled to housing assistance, which was pretty much not the case, but only if this is demonstrably a temporary period due to illness or accident, so it is also likely that an intention to return to work or workseeking will need to be shown.

Of course, when the EU citizen is entitled to housing assistance, non-discrimination applies, as indeed it did before. As both Head of Legal and I observed, this is certainly a problem for Hodge’s view.

By the way, EU Students - vocational ones under Art 7(d) excepted - are not entitled to housing assistance generally and are also not entitled to housing benefit or benefits generally.

Local housing for local people

Published
by
NL
on 20 May 2007
in Housing law and whatever
. 11 Comments

Margaret Hodge has decided that this is a good time to say that too much Council housing is going to economic migrants at the expense of local residents. Allocation policies should be rethought to reward ‘length of residence, citizenship and national insurance contributions’.

Carefully, the Industry Minister has managed to conflate the ‘coming over here taking our housing’ and the ‘un/deserving poor’ knee jerk reactions. Housing for the hardworking poor British, cries the Barking MP. Co-incidentally Barking and Dagenham have made the BNP the second largest party on the local Council.Margart Hodge

The trouble is that Hodge has put her finger on a genuine problem, but, whether through ignorance or calculation, has decided to perpetuate some unpleasant myths about it.

There is a huge shortage of Council housing and people who have lived in an area all or much of their lives are faced with their children finding it impossible to get a affordable place of their own or get a transfer to an adequately sized property. This most certainly breeds anger and resentment when it appears that others are simply walking into homes. I hear it every day and it is, without a doubt, a strongly felt view.

But where Hodge’s soundbites are dangerous is in echoing these resentments rather than a serious look at allocations policy and where the problems actually arise.

Hodge is quoted as saying:

“In exercising that choice as an economic migrant, should they then presume to have automatic access immediately to public social housing?”

But who are these ‘economic migrants’ snaffling Council housing? Who is getting immediate automatic access to housing? Let us see.

People who can’t access Council housing assistance at all include:

  • Asylum seekers
  • Anyone on a work, student, business or marital visa with a ‘no recourse to public funds’ limitation (just about all of them), infact pretty much anyone subject to immigration control.
  • ‘Old’ EU citizens who are not workers or workseekers (so anyone unemployed for roughly over 6 months)
  • ‘New’ A8 EU citizens, if they are not working (for any reason) at any time in the first twelve months of stay, or are not registered on the WRS [Corrected 21/5]. After twelve months continuous work, same as ‘old’ EU.
  • ‘Even Newer’ A2 EU citizens, as with A8.

Who does that leave? Who are these swarms nicking ‘our’ housing? It may well be that what people are seeing is housing of asylum seekers (not by the Council) and some housing by social services of homeless with children who have been refused the housing duty. Sometimes Council stock is used, generally that which can’t be let via the usual route. But the basic point remains true. An ‘economic migrant’ who has pretty much anything less than indefinite leave to remain, or isn’t EU and employed, is going to have severe difficulty getting Council housing.

[Edit 21/5/07 - of course, if Hodge wants to limit EU workers access to, in effect, welfare rights, there is going to be an almighty battle with the EU as well.]

And then the allocation policies are required to give priority to the homeless or those with health or medical needs, overcrowding etc., over measuring time of residence in the area or time on the waiting list. Anyone without those range of needs will be on a lower band and wait for a very long time regardless.

This indicates the real problem. The utter lack of housing stock. No revision of the allocation policy is going to make a significant difference to the pent up anger unless accompanied by a large scale increase in available stock (including repairing currently unusable housing). Of course the Tories started the problem with the double whammy of right to buy and stopping Councils using rent revenue to build more stock. But Labour have presided over the continuation of this policy and are only now showing signs of waking up to affordable housing as a major issue.

Hodge strikes me as displaying typical new Labour instincts in wanting to change allocation policy from being based on ‘need’ to the basis of being ‘deserving’. To then blame ‘economic migrants’ for the shortage of housing stock in pressured areas strikes me as downright irresponsible. Recognising your constituent’s concerns is one thing, parroting them without actually looking into the issue is another. One might even consider it to be a cynical gesture.