Another benefits attack by New Labour

Not content with pushing through the Welfare Reform Act, one of the most pernicious pieces of legislation since the Poor Laws, New Labour has now decided to pick on the poorest section of society again in order to balance the books and pay the bills for the bankers bonuses, and assorted other items of large expenditure. The latest wheeze, according to the Times today, is to reduce the amount of money which those claiming housing allowance can get.

Currently, half of those receiving the housing allowance - around 300,000 people - are helped by a policy that allows them to keep up to £780 a year if they find accommodation that costs less than the maximum benefit. But from April 1 they will no longer be able to pocket the leftover cash in a move aimed at saving an estimated £160 million, the newspaper said.

As several Labour MPs have pointed out this will only have the effect of stopping benefit claimants shop around for cheaper accommodation and will encourage landlords to raise their rents. Result? More money for landlords and less for those on benefits. Not surprising that Frank Field MP comments: "This could have been decided in Tory Headquarters." You are right Frank, and so could many of the other policies on welfare and benefits emanating from New Labour at present.

Homelessness charity Crisis said people on £65-a-week jobseeker's allowance could lose 20 per cent of their income under the proposals.
The charity's chief executive Leslie Morphy said: ''This proposal is ill considered and potentially counterproductive. It beggars belief that the Government intends to introduce this when, by its own admission, it has no idea what the impact on claimants will be. We urge the Government to reconsider.''

But will Labour listen? When I attended the lobby of parliament several months ago with trade unions and anti-poverty campaigners, organised by the PCS, we were told that Labour and Tory MPs on the committee discussing the Welfare Reform Bill just laughed at and mocked those giving evidence who were living on the bottom rung of society. No, as we have seen recently from secretly filmed footage, Alan Duncan MP considers £64k per annum as "living on rations". Yet those living on £65 per week are expected to take a drop in income.

This is truly scandalous and another indictment of this government's actions towards the poor, especially now with raging levels of unemployment. I sincerely hope that Labour MPs will oppose this, including Kate Hoey, who has been known not to toe the party line on occasion. I shall be watching closely as will many people on benefits and trade unions.