Mr. Ian Mearns (Gateshead): This morning at the Select Committee on Education, I asked the Secretary of State for Education whether his Department had done an impact assessment of the benefit changes on children's welfare and educational prospects. He said that as far as he was concerned, that had not been done but it should be done. Is that a good idea?
7.15 p.m.
Mr Howarth: My hon. Friend makes his point well with his experience of that Committee sitting. I absolutely agree with the sentiment behind his question.
+++
Mr. Ian Mearns (Gateshead): I have just had a brainwave about where an awful lot of these second homes that will fill the gap will come from. When the housing benefit changes kick in, and people are evicted from their properties because they can no longer afford the rent as the property was under-occupied, those empty properties that belong to private sector landlords will be empty second homes. Of course we can raise the revenue from them. Does my hon. Friend think that is a possibility?
Alex Cunningham: I have known my hon. Friend for many years, and I am used to his brainwaves, which normally apply to education. Of course, he is perfectly right.
The people who will be affected already face higher food and energy bills. Sadly, however hard they work, they are unlikely to get any of the fancy bonuses that will be pouring into the coffers of bankers and everybody else over the next few weeks and months. Quite simply, the proposals merely transfer one of the national costs of rising unemployment to councils and local taxpayers, creating a serious risk that every resident will see further service cuts beyond those already threatened.
+++
Mr. Ian Mearns (Gateshead): In the light of the Minister's reflection that the Secretary of State is highly unlikely to use his powers of intervention, on what date does my hon. Friend think the right hon. Gentleman became such a shrinking violet that he would not use the powers that were open to him?
Mr Kevan Jones: The Secretary of State's track record is there to see. On his edicts, he talks very much about localism, but in this Bill we already see that he has kept for himself swingeing powers to intervene. Over the past 18 months, we have had diktats to councils on weekly elections, including the idea that to save money they should have fewer pot plants, and lectures on the size of their balances, so I do not accept that he is a born-again devolutionist who is giving powers to local authorities. He will quite clearly intervene when he needs to.
+++
Mr. Ian Mearns (Gateshead): My hon. Friend emphasises the differences between local authority areas, and he has compared Durham and Wokingham. A prime indicator of levels of deprivation is the number of looked-after children per 10,000 population, and I just happen to have that statistic for Wokingham. The number there is 22 per 10,000 population, whereas in Middlesbrough it is 104 per 10,000 population. That illustrates the contrast between the levels of deprivation and need in different areas, and I hope he will bear it in mind.
Mr Kevan Jones: I will, and that is why it is important to have in the Bill the criteria by which authorities will draw up their local schemes.
The reason why I give the differences between areas is that it is quite clear that Durham will have to draw up its scheme very differently from the other authorities that I have mentioned. They also indicate that, as I said in last week's debate, the Bill will favour southern councils over northern ones such as Durham. It is not a coincidence that all the constituencies that I read out happen to be Conservative.
+++
Mr Kevan Jones: The hole could be plugged by further cutting benefits for those who are in work and others. Second homes give another method - obviously, there are a plethora of second homes in Bradford.
Mr. Ian Mearns (Gateshead): There are loads in Gateshead.
Mr Kevan Jones: Obviously, and in other places. They will fill the black hole. We could also increase council tax. However, that is no good for councils in the North-East, where 50% of properties are in band A.
Mr. Ian Mearns (Gateshead): Fifty-six per cent.
Mr Kevan Jones: My hon. Friend says that the figure is 56%. Only 2% of properties in Surrey are in band A. The ability of councils in the North-East to raise additional funds is severely limited.
Return to Homepage | House of Commons Contents
| Promoted by Ken Childs on behalf of Ian Mearns, 12 Regent Terrace Gateshead NE8 1LU |