However, the pair remain committed to introducing so-called "shopping incentives" to ensure tenants have more interest in the amount of rent their benefit pays, in what they describe as "the greenest bit of the Green Paper".
Offering tenants 80 per cent of their rent in housing benefit and making them pay the remaining 20 per cent is the favoured shopping incentive option.
Raising income support levels by 20 or 25 per cent of average housing costs for the area and household size is suggested to ensure low income tenants can make the minimum contribution.
The paper effectively rules out a fixed rate allowance, even with regional variations, as "not an attractive option".
But shopping incentives have already been given short shrift by the social security select committee. Hearing evidence as part of its inquiry into housing benefit reform, the commitee questioned the effectiveness of implementing shopping incentives and heard that the move was also deeply unpopular with campaign groups.
National Association of Citizens Advice Bureaux social policy officer Liz Phelps warned of its damaging potential as it "leads towards greater social exclusion" because "poorer people move to poorer parts of Stockport".
She claimed: "People are concerned about the level of their rent. They are thinking about the longer term."
Eagle played down any criticism by insisting reform would not take place until rents had been resolved. "You cannot give people an interest in their rents and ask them to make logical decisions if they get smaller, lower quality for a higher amount of rent."
Raynsford said: "It would give incentives for people to move into smaller accommodation if they want to, because they will be able to get a saving. The priority is to reach people who are looking for work."
Source
Housing Today
No comments yet