Skip to main content
Mayor of London logo London Assembly logo
Home
London Assembly

Women and Housing Report

Affordable Housing

Key information

Publication type: General

Publication date:

The London Assembly is urging the Mayor to carry out a review of the London Living Rent to ensure women in London can afford to live in decent homes within the capital and to reduce inequalities associated with the gender pay gap.

One of the Mayor’s affordable housing products is London Living Rent, where rent is based on a third of average local household incomes and adjusted for the number of bedrooms in each home.

The London Assembly Housing Committee met in July 2022 where they heard real-life experiences from women in London and the challenges they face with housing costs.

At the Committee meeting, there was a discussion about whether rent policy for London Living Rent could take account of the gender pay gap. Women earning the women’s median wage need to spend 63% of their earnings to afford the median private rent in London, compared to men needing to spend 49% of their earnings.

The Committee has published a report with 13 recommendations for the Mayor and Government to reduce inequalities in housing for women in London. The recommendations include:

  • The Mayor should review London Living Rent and consider changes to the rent setting policy to have regard to the gender pay gap, for example whether some rents could be set at median women's incomes rather than general median incomes.
  • The Mayor should expedite plans to deliver his manifesto commitment to launch a cross-sector policy forum to coordinate efforts to advance gender equality.
  • The Mayor should work with local authorities to deliver support to women in need of housing, such as tenancy guarantees and help finding longer term housing. He should support local authorities to develop clear and detailed communications to women on housing waiting lists who are being discharged into the Private Rented Sector.
  • The Government should: a) respond to the findings from the Mayor’s cost-benefit analysis of removing the ‘No Recourse to Public Funds’ policy; b) state whether the policy is to be continued; and c) if the policy is to be continued, explain the justifications for its continuation.
Back to table of contents

Related documents

Women and Housing: a Gap in the Market