The Removal of the Spare Room Subsidy (the ‘bedroom tax’) has not met its intended outcomes. This has led to an apparent U-turn by the Liberal Democrat leadership, based on evidence published in the interim policy evaluation. This report highlighted the economic hardship experienced by those affected and that the accelerated demand for downsizing has been difficult to meet.
It is to be applauded that Liberal Democrats appear to have responded to evidence which suggests that the policy isn’t working. Also to be welcomed is the intention to exempt disabled people from the policy. But it is indefensible and incomprehensible that they were not exempted in the first place. In its relatively short implementation period, this policy has caused unnecessary hardship for many families.
Suggestions have been made by senior Liberal Democrats that it is not the guiding principles of the policy that are wrong, but merely its implementation. The proposal that only those who refuse ‘suitable’ smaller accommodation will be affected is still of concern and may not address the flawed assumptions on which the policy was based and which have led to its failure to meet its intended outcomes. These assumptions include the availability of good quality housing and the assumption that people are easily able to move outside their existing travel-to-work areas and networks and find alternative or additional work. Such issues were highlighted by NGOs prior to the policy’s introduction and could no doubt have been evidenced through a decent feasibility study using existing data. Such flawed assumptions pervade other Coalition welfare reforms.
Many in the party hope that the U-turn is a response to the concerns voiced by grassroots members via the party’s democratic process, which latterly has appeared weakened. However, the party leadership would have been wise to have listened to such concerns before introducing such an ill-conceived policy which has further tainted the party. It has resulted in the party not only appearing to be subsumed by Conservative ideology, from which the leadership is now attempting to distance itself, but also being blamed disproportionately for its fallout.
Though the rethink is welcome, these small concessions will inevitably be viewed in the context of the continuing strategy of the Coalition to reduce the size of the welfare state, as well as welfare reform and welfare-to-work agendas that continue to penalise the disadvantaged. The most recent Conservative-led plan to delay benefits claims for five weeks is the latest example.
The U-turn is likely to be too little and much too late to help the party regain voters’ trust. Hopefully there is still time, if the courage is there, to limit the damage caused by this and other welfare reform policies to which the party is still committed.