The new “bedroom tax” fails to address the apparent contradiction implicit in this piece of legislation when compared with the requirement that all publicly funded housing should achieve a “Lifetime Homes” standard.
The “bedroom tax” is designed to encourage mobility in the market: the idea is that “home” is a temporary resting place and that, as people’s needs change, they move.
The Lifetime Homes legislation, in contrast, demands that housing should be adaptable to cope with almost any eventuality into old age: the idea is that “home” is a place for life, come what may.
There is something bizarre in legislating for either eventuality — forcing people to move from their home because their circumstances change while at the same time insisting on expensive “flexibility” based on a range of requirements that are rarely needed. Less legislation and more housing please.
Charles Thomson
London
No comments yet