Welfare Reform Bill

My Lords, many arguments have been very well made but there is one argument I wish to put particularly. I re-declare my interest as chairman of First Wessex and the Housing 21 housing association because the danger is that we are seen as taking the vested interest side on behalf of organisations—the housing associations, in particular, having concerns about the amendment. Our prime concern should be with the tenants. I accept the objective—trying to expand the rights and responsibilities of tenants is a good objective—but this is a major social experiment that we are plonking on top of a complex administrative exercise, as has been mentioned. For that reason, we must be guarded in what we are doing because it is the tenants who will suffer; it is they who will have the stress of getting into arrears. The housing associations in some respects will look after themselves—they will put in processes to overcome this although there may be some disadvantages—and it is the tenants who we should be most concerned about. I know the Minister has already initiated consultative exercises and we have to see what conclusions they arrive at in regard to our concerns on this issue. However, as has already been stated, we know that 15 per cent of tenants of housing associations, for example, have no bank accounts whatever. That problem also has to be overcome before we can go through this process. We have a great many doubts about what is happening in the housing benefit offices, who will be doing the liaison there and how tenants will sort out their problems if they get into arrears. Obviously there will be a great deal of pressure on the housing associations. Given the economic pressures we face, they will obviously expand—as they are doing now—the welfare benefit advice they already give. I repeat that in the future clearly we should have respect for the rights of the tenants, but do not overlook the huge burden of the task you are putting on the system by not having this protection.