Source · Select Committees · Health and Social Care Committee
Recommendation 6
6
Deferred
Paragraph: 26
Voluntary quality standards for housing development fail to adequately protect residents' health.
Recommendation
An absence of hazards is not enough on its own to ensure that housing protects residents’ health. Space, design and location matter, and these should not be the preserve of those who are able to afford more expensive housing. Several standards exist to support the development of housing that is more widely protective of good health. Dwellings created under Permitted Development Rights (PDR), which comprise some of the most egregious examples of housing that is bad for health that we have seen during this inquiry, are now subject to minimum safeguards on space and light. These are welcome and much-needed but they are also an exception: adherence to any kind of quality standard is voluntary for the vast majority of developments and dwellings. Building enough homes is important, but the Government must require developers to aim higher, with quality housing and development that protects residents’ health.
Government response summary AI-generated
The government deflected the recommendation by discussing the roles of local directors of public health and Integrated Care Boards, stating there are no plans to alter ICB membership requirements, rather than addressing housing quality standards, space, design, or developer requirements for health-protective housing.
Paragraph Reference:
26
Government Response
The government responded to this report on 9 May 2024. No passage in that response could be matched to this recommendation. Read the response document ↗