Benefit cuts to be challenged in High Court
Neil Puffett
Wednesday, July 20, 2011
A High Court judge is set to rule on the legality of controversial housing benefit cuts after a child poverty charity launched a legal challenge.
Lawyers acting on behalf of the Child Poverty Action Group (CPAG) will argue that the changes, which they claim will make a large area of central London no longer accessible to housing benefit claimants in the private rented sector, are contrary to the schemes’ purpose – to prevent homelessness.
The High Court will also hear the government failed to pay due regard to the general equality duties under the Race Relations Act 1976 and the Sex Discrimination Act 1975.
This, they argue, is because black and minority ethnic groups and lone parents will be disproportionately hit by both cuts being challenged.
Ahead of the start of the hearing, CPAG chief executive Alison Garnham said: "We are going to the High Court to protect Britain from becoming a country where longstanding, mixed communities are turned into private members' clubs for the wealthy.
"The Prime Minister promised to prioritise poverty and said that the test of his policies would be how they help the most disadvantaged, not the rich, yet these measures will make the poor poorer and hurt and uproot only families relying on housing benefit to help pay the rent."
The Department for Work and Pensions said it is vital steps are taken to manage spending on housing benefit.
It said in a statement: "It's the right and fair thing to do and the changes we have made have been heavily scrutinised by parliament.
"We are not expecting large numbers of households to become homeless through these measures, but we are making an additional £130m over the next four years available to local authorities through the discretionary housing payment scheme to support vulnerable households and help smooth the transition of the housing benefit changes."
Earlier this month children's minister Sarah Teather described plans to cap benefits for couples at £500 a week as "extremely worrying".