Another report, this time in the Independent, reveals the real callousness at he core of the ConDem cuts:
Thousands of people will be made homeless as public spending is slashed because of a dangerous combination of higher unemployment, increasing repossessions and cuts to housing benefit, housing experts have warned.
The retired, disabled people, carers and working families will be hardest hit and charities predict it will trigger the steepest rise in families living in unsuitable accommodation and individuals sleeping rough since the 1980s.
Those in London will be the worst affected, forcing an exodus of poorer people from the centre to outer boroughs, and adding to the financial pressures on local authorities, which are obliged to find homes, school places and social care for the newly arrived families.
The homeless charity, Shelter, said that some households in London currently receiving housing benefit will have to find a shortfall of up to £1,548 a month to meet their housing costs. The result, say opposition MPs, will be "social cleansing" of poorer tenants from richer areas.
Campbell Robb, the chief executive of Shelter, said: "The consequences have not been thought through by the Government. If this support is ripped out suddenly from under their feet, it will push many households over the edge, triggering a spiral of debt, eviction and homelessness."
To put it in context, some facts:
There are 4.72 million housing-benefit claimants and 1 million of those receive Local Housing Allowance, the housing benefit for tenants in the private rental sector. In his Budget, the Chancellor imposed caps on housing benefit of £400 a week for a four-bedroom property and £250 a week for a two- bedroom home. Future increases will be linked to retail-price inflation rather than actual rents, which will further erode the value of the benefit.
Since 2000, average rents in London have increased by 65 per cent while the CPI has increased by just 17 per cent. There will also be a 10 per cent cut in housing benefit for those unemployed for more than a year, criticised by the independent Institute for Fiscal Studies as a blunt and "punitive" instrument to encourage people to find work.
The consequence:
Some fear a return to almost Dickensian conditions in London in particular. James Murray, a cabinet member for housing at Islington Council, said: "In Islington we have thousands of families on the waiting list for housing, many living in desperate overcrowding. It is not rare to see seven or eight people in a two-bed flat — with the children often unable to do their homework, unable to have any privacy, and with the whole family suffering under the stress.
And as James Murray said:
"A cap on housing benefit could put a third of Islington's private-sector tenants who are on housing benefit at risk of eviction," he added. "This will only increase the pressure on social housing, and so more than ever we desperately need more investment in social rented homes. "
The Green New Deal is the only programme to suggest such a policy that I know of.
But instead of investment and enlightened problem solving we have a government intent on creating social division, injustice and poverty — and with every indication that unlike most governments this one will succeed in achieving its goal (bar budget reduction — which is just a cover).
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
I’ve just finished reading ‘Freedom Next Time’ by John Pilger, and in it is discussed how the current model of economic aparthied in South Africa is basically a testing ground for a form of economic aparthied in other countries (specifically mentioned as an is Detroit in the US) where-by an underclass of poor act effectively as servants to the wealthy.
I don’t know enough about it really to comment, however the above does sound like the rolling out of such a model in the UK. Increasing the gap between the rich and the poor, and cordoning the poor into what will effectively amount to ghettos
I would recommend reading this particular book by Mr Pilger – interesting (and worrying) food for thought
“The homeless charity, Shelter, said that some households in London currently receiving housing benefit will have to find a shortfall of up to £1,548 a month to meet their housing costs.”
Hang on a minute! A *shortfall* os £1,548 a month?!?
Are you saying that I have to pay tax to allow someone else (deemed “poor”) to live in a house I cannot afford myself (nor even realistically aspire to afford)? Where’s the justice in me having to live in the East End to pay tax for someone else to live in Knightsbridge? Why can’t they just move to where I live?
I never knew this was even going on. Sounds to me like it should never have been allowed to happen in the first place!
@Online Accountant:
“Increasing the gap between the rich and the poor, and cordoning the poor into what will effectively amount to ghettos”
Excuse me, but the gap between “rich” and “poor” that I can see is that I (“rich”) am poorer than the “poor”!
@JamesD
Bigotry is alive and well I see
It is not condoned here
@ Richard
“A bigot is a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices. The correct use of the term requires the elements of intolerance, irrationality, and animosity toward those of differing beliefs.”
@Richard
I seem to recall someone else used the word bigot in an attempt to shut down any discussion of legitimate issues. They subsequently lost their job.
@Alan Gittins
Oh dear, another right wing threat? Whatever next?
And did I really get the use wrong?
face reality: we have a government that is bigoted (definition above noted). It’s the basis of its policy. Is it surprising that it may have some supporters?
“Oh dear, another right wing threat? Whatever next?”
It wasn’t a threat! Just an observation that the Left use the word “bigot” to mean “person I don’t agree with” then act all hurt and surprised when ordinary people react accordingly.
@Alan Gittins
Oh I see
Ordinary people can’t be bigoted
Just lefties
That’s clear then 🙂
“Ordinary people can’t be bigoted”
Oh they most certainly can. For example, because of the way the immigration debate has been conducted (i.e. it hasn’t) all kinds of lies and hatreds have been allowed to fester, leading to widespread bigotry.
You never did answer my point about the morality of me being forced to pay for people supposedly in poverty to have a better standard of living than me. Is it right or not?
@JamesD
Redistribution is right, yes
I have no knowledge of your circumstances – and you seem quite unwilling to inform yourself of facts as opposed to prejudice so comment beyond that is not possible