The proposal by the Chartered Institute of Housing (CIH) and the National Housing Federation (NHF) to impose annual rent increases of CPI +1% for the next decade is not merely a policy suggestion. It is a microcosm of the structural assault embedded in the system, where institutions nominally tasked with supporting those who protect the vulnerable instead align with the interests of capital to further immiserate the poor. This is not an anomaly; it is the logical endpoint of a system designed to privatise gains and socialise costs, while masking exploitation in the language of necessity and progress.
Who are the CIH and NHF? Though cloaked as advocates for housing justice, they operate within a framework that accepts as sacrosanct the priorities of state and corporate power. Their demand for above-inflation rent hikes—ostensibly to fund social housing construction—reveals a deeper allegiance to the logic of private profit. The claim that tenants must bear the burden of austerity (disguised as "investment") while developers and financiers reap those profits is a familiar refrain.
Consider the arithmetic of power. CPI +1% annual increases compound over time, systematically transferring wealth from tenants—disproportionately low-income, disabled, and marginalised communities—to housing associations, developers, and the financial institutions that underwrite them. This is not an accident but a design feature. The "house-building programme" touted as justification serves dual purposes: it legitimises taking wealth from the poor while expanding the market for private developers, whose profits depend on state-subsidised demand and the erosion of truly affordable housing.
The framing of this policy as a "necessary sacrifice" for the greater good is a classic ideological manoeuvre. It mirrors the rhetoric used to justify austerity, deregulation, and privatisation since the Reagan-Thatcher era: the myth that the suffering of the many is an unavoidable cost to "stimulate growth" or to "build baby build". In reality, the future being built is one of deepened inequality, where housing—a basic human right—is transformed into a vehicle for rentier capitalism.
The NHF and CIH’s complicity in this arrangement reflects the broader capture of civil society by capital. Housing associations, once rooted in social democratic principles, now operate as de facto arms of the financial sector, reliant on private debt and market-driven models.
Meanwhile, the state’s role is to enforce this hierarchy. By sanctioning rent hikes, it absolves itself of the responsibility to fund social housing through progressive taxation or to curb the profiteering of developers. Instead, it offloads the cost onto those least able to resist—a form of regressive redistribution masked as policy pragmatism.
Meanwhile, the state’s role is to enforce this hierarchy. By sanctioning rent hikes, it absolves itself of the responsibility to fund social housing through progressive taxation or to curb the profiteering of developers. Instead, it offloads the cost onto those least able to resist—a form of regressive redistribution masked as policy pragmatism.
This is not merely a housing crisis. It is a manifestation of division and engineered inequality, created not by overt force but with spreadsheets, press releases, and the cold calculus of "CPI +1%." The betrayal by the CIH and NHF lays bare a fundamental truth: in a system where capital holds sway, even institutions claiming to represent the public interest will ultimately serve the interests of power.
The solution, as always, lies not in appeals to the benevolence of elites but in organised resistance. Tenants must recognise this policy for what it is—a transfer of their labour and dignity to capital—and reject the false argument that pits their survival against the "need" for development. Housing justice requires dismantling the structures that commodify shelter, not collaborating with them.
Comments
Post a Comment