- Conference
- 2013 Local Government Service Group Conference
- Date
- 1 January 2013
- Decision
- Carried
This Conference recognises that the Con-Dem Coalition Government is intent on undermining the system of collective social security and on reducing the household incomes of those on less than average incomes. This will include many UNISON members working in local government.
Conference notes that, as a share of national income, wages have fallen over the last thirty years.
Conference rejects the divisions that the Westminster Government is trying to create between people in and out of work, as it rejects the divisions the Westminster Government has sought to create between public and private sector workers.
These proposals for Universal Credit will:
1) Have a significant impact on benefits staff working in local government and for private contractors that deliver the benefits service for a minority of local authorities across the UK. These proposals will adversely impact on jobs, pay and conditions and the work they undertake on behalf of the public
2) Introduce conditionality to part-time workers earning less than 35 times the National Minimum Wage
3) Reduce the household incomes of millions of people before it is introduced in October 2013 as a result of changes to housing and Council Tax benefits, Employment and Support Allowance and tax credits and the real terms cut in the rates that will apply over the next three years
4) According to the Government’s own impact assessment, further reduce the household incomes of 2.8 million people after the introduction of Universal Credit
Conference welcomes the implementation of decisions made at Conference 2012 to organise and recruit housing benefits staff, and the TUC facilitated work between UNISON and PCS who represent the majority of staff in DWP and HMRC that are also affected by the introduction of Universal Credit.
Conference remains concerned that the introduction of Universal Credit could result in a significant number of the 20,000 housing benefit posts being lost and that some staff may face redundancy if an effective service delivery model is not created. This would affect unitary and metropolitan authorities, but particularly district councils as a high proportion of their workforce is in combined revenues and benefits departments.
Conference is also concerned about the impact that removing direct payment to landlords (subject to exemptions) will have on landlords’ finances. Higher rent arrears, increased collection costs and more bad debt provision are signs of financial inefficiency and will ultimately lead to reduced service provision and higher rents for tenants as well as fewer employment opportunities. In extreme cases the financial covenants of some housing organisations may be placed at risk with potentially disastrous consequences for tenants and staff.
Conference notes that UNISON submitted written and oral evidence to the Work and Pensions Select Committee and that the Committee subsequently called for the DWP to publish clear details of the service delivery arrangements before anybody applied for Universal Credit.
Conference continues to believe that a high quality service cannot be provided to clients simply over the internet, and local authorities should provide the local element of an integrated service, using the irreplaceable skills experience and knowledge of housing benefit staff.
The introduction of the ‘bedroom tax’ in April 2013 is one of many changes which will detrimentally affect many households, including those of many UNISON low paid members, already struggling with competing demands such as food and fuel.
“The “bedroom tax” applies to council and social housing tenants deemed to live in properties with one or more unused bedrooms. It is a reduction in Housing Benefit eligibility calculated as either 14% or 25% of the total ‘eligible rent’ – not calculated just as 14% or 25% of that element of rent paid by Housing Benefit. The government says it will mean an average loss of about £14 a week for council tenants and £16 a week for housing association tenants; with 655,000 households (or roughly a third of social sector claimants) affected in total and approximately 180,000 households facing the 25% of ‘eligible rent’ reduction. Lord Bassam’s survey suggested the true figure will be more than 900,000 households affected.
The government’s estimated ‘saving’ to the welfare budget from the “bedroom tax” is approximately £1 billion over two years. This is predicated on tenants either taking the hit to their pockets or relocating into social housing with fewer bedrooms, ignoring the effect on children having to move schools or on tenants’ work. Yet smaller social housing is simply not available in the numbers required, and this reduces even more the further North you look. Inevitably for most affected households if they want to ‘downsize’ the only option will be private rentals where, even with one fewer bedroom, rents are far higher. For example in Manchester the average 3-bedroom council house rent is £400 per calendar month and £335 pcm for a 2-bedroom council house. The average cost of private rental is £523 pcm for a 1-bedroom flat, £689 pcm for a 2-bedroom flat and £1,020 for a 2-bedroom house.
So if tenants do relocate to private rental the consequence of this huge rent differential will be picked up by Housing Benefit again.
Housing Benefit is a significant cost but that’s predominantly because house prices and private rents have been left free to rise without control and funding for council and social housing has been deliberately restricted to help fuel the property bubble. Most of this taxpayers’ money now goes to private landlords. A more inclusive and sustainable solution could be achieved by a few years of rent controls allied with a massive programme of council and social house building.
Instead the approach of a “bedroom tax” imposed on council and social tenants, introduced on April Fools’ Day, will most likely see homelessness increase, will not reduce overcrowding, will force many people into generally worse living conditions, the housing benefit bill will likely rise and the taxpayer will be subsidising private landlords all the way to a tax haven. It is a further attack on the poorer end of society and a further attack on social housing, economically unviable, divisive and driven by ideology.
Conference notes a number of Councils and social housing providers have, or are considering, reclassifying properties to a lower number of bedrooms. This may assist when seeking new tenants for low-demand properties and could partly mitigate the impact of the “bedroom tax” on current and future tenants. However, large-scale reclassifications could raise a number of legal and technical questions as well as result in a potential loss of rental income and place further pressure on already-low available funding for new build. We can applaud the intentions of our more socially responsible landlords but ultimately this pernicious ‘tax’ needs to be challenged and opposed publicly.”
The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) abolished the discretionary social fund and transferred funding for Community Care Grants and Crisis Loans for living expenses to the Scottish Government from April 2013. Local Authorities have been appointed to deliver the new Scottish Welfare Fund which is likely to impact on already stretched budgets and demands.
The proposals will have a significant impact on Housing, Social Work and Benefit Staff across the UK. These proposals will adversely impact on jobs, terms & conditions and the work they undertake on behalf of the public.
UNISON members working in these areas will be faced with some of the most challenging circumstances with increased evictions, homelessness, domestic violence and mental health illness.
Conference therefore calls on the Service Group Executive:
a) To oppose the attack on the system of collective social security
b) To Intensify our campaign of informing MPs, councillors, MSPs and AMs about the potential impact of failing to have a proper delivery mechanism for Universal Credit
c) To campaign for the end of the Bedroom Tax in the social rented sector.”
d) To work with regions, branches, Labour Link, local authorities, MPs, Scottish and Welsh Governments, Councillors, Professional Organisations and Service Users to secure a sustained long-term role for local authorities in the delivery of a rights and benefits service that includes a localised Universal Credit service that enables people to apply, resolve enquiries, get assistance and process documentation locally
e) To mobilise and organise staff in housing benefit departments to campaign to maintain a quality service, and to recruit and ensure UNISON members and branches are well organised and prepared in the event of a transfer and to mobilise our members in the campaign and liaise with other Service Groups affected
f) To continue to engage with pathfinders and pilots on involving local authorities in delivering universal credit at local level
g) To continuing to explore ways of enabling and supporting branches to take lawful industrial action in defence of benefit jobs and/or to maintain the identity of their employer in the event of transfers
h) To provide adequate resources, advice and guidance to the devolved nations
i) To ensure our members are given adequate training and resources to deal with the challenging circumstances they will face
j) To campaign for a UK wide ‘no eviction policy’ by housing providers for those adversely affected by the “bedroom tax” and to campaign and mobilise our members and public opinion against evictions arising from the Bedroom Tax and for the protection of everyone that is adversely affected by securing its abolition and sufficient additional resources to cover any additional arrears that have accrued to social landlords.
k) To continue campaigning for a massive programme of new build council and social homes.