Changing the standard by which homes are defined as overcrowded would mean more pressure on councils to rehouse the families affected. Yet many of those with the biggest problems support change.
"Politically this is a huge issue," says Jamie Carswell, Hackney council's cabinet member for housing. "It means the perception of social housing is terrible as people have been waiting five years and more to get something done. It is a massive thing for residents." The east London borough is the third most overcrowded in England according to figures from the 2001 census. In Hackney, there are 7795 households with more than one person per room: that's 9% of all the households, both public and private sector, in the borough. Scrapping the present standard for measuring overcrowded households – which dates from 1935 and captures just a fraction of the families living in crowded conditions – would mean even more pressure on Carswell and his colleagues. Yet he supports changing the standard and improving it to show the true picture of the conditions in which British people live.

And he is not alone. Analysis by the Association of London Government and Housing Today shows that of the 10 London councils with the biggest overcrowding problems and the 10 most overcrowded outside the capital, 13 would support a change in the standard. Housing Today asked them why.

London

Tower Hamlets
Maureen McEleney, director of housing
Change the 1935 standard? YES
"We acknowledge we are the council with the worst overcrowding problem but, as ever, there is no one factor. There is a lack of housing supply, therefore many family members remain at home when they would prefer to move out and buy somewhere of their own.

"We are one of the most deprived councils in the country, where a great many people are on low incomes. Coupled with high house prices, it means that people just can't afford to buy a home. This is a straightforward recipe for overcrowding.

"We do a lot to try to deal with this – knock throughs, unused adjacent empty space, lofts. We also give people who are under-occupying large family houses huge incentives to move: £500 per bedroom and removal expenses. Getting these big properties is just so valuable to us that the effort and expense is worth it.

"I would support a change in the standard, but it needs to come with something that helps us to remedy the situation. Overcrowding affects health, education and many things that have an impact on people's quality of life. We would most certainly support doing this if we could work with the government towards achieving a long-term target."

Hackney
Jamie Carswell, cabinet member for housing
Change the 1935 standard? YES
"Our overcrowding issue is very much down to the rise in house prices – people are sitting tight as the gap between renting and buying is too big – coupled with the fact that we are in the middle of a large refurbishment programme, which takes some of our stock out of circulation for a while. Our options are severely restricted.

"In 2002 we began a new lettings policy with different priority bands. We don't stick to the 1935 standard as it simply isn't a modern standard. Severely overcrowded households are calculated on our own assessment of bedroom need. We prioritise those families that require two bedrooms or more.

"Right now, however, it is like shifting deckchairs on the Titanic. The real issue is the dearth of large family-sized homes. Until that is addressed, we will continue to struggle. Politically this is a huge issue in Hackney.

"I support changing the standard, but we couldn't do this without ensuring more supply was coming through the system. Wherever we draw the line is fine, but the crucial thing is to get large family houses into this."

Brent
Martin Cheeseman, director of housing
Change the 1935 standard? YES
"It is important to face up to the problem. Overcrowding can cause as much difficulty as being in temporary accommodation, so it deserves priority and to be dealt with.

"I would support a change – there is no point in sticking at the 1935 standard on the basis that we can't do anything about it. That is not acceptable. We need to work out the size of the problem and then work towards dealing with it – a modern definition is needed."

Camden
Neil Litherland, director of housing
Change the 1935 standard? NO
"I am wary of the first move to tackle overcrowding being to crank up the legal requirement on councils to deal with it.

"No one would argue that the 1935 standard is not outdated, but the idea that you solve the problem by creating more pressure in the system in the hope that more supply will magically appear is flawed logic and not the right place to start.

"If all groups – homeless and overcrowded – are given equal priority, you are back where you started and the system would implode. The way we would like to deal with this is through our allocation policies – 40% of our new lettings are already transfers, most of which are because of overcrowding."

Outside London

Pendle council
Trevor Mitton, environmental health and urban renewal manager
Change the 1935 standard? YES
"Most people we speak to are surprised by the terms of the standard. In terms of modern day expectation, most people think of suitable rooms as bedrooms, not kitchens or living rooms. We are obviously concerned about overcrowding.

"We have an oversupply of smaller, two-bedroom terraced houses in the borough and not enough four-beds that people can afford. A lot are occupied by ethnic minorities. Up to 50% of people are ethnic minorities in the most deprived wards. They tend to have larger families."

Rochdale
Paul Beardmore, head of strategic housing
Change the 1935 standard? YES
"We are acutely aware of [the overcrowding issue] and fairly aware of the main reason behind it – a relatively high ethnic minority population, particularly Bangladeshi, Kashmiri and Pakistani communities. These are concentrated in private housing in the town centre of Rochdale. There is empty stock, but in other parts of the borough.

"Our dilemma is that there's a huge attachment to the local community and the local area and demand to stay within those areas limits people's choice. One of the greatest reasons is security, and there will be mosques and community shops in that area.

"But we do not try to do social engineering, forcing people to move to different areas. That doesn't work, people must feel secure moving into new areas."

Birmingham
Lisa Trickett, head of housing strategy, Birmingham city council
Change the 1935 standard? YES
"We have to be very clear about the differing standards that apply with overcrowding. We need consistency: there is a room standard and a space standard, and some local authorities interpret these with a points system.

"We would argue for the need to change and reflect different needs. We clearly have a problem in the mismatch between supply and demand.

"Eastern Birmingham is the biggest risk area, particularly where there are large Pakistani households with extended families.

"We've got to get far more sophisticated in understanding where the problem is coming from."

Source

Housing Today

Related files/tables