Ed Howker

Cameron’s clearances

The political – and human – costs of housing benefit reform may be higher than anyone in the government has guessed

issue 06 November 2010

James Cummings could never refuse a drink. Even after his boss — a Watford publican — threatened him with the sack he couldn’t lay off the bottle. He’d worked his way through the profits of a family business, two houses and a marriage by then. He eventually awoke in a tunnel under the Elephant and Castle three weeks after he was sacked from the pub. That was the winter before last.

Now, having recovered sufficiently to rent a flat, fight his addiction and get some qualifications, James is doing everything we expect of those on unemployment benefit. He is teetotal and has avoided debt; he does voluntary work with other addicts and is applying for jobs.

The trouble is, as a result of George Osborne’s radical overhaul of housing benefit, his already stretched household finances may be about to snap. Next year, his housing benefit will be cut by £7 a week and at that point his income from welfare payments — which just allow him to live on £50 a week — will no longer cover the cost of bills, food, and the bus to and from job interviews.

Get Britain's best politics newsletters

Register to get The Spectator's insight and opinion straight to your inbox. You can then read two free articles each week.

Already a subscriber? Log in

Comments

Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months

Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.

Already a subscriber? Log in