Sunday, July 03, 2011
Re-think needed on welfare reform
This morning's Observer revelations that even Eric Pickles thinks that the proposed £500 cap on welfare benefits is set at the wrong level must cause the Prime Minister to pause and reflect.
The paper says that the Communities Secretary put in a letter his view that the cap will increase the burden on taxpayers, because thousands of families will be unable to pay their rent and will have to seek local government help:
Written by Nico Heslop, Pickles's private secretary, at the clear instigation of the minister, the letter lays bare fears of mass homelessness "disproportionately impacting on families". It says:
■ 40,000 families will be made homeless by the welfare reforms, putting further strain on services already "seeing increased pressures".
■ An estimated £270m saving from the benefits cap will be wiped out by the need to divert resources to help the newly homeless and is likely to "generate a net cost".
■ Half of the 56,000 affordable homes the government expects to be constructed by 2015 will not be built because developers will realise they will not be able to recoup even 80% of market rates from tenants.
I suspect most of the impact of these reforms will be felt in England, where property values are greater, but there is no doubt that some in Wales will also be affected.
There is still time to reconsider this cap and I hope that the Government do so. Certainly, if I was in the House of Lords I would be seeking to table amendments to this legislation and I hope that the Liberal Democrat peers do so.
The paper says that the Communities Secretary put in a letter his view that the cap will increase the burden on taxpayers, because thousands of families will be unable to pay their rent and will have to seek local government help:
Written by Nico Heslop, Pickles's private secretary, at the clear instigation of the minister, the letter lays bare fears of mass homelessness "disproportionately impacting on families". It says:
■ 40,000 families will be made homeless by the welfare reforms, putting further strain on services already "seeing increased pressures".
■ An estimated £270m saving from the benefits cap will be wiped out by the need to divert resources to help the newly homeless and is likely to "generate a net cost".
■ Half of the 56,000 affordable homes the government expects to be constructed by 2015 will not be built because developers will realise they will not be able to recoup even 80% of market rates from tenants.
I suspect most of the impact of these reforms will be felt in England, where property values are greater, but there is no doubt that some in Wales will also be affected.
There is still time to reconsider this cap and I hope that the Government do so. Certainly, if I was in the House of Lords I would be seeking to table amendments to this legislation and I hope that the Liberal Democrat peers do so.
Comments:
<< Home
No the HB Cap should STAY! Most people outside London/SE find it laughable and disgusting that they are in fact subsidising London rich landlords to keep people into a life they could never afford themselves - and actually perpetuating the pernicious circle of london-centrism.
Anybody who cannot claim HB resents the fact that people are simply housed in places they could never afford themselves - indeed, if they themselves had a big salary decrease they may have to move and take their children to other schools.
What's wrong with Londoners - they are like the greedy factory owners that want to squeeze the life out of anybody outside to keep them into the lifestyle to which they've become accustomed.
Like an addict that needs changing they need to be weaned off the drug so that they can see clearly.
Basically, in a way of rebalancing the economy the state should subsidise only up to the level of the average home. The rest should be derived from higher taxes. sales taxes, tourist taxes from within the bounds of the GLA administered by that body!
People in outlying areas are going to begin kicking up a fuss - WE DON'T WANT THE CRUMBS FROM UNDER THE RICH LONDONERS TABLE - WE WANT TO USE OUR LOWER LAND VALUES AND SALARIES TO COMPETE ON AN EQUAL PLAYING FIELD WITH THE REST OF THE UK.
GOT IT?
Anybody who cannot claim HB resents the fact that people are simply housed in places they could never afford themselves - indeed, if they themselves had a big salary decrease they may have to move and take their children to other schools.
What's wrong with Londoners - they are like the greedy factory owners that want to squeeze the life out of anybody outside to keep them into the lifestyle to which they've become accustomed.
Like an addict that needs changing they need to be weaned off the drug so that they can see clearly.
Basically, in a way of rebalancing the economy the state should subsidise only up to the level of the average home. The rest should be derived from higher taxes. sales taxes, tourist taxes from within the bounds of the GLA administered by that body!
People in outlying areas are going to begin kicking up a fuss - WE DON'T WANT THE CRUMBS FROM UNDER THE RICH LONDONERS TABLE - WE WANT TO USE OUR LOWER LAND VALUES AND SALARIES TO COMPETE ON AN EQUAL PLAYING FIELD WITH THE REST OF THE UK.
GOT IT?
# posted by 
: 12:22 PM
: 12:22 PM
Anon - the £500 total means £117 a week for housing benefit for a family with 4 kids. That is far, far below the rental on the average house in the UK. We are talking about a postie living in a cheap part of London, losing their job, and having to move to Merthyr Tydfil (the closest place with a house of relevant size available for £117pw).
Tim Leunig
Post a Comment
Tim Leunig
# posted by : 8:40 PM
: 8:40 PM<< Home
