Almost half fear unexpected £100 bill 'would leave them struggling to pay rent'
The Salvation Army's Captain John Clifton said: 'When nearly half of people are so financially fragile that they are living in fear of a £100 bill, something has gone very wrong'
Almost half of adults fear an unexpected £100 bill would leave them struggling to pay their rent or mortgage.
The survey for the Salvation Army found 48% of people were extremely or very concerned over an extra expense. A further 22% of the 1,000 people polled said they were "fairly concerned" while 29% said they were not concerned, the charity said.
The Salvation Army's Captain John Clifton said: 'When nearly half of people are so financially fragile that they are living in fear of a £100 bill, something has gone very wrong — and the Government must take notice." He said to protect those who are struggling the government must unfreeze housing benefit or risk pushing "thousands more over the cliff edge into homelessness".
At the Budget last year Chancellor Rachel Reeves said the local housing allowance (LHA) will remain at existing levels until 2026. It was also frozen multiple times during the Conservatives' 14-year spell in government.
Mr Clifton added: 'Rent and bills have gone up and welfare support has gone down. Every day at our food banks, debt and employment advice services, churches and community centres we see the reality of what it's like for people who can't afford to feed, clothe and house themselves and their families.
'With so many living on a knife-edge, the risk of homelessness is no longer something that happens to 'other people' — it's becoming a real concern for ordinary households across the country.'
A government spokesman said: 'No one should be in poverty. That's why we've extended the Household Support Fund and Discretionary Housing Payments for 2025-26 to protect the most vulnerable while we fix the fundamentals of the social security system, so people don't rely on crisis support.
'Alongside this, we have increased the National Living Wage, uprated benefits and are helping over one million households having introduced a Fair Repayment Rate on Universal Credit deductions, on top of reviewing Universal Credit to ensure it can best contribute to our aims from tackling poverty and making work pay.
"Meanwhile, we are boosting the Affordable Housing Programme by £2bn which will build 18,000 new social and affordable homes – getting families into safe and decent homes while supporting our Plan for Change milestone of 1.5 million new homes by the next Parliament and driving economic growth.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sky News
29 minutes ago
- Sky News
The big mistake Labour think Nigel Farage has made - and how the chancellor hopes to capitalise
Next week, the chancellor will unveil the first spending review since 2021. It will set Whitehall budgets for the remainder of this parliament and it will be a big moment for a government struggling to tell a story about what it is trying to achieve to voters. Rachel Reeves, flanked by transport workers in a bus depot in Rochdale, knows it. She came to the North West armed with £15bn of funding for trains, trams and buses across the Midlands and the North. Much more will be announced next week when the chancellor sets out her capital spending plans for the remainder of the parliament, having loosened her fiscal rules in the budget for capital investment. More is coming. Next week, the chancellor is expected to announce plans to spend billions more on a new railway line between Manchester and Liverpool, as well as other transport schemes for northern towns and cities. This will be the backbone of the "Northern Arc" that Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham has been arguing for as a northern version to the much-vaunted Oxford-Cambridge growth corridor. Labour will pour £113bn into capital investment over the course of this parliament and there is an economic and political imperative for a chancellor to talk up capital spending in rail and roads, houses, power stations. On the economic side, she is in search for growth and hopes investment in infrastructure will create jobs and fire up the economy. On the politics, Labour need to show voters in their red wall seats that it is the Starmer government and not Nigel Farage that will improve the lives of working people. Ms Reeves spent a lot of time in her speech talking about the need to invest right across the country. She is overhauling the Treasury's "Green Book" that assesses value for money for public projects to make sure that funding decisions don't just get concentrated in the South East but are weighted to the Midlands and the North. 2:44 She also, in reiterating her commitment to her fiscal rule to not borrow to fund day-to-day government spending (the annual budgets for our schools, councils, courts, police, hospitals), sought to draw out the "choice" between Labour and Reform, as Labour seeks to capitalise on Mr Farage's decision last week to promise up to £80bn worth of new spending - including scrapping the two-child benefit cap and increasing winter fuel payments - while not explaining exactly how they could be paid for. Expect to hear lots more from Labour in the coming weeks about how Mr Farage is an iteration of Liz Truss, ready to pursue "fantasy economics" and trash the economy. Labour are gleeful that Mr Farage has opened up this line of attack and think it was an uncharacteristic political misstep from the Reform leader. "Farage was a politician for vibes, now he's turned himself into a politician of policy and he didn't need to do that yet," observed one senior Labour figure. But if that is the sell, here is the sting. While the Chancellor has loosened her fiscal rules for capital spending, she is resolute she will not do the same when it comes to day-to-day departmental spending, and next week harsh cuts are on the way for some departments, with Yvette Cooper at the Home Office, Angela Rayner at local government, and Ed Miliband at energy still wrangling over their settlements. Ms Reeves was at pains in Rochdale to talk about the extra £190bn the government has put into day-to-day spending in this parliament in order to see off the charges of austerity as those spending cuts kick in. Her allies point to the £300bn in total Ms Reeves has poured into capital projects and public services over this parliament. "You just can't say we aren't a tax-and-spend government," said one ally. But this isn't just a chancellor fighting Mr Farage, she is also battling with those in her own party, under extreme pressure to loosen her fiscal rules, or tax more, as MPs - and her prime minister - demand she spends more on welfare and on getting the UK warfare-ready. You can see it all playing out. After a local election drubbing, the chancellor U-turned on her seemingly iron-clad decision to take the winter fuel allowance away from all pensioners. Now, I'm hearing that the prime minister is pressing to lift the two-child benefit cap (no matter his chief of staff is opposed to the idea, with the cap popular with voters) and MPs are demanding a reverse to some disability cuts (one government insider said the backbench revolt is real and could even force a defeat despite Sir Keir's whopping 165-strong working majority). Meanwhile, the prime minister is under pressure from US President Donald Trump for NATO to lift defence spending to 3.5% of GDP. Spending demands and rising borrowing costs, there is no wonder that attention is already moving towards possible tax rises in the Autumn budget. Ms Rayner, the deputy prime minister, wrote to the chancellor, arguing for targeted wealth taxes. Andy Burnham, the Greater Manchester mayor, told me this week on Electoral Dysfunction that he wanted more taxes on assets and a revaluation of council tax bands so those with large, valuable homes pay more. "We have not taxed assets and wealth properly and I'd come up with something that can be controversial but council tax has not been revalued since the early 90s so there are homes in London worth tens of millions of pounds that pay less council tax than many average properties here in Greater Manchester so I would look at reforms in that space," Mr Burnham told me this week. "I would look further at land taxation and land taxation reform. If you put in new infrastructure, what I learned through Crossrail, Elizabeth Line - you lift the values of that land. "So why don't we capture some of that uplift from that? I personally would go for a land value tax across the country. So there are things that you can do that I think can be seen to be fair, because we haven't taxed those things fairly. "I've said, and I'll say it again, we've overtaxed people's work and we've undertaxed people's assets and wealth and that balance should be put more right." I asked the chancellor on Wednesday if Ms Rayner and Mr Burnham had a point, and would she level with people that taxes might have to go up again as she struggles with spending demands and self-imposed borrowing constraints - she, of course, swerved the question and said the priority for her is to growth the economy. These questions will, I suspect, only get louder and more frequent in the run-up to the budget should borrowing costs continue to go up alongside demands for spending. The chancellor, at least, has a story to tell about rewiring the economy as a means to national renewal. But with the spoils of infrastructure investment perhaps decades off, Ms Reeves will find it hard to frame this spending review as a reboot for working people rather than a kicking for already stretched public services.
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
Reeves doubles down on pledge not to raise taxes as Britain faces cuts
Chancellor Rachel Reeves insists Labour's spending plans are fully funded without raising income tax, VAT, or national insurance, despite warnings of potential cuts to public services. The Resolution Foundation and the NIESR suggest that increased spending on health and defence will necessitate cuts to other public services if tax rises are avoided. Internal government sources indicate a 'civil war' within the cabinet, with some Labour figures warning Reeves will have to abandon manifesto pledges on spending. The IFS director Paul Johnson has warned that tax rises will be needed to meet Labour's spending commitments. Reeves maintains that manifesto commitments are fully costed and funded through measures like VAT on private school fees and cracking down on non-doms, despite pressure to consider wealth taxes.
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
Starmer has brought Labour to the brink of extinction. This makes him even more dangerous
Brace, dear readers, brace, for everything will get worse before it gets better. Sir Keir Starmer's premiership is holed below the waterline, his party on the verge of disintegration. Starmer has lost control of immigration and of the public finances. Nobody knows what he stands for. It is a question of when, not if, he is forced to fire Rachel Reeves. It is unclear whether he will lead Labour into the next election, or even whether it will remain the dominant party of the Left. Bring it on, I hear you say. But a desperate Starmer will be far worse than the incompetent, complacent version we have been subjected to so far. He no longer has anything to lose. He will target Middle England with wanton abandon, embracing Corbyn-lite policies to shore up his far-Left flank. Every stupid idea in the collectivist arsenal – wealth taxes, the revaluation of council tax bands to hammer expensive homes, a cap on pension pots, the removal of pension tax relief, a war on Isas, steeper inheritance tax – is bound to make a comeback to fill his self-inflicted fiscal black hole. The 'rich' will be asked to pay more for water and broadband via 'social tariffs'. Ed Miliband will be emboldened in his rush to net zero, minus the occasional tactical delay. There will be no end to the woke madness, rampant crime and unjust legal decisions. As ludicrous as this might sound to outsiders aghast at Starmer's proto-socialism and disgusted by the human rights lawfare pushed by Lord Hermer, his attorney general, many Labour MPs and intellectuals actually believe that Starmer's error was to tack too far to the Right. They believe he cares too much about a Red Wall that is already lost. Those in urban seats hated his warning that migration was turning Britain into 'an island of strangers' (the Red Wallers disagreed). Most saw Reeves's attempts at trimming a few benefits to placate the bond markets as this Government's foundational error (the Red Wall MPs agree). Others believe he is being too cautious when undoing Brexit. Many MPs want Britain immediately to recognise an independent Palestine – even though no such body would truly accept Israel's right to exist – a grotesque gesture that would confirm once again that pogroms and terrorism works. The Prime Ministers' critics blame Morgan McSweeney, No 10 chief of staff, for the Government's supposedly centrist approach, and are convinced that Starmer listens too much to Tony Blair and his allies (such as Liz Lloyd, director of policy, delivery and innovation at No 10). There is talk that 15 Labour MPs may defect to the Greens if they choose as their new leader Zack Polanski, who wants to turn the party into a Left-wing populist alternative to Reform. It is hard to oust a Labour leader, but Starmer's position is weakening. Labour's problem is the mirror image of the Tories'. Britain is undergoing a brutal realignment. Both parties were coalitions; the Tories had no rival to their Right and Labour none to their Left. Policies were designed to appeal to centrist 'median voters' and a few thousand swing electors in a few seats. Everything has changed, for three reasons. First, the Blair-Brown-Osborne-Starmer managerialist orthodoxy has failed. The economy is toast, the public sector is kaput, social breakdown is rife and the ultra-high immigration model has gone badly wrong. The electorate craves new ideas. Second, voters have become radicalised by culture wars. Previously uncontroversial views – on biological sex, on free speech – are now key markers of identity. Education has become more important than class, income or wealth when it comes to political affiliation, and, tragically, sectarian voting is back, fuelled by demographic change. Third, the political marketplace is working: the public want more choice, and they are getting it. Nigel Farage's Reform is leading the polls, while on the far-Left the Greens and 'pro-Gaza' Independents are surging (with the latter's appeal probably underestimated by researchers). Many no longer detect any difference between Labour and Tories, and no longer care which of the old duopoly is in power. On the Left, voting is becoming performative, an expression of identity and values, not a means to seize power; tactical voting is waning, and fragmentation rising. The Labour coalition is gone, never to return. Its Right flank has fled to Reform. Some social democrats are opting for the Lib Dems, a party that could yet overtake Labour in parliament. For Starmer, the only hope is to tack Left, appealing to Greens and Corbynites, to bash Israel and U-turn on cuts, but it won't work: this electorate has become so extreme that even a speech praising Marx and Engels would flop. Recognising Palestine wouldn't be sufficient; they would demand Russia-style sanctions. Higher benefits would be ridiculed as Austerity 2.0. There are some around Starmer who believe he can muddle through, but they are deluded. Yes, the French are saying they will help with small boats (good luck with that), two polls suggest a smaller Reform lead, and £15 billion will be spent on buses in the North. So what? The big picture is apocalyptic. Reeves will increase taxes at the Budget to fund her U-turns on winter fuel, the two-child benefits cap and personal independence payments, as well as public sector pay rises. She will then need to rise taxes again and again over the next few years to put defence on course for 3.5 per cent of GDP, plus another 1.5 per cent on related spending – even before any further increases in spending on the welfare state in a doomed attempt to buy back votes. This could trigger a full-on fiscal crisis: the tax take is already maxed out and will surely fail to keep up with spending. Labour is polling at 22 per cent, down 11.7 points on a pathetically poor election victory. Gordon Brown, Ed Miliband, Jeremy Corbyn, Neil Kinnock and Michael Foot performed better than Starmer's current ratings. We need to go back to 1918, when Labour, still a fringe group, collected 20.8pc under William Adamson, for the party to be scoring so poorly. This is where Labour is heading, or worse. Starmer could be its final PM, the closing chapter in a 100- year story. Let's hope he doesn't entirely ruin Britain on his way out.
