Bedroom tax: Lessons in morality from Iain Duncan Smith

Kara Moses reflects on the experience of protesting at the Tory minister’s mansion – and offers a glimpse of the luxury he enjoys while lecturing us about ‘fairness’
18 April 2013

The activists outside Iain Duncan Smith's front door

Last weekend I joined Disabled People Against Cuts and UK Uncut in handing in an ‘eviction notice’ to Iain Duncan Smith at his £2 million Tudor mansion in Buckinghamshire in protest against the bedroom tax, which will disproportionally affect disabled people.

Around 30 of us descended on the unsuspecting sleepy village of Swanbourne, where Duncan Smith enjoys the luxury of a Grade II listed, 16th-century mansion he enjoys for free through virtue of marrying into a multimillionaire aristocratic family.

After parking up a fleet of accessible minibuses and cars at the pub just across the road – which, incidentally, is part of the estate, along with the post office, private school, many of the houses in the village and 1,300 acres of prime farmland – our not-exactly-inconspicuous band of activists brandishing banners and placards (many in wheelchairs), journalists, photographers and fluorescent-jacketed legal observers trundled over the road to pay IDS a little visit.

Luxury vs fairness

After the eviction notice was slapped onto to the rather beautiful huge wooden front door, the sun came out and we got the party started. We had a lovely picnic on his front drive, danced to reggae, frolicked on his lawn, enjoyed a walk around the extensive grounds complete with tennis court, swimming pool, lake, beautiful gardens and even a flock of sheep. Even the bemused local police who showed up couldn’t resist having a nosy around.

Looking at all this luxury that Iain Duncan Smith enjoys, and thinking of the suffering he is causing to thousands of the most vulnerable people in our society by slashing much-needed support and charging them ridiculous taxes for having so-called spare bedrooms (when he and his parliamentary friends have spare mansions) I can't help but think that perhaps this is all a little unfair. Thankfully IDS has something to say about that. I am comforted to hear that the benefit changes are in fact about ‘fairness’. I've clearly got it all wrong.

‘It's about fairness to those who pay vast sums of money in taxation to see that people living in subsidised accommodation who often don't use the bedrooms they've got, while others live in overcrowded accommodation,’ he told ITV News recently. ‘They can't get the accommodation they need. This is a nonsense problem that was created by the last government who didn't build enough housing and didn't manage the housing stock properly.’

You're right, Iain. People do pay vast sums of taxation. Well, some do. Rich people and corporations can, of course choose, to opt out. The teeny £25 billion that is lost from our economy each year due to tax evasion might just go some way to help us out of this recession. Every penny counts, after all. I must admit, it was admirably generous that on the same day the bedroom tax was brought in the 50p tax rate was abolished, giving 13,000 millionaires a £100,000 tax break each. Will that include you then, with your £1m fortune?  That's enough to pay for six and a half 'ha-ha' walls (I had a lovely walk along yours by the way).

You also make a fair point about many people on housing benefit not using their spare bedrooms. I'm sure many don't. Oh, apart from the two thirds of the 600,000* households affected by the bedroom tax that include a disabled person. These ‘spare’ rooms are often used to store equipment like hoists and medical supplies that won't fit anywhere else, or for carers to stay. Many disabled people are cared for by their partners who may need another bed to sleep in as their disability means they suffer from spasms or similar episodes during the night. But that's not that important, and they can after all just move to another smaller property nearby quite easily. (Can't they?) There is the slight problem though of the 100,000 living in properties adapted for their needs, at an average cost of £6,000. But I'm sure we can find a fair way to finance adaptations to their new homes. What was that tax evasion figure again?

A few suggestions

You quite rightly point out that people living in subsidised accommodation can't get the accommodation they need. Are you referring to the lack of small homes in the social housing sector? Maybe you were thinking of Hull, where the bedroom tax will hit 4,700 families with a spare room, but where there are only 73 small properties free.

Most new-build one and two bedroom flats are under the control of private developers and landlords, so those not able to pay the bedroom tax will be forced into private sector – but with far higher rents for smaller properties in the private sector, won't that cost the government more? I suppose the books will be balanced by the fact that less than 50 per cent of private landlords won't accept tenants on housing benefit. But I wonder where all those 80,000 people who are estimated to be made homeless as they fall behind in payments will go? Hopefully they'll just disappear and stop costing us money.

You're also right to highlight the housing problem we have. There isn't enough affordable housing, and it isn't managed properly. There are currently two million people on housing waiting lists. Private developers sit on enough land for half a million homes, waiting for prices to rise. We agree on a lot, Iain.

I agree that we need to use housing more efficiently. I'm an environmentalist by tradition and under-occupied houses don't make much sense from that perspective. But I must admit that I question whether adopting a national ‘one size fits all’ approach to tackle overcrowding is going to work; for this policy is also targeting parts of the country least affected by it – which could potentially cost the taxpayer more money if the people told to downsize actually did. Furthermore, capping housing benefit equally everywhere, regardless of widely differing rents, means driving the poor and the unlucky into no-hope ghettos without jobs or school places, as Polly Toynbee eloquently put it. But in the interests of fairness, which we all agree is a fine thing, maybe some of those billions of pounds of avoided and evaded tax could be used to help pay the bill?

Here's an idea. How about building more energy efficient, affordable social housing that meets the needs of society, with its changing demographics – which may mean smaller properties for those that don't need so many rooms. Wouldn't that mean more jobs too? For every 100,000 new homes, GDP rises by 1 per cent – and that is the most important thing after all.

Anyway, I'm sure you don't need suggestions from me. I'm no expert. I'll let you into a little secret – I'm not the biggest fan of your friend George Osborne. You might even go as far as to say I'm a critic. And he says that we critics of his are ‘out of touch’ with ordinary people whose taxes pay for the benefits system. Well I'm an ordinary taxpayer who pays for the benefits system, so I'm probably so out of touch with myself that I don't know my arse from my elbow. But for what it's worth, I'd quite like those millionaires and corporations to cough up once in a while. You seem to have it all figured out anyway.

Different understanding

So I really must thank you, Iain. For a lovely day out in the countryside, for hosting our picnic, and for righting my clearly distorted, out of touch views on fairness. Your understanding of the word is clearly far superior to mine.

Just to make sure I had my muddled thinking cleared up sufficiently, I looked up the word in the dictionary: free from bias, dishonesty, or injustice; reasonable and morally right; if a situation is fair, everyone is treated equally and in a reasonable way. Hang on a minute. Free from bias and dishonesty? Weren't you recently accused of misrepresenting government figures in an attempt to make your cap on benefits policy appear like it was successfully driving people to find work? Reasonable and morally right, equal treatment for all? Heavily penalising the most vulnerable members of society for a crisis they didn’t cause while the richest enjoy tax breaks, freedom from any mansion tax and openly tolerated tax avoidance and evasion doesn't sound reasonable, moral or equal to me.

It seems we have a very different understanding of the word after all. But hey, that's OK. Because at the end of the day we're all in it together. Apart from when we're not.

* This is a government estimate, however Lord Bassam's survey of south-eastern councils suggests the national figure will be more than 900,000 households.

Kara Moses tweets at @Kara_L_Moses. www.karamoses.com




 

Donate to build socialist media

Right now, with the rise of Jeremy Corbyn, there is a real possibility of a resurgence of the left in Britain. With mainstream media showing clear bias against Corbyn, this new left movement urgently needs its own strong voices.

Welcome to Liverpool - a heartland of the rebel cause

Thousands of activists will arrive in Liverpool this month for the Labour Party Conference and its fringe events. Jenny Nelson recommends places to visit and introduces the local political scene

Housing and land activists to join forces

In the run up to a November event Robin Grey makes the case for urban and rural communities to work together to tackle land rights, ownership and usage

The Train Gate story is a product of desperation

Alex Richardson-Price observes the pressing need for a character assassination, by any means necessary, of Jeremy Corbyn.




Little Richardjohn 18 April 2013, 13.45

Where is the morality, legality or economic sustainability in demanding £20 for a bedroom which the relative rent values say is only worth less than £10? And from people who don’t have enough to live on anyway.
That is the Sheriff of Osborne demanding a sheep for every chicken the peasant owns.
It is not a policy, but a direct declaration of war.


Lucinda Troth 18 April 2013, 14.58

Excellent article Kara. The whole “we’re all in this together” line is a joke. It is the most vulnerable sections of society that are being targeted.


Mike Bedrock 19 April 2013, 16.30

Excellent reporting Kara, some are more “In this all together than others” as we can see by this


Kenneth J Budworth 19 April 2013, 18.52

Well said-VERY well said!!!!


J jones 19 April 2013, 21.24

Thankyou all that had the wisdom and strength you did at his mansion, we are not all in it together,,disabled, elderly, sick, poor and vaunrable are, the rich are on their own, but we over take them in bounds, we are a strong force, together, we can climb mountains, they just grow old, fat, and ugly, we grow wisdom, as we live in the real world, and want to be recognised we may not be rich, but we are rich, would never be accepted for work, we live a quiet life, we take more than the other side realise, we don’t need mansions, rich lives, what we want is to be treated with the respect we all deserve, and earn each and everyday and a quality of life, that is a right for every human being.


John Walker 20 April 2013, 17.37

I’m beginning to wonder if Scottish Independence will now be an attractive option to Tory Rule after all they have only got one MP north of the border so what right does that give them to govern Scotland i wonder.
That said, Independence was not originally my first choice but now i’m beginning to wonder. If Scotland did vote for independence i would feel for our English freinds who would still be living with Cameron and Co and all that they stand for. Make no mistake, there are vested interests who will do there damnedest to obstruct the will of the people no matter which way the vote goes and the thought that we could actually make a success of it probably scares the shit out of them but i feel whatever happens there has to be a better alternative than this.


Tony 21 April 2013, 14.02

Great article,i think its time for a civil war,these toffs are having a laugh but its not funny for the poor and im one of them and getting more and angry !


Rupert Ferguson 25 April 2013, 23.32

Without being rude or obnoxious, do any of you think that Ian Duncan Smith is going to pay one bit of notice to any of what these protestors or their banners are saying? The Tories are not the only people we have to blame for this. We also have the other two main political parties and the Civil Service as well. The basic problem here isn’t just about Class War from the Tory side of the argument, it’s also about corruption and self serving attitudes within the entire political set up. The reason why we have a housing crisis in this country to begin with is because those in control are making a nice tidy little some out of it. Labour made all these promises with regard to how it was going to provide all this affordable housing which never materialized. Now Cameron is doing the same. None of them will deliver because the minute the housing shortage is cracked the prioe of property will start to fall. And, as the author of this report correctly points out, there just aren’t sufficient smaller properties for those who are going to be hit by this tax to move into!



Comments are now closed on this article.






Red Pepper · 44-48 Shepherdess Walk, London N1 7JP · +44 (0)20 7324 5068 · office[at]redpepper.org.uk
Advertise · Press · Donate
For subscriptions enquiries please email subs@redpepper.org.uk