Campaigners in Caerphilly have called on the Welsh Government to act, after AMs said they should consider refunding tenants affected by the ‘Bedroom Tax’.
The Welsh Assembly’s Public Accounts Committee said the Government should consider following the SNP’s lead and pay affected tenants extra housing benefit.
As part of the Welfare Reform Act the UK Government removed the spare room subsidy, a move labelled the ‘Bedroom Tax’ by its opponents.
It means social housing tenants who are seen to be ‘under-occupying’ have their housing benefit cut by up to 25%.
A report published yesterday, July 29, ‘Responding to Welfare Reform in Wales’, said the Welsh Government should carry out a “cost/benefit analysis of mitigating the full impact of the removal of the spare room subsidy through Discretionary Housing Payment (DHP), as the Scottish Government chose to do”.
There has already been a 570% rise in cash paid out by Caerphilly County Borough Council in DHP since the introduction of the ‘Bedroom Tax’ in 2013.
But campaign groups are calling on the Welsh Government to act to help those struggling to pay the extra rent.
Roy Davis of Caerphilly County Against the Bedroom Tax said: “The pressure is going to be more on the Welsh Government than the council now after there was the announcement that they should be doing more to help people.”
Cardiff and South Wales Against the Bedroom Tax’s Jamie Insole said: “The Welsh Government desperately needs to step up, adopt the committee’s recommendations and find the money to cover the cost of the ‘Bedroom Tax’ in time for October’s budget setting.
“Meanwhile, we are working to set up a ‘no eviction network’ and will fight any attempt to throw out a tenant in the courts, media and, ultimately, the community.
“We will not stand by and allow anyone to be evicted from their home for the crime of poverty and inability to meet the cost of this unjust levy.”
The network has also been adopted by Caerphilly County Against the Bedroom Tax.
Mr Davis said: “We’ve set up a network where people who are willing can help show vulnerable people faced with eviction support, by keeping back the bailiffs or helping with appeals.
“It’s aimed at people who are vulnerable to eviction and those who want to volunteer. The best way to get in touch is on our Facebook page.”
Cllr Colin Mann, leader of the Plaid Cymru Group on Caerphilly Council said there should be no eviction of tenants in arrears solely due to the ‘Bedroom Tax’.
He said: “The Plaid group submitted a notice of motion to council back in 2013 on the ‘Bedroom Tax’. Our proposals then were the catalyst for officials looking much more closely at this issue.
“I believe that a great deal of effort has been made by housing officers to help tenants wherever possible, but it is still true to say that this tax is hitting some of the poorest people very hard.
“There is still a huge lack of suitable alternative accommodation to move into and although efforts are being made to address this there is a long way to go before the supply meets the demand.
“Personally, I would support any action within the law to avoid evictions of tenants for ‘Bedroom Tax’ arrears.”
Labour councillor Hefin David, Chair of Caerphilly Council’s Policy and Resources Scrutiny Committee, said Labour would have abolished the ‘Bedroom Tax’ if they’d been elected to Parliament in May.
He said: “It is clear that the Tories will push ahead with the policy in the years ahead and it will inevitably have a devastating effect on communities.
“I have ensured that Caerphilly Council has established a 12 point plan to help tenants who are affected. Caerphilly Council is leading the way in protecting our tenants.
“The plan includes waiving limited breaches of tenancy to assist with transfers; the provision of advice and support for tenants and doing all we can to convert properties where possible.
“We will continue to work closely with the tenant–led Caerphilly Homes Task Group to review the latest consequences of the ‘Bedroom Tax’.”
It is understood that there has been no evictions in Caerphilly County Borough due to the ‘Bedroom Tax’.
Labour Party member of the accounts committee, Jenny Rathbone AM, told the BBC that the Welsh Government could not afford to “pick up the tab” for the ‘Bedroom Tax’.
I fully support the bedrooms tax! In fact, cut benefits even more. Start with child benefit first.
I agree; let’s start with capital gains benefits, tax write-offs, subsidised asset transfers and other choice waivers. I think it is about time we privatised these posh parasites – let them stand on their own four feet. What do you say old chum? Meanwhile we can use local authority pension funds to build thousands of new social houses and lift real people out of poverty. Real people mind you…
Hear Hear Mr Von.
Build social houses? Where to? Why?
There is already a surplus of housing in the UK. There are 600,000 empty homes in the country. It is also important we note that the increase in population in Caerphilly is under 1%; there is not a demand for social housing in Caerphilly.
You seem to be blinded by the problems. You jump to address poverty with measures that have been proven to fail, but you fail to address the cause of poverty which is the terrible education system in Wales, the lack of practical skills, and the lack of serious work to entice modern companies to Wales (there is a reasons ARM Architectures designing processors used in billions of electronic devices is based in Cambridge, not Cardiff).
Comrade; Welsh Government is currently chucking millions at all manner of concerns in an effort to lure money bags, yet of the 50k or so private sector ‘jobs’ created since 2012, over 74% pay below living wage. That to, my mind, constitutes failure! Combine social new build with community energy generation projects; give people a stake. Speaking as a one time underwriter, do you really think that ‘buy-to-let’ has played any positive social role?
As for education, I agree that it has a key role to play in tackling inequality (and ignorance). What is it that you are specifically proposing? Either way, whilst marketisation has blatantly failed it is difficult to measure the prospects for a highly skilled workforce if its economic base is predicated on a sweatshop model.
Interesting that you refer to UK figures. Check out the comparable Welsh stats. As for Caerphilly, the last time that I looked, there were anything up to 600 tenants chasing a three one/two bedroom properties.
Have you considered a heart transplant?
The Welsh Government is, and always has, been a failing vanity project for small time, socialist-loving, Welsh people. Luring the private sector is the right path to take, but the exact industries attracted need to be ones in technology, finance, insurance, and IT. These are the largest growing industries in the world; it is silly not to actively attract them.
Buy-to-let is an interesting one. If a person had a decent credit rating, and is a not adverse to risks, it is a good way to generate a steady income through the rent, look after your offspring when you have gone, and build up money for retirement. The danger is not earning enough to pay off the mortgages, but that aside, it is fantastic for the people who do it. For the people looking to rent, buy-to-let has led to an increase in homes available to rent in the private sector, and thus a decrease in rent. Minimum rent controls limit supply, and state-backed house construction is a return to the inefficient failings of the 80’s.
Education will never bring equality. Indeed, anyone who thinks about equality properly knows it is nothing but a wet dream for idealists. It is a scientific fact genes control the abilities of people in subjects. Some people will always be smarter than others, and people who are smarter will usually do better in life. Plus, the wealthier will use private education – this boosts life experiences, expands horizons, a gives a child more experiences – private education cannot be banned. Well, it can, but then there will be an increased problem with private tuition. That cannot be banned as doing so will mean banning children from spending time with well-educated family members.
What is it I am proposing? Simple, selective education to pluck out the brightest from any background, give them the best possible education, and push them to reach their potential in life. Does this mean the return of grammar schools? Yes! It will help give the brightest people in society a boost, improve equality. I want to reduce inequality by allowing people to catchup, not making the rich less rich.
Is there anything wrong with equality? No, not really. I support Nozick’s entitlement theory. After all, everyone started off equal, some family members have simply made better decisions over time.
Oh dear, it sounds like you want socialism. Socialism is a failure, capitalism is successful. North Korea, Eastern Europe, China in the 80s, and Cuba are all socialist. I take it you would happily live in all of those countries if given the chance?
Come on Jamie, let`s have more of the same. Dean`s comments are easily countered and destroyed, and I have formed the opinion reading jis comments for months now that he does`nt believe all he says, otherwise he would properly identify himself. and take the credit.
Please, find me on Facebook under the same name.
You actually promote the same views on Facebook?, you have just reminded me why I steer clear of that inane brain numbing claptrap promoting `media`.
Who are your `political` friends Dean? Who`s flag do you fly? it would be interesting to know.
Mine are left wing, socialist, and I fly the Plaid Cymru Flag and proud.
If you really have been following my comments for months you would know I am right-wing, I support UKIP and the Conservatives, and drift between the two as both parties have policies I do not like.
Anyone, of course, can `create` an identity on facebook.
Ha! You really are a national treasure. We should outsource you to SERCO under an attendance/provision agreement.
The ‘luring’ has failed (see above). Even the civil servants charged with the afore-mentioned commercial grooming admit that it is a national disgrace. Only a fool could conclude that flinging money at capital can in anyway ‘lure’ investment. It is the strategic equivalent of pouring your last canteen of water onto the sand in the hope that this will bring rain to the desert.
As for the PRS, whilst your account of risk/reward would pass muster for the purposes of a buyers prospectus (one of those seminars catering to silly, petit bourgeois’ who hope to make an easy buck), your subsequent suggestions do not really tally with the facts. Tell me about the falling rents? Tell me about the rising standards? For social housing we have WHQS – tell me about it’s PRS equivalent? Or is it that we now work in a property owning paradise; could that be it?
You strike me as a fellow who is prepared to argue for a hopeless position. A little like one of those lads in Berlin; taking on the advancing soviet tanks. However, in this case, we are discussing real processes, all of which contain a human essence which can be measured with a quantum of misery or contentment. Are you really a partisan for the misery of others? Come on – you are better than that!
No doubt you are sincere in your beliefs but I cannot make head nor tail of your argument. It reads like the stuff from management consultants that I was meant to take seriously and implement a few years ago.
Please write in plain English without the unnecessary metaphors and acronyms, it is kinder to the reader and more persuasive.
Sage advice! I was having fun.
Put simply, tenants can no longer bear the burden of paying money they do not have or downsizing to properties that do not exist!
That is correct, I have always thought this ‘bedroom tax’ or ‘benefit reform’ or whatever one wants to call it is a non starter. It won’t work, it won’t save money and it will financially affect the wrong people.
This still leaves the problem of how the nation is going to balance the books. For starters I would stop borrowing money to support foreign aid, limit child benefit to two children, withdraw from the EU, invest in manufacturing & technology, stop dropping bombs on people in the Middle East, simplify the corporation tax system to ensure that large firms do pay tax and reduce the waste in our many layered government system.
The bedroom tax is tinkering on the edges and will not solve anything.
You have misunderstood everything I have written, than again, it is expected for someone who likes to take something, spin it, claim he is right, and then call the other person heartless.
Yes, we need more private investment, but no, that does not come through throwing money at them. Private investment comes from tax cuts for industries. Examples of tax cuts in action include attracting B&Q to where its current head quarters are, the port of Southampton, and Toshiba or Sharpe (one of them, my memory fails me) years ago when there was a manufacturing plant in Newport employing lots of skilled workers. You would have known this if you asked for more detail about my plans instead of assuming.
The PRS is simple economics. If there is money to be made people will be attracted to the industry. When more people are willing to rent out houses on buy-to-let mortgages the supply will increase. When supply increases there will be a fall in price. The problem with your argument, whatever your argument is as you have not said but I will try and guess it, is that it is impossible to retrospectively judge the supply of housing imagining buy-to-let did not exist, making it very difficult to pass an answer on how the supply of housing has been affected. I have the theory on my side though.
Without engaging too much in the mudslinging you strike me as one of those student who spend their time harassing people on the streets of Cardiff with socialist-promoting pamphlets. the big issue being they have never had anything more than a part-time Saturday job, they have never had to pay tax, they have never had to worry about mortgages, and they have no experience of the real world. They have this idealist vision of a utopian world where everyone is equal and gets along. Please tell me I have you mistaken and that your comments today have been made under haste.
Really; a misunderstanding? What have I ‘spun’?
I invited you to clarify your ideas around education; argue with reference to Welsh social housing stats; account for the simultaneous growth in the private rented sector (PRS) and the concurrent decline in standards/rise in rents and have, as yet received nothing.
Indeed; all I get is this odd point about B&Q which, whilst beguiling in a homely sort of way, completely ‘misunderstands’ the powers currently available to Welsh Government. Are you familiar with the Silk Report? Can you imagine the effect of Wales engaging in a corporate bidding war with London? Another tired race to the bottom!
What next? Perhaps Jane Hutt should take us bak to gold-standard?
I think there ought to be a bedroom tax on Cruise Cabins, with double beds, ( A cabin Tax) much like a single person suppliment, but in this case an additional cost for the additional weight the ship has to carry, and, it`s increased carbon foorprint, for the `drag` against the waves.
I think this `tax` should then be used to offset what the poor and needy have to pay caused by being robbed by the Tory `bedroom tax`..
Funnily enough, when you book a cruise the price is quoted on a basis of two people sharing. If only one person want to go in that cabin that one person pays a higher per person price (some ships have smaller cabins for the single traveller though). The same is true when you check into a hotel. It is cheaper per person for a couple to pay for a room than it is for a business traveller’s per person cost. The extra charges you refer to are very much in practice now – not for an environmental reason but an economic one for the company. Single person supplements are old school now – they exist in name only but the workings have changed.
Passengers travelling in a first class cabin on an aircraft pay higher APD for their increased carbon footprint. The extra charge is double the APD paid by economy class passengers.
Similarly, if people are living inefficiently in a home it only right they face a charge. Think of the bedroom tax as a below maximum occupancy supplement.
Unless one lives in ones own house, in which case who cares that a mansion may be grossly under occupied?.
One of the key lines above is
There is still a huge lack of suitable alternative accommodation to move into and although efforts are being made to address this there is a long way to go before the supply meets the demand.
There is a failure by the council and housing associations to provide accommodation of the right size to suit the changing make-up of modern living. Councils and HA’s had many years to make these changes, the demographic data was clearly there, but they failed to do this. The spare room subsidy is designed to force social housing providers to meet the needs of their clients through demand led economics. Like many Conservative policies, it will work, but fails to take into account personal circumstances, and the situation now where individual tenants would like to move to smaller accommodation, but there is a provision gap due to failing of social housing providers.
The alternatives to this policy are to either continue to provide accommodation which is too large (and expensive) for the needs of the tenants – at the expense of tax payers, or to forcibly evict tenants who are ‘over accomodated’. The latter is politically, and ethically unacceptable, but so is the former. The state has limited resources and policies to ensure that these resources are used efficiently are essential otherwise we end up with a bloated state, high taxes and a failing economy.
Some tidy points Steve.
Back in 2009, I lived in London for a little while. High quality social housing was relatively plentiful and tenants, for the most part, swopped throughout their lifetime.
There again, the ‘bloated state’ idea militates. During the past 10 years a position has developed whereby £1 in every £3 of frontline spending is ‘delivered’ by the private sector. Austerity is used as a foil for asset stripping and super profits – and have services really improved? Look at the social care sector then consider the role of arguments around a ‘bloated state’! Moreover, we seem to have a lot of regressive taxes, low wages and burgeoning inequality.
Either way; there are plenty of ways to build more social housing; as suggested, permitting local authority workers to tie in pension funds. A lot safer than the Bank of Iceland?
Politics is nothing without ethics; ethics fixes politics in its proper human context. What is politics if not the pursuit of human good? Telling tenants to pay money that they do not have or downsize to properties that do not exist promotes the mean, nasty opposite.
There again, I am guessing that we agree about this!
The likes of JamieVon and all those whining about the so called “bedroom tax” need to get their facts straight. The under occupancy surcharge is NOT a tax at all, a tax is a levy imposed by the State on the earnings of an individual or a company, or it is added to certain purchased goods. The so called “bedroom tax” is in fact a reduction in benefit, and is essentially voluntary. Also what these blinkered socialists conveniently fail to remember is that the “bedroom tax” is a Labour policy introduced by Gordon Brown in 2008, and there is no way that if Labour had gotten into power (at an election they lost miserably ) that they would have repealed it.
The under occupancy surcharge is not a one size fits all policy and there are many exemptions,many winners and inevitably when new policy is introduced there will be some losers, but would JamieVon charge the same rent on a 4 bed house as a 2 bed house, if he did then he’s no sense whatsoever. Councils need to make better use of their housing stock and these folk who are whining and protesting also need to remember that the houses they are living in do not belong to them, if you purchase your own property you have many choices, if you rent from somebody else your choice is limited. Sadly life is not fair, there will always be rich people and there will always be poor people, if the working people of the U.K were against the under occupancy surcharge they would have voted for Red Ed, but they didn’t so it just shows that the majority of people support the fact that if a council tenant has a spare room then they should pay for it or move to a smaller property, the tax payer should not be subsidising spare rooms.
“Mr Mandela needs to get his facts right. This is not racism; this is ‘separate development’. Unfortunately, there will always be some peoples who lag behind others. Sadly, life is not fair – no point whining about it.”
(Repeat whilst imitating a bad, South African accent, prior to curling up in the ashtray of history)
Oh dear, I am beginning to think like a school master but I can’t resist it. Bad analogy here, apartheid was a lack of equality based on the colour of a person’s skin. This is wrong and I spent a lot of time in the 1980’s protesting and marching to point this out to the powers that be.
Paul was not talking about race but facts. People are not equal, some a are good looking others not, some are clever others stupid, some are physically strong others are weak. The point Paul made, as I read it, that there are advantages accruing from making the considerable sacrifice of going into debt in order to buy your own house. Those that don’t (and just for information I spent the first 20 years of my life in a rented home before buying my own house) will always have fewer choices than homeowners.
I still think the ‘bedroom tax’ is foolish because it does not address any major issues, will not save money and will hurt some individuals for no good reason. That said, abolishing it will do nothing for equality whatsoever.
Some `cool dude` signing in as `Cool Cruiser`.commented on another on line blog, after a particularly enjoyable `cruise`.
“I have returned from a two week Caribbean cruise like no other before. (been on one before then cool dude?) At the first port a Princess ship was there about to leave the same timeas us. Our two ships had a great experience shouting, singing, and it was one of those passenger build-ups where everyone joined in.
Over the next two weeks we bumped into the same ship with the same
passengers (or I think they were the same as the passengers all joined
in again) five times at different ports. We ended up making friends with
people not on our ship, and it was sad to leave at the final port”,.
How common is this?
I wonder if this blogger was a Bedroom Tax Payer? or a rich pensioner in reciept of Welfare benefits? or a family man on low pay and a zero hours employment contract?, or, could it be someone who consistantly tells the rest of us how wrong we are to protect the vulnerable in our communities, the sick pensioner, or, the disabled working man who needs additional help from the state to live as normal a life as possible.Come clean `cool cruiser` Dude.
I am not effected by the `Tory` bedroom tax. But I am glad that I live in a constituency in which Labour Assembly Members, Particulary Jeff Cuthbert, led a campaign from the Assembly, last year to encourage the Government to at least help the disabled to be exempt from this obnxious idealogical attack on working people and the sick and disabled, Over 50% of tenants affected by the reduction in housing benefit are disabled.
Caerphilly Council decided to protect the most vulnerable effected by the changes, and have not had to undertake any evictions as a result of vunerable tenants falling foul of this attack on them by the Tory UK government, The Labour Caerphilly council are to be congratulated for the way they have dealt with these issues so far, and their continued intentions to maintain this position for as long as they are able.
Jeff Cuthbert and his local Labour Colleagues on the Council will not submit to this attack on the most vulnerable disabled and sick in our communities, it is to the credit of the Labour leadership of Caerphilly Council, and, to single out a Senior Committee Chairman, Councillor Hefin David, who has worked tirelessly to maintain this position, and, who will be the next Labour Assembly Member for Caerphilly when Jeff Cuthbert hands over the legacy he has created, as a first class Assemby Member representing his constituents, on his departure as an Assembly Member, Councillor Hefin David is steeped in the same public service tradition as Jeff Cuthbert and will continue to fight for the underdog, the poor working families in Caerphilly, the children living in poverty in Wales, the sick the disabled and the jobless, to ensure they are properly supported and represented, and to ensure a better future for themselves and their families.
This is the real world, not that promoted by Dean and others who would like to see a totally different society for us to live `under`, in Wales. Whilst there are people like Jeff Cuthbert, and Hefin David, and their colleagues on Caerphilly Council, at the heart of WELSH politics t,hat will not happen. Thank god.