Is this Minister really ignorant or just pretending?

Well done to the Today programme on Radio 4 for covering the impact of the “bedroom tax” on families on the breadline. And what a disgraceful response from Stephen Webb, Lib Dem architect of the Government’s benefit policy.

The premise that people who have got some spare space should “downsize” is a reasonable one – but why start with those who are struggling to make ends meet? If Council Tax was fair, there would be an incentive for people to move. The graph below shows what “fair” looks like:

Council Tax

The impact of the unfairness is such that even if you ignore the very expensive properties (which should be valued individually and subject to a “mansion tax”), people in a Band E property would pay about the same and everyone in smaller properties would pay less.

But instead of introducing fairness (what the Lib Dems talked about in their manifesto, along with setting higher tax rates instead of discounts for second homes), they are hitting people in social housing. As was explained on the programme, if someone in social housing is forced to move into a smaller property, they will probably have to go  into private housing – and therefore their rent will probably be higher for a one-bed flat than it was for the two-bed flat. This will be covered by housing benefit so there is no saving to the state and the individual is going to find it more difficult to make work pay.

And this is an actual deliberate policy? What nonsense.

To make things worse, Stephen Webb is blaming local councils for not allowing exceptions. I don’t know the detail of whether the grant is ring-fenced, but I am sure the amount set aside for “special cases” is utterly inadequate – and the pressure on local councils in England is enormous (It is bad in Wales but not nearly as bad as the Welsh Government has shared the pain across all the services it funds whereas the UK Government is placing the brunt of the cuts on local councils in the hope that someone else will get the blame).

As if we hadn’t heard enough nonsense already, Stephen Webb went on to claim that the extra £14 a week can easily be made up by working an extra shift. As was pointed out by the incredulous journalist, the main problem in the economy at the moment is that lots of people already can’t get the number of shifts they want. Our economic woes are not because of scroungers, but because there’s not enough work for the strivers. This situation is called “underemployment” and it is a direct result of the Government’s austerity programme. You can read a recent analysis of underemployment in the UK here and a summary of the impact of the Government’s bedroom tax here.

This interview begs the question: is the Minister really ignorant of the issues or is he pretending, because he and his party did a deal with the Tories which abandoned their economic policies in return for a sniff of power and he feels unable to say what he really thinks?

In other news, Michael Gove will announce this afternoon to the House of Commons that he is abandoning one of his silly ideas. He will probably be given a hard time, which is unfair because for once he is doing the right thing. But before we feel too sorry for him let’s remember that if he talked to experts before he made his announcements (perhaps commissioned a review of qualifications by experts as happened in Wales – or just used this one and call it “best practice”), then he wouldn’t humiliate himself so often would he?

Before the General Election, Michael Gove gave a memorable interview where he said that if after the general election, two parties cobbled together a programme of Government it would be a disgrace. “If that’s democracy,” he said, “I’m a banana”. Something to remember for this afternoon’s announcement. Maybe he could dress up in a banana costume…


2 thoughts on “Is this Minister really ignorant or just pretending?

  1. You are right that the poorest in society should not be penalized in this manner. You are also right in your conclusion that much of the hardship now being felt by our society is the direct result of the austerity measures that have been introduced.

    Which naturally raises the question: Given their appalling record of managing the economy, how would Labor balance the books should they be elected come the next General Election?

    P.S. Please remember that we are effectively Bankrupt thanks mainly to Tony Blair / Gordon Brown and their treasury team of idiots who now lurk on the opposition benches!

    • That’s simply not true – the deficit reduced between 1997 and 2007 because Labour paid off national debt. It is the international banking crisis and the economic downturn which caused the problems after that. Cutting the deficit too far and too fast is not an answer. The Liberal Democrats and Conservatives have now proved that this doesn’t work and in fact pushed up the deficit further.

      If you are arguing that there should have been tighter regulation of the banking sector to prevent th international banking crisis, then I agree – but lets remember that at the time, George Osborne was arguing for less regulation not more. He also said an incoming Conservative Government would accept Labour’s spending plans because he thought they were reasonable.

      There is also the underlying issue that an economy based on ever increasing house prices won’t be sustainable – the Government’s objective needs to be stable house prices not rising house prices which requires a balance of support for those in difficulty and wealth taxes for those doing well. Incidentally shifting the burden of tax from income to wealth will help get the economy going again as it ensures that work pays.

      But an incoming Labour Government won’t have a magic solution. The economy it will inherit will be smaller that without austerity and the deficit larger. What will be needed is not a larger public sector but a stronger government focus on creating jobs – so shifting what the Government does and long term investment plans towards that objective. That will be the need to have – the nice to haves will have to wait until we’ve got the economy moving again.

What do you think?

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s