Reading Labour play politics with Welfare - again

It's disappointing to see that less than two months into the job Labour's new Lead Member for Housing, Cllr Eden, seeking to make political capital out of Welfare in Get Reading this week, a tried and tested tactic of her Party.

A lead councillor in Reading is calling on the town’s two MPs to oppose plans to put a cap on housing benefit.



Councillor Rachel Eden, lead member for housing and neighbourhoods, said Government welfare reforms could make 40,000 families homeless and put a huge burden on council finances.


The reforms cap the level of housing benefit which would mean in expensive areas, the benefit may no long meet the actual cost of rent.


Cllr Eden said: “Here in Reading we’ve known for months that the Government’s proposals would be likely to strain the council’s resources, while causing problems for many residents. I am calling on Reading’s MPs to meet with us and to withdraw their support for these proposals .”

The issue of changes to Welfare is an important one and we should be concerned about.

I and many other Liberal Democrats have real concerns about the impact some of the changes to welfare policies families and vulnerable people.

I and others have raised these issues with our MPs and Ministers and they are well aware of the need to get them right.

Labour councillors and MPs, on the other hand need to face facts: they went into the last General Election planning to cut welfare and pledging specifically, to cut housing benefit.

The way to address genuine concerns about these changes is to engage properly with MPs and to champion these issues in Parliament as a number of Lib Dem MPs such as Jenny Willott and John Leech have continued to do.

The way not to do as Cllr Eden has done is via cheap newspaper headlines which seek to spread concern amongst some of the poorest people in our community.

When I was Lead Member I worked hard to build good relationships with both Reading MPs because I felt strongly, and still do, that the the needs of residents should come ahead of party politics.

The approach I and other Lib Dem councillors took led to increased funding for a number of key housing projects including the regeneration of Dee Park and building of much needed extra-care homes on the former Avenue School site in Katesgrove.

Cllr Eden, in her failure to articulate a) her Party's real position and b) accept her Party's responsibility for the financial crisis that has led to a need to reduce public debt so dramatically does nothing to to move the debate forward or help those who may be affected.

I'm sure this is a well intentioned error by Cllr Eden who is new at her role and as such does not shoulder the entire blame for this mistaken position.

Hers is simply the latest in a long line of hypocritical attacks by Reading Labour politicians.

Last November, when I wasLead Member for the same area and proposed reforms to housing benefit were announced Cllr Pete Ruhemann, the Labour Group's longstanding 'official press spokesperson' took to the airwaves claiming that London Boroughs were already block-booking rooms in Reading as a result of people being forced to move out of London due to benefits changes.

He did not have the imagination to think up this line it was being spun by the Labour Party nationally too: I was rung up by the Daily Mail on the back of this story and when I investigated with officers at the Council it proved to be whollywithout foundation.

All Cllr Ruhemann's comments did was to increase fears amongst people living on some of the lowest incomes in Reading.

Which is just what Cllr Eden is doing.

Disgraceful.

Let's be clear, these attitudes are expounded by councillors from a political party that was committed to making £44 billion pounds worth of cuts going into the last general election.

Ex Welfare Minister James Purnell admitted Labour planned to make cuts to Welfare and he wished he had gone further.

And both Cllr Eden and Cllr Ruheman come from a Party which fought the last General Election on a platform of pledging to cap housing benefit.

So, in future, when it comes to Welfare a bit more honesty, a bit less piety and a lot less politicking from our Labour councillors would make a nice change

Homes not headlines - in search of credible housing policies

I read with interest today that Ed Miliband is set to talk about a radical new housing policy, in his 'fightback' speech today.

On closer inspection it seems he is simply going to argue for tweaks to councils allocations policies in favour of more 'deserving' households in an attempt to redistribute homes more fairly:

"One area where people’s sense of fairness is under threat is social housing,’ he will say. ‘In Manchester, as well as helping the most vulnerable families and disabled people with housing, they prioritise households who are giving something back to their communities – making a contribution – for example, people who work for or run local voluntary organisations. They also look to reward people who have been good tenants in the past and who have paid their rent on time and never been involved in any antisocial behaviour.’

Whilst laudable his stance misses the point entirely.

Miliband's pronouncement is the latest in a long line of ill-thought out housing policy announcements which fail to address the key issue facing UK housing policy: that of lack of supply.

Recent examples of this approach which appears to be motivated by a desire to grab the headlines rather solve housing problems:

• The last (Labour) government changed the rules to enable councils to develop their own allocations policies.
• The current government via the Localism Bill is bringing in new powers to enable Councils to vary the length of tenure from fixed term to lifetime.
• Last week Tory ministers floated the idea of evicting Council tenants earning over £100,000.

At most these changes will make a few thousand more homes available to people but the downside is they could also potentially displace needy people.

Not only that, talking in the newspapers about who should get access to social housing contributes to a myth that people living in social housing now shouldn't be there.

This breeds mistrust and resentment between individuals and communities.

In short, it's not helpful and it does not solve the problem of housing.

I am no expert but I can tell you that five years as a local councillor has taught me not that the wrong people are getting social housing, but there simply is not enough of it to go round.

This is not a moral issue about deserving versus undeserving.

Surely the real issue is one of affordability - people who can afford to own their homes are the exception not the rule in many communities.

The number of first time buyers has fallen and buying a home is out of reach for many young people.

In Reading, families can wait for many years to access social housing that meets there needs.

The wait for family-sized housing - 3-4 bed homes is by far the longest.

There is barely a week that goes when a family doesn't contact me in distress stuck on the Council's housing waiting list desperate to move into larger or more suitable accomodation.

What hope for them?

When I was Lead Member for Housing I was proud to deliver the first new Council homes in Reading for twenty years.

But I realised this was just the start and will only go one small step towards meeting demand for housing.

At the next Council meeting I will be challenging the new Labour Lead Councillor to do more.

There are various ways you can do this and they don't all involve building new homes.

Tackling the problem of empty homes is one, underoccupancy another.

Labour's record on increasing housing supply is not good:

•  Labour sold off almost as many houses as they built (over half a million homes sold). 
• Labour's total net increase in social housing stock was less than 20,000
• Between 1997-2010 waiting lists for social housing rose by 800,000

But that was then, this is now, and with less public money around it is going to be much harder for Councils, housing associations and developers to build new homes.

The Coalition Government has set itself a tough target:

'to increase social housing supply by more each year than Labour achieved in thirteen years added together (Andrew Stunell MP).

I really hope the government meets or ideally exceeds this target. What is clear, however, is that simply tweaking the way councils allocate homes will not be enough.

Update

Officers have confirmed there are currently just under 8,000 people registered with the Council for social housing in Reading alone.

Don't let anyone tell you it can't be different

This week has been one of the busiest of the campaign so far. As well as my daily diet of campaigning I took part in two hustings - one organised by Reading Faith Forum and another by the Argyle Road Community Church. I was interviewed by BBC Parliament's education service for a video to be shown in schools after the election and I also found time to pen an article for the Reading Chronicle's election series on Lib Dem policies for tackling crime and anti-social behaviour. We've been campaigning all over the constituency and we are continuing to find plenty of Lib Dem supporters wherever we go. Delivering leaflets in Southcote earlier in the week several people stopped me in the street to say they were fed up with Labour and would be voting Lib Dem. Out and about in Whitley Wood and Kennet Island yesterday I received a very warm reception and it was encouraging to hear people say they were thinking long and hard about how they would be voting this year, with many of them seriously considering voting Lib Dem in many cases for the first time. I've had a steady stream of emails from undecided voters who are keen to find out more about our policies, as well as emails from people seeking my help on various issues after being let down by Labour politicians nationally as well as locally. We are finding support for Nick Clegg and the Liberal Democrats in Reading West showing no sign of abating. This picture is mirrored nationally with many polls continue to show Labour in third place. The Reading Chronicle has picked up the fact that the odds on me being elected as Reading West's first Lib Dem MP have been dramatically reduced. In the last 24 hours The Guardian and Observer newspapers have both said they are backing the Lib Dems as the best chance to reform our political system.
There is no doubt that the Leaders' debates have helped spark more interest in the upcoming election locally. I can honestly say many people I've spoken to on the doorstep continue to be unconvinced by David Cameron, despite his slick campaign. There is only one person less popular than him on the doorstep...and that's Gordon Brown. He was very unpopular on the doorstep in Reading West before the Rochdale moment, now his name is mud in many places and I wouldn't want to repeat some of the language people have used to describe him here! Sadly for Labour visits to Reading by celebrities such as Eddie Izzard are not going to change people's minds at this late stage in the campaign. People base their decisions on more fundamental issues than that. This Party Political Broadcast by the Liberal Democrats shown a couple of days ago featuring Nick Clegg encapsulates really effectively the huge opportunity facing voters in Reading West. The chance for real change - change to our politics , our tax system and our economy. The two old parties (Labour and Conservatives) have so much to lose if our political system changes - they are based on vested interests. That's why they are hoping that people vote for them to help ensure things stay the same. Labour have fought a depressingly negative campaign in Reading West and I fear that as they get more and more desperate their leaflets will get even worse. My feeling is this style of campaigning will backfire. The reaction we are getting on the doorstep says that this year many people want something different from politics and politicians - a promise of something different, something better. It's really positive that thousands more people have registered to vote ahead of this election. I hope as many people as possible use their vote on 6 May to vote Lib Dem for real change. Still need convincing? Check out this ace video:

Anyway, there's only a few days to go now until Polling Day - apologies in advance for lack of posts between then and now. Our campaign is not backed by trade unions or wealthy donors and we rely on help from local volunteers. If you have some time to spare between now and Polling Day to help my campaign in Reading West and get the vote out on the day please post a message via my Facebook page, send me a message on Twitter or email me daisy@daisybenson.com.

Vote Lib Dem for a fresh start in Reading West!

One of my supporters passed me a Labour leaflet this evening 'Vote Lib Dem get Tory' is the main message. They weren't impressed and they weren't surprised. It was clearly issued by Labour HQ in London. I read it twice and I couldn't find one positive reason to vote Labour on it - which you have to admit after 13 years in government and even more on the Borough Council is pretty pathetic. Locally the leaflets are not much better with the latest one featuring a nasty personal attack on me. This kind of campaigning is really depressing and is turning people off voting for any political parties this election. It is corrosive and will do Labour no favours at the ballot box. I've got used to this kind of campaigning from Labour as a councillor and when the personal attacks start it usually means I'm doing something right. Labour are keen to talk down our chances because they know that we represent a threat to them.Labour politicians in Reading have should be worried. Wherever we go in the constituency Labour voters are telling us they fed up with Labour and are backing Lib Dems this time. People want a fresh start and politicians they can trust - politicians they know will work hard for them. My record of action as a local councillor sets me apart from the other candidates in the race - local people judge me on my record, not Labour's leaflets. They see me busy helping local people and getting things done and they like what I do. It helps that nationally as well as locally things are turning our way. The latest poll from ICM/Guardian has the Lib Dems on 23% and Labour support falling below 30% after a surge in support for us (+4)..Lots of people I've spoken to in Reading West this week watched Vince Cable on 'The Chancellors' debate on Monday evening and were really impressed by what they saw. One lady rang me to say she thinks Vince should get an OBE! Another told me 'Vince won that 1-0;'. Feedback I'm getting from other parts of the country is similarly positive and Vince is widely viewed to have won that particular round of the debate. My Dad told me he was phone canvassed by the Tories in Camden during the debate which strikes me as slightly bad timing (and it was met with a predictable response!)
I met up with Alok Sharma (Conservative) and Adrian Windisch (Green Party) earlier today to sign a 'Clean Campaign Pledge'. I think it's important that we strive to mount a positive campaign attacking policies not people. The Labour candidate doesn't appear to have signed the pledge so far, which is a pity. I drove along Oxford Road today and saw the latest Conservative posters looming down from billboards - they feature a creepy photo of Gordon Brown smiling alongside claims of Labour 'failure'. I think it was supposed to be ironic but I just thought they looked cynical. Lots of people will look at the those posters and think 'they're both as bad as each other'. In fact, that's what people have already said to me on seeing them. The Labservative campaign came to mind - a campaign pointing out the similarities of Labour and Conservative parties -parties that represent 'no change - more of the same':


Anyway, I'm buoyed up with loads of energy to get our positive message out to voters in Reading West. New volunteer helpers are joining our campaign every day. One said to me:
"Keep that commitment and energy it is so refreshing. We need a different kind of politician so badly in Reading." As Nick Clegg says, if you want change you have to vote for it - check out this video and of course, Vote Lib Dem!

Reading residents hit by Labour's Council Tax hike

I have written extensively about how Labour's policies in Reading are hitting the poorest and most vulnerable hardest. Many of them despite Gordon Brown's recent pronouncements are just plain unfair.The most recent example has been imposing service charges on Reading's council tenants - for basic services they currently get as part of their rent.
Well, last night Labour politicians in Reading went one better (or rather one worse ) - pushing through a 2.2% Council Tax increase. The proposed increase was higher than the national average (1.9%) and many neighbouring authorities. The timing of this hike could not be worse for Reading residents. As I pointed out last week, the recession continues to bite - with the number of people claiming out-of-work benefits rising last month.
As a party we are opposed to Council Tax in principle. It is an unfair tax. It is not progressive - far from it: Council Tax hits those on fixed incomes hardest - elderly people in particular. And for all the Conservative's hot air last night about the iniquities of our Council Tax system the Conservative Party nationally have no plans to abolish it if they come to power - and why would they? Council Tax was after all introduced by a Conservative government all those years ago.
Only the Lib Dems are committed to scrapping Council tax and replacing it with a fair tax system. We would go further - raising the tax threshold taking those who earn £10,000 or less out of income tax all together.We would also return local spending powers and decisions to local councils, who have seen their powers gradually eroded under successive Conservative and Labour governments.
The Lib Dem Group on Reading Borough Council opposed Labour's Council Tax rise last night. Because it is unfair and because we believe it is possible to provide good services for less and to continue to protect frontline services - plenty of other councils have done it. We are campaigning for better services and better value for money for local Council Tax payers. Reading residents have said they want better value for money from their Council - when surveyed in 2008 for the government's Place Survey 69% of residents surveyed said they didn't think RBC offered value for money.
There are too many areas where the Council is not living up to local people's expectations. For example, the fear of crime in Reading is higher than elsewhere and local residents have said they have little faith in the Council's ability to deal with this problem. Residents have said in survey after survey carried out on behalf of the Council that areas they want the Council to focus on tackling are: levels of crime, levels of traffic and clean streets - hardly rocket science!! And yet we have a Labour leadership that thinks chasing city status should be a top priority for the Council. But Labour stopped listening to the views of local people in Reading many years ago and they will pay a high price for this at the coming elections.
It should not be up to residents to plug the massive hole Gordon Brown and the Labour party have blown in the public finances. Councils, like other public bodies must tighten their belts. Yes, demand for some important council service is growing - for example in areas such as community care. And these important areas must be protected from cuts. However, savings must be made and overall when it comes to budget setting Labour's solution to every problem is always to throw public money at problems and increase Council Tax year after year in Reading (although when an election looms they are miraculously able to find savings). This approach is simply not sustainable: the money for extra spending has been spent - locally and nationally the level of public debt is not sustainable.

We made clear last night we were against the proposed Council Tax increase Labour put forward and we were prepared to listen to an alternative proposal from the Conservatives (they are the largest opposition group on RBC) which would allow Council Tax to be frozen in Reading . We waited...but none was forthcoming. The Conservatives failed to put forward any costed proposals about how they would achieve a reduction during the meeting and failed to turn up to vote on Labour's budget when it mattered. Their behaviour has landed Reading residents with a massive tax increase.This was irresponsible, gesture politics at it's worst from the Conservatives in which they promised a Council Tax freeze but failed to deliver one - which sadly followed last year's pattern. Serious times demands seriousness from local politicians - particularly when it comes to making decisions as important as this one that affects so many people in our Town.
Last night gave us more proof if proof were needed that neither the Labour or Conservative parties in Reading are the right people to run Reading Borough Council. And If you live in West Berkshire things do not look any rosier - there as leading Lib Dem councillor and Newbury PPC David Rendel has pointed out 'the vulnerable will pay more and receive less'.
If you feel strongly that our current tax system is unfair, you are opposed to further tax increases from Labour and you want elected representatives who care about fairness and value for money services the choice is clear: vote Lib Dem - the real alternative in the forthcoming local and general elections. Because as we discovered again last night what you get from the other parties when it comes to tax and spend is just more of the same.

Conservative policy 'U-turn' threatens empty homes campaign

I have been campaigning for the last four years for the need for urgent action to bring the hundreds of empty private homes in Reading back into use. As a direct result of the campaign I have led as Lib Dem housing spokesperson Reading Borough Council now has an empty homes strategy and resources dedicated to tackling this problem.To find out more, you can listen to my recent interview with BBC Radio Berkshire which I recorded just before Christmas here:

Despite our recent successes in getting progress on this issue I am not complacent about the scale of the problems we face and the amount of work still left to be done in this area in Reading. The recession has led to an increase in the number of empty properties in Reading - notably in Battle ward in West Reading (pictured) and with the housing waiting list currently standing at around 5,000 there is a pressing need and I would argue strong moral grounds for speedier action to make more housing available for local families.

Anyway, I like to keep up with what is being said and done nationally on this issue and to continue to campaign for action. In April last year I went to Whitehall to meet the government minister responsible for empty homes, Iain Wright MP, to press the Labour government to do more. And I didn't stop there. When he was reshuffled shortly afterwards I lobbied the minister who took over from him, Ian Austin MP and got him to back further action to help councils like Reading do more to bring empty homes back into use.

The problem of empty homes gained national prominence last year and I was pleased to see a consensus emerge amongst the three major political parties that bringing empty homes back into use should be a priority - this was largely thanks to active campaigns led by the Empty Homes Agency and Inside Housing magazine.

More recently the Lib Dems have led the way on this issue with Nick Clegg and Sarah Teather announcing a few weeks ago that action on empty homes would be a key element of our Party's manifesto at the coming general election - something I was obviously very happy about as it is a policy that will really benefit local people here in Reading.

I was dismayed, therefore, to read about the Conservative shadow housing minister, Grant Shapps, signal an apparent u-turn by his Party on this issue in this week's Evening Standard as I was travelling home from work earlier this week. In the article, Mr Shapps says that the Tories would abolish empty property management orders (EDMOs) which give councils the power to bring empty homes back into use. Mr Shapps attacked the powers as "draconian".

This strikes me as a potential backward step and gives landlords and local authorities the wrong message on empty homes. I have looked into this issue and found that EDMOs have only been open to councils since 2006, following Royal Assent of the Housing Act 2004 in 2006. Interestingly at the time they were proposed by the Empty Homes Agency these powers attracted cross-party support. Since the legislation was introduced councils have been encouraged to use these powers but most only use them as a last resort for various reasons not least because they can be time-consuming and costly. Sometimes, however, the threat of action by a local authority is needed in order to spur landlords into action.

The answer to a parliamentary question tabled by Sarah Teather earlier this year revealed that so far councils (and that includes Conservative-controlled councils) have used these powers a total of 15 times. This hardly gives the impression of councils using these powers excessively.

So I think the claims made by Mr Shapps in the article in the Evening Standard in which he attacks EDMOs as "bully-boy" laws which he says are being used to "seize the homes of the dead and vulnerable" risks being pretty misleading about both the frequency and the way in which councils have used these powers.

EDMOs have so far not been used in Reading as officers have felt it has not been necessary to use them. I notice they have been used by Conservative-controlled South Oxfordshire District Council, though. Here in Reading, a 'carrot and stick' approach used by officers is proving effective in most cases although it is a slow process and there is a backlog of empty properties to tackle (following years of inaction by Labour).

Officers I have spoken to working in the area of empty homes argue that EDMOs should be just one of a range of tools available to councils to tackle the problem of empty homes.

These powers do not need to be used in relation to every home - sometimes the threat of action by the local authority is enough to get landlords to return their properties to use after a long period of time. I would accept as well that these powers could be tweaked to make them more effective.

Without these powers it might make it more difficult for councils to persuade landlords to bring empty properties back into use. So, Conservative policy could lead inadvertently to an increase in empty properties.It would therefore seem that tackling empty private homes is no longer a priority to the Conservative Party.

The latest comments made Grant Shapps give out a very mixed message to the public, councils and landlords about his Party's approach to the problem of empty homes - not least because they appear to be in sharp contrast to Mr Shapps' public support for Inside Housing's 'Empty Promise' campaign last year .

This campaign sought cross-party support for three campaign pledges:

- calling for VAT to be cut to 5 per cent on home refurbishment and renovation;

- a grant for social landlords to buy and repair empty properties;

- and clearer guidance to help councils use empty dwelling management orders to free up homes.

According to Inside Housing when he signed up to the campaign last year Mr Shapps said he 'warmly welcomed' these pledges. It's not clear why Mr Shapps' and his Party have cooled towards the national empty homes campaign since then.

In contrast to the confused position of the Conservatives on empty homes, Sarah Teather and Nick Clegg have demonstrated a clear commitment to helping councils and landlords work together to tackle the problem of empty homes.

A Lib Dem government would empower councils to take a more proactive approach to dealing with the problem of empty homes in their area by giving them access to more grants and loans to incentivise landlords to help tackle this country's affordable housing crisis - and create jobs on the way!

Check out this video to find out more:

Lib Dems' practical plan to cut crime vs Tory spin

Earlier this week the Conservative Party made the headlines for all the wrong reasons as they were roundly criticised for misrepresenting figures on violent crime for political gain.

I caught a bit of Chris Grayling, Shadow Home Secretary being interviewed on Radio 4's Today programme and I cringed. He said something about how if you talked to people on the streets they would confirm crime had risen - hardly very scientific! The point there is that what people feel about crime is based on people's perceptions not hard data: and I would agree that fear of crime is an issue.

Let's not forget the key point that Louise Casey reminded me of recently: 80% of crime goes unreported. So we need to be very careful about how we use and refer to crime data.

If you've been reading this blog and my ward blog you'll know that one of my big issues is the need to radically improve public confidence in the Police and the Council's ability to tackle crime and anti-social behaviour.

I have actively campaigned for a more effective approach in Reading which involves more regular communication and a better dialogue from the authorities with the public.

Political stunts like the one launched by the Conservatives are highly damaging to public confidence (which is already low when it comes to crime) and I was pleased to see the response by the Chairman of the independent UK Statistics Authority which pointed out the folly of a politician attacking official statistics.

The British Crime Survey has been around since 1981 and although it may not be perfect I would suggest it is more credible than a certain political party when it comes to crime figures!

In stark contrast to the crude politicking of the Conservatives on crime this week (which was nothing other than damaging both to public confidence and to the Conservative Party's standing), I was really pleased to see Nick Clegg and Lib Dem Shadow Home Affairs Spokesman Chris Huhne set out the practical ways in which a Lib Dem government would make communities feel safer.

It's simple: Lib Dems would scrap ID Cards and spend the money on 3,000 more Police on the beat.

The plans called 'Safer Streets - more and better Police' include proposals to publish detection rates as well as ward level crime data.

It chimes in very much with the way we have campaigned to get crime tackled more effectively here in Reading and I think these proposals would be a very positive step towards making people feel safer and to improve public confidence in Policing.

Research published by the Lib Dems at the same time as the policy revealed:

• Police numbers have fallen in 18 out of the 43 police forces (42%) in England and Wales since 2005. Two thirds of these police authorities are currently controlled by the Tories and one third by Labour
• The new officers proposed under Liberal Democrat plans could be expected to make an additional 27,500 arrests and solve more than 24,500 extra crimes each year in England and Wales alone

Contrast these pledges with the actions of Conservative Mayor of London, Boris Johnson this week - who campaigned on a crime ticket then announced he would be cutting 450 Police officers in the capital!

I look forward to finding out what local people in Reading think about these proposals when I talk to them on the doorstep over the coming weeks.

As a local councillor I have heard many complaints from residents over the years that there are not enough Police in their areas - right across Town.

I'm really pleased as a parliamentary candidate that I will be able to say hand on heart that I am standing for a Party ready and able to offer genuinely practical solutions to cutting crime.

Simply scaremongering as the Conservatives have done this week will do nothing other than damage what little confidence people have in the ability of the Police and councils to tackle crime.