'Bedroom tax' will mean 1,000 fewer affordable homes. Devolve welfare to Wales!

The moral and ethical arguments against the ‘bedroom tax’ have always been weak. While ideology may lead you to divide between the ‘deserving’ and the ‘undeserving’ poor, ideology cannot deny the evidence, and it is ultimately evidence which should dictate government policy.

Since the ‘bedroom tax’ was introduced just over six months ago, we see a double whammy affecting the housing supply crisis. Arrears from the ‘bedroom tax’ have exceeded £1m and a rise in the number of void properties has meant that over 700 homes in the sector are empty. Just 3% of the 22,000 housing association tenants affected have been successfully downsized. We have always argued that there are simply not enough one and two bed properties to move people to. With an estimated 90,000 on social housing waiting lists, how can we justify a policy that sees Wales losing out on 1,000 affordable homes?

Of course, the effect on housing associations is only half the story. Tenants are already struggling to afford the basics, the use of food banks is increasing, energy companies are increasing their prices and we are seeing a surge in the use of high interest lenders and loan sharks. Some payday lenders are reported to be planning to treble their business on the back of so-called welfare 'reform’, people are being pushed further into poverty and the threat of losing their home is very real.

Landlords are faced with tough choices. We note what’s been happening around Wales with various protests, often the landlord getting the blame. Tenant groups and some politicians have campaigned for a ‘no bedroom tax evictions’ policy, but landlords can’t continue to subsidise the extra costs brought about by welfare reform which would impact on the potential reduction in services for other tenants who pay their rent.

This divisive measure threatens social justice and cohesion, turning tenant against tenant, tenant against landlord and vice versa. We need to stand back and realise that the only solution is to take power closer to the people.

As a sector we have been doing all we can to mitigate against the reforms. We’ve launched the ‘Your Benefits Are Changing’ campaign to raise awareness and have set up an advice line to provide free independent advice to those affected. We’ve also supported the expansion of Moneyline Cymru, a not for profit organisation set up and part funded by Welsh housing associations for people largely ignored by mainstream lenders. Moneyline Cymru branches have issued over 13,000 loans to the value of more than £6m since it was set up in 2009. Customers are also encouraged to open a savings account with nearly a third opting to do so, collectively saving a total of £900k.

Last week the Labour Party tabled a motion in the House of Commons to repel the ‘bedroom tax’, and the vote was lost by only 26 votes. So if robust statistical evidence which shows that this policy is failing is not enough for the UK Government to axe this pernicious policy, what can we do? The solution is for Welfare Reform to be devolved to Wales.

In an asymmetric union, we can now look to Northern Ireland and see them use their powers in welfare policy to do something different. They have legislated to stop the ‘bedroom tax’ affecting existing tenants. Like Wales, it is affected to a far greater degree than England and Scotland, but their devolution settlement has allowed them to protect the people of Northern Ireland from the policy, and also to adapt the upcoming changes to Universal Credit and Direct Payments to fit the needs of Northern Irish tenants. With the Silk Commission due to report on further powers for the Assembly in the New Year, what chance they listen to CHC’s recommendation that Wales is given parity with Northern Ireland on welfare powers?


Nick Bennett
Group Chief Executive, CHC Group


You can read the full press release on CHC's 'bedroom tax' research here.

I don't buy food

CHC hold training events at our head office and there's often leftover food at lunchtime. We’re informed about this in an email… Come and get it! What happens next? Yes, there's an almighty scramble to the kitchen for the chance of a free lunch or a nibble of a piece of cake. But, hold on, how many people need this? Those who haven't prepared lunch, the majority, will say they need this food. Others will say it will only go to waste, the cheese sarnies always do. But is this real need? The numbers taking advantage of this meal are increasing. Would you turn down a free lunch? Or would it be any different if someone told you that they’d do your weekly shopping today for free and deliver it to the end of your street for free? I for one can be honest enough to say I would never give up the chance of free food.

Foodbanks and food parcels have become an established part of communities across the UK. Many communities need them to survive the deep cuts to welfare, and some communities who run them are 'doing their bit for the poor as part of the Big Society'. But what experiences have tenants had with them? Is it a free meal, as Lord Freud describes it, or is there a real need? A tenant living in Blaenau Gwent told me about the food parcels that arrive at their local Community Centre every other week. 'It’s chaos, like a scene from Africa. Everyone runs out and opens up the packages, trying to get the best things. You know, sweets and stuff.' There's no assessment of need and the whole thing lives up to the free meal stereotype. Another tenant tells me of having to pray before receiving a parcel, as most foodbanks are run by religious organisations. Finally, a tenant asks me, ‘What would you do with 12 bottles of tomato ketchup with a hint of balsamic vinegar?’ Ideas on a postcard? Contrary to Zoe Williams' belief, food parcels do contain luxuries. Champagne is the most expensive product I’ve been told about.

The reasons for increasing use of foodbanks have been cited as a change in benefit, a sanction or a delay, or use of payday loans. However, these have all been around for several years now, therefore the recent welfare reforms are not the reason. The problem lies with benefit take up, application and processing. Payday loans are another problem altogether. Welfare reform is exacerbating these reasons for use, and this is set to get worse with possible 7 week delays for Universal Credit payments which will see the desperate Friday become a desperate week. Weekly or fortnightly payments often leave households in desperate financial situations in the last days between payments, and stories of parents not eating on a day or weekend prior to payment is common. However, when monthly UC payments start these days will accumulate into the 4th week, and there is a real danger of parents trying to go several days without food. Food parcels will therefore become an essential need for many.

One of the reasons UC is being rolled out is to increase personal responsibility of finances and to combat the 'I don't pay rent' belief. However, the ever increasing use of food parcels is creating the same problem. Last month, I heard the phrase ‘I don’t buy food, I get one of those voucher things’ for the first time when asking someone about their expenditure on food. What Lord Freud doesn't understand is that changes to welfare benefits are not recognised by claimants in the same way that policy makers see them. Advice agencies used to assist people in desperate need to claim a crisis loan or community care grant, but now they pass on a food voucher. Has the social fund been replaced by foodbanks? Claimants are beginning to believe so and are therefore seeing food as another entitlement. 'I don't buy food'.


Paul Langley
Senior Money Adviser