Morning:
6°c
Poor will be driven out of London by benefit cuts, warns Labour MP
Paul Waugh, Deputy Political Editor5 Jul 2010
Ministers were today warned that housing benefit cuts could lead to “social cleansing” after Westminster council said it may have to house poor families outside central London.
The Tory-run borough, which backs the Government's new £400-a-week cap on the benefit, said that large families have to be “realistic” about their future chances of living in the heart of the city.
Philippa Roe, Westminster cabinet member for housing, said she had no problem with people claiming the benefit but the system was at fault for paying huge sums to private landlords.
She added: “If people request to be housed in Westminster we will do our best to help. But large families do have to be realistic about living in the heart of the capital and may need to be housed outside the borough.”
Labour MPs seized on Ms Roe's words as proof that many boroughs will now seek to cut their costs by “shipping out” poor tenants to cheaper parts of the city such as Barking and Dagenham.
Karen Buck, MP for Westminster North, said the changes would result in a mass “exodus” of families who have lived for generations in areas such as Camden, Westminster, Chelsea, Fulham and Islington.
“For more than 400 years, central London has been socially mixed and this Government now wants to radically end that,” Ms Buck said.
“This would lead to social cleansing on an unprecedented scale, with poorer people shipped out in large numbers to the outskirts. It is as if Dame Shirley Porter had been put in charge of housing policy — but this time on a national level.”
The Government aims to save £1.8 billion from the changes and Ms Roe pointed to the 80 families in Westminster who were claiming housing benefit for sky-high rents of more than £1,000 a week.
London Councils, which represents town halls, has predicted 170,000 Londoners will be hit by the planned cap on the benefit.
Central London boroughs such as Camden, Hackney, Westminster, Tower Hamlets, Hammersmith & Fulham and Kensington and Chelsea will be the worst affected, it said.
A new Chartered Institute of Housing report showed that 600,000 of the poorest families will lose an average of £1,000 a year.
Housing officers in inner London estimate that because temporary accommodation is either too expensive or in short supply, the only option will be to move tenants to outer regions.
Campaigners point out that housing benefit is paid not just to those on the dole but also to tens of thousands of people in low-paid jobs such as teaching assistants, hospital porters and care workers.
In Westminster alone, Labour says that 84 per cent of the high-rent borough's claimant households will be worse off — some 4,592 out of a total of 5,430 on housing benefit.
As a result of the Right to Buy legislation, the number of council homes available in the capital has plunged in the past 20 years.
In many cases, former council homes are now being rented out at high rents paid through housing benefit.
Ms Roe said that although some housing charities were predicting a rise in homelessness, the new lower benefit rate will lead to a fall in rent levels “as landlords will not be able to charge such high sums”.
Reader views (28)
Matthew, London, Good luck mate, because just reading your comments I know there true. Some of the right wing comments here are just from the pretenders in our society. They don't this and they don't that, just greed people who believe they are rich, they want to be a Tory, Vote Tory! But they still live month to month, like us all, but of course they don't want anyone to know. As in everything like HB each case is different, but these silly people try to put everyone in the same bag, and blame everyone else for their short comings. It won't be long before these cut start to hurt them, and only then will they think differently, and then they someone else again.
- Frederick, London, 14/07/2010 18:29
Report abuse
RUSSELL-- Indeed-- the Whole of Britian has had its generouse heart of the middleclass, true doers, of all things British taken for FREE,and bent to suit the pretence social developements by these Social Engineers. BUT! again it was the Upper class who stepped away from the Middleclass during the didigital expansion because it was happy hours, progressive and fun money. Now the social engineers are in their back yards,using other Nationals to clear them out.-- Top Snobs, Power People,The Enbedded Top Class, are now rather uncomfortable, and its going to get much more abrasive.The Flight of many, many of the unloved Middleclass will emigrate to other Commonweath Countries such as AUSTRALIA / CANADA is on for one and all, they get more for the dollar and the places are BOOMING especially in Australia, they reckon they have a 10yr future of shortage of skilled workers.
- trevor, stockwood, 10/07/2010 06:08
Report abuse
I suppose that there will be a small number of true English people remaining in London after the great majority are driven out. After all, the oil rich sheiks, international tycoons, Russian oligarchs, Premier League footballers, and mysteriously affluent M.P.s will need a small number to clean their homes, drive their cars, look after their children, and in some cases, provide unusual sexual services. Also a few Beefeaters and groups of Morris Dancers may be retained to amuse the tourists. Personally I would not like to belong to the new servant class, particularly if my servant quarters were in the hideously vulgar block of flats being built at the entrance to Hyde Park near Scotch Corner. This abomination is a metaphor for London, a once beautiful city now selling its soul for the benefit of rich but vulgar foreigners, aided by bank finance and greedy tasteless developers. The nature of London is being changed for the benefit of the rich but tasteless few and to the detriment of the ordinary hard working decent Londoner who is slowly being priced out of his/her own city- a tragedy taking place before your eyes.
- Miguel M, Old Isleworth, 07/07/2010 13:05
Report abuse
We would all love to live in a posh area in central London near to everything "exciting". However, some of us have to pay for ourselves and therefore we buy/rent where we can. A 3 bedroomed house with garden back and front and off street parking now cost approximately £900. per month.If you have no job and cannot afford to pay for central London then what is wrong with that.
- Amber, Mitcham Surrey, 07/07/2010 11:08
Report abuse
"Or just bored and ugly? Like really really bored and ugly .."
- Matthew, London, UK
Really really bored and ugly! Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!!
Bored and ugly? No, just the hard working top tax paying people who have to fund the lazy socialist Labour voters. Socialism is about spending other peoples hard earnt money whilst doing as little as possible yourself.
- Frank, Home Counties, England., 06/07/2010 09:33
Report abuse
In Westminster it is both a market, and democratic, imperative that lower paid peple should not be supported in living here. They should go and live somewhere they can truly afford. It makes a mockery of being rich, having poor people living next door. It is social engineering to encourage a cross-section of society to live in expensive areas, the public purse should not be doing this. In addition to well-off, native born British people, Central London is very popular with international money and international citizens, it is natural that wealthy people should want to live here, they should not be prevented from doing so by occupied housing. If people who have lived here for a long time, when costs were different, can no longer afford to live here, then they should go, if they are on minimum wage, or they lose their jobs, they should go. Central London is expensive, there are other areas that low paid people can go to and they should receive support to enable them to live there instead, maybe in the lowest 30% of the available housing in those areas, as is planned, rather than up to the average as is now the case, if landlords will accept them. It is absurd to try to prevent people with the money to live here from doing so by spending public money subsidizing poor people to live in expensive property. It is this subsidy and the covetousness of low waged or unemployed people themselves, wanting to live here, which is putting up prices. We should provide buses to help them.
- Russell, London, Broken Britain, 05/07/2010 22:11
Report abuse
Thank you Rogan for your reply. At least you provided a rational response to my (yes very) socialist argument. Why do others here always, always have to resort to anti-immigrant, benefit scrounging comments etc that are so offensive? I claim HB by the way. I have a family of 4. I am a social worker and part time lecturer. My wife is studying to become a medical professional. We happen to live in SW London where a small 2 bed house to buy would be £475k and to rent we negotiated very hard and managed to secure at £1250pcm. As it happens we find out the local authoirty can assist us with income assessed HB. The process is rigourous and under constant scrutiny. Our HB is often suspended at the smallest of change of circumstances to prevent overpayment. Without it, or the looming cap, or rent assessed at the lowest 30% of average rents (average rent in south london for a 3 bed house is £1500+) we may struggle. Finances are stretched. My pay is frozen, we may soon lose out on child tax credit. We are certainly not rich and we live within our means. This is the reality of many of us on HB. We are not all single parents, we just need some assistance in paying massively high rents.
Ok, the alternative - we move. Take the kids out of a great local comp school. I pay more to commute to work. Childcare will now have to paid for (currently informal). Family see us less. Support networks dissolve. Please see the real stories, not just opccasional huge families in mansions.
- Matthew, London, UK, 05/07/2010 22:07
Report abuse
Matthew Q, London, UK, your comments make sense - if you start from a socialist perspective.
"Firstly, the HB will save £1.8 billion, less than 1% of the budget deficit" - well, yeah. And that gets added to to countless othere savings that have been forced upon the current government by their predecessor's spendthrift policies.
"Why cant a single parent (remember he or she is the parent that stayed) remain in a decent property near a good school, maybe in a safer area? Or is this just the priveledge of the rich and the few?"
What part of "living within your means" don't you get? 'Stayed'? Encouraged by Labour to stay single in too many cases.
"Many landlords.... (this, that and the other...)"
I do agree with you on this one. But that isn't the government (your target), it's those who've been taught they can get away with what amounts to ripping-off tax-paying, responsible people by an over-generous system. Sort THEM out first.
"Why is it ok for affluent home owners who chatter at dinner parties and school fetes about "property prices" and for the media to scream in terror when property prices fall but condemn many hard working families" - sneering at the affluent by the not so affluent? Standard socialist fare. Easy targets that aren't expected to shoot back. Hint - as taxpayers, amazingly, they're entitled to an opinion also.
Everyone seems to think they are exceptions to the austerity measures. I suggest they take that up with the previous government.
- Rogan, Irving, 05/07/2010 20:28
Report abuse
I work 8 - 6, 5 days a week and I do not live in central London because I cannot afford to. So why, in that case, should someone who does not work for a living be able to live there? I would love to live in central London if I could.
- JS, London, UK, 05/07/2010 20:05
Report abuse
Being a legal immigrant in the UK, I understand the frustrations of many native people have over many migrants that arrive to these shores to take advantange of the welfare system. Nobody forces a family to have 4 or 5 children. This is a personal decision. A couple should have the children they can afford. I think it is a fundamental mistake to pay massive amounts of money to pay for rent of accomodation in Chelsea or Westminster for a family of immigrantes or refugees to live there. If you have the privilege to live in this country, you should contribute to it working hard, paying taxes and supporting your own family. If you can't afford to live in central London, move to where you can afford it and have only the children you can afford. I pay almost half of my income in taxes and have a massive mortgage that I struggle to pay but I am proud to have never received one pence in benefits. I don't want to pay taxes to provide for lazy people or those that abuse the system. I live far away from the centre and commute 1.5 hours to work each way everyday and I don't see anything wrong about that. Perhaps once they cap the benefits, greedy landlords will lower their expectation once the big tenants, the councils, will reduce their maximum allowances to fund housing benefit. We want an aspirational society, so if you aspire to live in Chelsea or Westminster, work hard and make your own money to move there, and if you can't, live where your incomes allows you. Simple!
- Legal Immigrant, Brentford, UK, 05/07/2010 19:25
Report abuse
Is this website a joke? Is it a forum for the BNP? Bored, affluent surbaban home county, white, intolerant, ugly, nasty, nasty people you all are. And then you will all probably have the cheek to say "I fought the Nazis for a free country". No, really, this web forum is a joke right. You people are not for real. Or just bored and ugly? Like really really bored and ugly and probably quite dysfunctional and lonely. You abuse benefit claimants and pour bile at immigrants, you get some back ok
- Matthew, London, UK, 05/07/2010 18:54
Report abuse
R F - You are so right!
So much of the worlds driftwood end up in our
capital city -usually begging, sleeping on the
streets etc etc not to mention the crime rackets
that have evolved over the past 20 -30 years.
No wonder the indigenous wealthy have moved to
more pleasant areas of the country - who can blame
them?
- Margaret, Knebworth UK, 05/07/2010 18:16
Report abuse
RF York
And hopefully northerners will stop scrounging off the south with all their chronic welfare dependency and public sector jobs. You moan about immigrants when your own region is a complete drain on the country
- clive, london, 05/07/2010 17:50
Report abuse
Excellent news! send them up north - we don't care what happens there
- Curruthers, london, sussex, south west france, 05/07/2010 17:46
Report abuse
I hope none of these scroungers will come out of London and end up near me.
- Anglo, Sussex England, 05/07/2010 17:04
Report abuse
The middle class were pushed out of London years ago as they could not afford to live there, even with descent paying jobs, so why should the poor get the privildge of living in the city for free / with no job? London is now a city of the rich and poor, the rich can afford it and the poor get it for free, how is that fair for hard working middle class families who have already been forced to move to less expensive boroughs and in some case, even out of London?
- Dirk Diggler, Soho, London, UK, 05/07/2010 16:44
Report abuse
The indigenous people of this country take out a mortgage and buy houses which they can afford - unlike benefit scroungers and immigrants who walk into million pound properties and get the government to pay the rent for them. Hopefully those who will be driven out of London will be driven back to the countries from whence they came.
- R.F. York, Yorks, UK, 05/07/2010 16:38
Report abuse
This is not the first time Council tenants have been shipped out,look at all the new towns,all populated by ex London council tenants Swindon,Stevenage some people never forget !!!!!
We will start building New Towns shortly.
What about starting a reverse immigration programme,don't forget folks you heard this from me.
- Davey_buoy, Chertsey, 05/07/2010 16:05
Report abuse
The goverment is not stopping benifits,it is capping them.Only a dumb goverment would end benifits,like only a dumb goverment would pay 2000 per week for benifits.
- dave, london, 05/07/2010 15:51
Report abuse
The case last year of a family receiving £104,000 in housing benefit has to show that the whole system needs a revamp. I still can't see why so many people who don't work need to live in the most expensive place in the country. I'm sure the rent is cheaper on the outskirts of Middlesboro.
- Alex C, London, 05/07/2010 14:54
Report abuse
Most people live in housing they can afford. Why should people be encoraged to stay if the rent/mortgage is beyond thier means. . Why are we supporting people to live in properties in the private sector for someine else to make a profit? Tax the landlords at 90% then they make think again.
- Mary, Hornchurch, Essex, 05/07/2010 14:25
Report abuse
It's about time a cap was put into pace. The vast sums council plough into rented accommodation is now stupid.
If local authorities didn't waste so much money they could build new homes.
- Scott, Docklands, London, 05/07/2010 14:17
Report abuse
Face it, the majority of the rich and the naive voted Tory. David Cameron prayed on the naive to raise his votes, and a good job he did too! He knew that everybody hated Gordon Brown for messing this country up and gained from Gordon Brown's self - inflicted errors.
- RMT Member, London, 05/07/2010 14:08
Report abuse
"the changes would result in a mass “exodus” of families who have lived for generations in areas such as Camden, Westminster, Chelsea, Fulham and Islington."
A bit misleading surely? This only applies to those on benefits, and surely those who have been on benefits for generations have been abusing the system? Perhaps this will force them to get a job?
- Bob, Cheam, 05/07/2010 14:05
Report abuse
The hysteria about housing benefit (HB) for privately renting tenants needs to be checked for a second. Firstly, the HB will save £1.8 billion, less than 1% of the budget deficit. Secondly, what is the problem with poorer people living in affluent areas? Why cant a single parent (remember he or she is the parent that stayed) remain in a decent property near a good school, maybe in a safer area? Or is this just the priveledge of the rich and the few? When council houses are not being built and home owership is now out of question to many, HB is the only alternative for the rest of us. It is not claimants fault that houses are so expensive and therefore landlords charge higher rents. Many landlords openly ask for "sharers" as they get the high rent that way. Many private landlords openly discriminate against claimants using the "No DSS" on adverts. Might as well add "NO Irish" as well in my opinion.
Why is it ok for affluent home owners who chatter at dinner parties and school fetes about "property prices" and for the media to scream in terror when property prices fall but condemn many hard working families, who, for no fault of there own, missed out on the property boom, but are forced to rent?
The banks face a £2 Billion levy but welfare cuts amount to £12 Billion. Bank bonuses are left alone but public sector pay is frozen (cut) and HB cut also. But you all still say "something has to be done!". Funny how the most vulnerable are always the easiet of targets. Cheers libdems
- Matthew Q, London, UK, 05/07/2010 13:52
Report abuse
“For more than 400 years, central London has been socially mixed and this Government now wants to radically end that,” Ms Buck said.
Yes, so what happened in the 19th century when the rail companies evicted whoever was in their way to build rail lines and termini? No compensation, no rehousing, no benefits.
- BJ, East London, 05/07/2010 13:45
Report abuse
RTB is one of the most iniquitous political agendas ever pursued. Anyone owning more than one property (i.e. the home that they live in) should be taxed double.
- Blue Baby, London, 05/07/2010 13:35
Report abuse
Private Landlords are raking in the money because they know their tenants are having their rent paid through benefit from London Councils so they just charge what they like. The rents are exhorbitant. Council Tax payers are not paying tax to house they poor: they are paying to line the pockets of the Greedy. Something needs to be done to stop this racket.
- Janet, London, UK, 05/07/2010 12:41
Report abuse
