#Lab13 Welfare Reform: Coping with Change?

Lunchtime conference fringe on welfare reform, chaired by Helen Simpson from Circle Housing Group. First up was East Ham MP and Shadow Minister for Employment, Stephen Timms speaking about the Labour plan to tackle welfare by job guarantees for the long term unemployed. He sees housing associations as playing a key role in this as a gateway for unemployed tenants into work.

A future Labour Government will get rid of the bedroom tax. Which is a punishment for people over something they can do nothing about. When he goes canvassing in East Ham he meets people in fear of the Bedroom tax. Which will mean more people leaving social housing for the private sector and costing even more in housing benefit than they did in the social sector. There is a complete debacle over the introduction of universal credit. While the principle ok the implementation needs to be rescued.  We need a contributory element to benefits to rebuild trust in social security.

Sian Williams from London East End Toynbee Hall (Clement Attlee and William Beveridge) pointed out that it was not just beneficiaries who will be struggling to cope with the change - so will local authorities, Government and the 3rd sector. The cuts and caps will mean less money and more administration. There are some good points, such as it may result in a better relationship with providers, if beneficiaries are seen as customers. But massive costs to society such as forcing children to move schools. 

Christopher Smith also from Circle, told us that they had 3500 households impacted by bedroom tax and 200 by total benefit cap. Big fear that direct payment of housing benefit will result in greater arrears.  36% of households have a member who is disabled (this in in their general needs properties - not care projects). Some residents will be losing £300-350per week in London (Old Ford and Circle 33 properties). The new benefit universal credit is supposed to be "digital by default" yet 45% of residents report that they have no internet access.

Since April this year to date 24% of households affected had paid a part of their bedroom tax, 25% have paid nothing.  This is quote "a major challenge". Finally, Universal credit may bring about a risk based approach to new tenants. If arrears continues then it will have an impact on their ability to build new homes.

Last speaker was journalist Sunny Hundal who gave a more philosophical prospective about welfare reform. 1. People don't pay attention to detail 2. They don't care about facts and prefer emotional stories 3. Views on welfare are very difficult to shift.

People still think Tories are hard while Labour soft on welfare. They support only what affects them eg pensions, child care but not unemployment benefit. Labour should be more honest and not pretend to be tougher than Tories since people will just not believe them. There is a future for universal services such as Surestart but not handouts.

My question to panel started off as a statement (doesn't everyone?) that Labour should be more honest about welfare and explain that a decent social security safety net for all does cost more money that that all of us need to pay more taxes not just the very rich.

I also asked where was the voice of tenants in this debate? You have the voice here of the Labour Party, the unions, housing associations and the housing great and the good? If tenants had a voice would the Tories had been able to get away with Bedroom tax? (as usual with my questions, I didn't get an answer but time was short as we all had to rush off to hear Ed's speech).

Welfare reform: Its a £500 per week cap: its not a minimum

Last week I was having a conversation with a (Non Unison) trade union colleague about welfare reform and its impact on our members who work in Housing organisations and the backlash they will face.

She agreed about the backlash but said it was about time that the Government cracked down on benefits since people got too much money.

I disagreed and said that Job Seeker's allowance is only £71 per week, so how can she say this is too much money? She replied by saying that "£71 per week? They get far more. No one can live on that". I said no, it is only £71.

She came back by saying she had a "friend" who hasn't worked in years yet she has paid off her mortgage while on benefits and goes on foreign holidays.

I said you only get some of your interest paid not capital repayment if you have a mortgage and are on benefits. It sounds like your "friend" is fiddling somehow, not that benefit levels are too high. Which is a totally different and criminal matter.

Later that day I went to a trade union shop meeting and when again I brought up welfare reform, I had one member say that he only earns £22,000 per year and it is wrong that families who don't work get £26,000. A number of people agreed with him. I had to explain that only a tiny, tiny number of families get anywhere near that amount of money and only if they have a large family and have to rent in an expensive part of London. I explained that most benefit claimants are on £71 per week income. Again, this figure of £71 per week was disputed since surely "they must get more" and "no one could live on that amount".

I think that this (totally unrepresentative) sample shows the job of work we all have on welfare reform. Such is the power of the propaganda by the right wing tabloid press such as the Daily Mail and The Sun, that many ordinary working people are believing the fibs about "striver's and shirker's".

Too often in the Labour movement we live in our own bubble and imagine that everything thinks the same as we do on key issues. We need to step outside our own self congratulatory comfort zone, speak to real members and challenge tabloid Tory lies.

 Picture hat tip Press Not Sorry