PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES - United Kingdom Parliament

475WH
[Steve Webb]
Under-Occupancy Penalty
(Birkenhead)
The right hon. Gentleman said that if people move
into the private sector, it will cost money, but that is a
very static way of looking at things. When somebody
moves out of the social sector and into the private
sector, a social sector property will be freed up that
someone perhaps paying a high rent in the private
sector will move into. It is not self-evident that in cases
where someone moves from the social sector to the
private sector, it costs money overall. Yes, we are trying
to save money, and half a billion pounds will be saved
by the measure, but let me set that in context: in the
final year of the previous Labour Government, we were
trying to fill a hole not of half a billion pounds, but of
£150 billion a year. The right hon. Gentleman objects to
the measure, but it illustrates the scale of the task we
have been faced with. Even a measure such as this,
which has been controversial and difficult, saves only
half a billion pounds, and we have had to take many
more such decisions to deal with the fiscal deficit.
Good things are going on in local authority areas,
such as that of the right hon. Gentleman. I welcome the
fact that housing associations and councils are pooling
their stock to enable people to exchange. My local
housing association and others have had what they call
“speed-dating” events—I am not being flippant; that is
what they call them. They try to bring together people
from among their tenants, some of whom have a spare
room and some of whom are desperate for a family
home. I think of a constituent of mine who contacted
me after receiving a letter about this. She said, “I am
living on my own in a three-bedroom house. What are
my options? Actually, could my brother and sister-in-law
move in?” I said, “Absolutely. Talk to the landlord.”
26 MARCH 2013
That was an ideal outcome: it meant that the housing
stock was better used and someone else had suitable
housing.
To summarise, the way in which people respond to
the measure will be individual and varied. Some will be
able to exchange with someone else. Some will stay
where they are, regarding £2 a day, on average, as worth
paying for that spare bedroom. Some will fill the spare
bedroom with a lodger. As the right hon. Gentleman
colourfully suggests, some landlords will redesignate
properties, so that in effect there is not a spare bedroom,
and the landlord will take the cost. Some people will go
to the local authority, and we have put money into the
pockets of local authorities such as his—nearly £1 million
in the Wirral—so that the most vulnerable people can
go to their local authority and make their case and be
heard.
Again, I urge the local authorities to spend the money
that they have been given to help people, because we
have sought to protect the most vulnerable. We have
sought to protect families with disabled children, fosterers,
and people with service personnel living at home. We
have given local authorities the ability to respond on a
case-by-case basis. None of these decisions is easy, but
they are necessary decisions that we have sought to
mitigate where possible. We are trying to bring about a
beneficial effect: to make better use of scarce social
housing stock and to create fairness between private
and social tenants, which, I have to say, in the past, we
have not had.
Question put and agreed to.
4.59 pm
Sitting adjourned.
Under-Occupancy Penalty
(Birkenhead)
476WH