From Atos, to Legal Aid, to that of which Patrick Butler writes:
That just 6% of people affected by the bedroom tax have moved to a
smaller home, as a BBC
investigation has revealed, will come as no surprise to anyone living or
working in social housing.
The policy had two aims, to save £500m on the housing benefits bill and to solve the problem of overcrowding by freeing up "under-occupied" social properties for families on the waiting list.
There is increasing evidence that the bedroom tax has failed on both counts.
For a start, the projected saving had already been downgraded to £390m, and the government on Friday suggested it would drop further to £360m.
There is also evidence that the costs of dealing with the debt, eviction and widespread misery caused by the bedroom tax may mean cash savings are minimal.
Most housing experts agree with the principle that social housing should be better allocated – so that, for example, an older couple living in a four-bedroom property whose children have grown up and moved away ought to move on to somewhere smaller to make way for a young family – but there is widespread consensus in housing and local government that the bedroom tax does little to facilitate that.
The government insists it is "doing the right thing" by pressing ahead with the bedroom tax, also known as the abolition of the spare-room subsidy.
Experts, however, say it is unnecessarily punitive, badly planned and will cost more than it saves.
The bedroom tax affects about 500,000 working people in social homes in Britain who are in receipt of housing benefit and deemed to have more bedrooms than they need.
Affected tenants face average deductions from their housing benefit payment of £14 for one spare room and £22 for two. In effect they have to meet the shortfall from their own pocket.
Housing associations report that many tenants wish to downsize, but no smaller homes are available.
In England alone there are 180,000 tenants under-occupying two-bedroom homes, but only 85,000 smaller homes available.
The scarcity of smaller accommodation is especially striking in rural areas.
Pensioners are most likely to have spare rooms, but the government has exempted them from the bedroom tax.
Two-thirds of those affected are disabled, and many have specially adapted houses. If and when they move, the taxpayer may be forced to meet the costs of adapting the new property.
The government said on Friday that the bedroom tax was not a failure because even if 6% of tenants downsized that still amounted to 30,000 people.
To put that in a local context, in the London Borough of Camden, which has more than 1,000 overcrowded households on its waiting list, the bedroom tax had succeeded - as of January - in moving on just 4%, or 84 of the 1,587 tenants affected by bedroom tax, and some of those may have moved anyway.
In Newcastle upon Tyne [there are no hyphens, let Guardian subs take note] there are practically no overcrowded families waiting to be rehoused.
The bedroom tax is estimated to "save" £3.2m in housing benefit in the city each year, but the council estimates that it spends more than £2m providing help and support to affected households, while the government is providing nearly £700,000 a year in temporary financial support to tenants.
Newcastle City Council says that a year ago it boasted its lowest ever rate of homelessness. As a direct result of the bedroom tax, it says, 139 families now face eviction.
It is not clear from the BBC report how many of those who moved went to smaller social homes.
Those who moved into private rented accommodation are likely to be paying higher rent, and so adding to the housing benefit bill.
What is clear is that any savings that do arise will be met by some of the poorest and most vulnerable members of society.
Rental arrears are up among social tenants as a result of the bedroom tax and other benefit cuts, with 28% of them going into the red for the first time.
Personal debt is growing, as is food and fuel poverty.
Set aside the cynical spreadsheet calculations of ministers for a moment.
What food banks, advice agencies and housing professionals – people who deal day in day out with the consequences of welfare reform – agree on is that the bedroom tax is a turbo-generator of avoidable stress and human misery.
The policy had two aims, to save £500m on the housing benefits bill and to solve the problem of overcrowding by freeing up "under-occupied" social properties for families on the waiting list.
There is increasing evidence that the bedroom tax has failed on both counts.
For a start, the projected saving had already been downgraded to £390m, and the government on Friday suggested it would drop further to £360m.
There is also evidence that the costs of dealing with the debt, eviction and widespread misery caused by the bedroom tax may mean cash savings are minimal.
Most housing experts agree with the principle that social housing should be better allocated – so that, for example, an older couple living in a four-bedroom property whose children have grown up and moved away ought to move on to somewhere smaller to make way for a young family – but there is widespread consensus in housing and local government that the bedroom tax does little to facilitate that.
The government insists it is "doing the right thing" by pressing ahead with the bedroom tax, also known as the abolition of the spare-room subsidy.
Experts, however, say it is unnecessarily punitive, badly planned and will cost more than it saves.
The bedroom tax affects about 500,000 working people in social homes in Britain who are in receipt of housing benefit and deemed to have more bedrooms than they need.
Affected tenants face average deductions from their housing benefit payment of £14 for one spare room and £22 for two. In effect they have to meet the shortfall from their own pocket.
Housing associations report that many tenants wish to downsize, but no smaller homes are available.
In England alone there are 180,000 tenants under-occupying two-bedroom homes, but only 85,000 smaller homes available.
The scarcity of smaller accommodation is especially striking in rural areas.
Pensioners are most likely to have spare rooms, but the government has exempted them from the bedroom tax.
Two-thirds of those affected are disabled, and many have specially adapted houses. If and when they move, the taxpayer may be forced to meet the costs of adapting the new property.
The government said on Friday that the bedroom tax was not a failure because even if 6% of tenants downsized that still amounted to 30,000 people.
To put that in a local context, in the London Borough of Camden, which has more than 1,000 overcrowded households on its waiting list, the bedroom tax had succeeded - as of January - in moving on just 4%, or 84 of the 1,587 tenants affected by bedroom tax, and some of those may have moved anyway.
In Newcastle upon Tyne [there are no hyphens, let Guardian subs take note] there are practically no overcrowded families waiting to be rehoused.
The bedroom tax is estimated to "save" £3.2m in housing benefit in the city each year, but the council estimates that it spends more than £2m providing help and support to affected households, while the government is providing nearly £700,000 a year in temporary financial support to tenants.
Newcastle City Council says that a year ago it boasted its lowest ever rate of homelessness. As a direct result of the bedroom tax, it says, 139 families now face eviction.
It is not clear from the BBC report how many of those who moved went to smaller social homes.
Those who moved into private rented accommodation are likely to be paying higher rent, and so adding to the housing benefit bill.
What is clear is that any savings that do arise will be met by some of the poorest and most vulnerable members of society.
Rental arrears are up among social tenants as a result of the bedroom tax and other benefit cuts, with 28% of them going into the red for the first time.
Personal debt is growing, as is food and fuel poverty.
Set aside the cynical spreadsheet calculations of ministers for a moment.
What food banks, advice agencies and housing professionals – people who deal day in day out with the consequences of welfare reform – agree on is that the bedroom tax is a turbo-generator of avoidable stress and human misery.
No comments:
Post a Comment