An episode of " Sorry , I Haven't a Clue " ... could pass for one ?
https://www.theguardian.com/society/201 ... -tomlinson
Whose next ?
Life ... on The Street ... more like survival for millions !!
What planet is this junior minister living on ???
https://www.theguardian.com/society/201 ... -tomlinson
Poor families could take in lodger to beat benefit cap – minister.
Junior minister also says families living in poverty could move or renegotiate rent.
Families living in poverty because of the benefit cap could consider taking in a lodger to make ends meet, a minister has suggested, prompting a scathing response from the MP questioning him about the system.
Justin Tomlinson, the junior work and pensions minister, told MPs that other ways families could cope with the impact of the cap would be to move, or to seek to renegotiate their rent so it was cheaper.
Answering questions from the work and pensions committee, Tomlinson also said there was no specific government analysis taking place about the impact on people of the cap, introduced under David Cameron’s government, and reduced in 2016.
The absolute maximum amount of benefits a couple can receive, whatever their circumstances, is £20,000 a year, rising to £23,000 in London.
While the government argues it incentivises people to work and prevents the unfairness of people on benefits receiving more than the average wage, critics say it is pushing many families into extreme poverty and debt.
Questioning Tomlinson and the DWP’s head of working-age benefits, Pete Searle, the Labour MP Ruth George asked what analysis was being done into this effect. Stephen said that as part of a wider evaluation of “other outcomes” of the policy, officials were looking into how people “respond to the cap”.
George said: “Responding to the cap – does that include things like having to switch the heating off and be freezing cold at night? Does that include things like not being able to feed their children to a nutritionally decent standard?”
Almost two-thirds of people affected by the cap were not entering work, George, the MP for High Peak, said.
Tomlinson responded: “Of those, some will have made other changes, including in their housing costs, whether that is either moving or renegotiating what their rental housing costs are. Or they could, for example, take in a lodger. So there’s other circumstances than work.”
George responded with incredulity: “These are large families, they’ve often got three children in one bedroom. How are they going to take in a lodger?”
Tomlinson said this was an argument in favour of the government’s bedroom tax: “If there’s three children in one bedroom then you should start joining us in supporting releasing more family homes through or spare room subsidy changes.”
While some tenants in social housing are allowed to take in lodgers, for those in private accommodation it usually needs the landlord’s permission, and any income would need to be declared.
Explaining the reasons for the benefit cap to the committee, Tomlinson said it had three objectives: saving money; the “fairness test” over comparisons with working incomes; and incentivising work.
This had worked for many families, he said. “For those people where it has made a difference, it has significantly improved their life chances, for not just them but for their children.”
But George pointed out that of those affected by the cap, 81% are not subject to “work conditionality” – meaning circumstances such as very young children dictate they are not automatically expected to seek work.
Later in the session, the committee chair, Frank Field, asked if there were any plans to raise the cap, given rising rents and other costs.
Tomlinson replied: “There isn’t any work at the moment that I’m aware of that’s looking to change that cap.” Searle added that it was reviewed at least once every parliament.
Whose next ?
Life ... on The Street ... more like survival for millions !!
or to seek to renegotiate their rent so it was cheaper.
What planet is this junior minister living on ???