What Role Does Social Housing Play in Shaping the Rental Market?
First published in the Jersey Evening Post 2025-05-30
As the Government proposes a rent-setting review, it’s time to reassess the role social housing plays in shaping Jersey’s wider rental market.
At the recent All-Island Media debate “Housing…Crisis Averted?”, panel members and the audience explored the persistent and complex challenges of Jersey’s housing market. The debate was timely. The challenges presented by rental stress – where individuals or families spend more than 30% of their gross income – are now due to be examined following a States Assembly debate on 13th May.
As affordability pressures mount, particularly for low – and middle-income earners, one element of housing policy stands out as ripe for re-examination: the longstanding practice of setting social housing rents as a percentage of private market rents.
Currently, social rents for Andium Homes – Jersey’s government owned affordable housing provider – are set at 80% of prevailing private market rates. This model aims to balance tenant affordability with Andium’s financial sustainability. Yet with high market rents continuing to drive housing stress I would ask whether it’s time to flip the equation – or move away from it entirely.
What if, rather than tying social housing rents to private rents, we considered private rents in relation to a socially grounded baseline, such as those charged by Andium?
This suggestion isn’t a call for rent control or a criticism of private landlords, who operate under different constraints. Instead, it’s a way to open debate on what fairness in rent-setting actually means – and whether the relationship between social and private rents is still fit for purpose.
Jersey’s Unique Pressures
Jersey’s rental market is unusually tight. Geography, high demand, and limited land supply contribute to some of the highest average rents in the British Isles. This doesn’t just affect the most vulnerable – it impacts key workers, young professionals, and growing families who may earn too much to qualify for social housing, but not enough to comfortably afford private rents.
Andium Homes plays a vital role in this system. With a portfolio of around 5,000 properties housing roughly 10,000 Islanders, it is a cornerstone of Jersey’s housing infrastructure. Since its inception in 2014, Andium has significantly improved housing quality, delivering energy-efficient homes and strong community support. It is financially independent, but benefits from a Government guarantee that lowers its cost of borrowing and supports new development.
However, the current rent-setting model prompts a key question: is the requirement for Andium to deliver around £30 million annually to the Government as guarantor creating a policy effect akin to a regressive tax on social housing tenants?’
A Question of Fairness
If we accept that Andium is operating responsibly and effectively within its mandate, the issue becomes whether that mandate serves the long-term interests of fairness and affordability. Social housing tenants – by definition, among those least able to pay high rents – may be bearing a financial burden that helps underwrite public budgets or mitigate borrowing risks.
Viewed through this lens, the return to the Government could resemble a tax on low-income households. If housing support payments are then required to ease that burden, the policy may be not only regressive, but also inefficient. Taxpayers end up subsidising the very consequences of a rent policy designed to generate income elsewhere.
Of course, this is a simplified picture. The net return Andium delivers – after funding maintenance, servicing debt, and investing in new builds – is likely less than the headline figures suggest. Additionally, the Government guarantee does carry some financial risk, and the return helps to offset that. Any reduction in this return would likely require cuts or reprioritisation elsewhere in public spending.
Still, an important idea emerges: what if social housing rents were calculated based solely on the cost of sustainable operation and reinvestment – without the need to generate a fiscal surplus? Could such a change help alleviate the mounting rental stress across the Island?
Policy at a Crossroads
This is no longer a hypothetical discussion. The Government has proposed a review of the rent-setting framework, creating an opportunity to reconsider not just how social housing rents are calculated, but what they’re meant to achieve.
Decoupling social rents from private market trends would allow social housing to fulfil its true mission: delivering stability and long-term affordability for those who need it most. It would also reduce perceptions that social rents are inflated simply because private rents are high – an outcome that can feel arbitrary, even unfair.
Meanwhile, the private sector could continue to operate independently, without the perception of indirect regulation through public benchmarking. Such a shift wouldn’t fix the housing crisis on its own, but it could reset the terms of debate – helping align rent policy with both financial reality and social intent.
Time to Rethink the Model?
Housing policy will always involve trade-offs – between affordability, sustainability, investor confidence, and fiscal prudence. But the current model, where social tenants indirectly fund public revenue through rent, deserves renewed scrutiny in light of today’s economic pressures.
The world has changed dramatically since 2014. With a rent-setting review now on the table, we must ask some foundational questions. What is the purpose of social housing? Who should carry the cost of making it viable and sustainable? And if the system no longer serves those questions effectively, how do we evolve it without undermining its success?
Andium Homes has been a major success story for our Island. Deputy Mezac, the housing minister, has indicated a willingness to consider solutions to the malady of rental stress. Jersey now boasts social housing of a quality and standard to be proud of. But this should not prevent us from re-examining the framework that has delivered that success. Perhaps it is time to rethink not just the figures – but the principles behind them.