Welfare Reform Bill

moved AmendmentNo. 103C: 103C: Clause 29 , page 20, line 16, at end insert— ““(2A) Regulations specified in subsection (2) above may provide that the AMHB for a property must take account of the support needs of a tenant, including the requirement for a property with an additional room for the residence of a carer where one of the occupants of the dwelling is— (a) blind or treated as blind by virtue of paragraph 13 of Schedule 3 to the Housing Benefit Regulations 2006 (additional condition of the Higher Pensioner and Disability Premiums); or (b) receiving in respect of himself either— (i) attendance allowance; (ii) constant attendance allowance; or (iii) the care component of the disability living allowance.”” The noble Lord said: I apologise for my lack of familiarity with the proceedings. Again, the amendment has been suggested by Shelter and Citizens Advice—so it comes from a source that is common with the previous amendment—to probe an aspect of housing benefit that they feel is not working as well as might be expected. Those organisations feel that the current arrangements for providing extra funding for those on housing allowance who have special needs due to a disability are inadequate. In particular, they point out that the mechanism by which the Government attempt to meet these needs, the discretionary housing payments scheme that the Minister has referred to, is not enough. For example, an applicant for these discretionary payments must apply every three months at a minimum, preventing them from being able to guarantee to a private landlord that they will be able to meet the full amount of their rent for the whole six months of a standard tenancy. Of course, other benefits or exemptions are made available—for example, in non-dependent deductions and the single room rent—but still the statistics show that disabled people find it considerably harder than non-disabled people receiving housing allowance to rent in the private sector. A case history has been given to us about the problems which faced a wheelchair user seeking a suitable place to live. She found it difficult due to the lack of properties that met her needs as a wheelchair user. Finally, a two-bedroom private let became available in February 2004 that was suitable for her needs; the second bedroom was essential to enable the overnight support she required to live independently. She lived in this property for about a year and a half. However, during that period, there was a continuous discrepancy between the amount of rent being asked for and the amount of housing benefit she received—approximately £160 per month. It was clear that she was only receiving rent for a one-bedroom property. Despite numerous attempts to resolve the situation, including making discretionary housing payment applications, the situation was never completely resolved. There was still a major shortfall in her rent, and she was threatened with eviction on several occasions. This was extremely stressful for her and affected her health. Despite wanting to remain in the flat, it became obvious that this would be impossible for her. She was fortunate that another property became available in a housing association, but this was sheer good luck. Otherwise, she would probably have become homeless and would certainly be living in unsuitable accommodation. I offer that as an illustration. Can the Minister inform us if the Government have any plans to reform this part of the benefit system in the future? I beg to move.