Field slates government 'failure of nerve' on benefit docking

Controversial Labour MP Frank Field has branded the government's decision to back-track on plans to dock housing benefit a "deeply disappointing failure of nerve".

The Department of Work and Pensions announced on Tuesday that it would not proceed with the plan to withhold benefit from antisocial tenants.

But Field rejected the suggestion that the proposal he had supported was now dead. "It will happen," he said. "The prime minister has put the question to party members and they will support it. This defeat will form part of an even more determined effort to stamp out antisocial behaviour."

Backbencher Field tabled a private members bill in 2002 that would have introduced benefit cuts for antisocial tenants, but it was dropped after running out of parliamentary time.

The government refloated the idea in a consultation paper published last August.

The DWP announcement coincided with the publication of responses to that consultation.

A DWP statement said: "Victims and local people in particular were supportive of the proposed measures, though concerns were expressed by a large number of respondents about whether the measures would be workable or effective. In light of these concerns, particularly from local authorities and both private and registered social landlords, we have decided not to proceed with a housing benefit sanction at this time."

A DWP spokesman added that the idea was not being dropped entirely. However, the government may have been dissuaded from pressing ahead by the amount of criticism.

Almost 500 consultation responses were submitted. Of those, 75% were opposed. Of the 178 councils that replied, 80% were against the plans, as were 97% of the 80 social landlords that responded.

Controversially, the Association of London Government supported the sanction, although only two of the 12 London councils that responded took a similar view.

The Housing Corporation, which said the proposals would hit social landlords' income, mounted particularly strong opposition.

Its submission said: "A reduction of housing benefit would impact the association's cashflow, especially as many associations receive payments direct from the local authority rather than the tenant.