More than 80,000 new homes could be built in Britain each year if just half the total of £22,812m that was spent on housing benefit in 2011/12 was spent instead on investment in new social housing, GMB Congress in Plymouth was told on Tuesday.
The Congress called for a fundamental break in housing policy and for the billions spent subsidising private landlords to be switched to building new houses to let at affordable rents.
Over 80,000 new homes could be built each year nationally if half the money spent on housing benefit was invested in social housing.
On the same basis, in London a total of 15,544 new homes could be built each year if half the total of £5,884m that was spent on housing benefit in London is spent instead on investment in new social housing.
In the North West, on the same basis, the number of new homes would be 11,128, in the South East 8,669, in Scotland 8,432, in the West Midlands 7,757, in Yorkshire & The Humber 7,249, in the South West 6,229, in the East of England 5,605, in the East Midlands 5,008 and in the North East 4,466 new homes.
The total new homes that could be built for half of the money spent on housing benefit in England and Scotland is 80,083.
In Wales GMB estimates that around 4,000 new homes could be built for the £955,8m spent on housing benefit.
In 2011/12 a total of £23 billion was spent on housing benefit in England, Wales and Scotland to help meet housing costs for rented accommodation.
A total of £411 billion at current prices has been spent on housing benefit since it was introduced by the Tory Government in 1982.
These figures on housing benefit and possible new homes are in a new report published at the GMB Congress in Plymouth which started on 2nd June.
Paul Kenny, GMB General Secretary, told the congress: ‘Half the cash spent in Britain on housing benefit last year would fund over 80,000 new homes each year across the country.
‘Housing benefits to meet housing costs for rented accommodation for those on low incomes is a Thatcher Tory policy.
‘The cost has ballooned to £23billion per year.
‘Over the past 30 years a huge slice of the £411billions of taxpayer’s funds spent on this Tory policy has been funnelled to private landlords as “corporate welfare”.
‘Labour’s traditional and more cost effective policy of building good quality houses to let at affordable rent for those on low incomes was ditched.
‘Much of the stock of social housing that was sold off is now in the hands of “buy to rent” private landlords.
‘In Wandsworth for example there are 977 private landlords who own more than one of the 6,180 ex-council leasehold homes sold under the “right to buy” which are now owned by “buy to let” landlords.
‘One private landlord owns 93, another owns 32, another 15 landlords each own 10 or more and a further 83 landlords each own between five and nine of these dwellings.
‘Many of their tenants are in receipt of housing benefit rather than being charged affordable rents.
‘Public funds should be switched to investment in social housing and away from this failed expensive Tory policy of corporate welfare and private greed.
‘GMB Congress wants a Labour Party election manifesto insisting that councils build new homes to let at affordable rents all across the region.
‘Ending corporate welfare will save taxpayer’s money and will kick start the local economy. It will provide families with better quality houses with more security of tenure’.
In his General Secretary’s Report to Congress, Paul Kenny warned that in any future referendum on UK membership of the EU, if the ‘Social Chapter’ was removed, the union would call for a vote against.
Kenny said: ‘On Europe itself, membership of the EU has brought benefits at a time when employment rights were under attack and pretty much under attack from previous Tory governments.
‘TUPE working time as well as Health and Safety laws were coming from Brussels, they were not coming from Westminster.
‘Make no mistake about it either, if the Tories could scrap all of them they would.
‘That brings me to the Referendum. I think there will be one because all parties, effectively, will be drawn in to that argument.
‘What Cameron seeks is a Euro life membership of the EU, all the benefits for the bosses without any of the responsibilities for the social agenda, free movement and exploitation of labour, free markets for businesses and multinationals, and opt-out from the social agenda, and opt-out from all social employment protection, making Britain a sort of free port trading area, sweatshop Britain, low ages, lack of rights, a land of exploitation.
‘Well, let us be clear, many trade unionists were wary, or even hostile, to becoming part of the EU but we went with it.
‘Our union, the GMB, embraced the European process.
‘We were the first union to open an office in Brussels and Kathleen Walker Shaw has engaged, and we have benefited from that engagement.
‘But let’s be clear, and let the trades union Movement be clear, with no social agenda, no social advancement, if Cameron thinks that this union will campaign for a Yes vote without a Social Chapter, then he is wrong.
‘No social rights mean a No vote from me and I guess it is going to mean a No vote from you.
‘Let Cameron and let the CBI, and the employers associations, understand that if they want to benefit from free trade but they do not want to accept any of their responsibilities, they want exploitation, and if they think that we are going to line up with them on an agenda that just gives a Yes vote to stay in the EU on that sort of sweatshop Britain, then I am telling you they have a fight on their hands.
‘We are not going to stand by and just allow Cameron, and any government, to sign away the obligations of a social agenda as part of the whole EU agreement. We are not going to stand for it.’
Congress also heard that reduced budgets in Sheffield schools are now starting to bite and that this is proof that education is no longer protected or safe from government austerity measures.
The union responded to proposals that 26 schools in Sheffield are to lay off school support staff and down grade others.
Peter Davies, GMB Organiser, said ‘Sheffield City Council has issued to GMB a redundancy notice covering the loss of 58 jobs.
‘GMB believes that the situation is much worse than the council either realises or is admitting and that there are more to come.
‘GMB has not been consulted in good time in most cases and certainly not since December as the Council are claiming.
‘Reduced budgets in Sheffield schools are now starting to bite. This is certainly proof that education is no longer protected or safe from government austerity measures.
‘GMB is in discussions with the teaching unions and again, in most cases, teachers are simply unaware that they’ll be losing vital support staff in their class rooms come September.
‘There seems to be little or no realisation that many of the remaining reduced roles will not cover the support that teachers and pupils need in the classroom.
‘If our members end up in these reduced roles all good will would disappear and they will do no more than their reduced poverty level wages pay and in accordance with their job descriptions as the lowest grade is paid less than the living wage.
‘It is unfair to single individual schools out because they’re certainly not alone but we are seeing unprecedented job losses in schools and with many now choosing to buy their own HR services there appears to be little involvement from the Council.
‘GMB are consulting with members at all of these schools and there is a lot of anger amongst staff, we cannot rule out industrial action to halt this attack and the number of schools involved grows each week.’
GMB Congress passed an emergency motion on Tuesday pledging support for 230,000 teaching assistants facing sacking threats from the government.
Avril Chambers, GMB National Officer for Education Staff, told Congress: ‘Teaching assistants are not a “mums army” as Michael Gove so insultingly calls them.
‘They are education’s hidden professionals and are a vital integral part of our education system and should be recognised as such.’
The motion stated: ‘GMB Congress rejects any undermining of the fantastic work done by teaching assistants and will challenge any attempts to reduce their members. Our childrens’ education depends on it.’
