Bedroom tax

Last updated

The under-occupancy penalty (also known as the under occupation penalty, under-occupancy charge, under-occupation charge or size criteria) [1] results from a reform contained in the British Welfare Reform Act 2012 whereby tenants living in public housing (also called council or social housing) with rooms deemed "spare" face a reduction in Housing Benefit, resulting in them being obliged to fund this reduction from their incomes or to face rent arrears and potential eviction by their landlord (be that the local authority or a housing association). The under-occupancy penalty is more commonly referred to as the Bedroom Tax; especially by critics of the changes who argue that they amount to a tax because of the lack of social housing (or in some areas, any rented accommodation) for affected tenants to downsize to (and the refusal to accept the risk of taking in lodgers). The penalties are also criticised[ by whom? ] as having a disproportionate impact on disabled people.

Contents

In 2016 it was announced[ by whom? ] that the penalty would be extended to pensioners. Caroline Abrahams of Age UK, said: "Imposing the cap on older tenants will not only cause them anxiety and distress, it is also pointless given the lack of affordable housing options available to them". [2] [3]

Supporters of the changes have referred to the unreformed system as a "spare room subsidy" [4] whereby tax-payers allegedly subsidised social-housing tenants living in houses larger than their needs required. The stated intention of the under-occupancy penalty policy is to reduce these costs and to ease housing shortages and overcrowding. A similar policy was enacted over a decade beforehand in private-sector housing, as the Local Housing Allowance, without attracting controversy, and this policy essentially represents an equalisation of treatment of benefit claimants, regardless of whether they live in private tenancies or social housing. The reforms formed one part of the 2010–2015 Coalition Government's wide-ranging welfare-reform agenda which included the introduction of Universal Credit, the introduction of a cap on the total size of the welfare bill (see welfare cap), reform of Council Tax and reform of disability benefits (see Personal Independence Payment).

Policy

The under-occupancy rules apply from 1 April 2013 and applies to all those of working age. Having one bedroom more than the calculated allowance means a reduction in housing benefit of 14%, and two "spare" bedrooms means that a tenant will lose 25% of their housing benefit. [5] The rules for calculating allowed bedrooms are the same as for Local Housing Allowance for benefit claimants in private sector tenancies, except for the rules involving disability or the armed forces[ citation needed ].

One bedroom is allowed for each of the following:

Exemptions

A number of types of housing are exempt from the changes. These include those living in temporary accommodation, shared ownership accommodation and non-standard accommodation such as houseboats and mobile homes.

There is a further category of exempt accommodation defined as "accommodation provided by a housing association, a registered charity or voluntary association where that body, or a person acting on its behalf, also provides the claimant with care or support" (supported housing), "or supervision" (sheltered housing). [5] The UK Supreme Court ruled that failing to provide a bed room for the partner of a severely disabled tenant was a breach of that partner's human rights to a home. A room is needed in that tenancy for the disabled partner's medical equipment. [6]

If a "spare" bedroom is created following a death then a council tenant's housing benefit will not be reduced until a year after the death. [7]

Rationale

The official rationale of the policy is to encourage council tenants of homes that are supposedly too large for their needs to move to smaller homes so that the existing housing stock can be better used. A second rationale adopted by the Department for Work and Pensions is to reduce the overall housing benefit bill. [8]

In 2012, speaking in the House of Lords, Lord Freud stated:

I remind noble Lords of the core argumentation. We do not think that taxpayers should be expected to meet the cost of somewhere approaching 1 million spare bedrooms, a cost of around £0.5 billion every year. Clearly this is unfair, or certainly different, to those in the private rented sector who receive benefits based on their household need. [9]

Public opinion

In a November 2013, opinion poll carried out by Ipsos Mori found that more of the public supported than opposed the reduction of housing benefit for under-occupying social housing tenants. [10] The policy was most popular among owner occupiers and least popular among social renters. [10] In July 2014, a YouGov poll found that 49% of people opposed "the bedroom tax" and 41% supported it. [11]

Positions of political parties

Conservatives

The Conservative Party has tended to refer to the under-occupancy penalty as the removal of a "spare room subsidy" (implicitly taking into consideration the entire housing benefit paid out for the tenancy, rather than the net payment made by the tenant). Writing in The Telegraph Conservative Minister Iain Duncan Smith has argued:

We need to put an end to the unfair situation where the taxpayer is subsidising people to have homes, paid for by the state, with spare rooms they do not need. This is effectively a spare room subsidy. Britain can not afford it and nor can the taxpayer. [12]

Liberal Democrats

As members of the Coalition government, the Liberal Democrats leadership supported the Welfare Reform Act 2012. However, of the party's 57 MPs, 38 voted in favour, 18 abstained and one, Manchester Withington MP John Leech who was the first MP to speak out against the bill, voted against. [13] At their 2013 Spring Conference, members voted to review the policy that looks at the "money saved, costs incurred and the effect on vulnerable tenants". [14] In March 2014 Inside Housing reported that the Liberal Democrats plan to scrap the "bedroom tax" for all except those who refuse a suitable and reasonable offer of accommodation. [15] This represents a change in position as the party voted against a similar amendment to the 2012 Welfare Reform Act. Liberal Democrat Tim Farron (at that time President of the party) has also criticised the distorting effect that the under occupancy changes have on the market. [16] Following their change in policy, the Liberal Democrats voted with Labour on 5 September 2014, for Lib Dem MP Andrew George's private members bill to restrict the number of cases in which the penalty could be levied. [17]

In their 2017 general election manifesto, the Liberal Democrats declared their intention to scrap the bedroom tax. [18]

Scottish National Party

In their 2015 General Election manifesto the Scottish National Party stated that: "We will vote for the immediate abolition of the unfair bedroom tax". [19]

Labour

The Labour Party, pledged to repeal the act had they been elected in 2015. [20]

Other parties

The under-occupancy penalty is opposed by the Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition, [21] the UK Independence Party, [22] the British National Party, [23] the Green Party of England & Wales, [24] Plaid Cymru, [25] the Democratic Unionist Party, [26] the Social Democratic & Labour Party (SDLP), [27] the Alliance Party of Northern Ireland, [28] the Ulster Unionist Party [29] and Sinn Féin. [29]

Reaction

Protesters opposing the under occupancy penalty outside the Scottish Parliament. The term "bedroom tax" is used by critics to describe the changes to social housing occupancy rules. Scottish Parliament. Protest March 30, 2013 - 11.jpg
Protesters opposing the under occupancy penalty outside the Scottish Parliament. The term "bedroom tax" is used by critics to describe the changes to social housing occupancy rules.

In August 2013, The Independent newspaper released figures which (it argued) showed that 96% of the people who would be affected by the changes would be unable to move anywhere else due to the lack of available social housing. [30] Although it is illegal to sub-let a social tenancy, it is perfectly legalfor social tenants in this situation to take in lodgers, to cover the extra cost and is encouraged by the government; potentially, this provides the tenant with a net profit, and reduces the total number of people seeking alternative accommodation.

The under-occupancy penalty has been criticised for potentially costing more than it saves by forcing individuals into the private rented sector, where rents are higher, thereby increasing the cost to the taxpayer. [31] The National Housing Federation has estimated that the housing benefit bill could increase by £143 million if affected tenants were to downsize by moving into smaller privately rented accommodation. However the Government argues that freeing up social housing would also reduce the cost of housing people in expensive temporary accommodation; since those people would be more likely to find themselves in overcrowded accommodation as compared to those affected by the penalty, the combined impact should be to reduce net costs, and reduce net overcrowding.

Impact of death

Michael Rosen writing in The Guardian has criticised how, under government proposals, parents living in social housing could become liable for what he calls the bedroom tax after only three months following the death of a child, something that inadvertently causes the creation of a "spare" room. [32] In March 2015, The Daily Mirror reported that a woman had become liable for the bedroom tax after her son's death from a brain haemorrhage following an assault. [33]

Effect on disabled people

The changes in housing benefit have been criticised for having a disproportionate effect on disabled families. Two-thirds of individuals affected by the under-occupancy penalty are disabled. [34] Historically, most care and support for disabled individuals was provided by local councils, and their predecessors, rather than central government; in consequence there is an expectation from the government that costs arising out of care needs, including extra bedroom space, should be met by local council budgets. However, over the 20th century, central government took over the cost of providing benefits that cover housing costs; therefore, the government provided a new annual grant to councils, so that they can make discretionary housing payments for disabled people in this situation. The government has recently merged this grant into the general funding provided to councils.

In July 2012, the High Court rejected the premise that the policy was a breach of Article 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights due to the effect on disabled people. [35]

In January 2015, it was announced that the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom would rule in March 2016 on whether the "bedroom tax" was illegal on the basis that it unfairly discriminated against disabled adults. [36]

In May 2015, a father successfully challenged the penalty at a tribunal. The father had separated from his partner but was able to argue that his "spare" room was occupied by his son who stayed with him three nights a week. However, it was believed that the Government would challenge the ruling. [37]

In February 2016, a decision by the Upper Tribunal involving Stevenage Borough Council considered the question of what constituted a room for the purposes of the regulations. Judge Lloyd-Davies decided that a room "should be capable of accommodating a single adult bed, a bedside table and somewhere to store clothes, as well as providing space for dressing and undressing". This implies a minimum size of 65.81 square feet for a rectangular room. [38]

On 13 November 2019, according to the Guardian , the Supreme Court ruled that "applying a 14% housing benefit reduction to a man, referred [sic] only as RR, was a breach of his right to home under the Human Rights Act. RR’s partner is severely disabled so 'it is accepted' that the couple need an extra bedroom for her medical equipment, Lady Hale said". [39]

Case law

Effect

A 2018 study found the bedroom tax "was not successful in encouraging residential moves", but "it did incentivise people who moved to downsize – suggesting some success in terms of one of the policy goals, namely reducing under-occupancy. The policy did not incentivise people to work more and we find no statistically significant effects on households' food consumption or saving behaviour". [40]

The Centre for Housing Policy at the University of York have concluded that the under-occupation policy has saved money, but that the potential savings forecast by the Department for Work and Pensions have been overestimated. [41] The use of Discretionary Housing Payment has partly reduced the savings predicted for the penalty. [42]

In the twelve months since the policy was introduced, the original aim of freeing up underoccupied properties had, in the eyes of some, largely failed. In July 2014, a report was published by the DWP that said only one in twenty claimants affected by the change had downsized their property. A study published four months earlier had similar results. [43]

The report also showed that there has been great demand for downsizing properties but there has been nowhere near sufficient supply of suitable sized housing. [44]

In response to this report, the Liberal Democrats signalled a change in their support for the policy, with both Nick Clegg and Danny Alexander stating that they would like to see changes to the way it is implemented. [45]

See also

Related Research Articles

Corporate welfare is often used to describe a government's bestowal of money grants, tax breaks, or other special favorable treatment for corporations.

Nick Raynsford British politician

Wyvill Richard Nicolls Raynsford, known as Nick Raynsford, is a British Labour Party politician. A government minister from 1997 to 2005, he was the Member of Parliament (MP) for Greenwich & Woolwich from 1997 to 2015, having previously been MP for Greenwich from 1992 to 1997, and for Fulham from 1986 to 1987.

Welfare state in the United Kingdom

The welfare state of the United Kingdom comprises expenditures by the government of the United Kingdom intended to improve health, education, employment and social security. The British system has been classified as a liberal welfare state system.

Welfare Means-oriented social benefit

Welfare is a type of government support for the citizens of that society. Welfare may be provided to people of any income level, as with social security, but it is usually intended to ensure that people can meet their basic human needs such as food and shelter. Welfare attempts to provide a minimal level of well-being, usually either a free- or a subsidized-supply of certain goods and social services, such as healthcare, education, and vocational training.

Welfare reforms are changes in the operation of a given welfare system, with the goals of reducing the number of individuals dependent on government assistance, keeping the welfare systems affordable, and assisting recipients to become self-sufficient. Classical liberals and conservatives generally argue that welfare and other tax-funded services reduce incentives to work, exacerbate the free-rider problem, and intensify poverty. On the other hand, socialists generally criticize welfare reform because it usually minimizes the public safety net and strengthens the capitalist economic system. Welfare reform is constantly debated because of the varying opinions on the government's determined balance of providing guaranteed welfare benefits and promoting self-sufficiency.

The Right to Buy scheme is a policy in the United Kingdom which gives secure tenants of councils and some housing associations the legal right to buy, at a large discount, the council house they are living in. There is also a Right to Acquire for assured tenants of housing association dwellings built with public subsidy after 1997, at a smaller discount. By 1997 over 1,700,000 dwellings in the UK had been sold under the scheme since its introduction in 1980, with the scheme being cited as one of the major factors in the drastic reduction in the amount of social housing in the UK, which has fallen from nearly 6.5 million units in 1979 to roughly 2 million units in 2017, while also being credited as the main driver of the 15% rise in home ownership, which rose from 55% of householders in 1979 to a peak of 71% in 2003.

Labour government, 1964–1970 Government of the United Kingdom

Harold Wilson was appointed Prime Minister of the United Kingdom by Queen Elizabeth II on 16 October 1964 and formed the first Wilson ministry, a Labour Party government, which held office with a thin majority between 1964 and 1966. In an attempt to gain a workable majority in the House of Commons, Wilson called a new election for 31 March 1966, after which he formed the second Wilson ministry, a government which held office for four years until 1970.

Housing Benefit is a means tested social security benefit in the United Kingdom that is intended to help meet housing costs for rented accommodation. It is the second biggest item in the Department for Work and Pensions' budget after the state pension, totalling £23.8 billion in 2013–14.

Local Housing Allowance (LHA) was introduced on 7 April 2008 to provide Housing Benefit entitlement for tenants renting private-sector accommodation in England, Scotland and Wales. The LHA system introduced significant changes to the way Housing Benefit (HB) levels are restricted and how benefit is paid. It did not replace Housing Benefit - it is just a different way of calculating entitlement under the existing Housing Benefit scheme: the Local Housing Allowance is based on the 30th percentile of local rented accommodation, while the 50th percentile or median was used from the introduction of the policy until 2011. LHA rates relate to the area in which the housing-benefit claim is made. These areas are called "Broad Rental Market Areas", defined as "where a person could reasonably be expected to live taking into account access to facilities and services", and a selection of rents in the area are used to determine the LHA for each category of housing in the area.

Labour government, 1974–1979 Government of the United Kingdom

The Labour Party governed the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from 1974 to 1979. During this period, Harold Wilson and James Callaghan were successively appointed as Prime Minister of the United Kingdom by Queen Elizabeth II. The end of the Callaghan ministry was presaged by the Winter of Discontent, a period of serious industrial discontent. This was followed by the election of Conservative leader Margaret Thatcher in 1979.

Despite being a developed country, those who are living at the lower end of the income distribution in the United Kingdom have a relatively low standard of living. Data based on incomes published in 2016 by Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) show that, after housing costs have been taken into consideration, the number of people living in the UK in relative poverty to be 13.44m. In 2015, a report by Institute for Fiscal Studies reported that 21.6% of Britons were now in relative poverty. The report showed that there had been a fall in poverty in the first few years of the twenty-first century, but the rate of poverty had remained broadly flat since 2004/5.

The Fourth Labour Government of New Zealand governed New Zealand from 26 July 1984 to 2 November 1990. It was the first Labour government to win a second consecutive term since the First Labour Government of 1935 to 1949. The policy agenda of the Fourth Labour Government differed significantly from that of previous Labour governments: it enacted major social reforms and economic reforms.

The Third Labour Government of New Zealand was the government of New Zealand from 1972 to 1975. During its time in office, it carried out a wide range of reforms in areas such as overseas trade, farming, public works, energy generation, local government, health, the arts, sport and recreation, regional development, environmental protection, education, housing, and social welfare. Māori also benefited from revisions to the laws relating to land, together with a significant increase in a Māori and Island Affairs building programme. In addition, the government encouraged biculturalism and a sense of New Zealand identity. The government lasted for one term before being defeated a year after the death of its popular leader, Norman Kirk.

The history of rent control in England and Wales is a part of English land law concerning the development of rent regulation in England and Wales. Controlling the prices that landlords could make their tenants pay formed the main element of rent regulation, and was in place from 1915 until its abolition by the Housing Act 1988.

United Kingdom government austerity programme

The United Kingdom government austerity programme is a fiscal policy adopted in the early 21st century following the Great Recession. It is a deficit reduction programme consisting of sustained reductions in public spending and tax rises, intended to reduce the government budget deficit and the role of the welfare state in the United Kingdom. The National Health Service and education have been "ringfenced" and protected from direct spending cuts, but between 2010 and 2019 more than £30 billion in spending reductions have been made to welfare payments, housing subsidies and social services. The effects of United Kingdom austerity policies have proved controversial and the policies have received criticism from a variety of politicians and economists. Anti-austerity movements have been formed among citizens more generally.

Welfare Reform Act 2012 United Kingdom legislation

The Welfare Reform Act 2012 is an Act of Parliament in the United Kingdom which makes changes to the rules concerning a number of benefits offered within the British social security system. It was enacted by the Parliament of the United Kingdom on 8 March 2012.

Pay to Stay was the name of a government policy in the United Kingdom whereby council tenants earning £30,000 would have to pay "market or near market rents". The measure was due to come into effect in April 2017 with the Institute for Fiscal Studies estimating that the policy will impact upon 10% of social housing tenants. On 21 November 2016 the Housing Minister Gavin Barwell announced that the new plans for Pay to Stay would be dropped. Councils maintain the option of charging near market rates to those on incomes of £60,000 or more.

Succession rights in the United Kingdom (housing law)

Succession rights in the United Kingdom is an area of housing law concerning the ability to pass on their tenancy when they die something known as a succession.

Public housing in the United Kingdom

Public housing provided the majority of rented accommodation in the United Kingdom until 2011 when the number of households in private rental housing surpassed the number in social housing. Houses and flats built for public or social housing use are built by or for local authorities and known as council houses, though since the 1980s the role of non-profit housing associations became more important and subsequently the term "social housing" became more widely used, as technically council housing only refers to housing owned by a local authority, though the terms are largely used interchangeably. Before 1865, housing for the poor was provided solely by the private sector. Council houses were built on council estates, where other amenities, like schools and shops, were often also provided. From the 1950s, blocks of flats and three- or four-storey blocks of maisonettes were widely built, alongside large developments of terraced housing, while the 1960s and the 1970s saw construction of many high-rise tower blocks. Flats and houses were also built in mixed estates.

Housing in the United Kingdom

Housing in the United Kingdom represents the largest non-financial asset class in the UK; its overall net value passed the £5 trillion mark in 2014. About 30% of homes are owned outright by their occupants, and a further 40% are owner-occupied on a mortgage. About 18% are social housing of some kind, and the remaining 12% are privately rented.

References

  1. "Bedroom Tax". National Housing Federation. Archived from the original on 17 July 2014. Retrieved 17 July 2014.
  2. Poorest pensioners to lose hundreds of pounds a year in 'new bedroom tax' Archived 2 October 2016 at the Wayback Machine BBC
  3. Poorest pensioners to lose hundreds of pounds a year in 'new bedroom tax' BBC - "And Caroline Abrahams, charity director of Age UK, said: 'Imposing the cap on older tenants will not only cause them anxiety and distress, it is also pointless given the lack of affordable housing options available to them. [...] It will create hardship without any significant financial gains for the Government.'"
  4. "Local authorities and advisers: removal of the spare room subsidy". www.gov.uk.
  5. 1 2 "Under Occupancy (bedroom tax) Charges". Trafford.gov.uk. 1 April 2013. Retrieved 14 April 2014.
  6. UK government loses supreme court fight over bedroom tax The Guardian
  7. "Housing Benefit size restrictions in social housing: special circumstances". citizensadvice.org.uk. Archived from the original on 27 May 2015. Retrieved 27 May 2015.
  8. Wilson, W. (2013) Under-occupation of social housing: Housing Benefit entitlement, House of Commons Library, SN/SP/6272 p 4
  9. HL Deb 14 February 2012 c706
  10. 1 2 "Poll | More support than opposition for 'bedroom tax', but policy divides opinion". Ipsos MORI. Retrieved 14 April 2014.
  11. William Jordan, ‘Bedroom tax as divisive as ever’, 18 July 2014, YouGov.co.uk
  12. "Britain cannot afford the spare room subsidy". Telegraph.co.uk. 7 March 2013.
  13. https://www.publicwhip.org.uk/division.php?date=2011-06-15&house=commons&number=297
  14. "Bedroom tax: Lib Dem conference says no – as do 53% of party members". Libdemvoice.org. 17 September 2013. Retrieved 14 April 2014.
  15. Brown, Carl (28 March 2014). "Lib Dems propose to overhaul bedroom tax". Inside Housing. Retrieved 6 November 2019.
  16. Patrick Wintour (2 April 2014). "Lib Dem president will withdraw party's support for bedroom tax | Politics". The Guardian. Retrieved 14 April 2014.
  17. McSmith, Andy (5 September 2014). "'Bedroom tax' to be abolished as the Coalition is rocked by Lib Dem-Labour alliance". The Independent. Retrieved 6 September 2014.
  18. "What do the general election manifestos say about benefits? Labour, Lib Dem and Conservative policies in 2017 compared". Daily Mirror. 8 June 2017. Retrieved 30 August 2018.
  19. "Archived copy" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 26 April 2015. Retrieved 20 June 2015.CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)
  20. Liam Kelly (20 September 2013). "Drop bedroom tax now, says Byrne". The Guardian. Retrieved 14 April 2014.
  21. Trade Union and Socialist Coalition Press Pack
  22. "Manifesto watch: Where parties stand on key issues". BBC News.
  23. "Abolish the bedroom tax-where's Labours pledge?". British National Party. Archived from the original on 2 April 2015. Retrieved 8 March 2015.
  24. "Green Party - Green Party leader speaks out against bedroom tax as she visits Tameside homelessness project". greenparty.org.uk.
  25. "BBC Democracy Live - 'Scrap Bedroom Tax' say Plaid Cymru". BBC Democracy Live.
  26. Nicholas Watt (11 March 2015). "Democratic Unionist Westminster leader lays out demands for supporting government". The Guardian.
  27. "SDLP vow to block hated bedroom tax". Derry Journal . 19 November 2013.
  28. "Cochrane calls on Executive to explore all options to avoid 'Bedroom Tax' (The Alliance Party of Northern Ireland)". allianceparty.org.
  29. 1 2 "Archived copy". Archived from the original on 2 April 2015. Retrieved 12 March 2015.CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)
  30. Emily Dugan (5 August 2013). "'Big lie' behind the bedroom tax: Families trapped with nowhere to move face penalty for having spare room – UK Politics – UK". The Independent. Retrieved 14 April 2014.
  31. "'Bedroom tax' will cost taxpayers more". Channel 4 News.
  32. "Bedroom tax plans are a levy on the grief of the poor". The Guardian. 14 January 2014. Retrieved 14 April 2014.
  33. Jeremy Armstrong (15 March 2015). "A mother's anguish: A 'killer' took my son and now the Bedroom Tax will take my home". Daily Mirror .
  34. Patrick Butler (28 March 2014). "Bedroom tax has failed on every count | Society". The Guardian. Retrieved 14 April 2014.
  35. Shiv Malik (30 July 2013). "Bedroom tax legal challenge dismissed by high court". The Guardian. Retrieved 14 April 2014.
  36. Jamie Doward (10 January 2015). "Disabled tenants to challenge bedroom tax in supreme court". The Guardian.
  37. Julia Rampen (27 May 2015). "Bedroom Tax: 40,000 parents 'could appeal' after one dad defeats it - how you could do it". Mirror.
  38. "2016 UKUT 164 AAC". Ministry of Justice. 8 April 2016. Retrieved 11 April 2016.
  39. Weaver, Matthew (13 November 2019). "UK government loses supreme court fight over bedroom tax". The Guardian. Retrieved 13 November 2019.
  40. Gibbons, Stephen; Sanchez-Vidal, Maria; Silva, Olmo (15 December 2018). "The bedroom tax". Regional Science and Urban Economics. doi:10.1016/j.regsciurbeco.2018.12.002. ISSN   0166-0462.
  41. "Testing DWP Assessment of Impact of SRS Size Criterion on HB Costs University of York.pdf" (PDF). riverside. Archived from the original (PDF) on 13 April 2014. Retrieved 14 April 2014.
  42. "Archived copy". Archived from the original on 4 February 2015. Retrieved 9 September 2015.CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)
  43. Watts, Joseph (28 March 2014). "'Failed' bedroom tax has only pushed 6% to move". London Evening Standard . p. 6.
  44. "Evaluation of Removal of the Spare Room Subsidy: Interim Report" (PDF). 15 July 2014.
  45. Nicholas Watt (17 July 2014). "Nick Clegg defends bedroom tax policy shift". The Guardian.