Cllr Lucy Ivimy, the Cabinet Member for Housing, detects more Labour scaremongering
The new housing benefit rules are, I know, a source of significant concern to the opposition, and to various housing groups. I am well aware of the concerns expressed by Shelter about an impending crisis with extraordinary figures for the numbers of families likely either to be pushed into poverty or made homeless by the changes.
I believe all these fears are ungrounded. When the Shelter report is analysed, the conclusions are based on false assumptions and deeply flawed analysis.
The first assumption that Shelter makes is that landlords will not reduce their rent.
Let me tell you what I know:
First, there are 21,555 thousand households receiving housing benefit in the borough.
The overwhelming majority of these are comfortably within the new housing benefit caps.
Only some 2,000 housing benefit recipients are paying rents that are above the proposed caps. The other 19,500 will not be affected in any way. Of those affected, about 1,300 are residents that the Council has placed in accommodation. A further 750 are residents who have found their own there is no crisis when these caps come into force. For over half of these properties, the landlord has stated that the rent will reduce to come into line with the new caps.
A large number of further landlords are saying ‘maybe’. I strongly believe that, when it comes to it, the majority of these will also reduce their rents.
That means that about three quarters of those these families will be able to stay in the current accomodation without beaching the cap.
There are families where the gap between the rent currently being charged and the proposed cap is so great that landlords won’t reduce the rent.
Inevitably, this is typically those in larger accommodation. I remind member that the cap for four bedrooms or more will be £400 per week – that is £20,000 per annum on rent alone.
That would be hugely beyond the affordability of any typical working family and cannot be considered as ungenerous. For leased accommodation the cap is even higher, £500 per week or £25,000 per annum.
Some families may have to move and, if so, they are being given every assistance is procuring alternative suitable housing that takes into account all their family circumstances. Meanwhile, the Council has made funds available to ensure that no family will be made homeless or pushed into poverty or debt by these changes.
We welcome these reforms, believe that they are long overdue and will not result in any housing crisis.
Comments