Forum Topic

Impact of Housing Benefit cuts....Exporting the Poor

A piece from Dave Hill's weekly Guardian blog email'Metropolitan Lines' The same topic is covered at http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/davehillblog/2010/jun/24/george-osborne-housing-beneift-cap-london-poor-housholds"George Osborne's "progressive" emergency budget has been loyally dignified as "tough but fair" by Boris Johnson's economic development adviser but damned by Ken Livingstone as bad for London's poorest and its economy alike and by Oona King, now officially Livingstone's rival to challenge Boris for the mayoralty in 2012, as "short sighted and regressive." And as the details are digested a particular looming impact of Osborne's measures is coming into view - the quite literal marginalisation of Londoners who cannot meet their own housing costs.London Councils, the body that represents the capital's boroughs, has told me that nearly a quarter of a million of London's roughly three-and-a-quarter million households are in receipt of housing benefit in order to pay their rent to private landlords. Its rough early estimate is that 70 percent of these - about 170,000 - will lose income as a result of Osborne capping the amount of housing benefit the government is prepared to provide to the boroughs, which are responsible for administering and dispensing it.How will the people affected avoid eviction? What will become of them if they can't? How will boroughs fulfill their responsibility to find them alternative private rented accommodation, which they're only inhabiting in the first place because those boroughs lack sufficient housing stock of their own? The outcome seems grimly predictable. Those who have their housing benefit sharply reduced will have to move to somewhere cheaper, possibly smaller and very likely far from where they're living now. They may have to leave behind friends and extended family members they rely on. Those in work will have to travel further, as will their children if they're to continue attending the same schools. Their quality of life will not improve.Such additional pressure and expense will deepen the ludicrous London poverty trap which results from housing benefit being instantly withdrawn if unemployed claimants take a job. There will be an accelerated demographic shift, as more and more Londoners on low incomes become "exported" from the more prosperous boroughs to poorer ones where rents are lower. The ideal of socially mixed London communities, to which all political parties subscribe, will become harder to achieve. And the bleak irony will be that the cost of an economic crisis that began because people with little money were sold mortgages they could not afford will be being paid by Londoners with little money and less hope than ever of living in one of the richest cities in the world with stability, security and dignity."

Iain Muir ● 5929d3 Comments

Thomas I don't fully understand the first para.The reason why the Tories introduced the Housing Acts is because under the old Rent Acts 1957 and '63 and '65 it  was difficult a) to put up rents significantly and b) it was harder to evict tenants. Faced up to a huge rise in freehold values  and 18% inflation, landlords complained bitterly that the  current return was not worth the candle. Also then we did not have a population explosion, for which it has to be said was not controlled by Labour until the daily mail got to them in the last 3-4 years, by when it was too late.Nevertheless house building stopped on any major scale in the '60s and whatever happened in the 80's it still was necessary to increase housebuilding - regardless of what you suggest.So it also was when labour complained that so much social housing had been sold off by Mrs T. But they failed as well (roof was not fixed while the benefits of Ken Clarke's sun shone.)So both parties compounded their errors in no real housebuilding. You have to criticise labour just as much and I would say even more because the crisis became far more acute.But taking an axe to 30 years of very bad housing policy in one budget is just infantile. i mean Osborne is still in his thirties. He hasn't a clue (???cousin of Giles???)I don't see how rent reduction will work. Rent Officers  determine rents broadly by the average in an area, and a large area.If you live near Chiswick, private landlords charge the earth and in parts of Ealing some rents are very high. They are still higher than in social housing in the poorer parts. So the Rent Officer has to register high rents for private poor tenants which are above what the new HB proposals will cover.What is needed is a good old fashioned Wilsonian rent freeze on shops and rented accomodation. Can't see that happening. So build more housing and mainly out of London please. Would soak up quite a lot of unemployment into the private sector.

George Knox ● 5929d