"London housing benefit claimant numbers soaring..." - The Guardian

drc

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/davehillblog/2011/nov/04/london-housing-beneift-claimant-numbers-soaring

London housing benefit claimant numbers soaring, especially in suburbs

By Dave Hill

Two things are commonly said in conversations about housing benefit in the private rented sector - that's local housing allowance (LHA) for short. One is that any household in receipt of it is certainly comprised of innately workshy scroungers pretending to be ill who should immediately be driven out on to the streets and left to find a hedge or dustbin to reside in instead - oh yes, and their children should be fed to crocodiles. The other is that claimants who find that the government's capping of the benefit means they have to vacate expense parts of Inner London will only have to move as far as the cheaper suburbs, where rents tend to be lower.

Alas, new government figures offer little support for either belief. They show that between last June and this May the numbers of LHA recipients went up dramatically throughout the whole of Britain and that in London the increases were often spectacular. In Newham there was fall from 9,020 to 8,780 while in the City of London the number stayed at a level - and super-low - 50. Otherwise, the only way was up. And some of the biggest ups were in Outer London boroughs.

While Lambeth, Lewisham, Camden, Tower Hamlets and Islington saw percentage rises in recipient numbers of between 10% and 15%, Kingston, Barnet, Brent, Enfield and Ealing all burst the 20% barrier. So did Waltham Forest which, rather pleasingly, contains the parliamentary constituency of work and pensions secretary Iain Duncan Smith. Every other borough's hike was dwarfed by an almost freakish leap of 63.1% in Redbridge, whose crocodiles appear set to become very plump indeed.

What do these numbers reveal? Well, they might demonstrate that London's population of innately workshy, scrounging illness-fakers has mysterious multiplied in the course of less than a year, or they could indicate that flatlining wages and unemployment have enlarged the pool of households eligible for LHA, not to mention rising rents especially in those cheaper Outer London areas which - as has been predicted - are turning out to be not so much cheaper after all, as growing demand results in a more buoyant market.

The total number of recipient households in London went up from 182,570 in June 2010 - the month after the general election - to 215,070 in May 2011. That's a rise of 32,500, and not much help at all to a chap who's trying to bring the housing benefit bill down.

Brallaqueen

interesting re Redbridge - but 63 percent of what?

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

The total number of recipient households in London went up from 182,570 in June 2010 - the month after the general election - to 215,070 in May 2011. That's a rise of 32,500, and not much help at all to a chap who's trying to bring the housing benefit bill down.

Shocker.
Who could possibly have predicted that.

The only cure to any of these problems is economic growth. And you can't cut your way out of a recession.

flatlining wages and unemployment have enlarged the pool of households eligible for LHA, not to mention rising rents especially in those cheaper Outer London areas which - as has been predicted - are turning out to be not so much cheaper after all, as growing demand results in a more buoyant market.

There was never going to be any significant saving from this policy, nor any net impact to rents. As we've seen, rents have soared to new record highs despite this coming into effect for new claimants some time ago.

If anything, and thanks to this policy, rents have soared fastest in the areas and property types which were being used by potential FTB-s looking for cheaper accommodation to save a deposit.

House prices and rents are as high as they are because there is a critical housing shortage in this country, and for no other reason.

We've seen countries like the USA and Ireland try ultra-low base rates, liquidity support, bank bailouts, help for homeowners, etc etc etc. Yet their house prices are down 40% to 50%, and we are down just 10%, even after removing 70% of mortgage funding.

When you implement mortgage rationing, as we have seen, rents will soar instead. If you then try to control rents through meddling with housing benefit, cheaper areas will soar in price (eradicating the benefits savings), which also displaces private tenants trying to save money, and forcing them to pay more in the areas previously occupied by benefits claimants.

You can't solve a housing shortage by shuffling benefits claimants around from one area to another slightly cheaper area, which only increases demand in the cheaper area and forces those rents up.

This policy is a joke, nothing more than social engineering to appease the Daily Mail brigade.

It was always doomed to failure. And fail it has.

Sapphire

Isn't the huge rise in claimants due partly to immigration? I don't think immigrants are leaving – and in many parts of London they seem to be increasing, perhaps coming from countries which don't have benefits (or far fewer than in the UK), or where the economy is sinking fast. There seems to be a truly huge number of immigrants not just from third world countries, but also from continental Europe in London. It's noticeable everywhere you go, listening to people speak. I wish the government would face up to the EU and not allow people from abroad to claim benefits from UK taxpayers – many of them don't even keep any money they do earn in this country, and have no loyalty to the UK.

Ilya_Ilyich

Brallaqueen wrote: »

interesting re Redbridge - but 63 percent of what?

63% of the number claiming it in the previous june-may period

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Sapphire wrote: »

Isn't the huge rise in claimants due partly to immigration? I don't think immigrants are leaving – and in many parts of London they seem to be increasing, perhaps coming from countries which don't have benefits (or far fewer than in the UK), or where the economy is sinking fast. There seems to be a truly huge number of immigrants not just from third world countries, but also from continental Europe in London. It's noticeable everywhere you go, listening to people speak. I wish the government would face up to the EU and not allow people from abroad to claim benefits from UK taxpayers – many of them don't even keep any money they do earn in this country, and have no loyalty to the UK.

Wow.

Just........ wow.

Road_Hog

Sapphire wrote: »

Isn't the huge rise in claimants due partly to immigration?

That's exactly the reason. London is where the biggest percentage of immigrants head. But it's to be expected, if you offer a far better welfare state to people who live in a country that doesn't have much of a welfare estate, that is what is going to happen.

What it means for the future is though, the dismantling of the welfare state as we know it and I believe it is deliberate. Anybody that has not been to London for 10 - 15 years would be in for shock if they saw it now.

Sapphire

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Wow.

Just........ wow.

That's pretty meaningless as a response.

In case you are trying to imply I'm some kind of a racist, I am the offspring of political exiles, who was born in the UK. The influx of immigrants/migrants both from continental Europe and third world countries is too much for me (including of people from my parents' country) – and my parents feel the same.

They feel the UK and its taxpayers are being exploited. After talking to many people from my parents' country, it is completely obvious that all they are coming here for is to receive the generous benefits that they would not receive in their own country. They send any money they receive back home, then settle down to a far better life in their country courtesy of the UK taxpayer – who continues to pay their children's (strategically born in the UK) benefits even though they are not living in the UK.

Given the state of the UK economy, such practices must stop. The UK needs to take care of its indigenous population, born here. Taxpayers cannot afford to subsidize parasitic immigrants/migrants (not to mention others who claim benefits and should not) – it is completely unfair and unsustainable.

The indigenous UK population also needs to be taught to have some kind of a work ethic – it used to be that not having a job was a cause for shame. Now it seems to have become a way of life for many – many reasons for this, which I don't have time to go into at the mo. However, if benefits were harder to come by, many of those who are not working currently could and should take on the jobs done by immigrants/migrants. People should also learn that you often need to start from the bottom in order to achieve anything in life. These days people have incredibly high expectations, left over from the 'boom' years of labour's tenure in office (the boom being created by unrealistic borrowing in order to gain popularity for labour, the results of which we are unfortunately experiencing now).

BigAunty

There's been a 63% spike in LHA claimants in Redbridge? How did their numbers suddenly more than double?

I had a quick peak at the Nomis figures to look at economic activity (including out of work benefits) and at first glance, there didn't seem much awry from London or National averages.

http://www.nomisweb.co.uk/reports/lmp/la/2038431889/report.aspx#tabwab

I had a look at the out of work benefit statistics as a time series for that area, and it shows that it has been higher in the past.

http://www.nomisweb.co.uk/reports/lmp/la/2038431889/subreports/dwp_time_series/report.aspx?c1=2013265927&c2=2092957698

So does this mean that the LHA bill has escalated because of the higher number of working poor who find that they are eligible for it? More part time workers, people having their hours reduced, their wages stagnating while rents increase, etc?

drc

Did you see the programme about the welfare state with John Humphreys the other day? There was a family from Venezuela that had got Spanish citizenship and turned up in the UK in the hope of finding work, the dad was a mechanical engineer I think but he couldn't find work in his profession so was working as a cleaner.

He had 3 or 4 kids and was living in Islington and having most of his housing benefit paid for. It's just a crazy situation if people can come here and claim such a lot in benefits (I understand he works but the amount he pays in taxes as a cleaner will dwarf what he and his family are being subsidised by the UK taxpayer). There is no reason why this guy and his family need to live in Islington. He is from Venezuela, only came to the UK in the past couple of years so has no local connection and could quite easily work as a cleaner in the north of England where rent would be cheaper and his benefits would stretch further.

I understand that the socialists envisage a perfect world where everyone is supported but it just isn't financially sustainable. For every Venezuelan cleaner with 4 kids, the housing benefit (let alone the other benefits) are made up of the tax of several minimum wage earners. The sooner the welfare state is reformed the better.

Road_Hog

Sapphire wrote: »

That's pretty meaningless as a response.

In case you are trying to imply I'm some kind of a racist,

Probably he is, it's a tool of the Marxists. To stop any discussion about immigration it is deemed racism, and the racism card will be played whenever anyone mentions it. It makes question you yourself if you're a racist and makes you afraid to even discuss it.

Now, being against immigration is nothing to do with racism. The government's on figures show that between now and 2020, the population is going to grow by 5 million, most of which will be in England which is already over populated.

That's 5 cities the size of Birmingham, if anybody thinks that is a good thing, then could they explain it to me. Whilst you're doing it, also tell me how we're going to pay for all the extra infrastructure needed as the country is broke. Tell me where all the extra housing is going to come from, where will all this infrastructure be built, Green Belt? Farmland? The list is endless, it is going to cause massive problems, we've got 2.5 million (plus the extra hidden 1 million) unemployed, what are we going to do with another 5 million?

And after that? The government's figures estimate another 5 - 6 million in the following 10 - 15 years. So between now and the next 25 years, that's another 10 Birminghams.