Housing Benefit (Hansard, 16 December 1996)

§ The Minister of State, Department of Social Security (Lord Mackay of Ardbrecknish)
My Lords, we are consulting the Social Security Advisory Committee and the local authority associations on this proposal and will take final decisions after considering carefully all representations.

§ Earl Russell
My Lords, does the Minister remember that when he introduced a similar restriction on housing benefit for the under-25s the view was expressed that there was simply not enough shared accommodation to go round? Does he now have any reason to believe that there is enough shared accommodation for the under-60s? Or does he believe, as the noble Lord, Lord Peston, once put it, that it will be all right on the night?

§ Lord Mackay of Ardbrecknish
My Lords, the evidence that we have seen in relation to the position of students, for example, suggests that a growth in private accommodation available for people to use on a single room basis took place over the two years from 1993–94 to 1995–96. As regards changes that we have already made for the under-25s, we have monitored the results of that policy through discussions with rent officers and through day-to-day contact with local authorities. All the sources suggest that there have been very few hard cases and that the situation is working reasonably well. We believe that the market will respond to the new changes, as it does to every other change.

§ Lord Molloy
My Lords, is the Minister also prepared to consider the views of the associations of ex-service men and women who express anxiety about this proposal? As I am sure the Minister will agree, they have a right to have their views considered.

§ Lord Mackay of Ardbrecknish
My Lords, I was not aware that any ex-service organisations had expressed anxiety on the point. As I would be the person to receive any mail from them, I shall check when I return to the office but as of an hour ago I had received no such observations from that source.

§ Lord Molloy
My Lords, that is why they write to me, they do not trust others.

§ Baroness Hollis of Heigham
My Lords, will the Minister confirm the example of, say, a middle-aged 1273 woman who cares full-time for her frail mother in a self-contained flat and they are on housing benefit? However, next October the elderly mother dies. If the changes go through, will not the carer lose her home, because she will only receive sufficient housing benefit to cover a bed-sit? She has lost her mother and, after 30 years, will lose her home. She may be forced into a squalid and unsafe bed-sit, sharing kitchen and bathroom with strangers, alcoholics and former offenders. For paltry savings, is that decent for a middle-aged woman?

§ Lord Mackay of Ardbrecknish
My Lords, as is so often the case, the noble Baroness dramatises the situation almost beyond recognition. The position is that we believe that single people on benefit ought to be under the same strictures as single working people; namely, they must take account of their income when deciding on the kind of accommodation they can afford. That is the case for everyone in this country and it should also apply for those on benefit.

§ Baroness Hollis of Heigham
My Lords, will the Minister confirm that in the situation which I described of a middle-aged vulnerable woman—a carer who loses her parent—if the regulations go through from next October she will also lose her home?

§ Lord Mackay of Ardbrecknish
My Lords, I am reluctant to follow the noble Baroness down her imaginary route. The position will be that a single person will be eligible for the single rate base of housing benefit. Whether she can stay in the house she inhabits will depend largely on the difference in rent and whether she can afford to bridge the gap. As usual, the position is, therefore, that the noble Baroness, Lady Hollis, exaggerates hugely. It would be nice to hear from her whether she and her party intend to see increases in social security spending over and above that planned for the next two or three years. Your Lordships might be interested to hear from her and her party the answer to that question.

§ Lord Gisborough
My Lords, will the Minister confirm another example known to me? It is of a single woman occupying a six-bedroomed house. All her rent except £8 a year is paid for by the local authority. That denies five bedrooms to a family that needs them when she only needs one bedroom.

§ Lord Mackay of Ardbrecknish
My Lords, my noble friend paints another picture, but one that we know exists. It underlines the point that people should not be able to afford accommodation at the expense of the taxpayer which they could not afford if they were on modest earnings.

§ Lord Jenkins of Putney
My Lords, is the Minister aware that if he will possess his soul in patience for a few months, he will be able to ask my noble friend that question? He will be in opposition and she will be in government.

§ Lord Mackay of Ardbrecknish
My Lords, from that question I presume that, first, the noble Lord has 1274 looked into his crystal ball. He must have found it very cloudy indeed if he thinks that that will be the outcome. Secondly, I presume that the party opposite will not put a figure on a single promise or a single tax increase between now and the next election.

§ Earl Russell
My Lords, before the Minister harangues the House about the morality of his policy, could he try to ascertain its possibility? Before introducing his policy it would be simple for him to conduct a survey of the amount of shared accommodation available. Will he undertake to do so?

§ Lord Mackay of Ardbrecknish
My Lords, unfortunately I have not had much time to research the Question because until Thursday afternoon the noble Earl had tabled a quite different Question on the Order Paper. It was only changed to one on housing benefit on Thursday afternoon. My understanding is that there are 670,000 single people in houses or flat-shares in the de-regulated sector. In other words, they are in shared accommodation, either directly paying rent to the landlord or, in partnership with other people, sharing the rent of the flat or the house. The situation already exists. Everyone knows from their youth that that is how they started and that is how our children start in shared accommodation. They do that because it is what they can afford. The same rule of affordability ought to apply to people on benefit.

§ Lord McIntosh of Haringey
My Lords, the Minister accused my noble friend of dramatising the situation because she gave a specific example. Perhaps I may ask him a more general question. If, according to his previous answer, the rate of housing benefit in future will he single housing benefit, does it mean that if a married couple have been on housing benefit and one of them dies, the widow or widower will no longer receive sufficient housing benefit to remain in their matrimonial home?

§ Lord Mackay of Ardbrecknish
My Lords, we are talking about people under the age of 59. The noble Baroness did not give me a real example. If it was real, I should be interested to know the name and address of the person and I would look into it.
On the general question, if someone is in the situation postulated by the noble Lord where a person dies, the partner—husband or wife—will remain for 52 weeks on the housing benefit already in place. The housing benefit will then be reviewed and will be at the level of the single person's charge. It will then be for that person to decide whether they can bridge the gap in some way or move to accommodation they can afford. However, that happens to people who are in work. Why should it only be people in work who are confronted with these dilemmas and not those who are on housing benefit?

§ Baroness Gardner of Parks
My Lord—

§ Lords McIntosh of Haringey
My Lords—

§ Baroness Gardner of Parkes
My Lords, it is the turn of our side, we have only had one question on the 1275 matter. Can my noble friend answer a question on the incentive given in his Budget by the Chancellor enabling a landlord letting a room in his own home to receive an additional £1,000? Would such a property be available for people on housing benefit and is that classified as shared accommodation if a person takes a room in someone's home?

§ Lord Mackay of Ardbrecknish
My Lords, my noble friend is right to draw attention to that important tax incentive. The tax threshold to enable owner-occupiers to rent out their spare rooms will be increased to £4,250 from April 1997. That is important. One of the great problems we must face in this country is the increasing creation of single person households. The Opposition can stand on their high horses as much as they like, but it is a reality. Looking into the future, 4.4 million new households will be formed over the next 15 or 20 years. Eighty per cent. of them will be single-person households.
We have to look to the public purse; at least, we on this side must do so and we must try to contain the increase in housing benefit. If the party opposite has no desire to contain any of the increases in benefit costs, then so be it. Let them say that to the electorate.