Housing Benefit (Under-occupancy Penalty)

Gordon Banks Excerpts

Wednesday 27th February 2013 Commons Chamber

[Steve Webb]

The context is the need to save public money, but there are a variety of ways that we can do that. One way has already triggered the better use of social housing stock, but we are still in the overall context stage at the moment.

[Gordon Banks (Ochil and South Perthshire) (Lab)]

The Minister needs to understand that the real solution is growth in the economy: getting businesses to pay more corporation tax because they are making more profit; and getting more people into jobs and paying income tax, not this draconian and horrid tax that the Government are proposing.

[Steve Webb]

The structural deficit, which is the part of the deficit that does not disappear as the economy grows, was estimated to be approximately £80 billion. That is what we have had to tackle, regardless of the ups and downs of the economy. That is the core deficit that the Labour party left us to deal with—these are Labour cuts.

[Steve Webb]

No, I am afraid that the hon. Lady is not correct in saying that. There will be a range of responses to this change, which I will run through later in my remarks. Some people will stay where they are and will pay the shortfall; some people will use a spare room for a lodger or for sub-letting; some people will work or work more hours; and some people will move. Our impact assessment has a range of modelling on how people will respond, but it clearly includes people staying where they are and paying the shortfall—that is where the saving comes from.

[Gordon Banks]

On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. A minute ago the Minister said that these were Labour cuts. May I seek your advice and clarification about who is in government?

[Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Lindsay Hoyle)]

That is not a point of order, but the hon. Gentleman has certainly put his point on the record.