For those estates which were originally granted exemptions from your resident ballot requirement prior to or on 18 July 2018, and which have not progressed their plans for demolition and redevelopment, given these delays and changing circumstances in the intervening years, what is the justification for their continued exemption from resident ballots?

My resident ballot requirement allowed for both transitional and general exemptions, which housing providers could only seek once the requirement was enacted.

Transitional exemptions recognised that some estate regeneration projects were already underway at the point from which the requirement applied. However, they do not apply indefinitely if a provider subsequently fails to progress a project. Although I appreciate that complex, multi-phased schemes can be slower to deliver, my framework provides for transitional exemptions to be withdrawn in some circumstances.

Paragraph 8.6.17 of the GLA’s Capital Funding Guide makes clear that exemption four depends on planning consent not having lapsed. In relation to exemption five, paragraph 8.6.27 specifies that where delays mean that a provider allocated funding under my 2016-21 Affordable Homes Programme needs to seek funding from my 2021-26 programme, it must demonstrate that it “…has made satisfactory progress with the Strategic Estate Regeneration Project since the exemption was granted.”

General exemptions will typically remain in place precisely because of their rationale: without a change in circumstances, it will continue to be appropriate to waive the ballot requirement where demolitions are required to facilitate a major infrastructure project, to address concerns about the safety of residents, or to reconfigure the provision of supported or specialist housing.