
I think that the core theme I want to address
will have something to do with the notion of
what problems slum clearance has been
seen to be supposed to solve, what problems
it has actually been meant to solve, and
what problems it has created – or something
like that.

Purportedly meant to help provide decent housing for all
households
 In UK, owner-occupation has been seen as the primary
way of accomplishing this
 In 30s slum clearance did help successfully rehouse a lot –
in houses in burbs, mostly
 In 50s-60s, SC and urban rehousing often failed to provide
better
 Often succeeded, but failures were so spectacular that
severely damaged reputation of public housing

Summary: some major successes,
particularly early on. Some flamboyant
failures.
 Slum clearance a very powerful policy tool.
 Ultimately, its biggest policy impact may
have been to help fatally weaken the
reputation of public housing.





There has always been a housing problem
In 19th c, SC evolved not to address housing
problems per se, but to address broader
issues of public health
Industrialisation had brought great wealth
and great squalor
Slums seen to cause public health crisis
Clearing them helped reduce





Tension: property rights v public good
Slums were a nuisance. Nuisance removal act:
unfit for human habitation (M 27)
First housing acts were not meant to solve housing
problems
In fact, created many. We will see that creating
problems was not unique to housing policy of the
day.
“The cheapest remedies… are those of prevention.
An ill-planned town can never have all the errors
of its first formation corrected.” (in M 29)
By end of 19th c, the slums were seen as a housing
problem: the poor lived in unsuitable housing and
something must be done.
 This something was to knock down slums and
build better.
 Housing of the Working Classes Act 1890 first ties
slum clearance with building. But no obligation –
and about general needs, not poorest
 Filtering up

M (36) says that “before 1914 there was
barely a recognisable housing policy as
such”.
 Slum clearance in UK inextricably tied to
development of public housing.
 But what kind of public housing?







Slum clearance doesn’t happen after wars.
Modern slum clearance kicked off with
Greenwood Act of 1930 (Power 1993: 182)
For first time councils had responsibility to
rehouse entire communities
Lots of stats in ibid. Eg, about four m people were
forcibly moved from slums in the 30s, more than
any other decade.
Also “one m council houses were built under the
1930s slum clearance programme.”
The key issue is who they were built for.

Council houses in the 20s had been built for
better-off working class.
 Malpass says this was govt solving a political
problem rather than a housing one. (12)
 It was a response to voice. (Later, CH will be for
people who lack voice, and will add to or at least
continue this problem.)
 Beginning in 1930, central govt made a conscious
decision: public housing was to be for the least
well-off. (Later I’ll discuss why.) Slum clearance
was to be a key tool in solving the problem of
housing the least well-off.

By the start of WWII, pattern set. CH for the least
well-off, private market for rest. In the natl
psyche, writes M, CH had become firmly
embedded as the tenure that catered for slum
dwellers.
 “But it provided mainly suburban houses and it
was vastly better than run-down slums” (183). (So
it was a good brand in many ways.)
 Here add quote from Kinship book.
 This reputation would prove very fragile indeed.






Following WWII, Bevan refuses to push for super-high
numbers. Quote
Note that when numbers do rise under Macmillan, it’s
because private numbers do.
In 1950s, SC again enters national centre stage re policy, as
in Victorian public health scare days.
Helps propel Mac to leadership
Again, when private industry handles better-off wc, slum
clearance becomes a tool for providing cheap homes
(people’s houses) for the worst off.
Slum clearance rebuilding is complementary to private
market







Tabula rasa
Public housing becomes ever more for worst off
Slum clearance blights cities
Property put before people
Builders are having a laugh
When policy is aimed at a group that lacks
political power, it doesn’t have to go through
checks and balances. It can become a F’s monster.
“All we needed was some toilets.”

New Jerusalem becomes New Canaan.
 In the end, the monster turned on itself:
Ronan Point, corruption scandals.
 Small is beautiful movement.

A conclusion.