In reply to Justin Tomlinson's ‘challenge’ (Swindon Advertiser, ‘Bedroom Tax is not working’) we know there are people living in overcrowded accommodation. However, unlike Justin we don't think the solution is to set different tenants at each other’s throats as if some of them were the cause of the problems of the others.

The responsibility for the housing shortage rests on the shoulders of politicians, both Tory and Labour, who since 1980 have created a shortage of council homes by selling them on the cheap and refusing to build replacements.

If Justin is really concerned about families in overcrowded accommodation then why does he support government policy which sells family homes on the cheap?

Last year, three quarters of council homes sold in Swindon under ‘right to buy’were three or four bed properties.

The government is now proposing to encourage the sale of even more homes by cutting the qualifying period from five to three years. If the Council has at its disposal less and less homes then the only result will be those on the waiting list having to wait longer.

When it introduced the ‘under-occupation’ regulations (aka ‘bedroom tax’) the government knew very well there were insufficient smaller homes for tenants facing HB cuts to move into.

Swindon has more smaller homes than some towns, yet only around 140 households affected by the ‘bedroom tax’ have moved thus far. This still leaves more than 800 households having to pay 14 per cent or 25 per cent of their rent from the pittance that they are expected to live on.

The ‘bedroom standard’ which determines the number of bedrooms that families ‘need’ bears no relationship to real life experience. For example, a family of two parents and two children, a boy and a girl both under ten, would be pushed from pillar to post. If they live in a three bedroom house, it is deemed ‘too big’ for them and they would have to move into a two bed house to avoid a cut in their housing benefit.

Yet as soon as one of the children reaches ten they qualify for a three bed house. When one of the children leaves home they would have to move back into a two bed house again. When the final child leaves homes the couple would have to ‘downsize’ to a one bed flat. If the children are the same sex then they qualify for an extra bedroom when the first one turns 16. Does it make sense to impose so many moves on families? There is a lot of expense associated with moving to different size properties. It would be disruptive of their lives and unfair.

Between April of 2013, when the bedroom tax was implemented, and October, the number of people on the waiting list and the transfer list for one bed, two bed and three bed properties, has continued to rise. The numbers on the transfer list (existing council or Housing Association tenants) have also continued to rise.

This proves what we have said all along, that the bedroom tax would have a marginal impact on the housing shortage. Instead of making the lives of some tenants a misery, forcing people out of their homes and their communities against their will, perhaps our MPs could concentrate their efforts on the very thing that needs to be done to tackle the housing shortage. I refer to the need for a new round of council house building. Are they in favour of building new council housing or are they happy to see the rising generation forced to live in the private rented sector with exorbitant rents and higher housing benefit payments?

Martin Wicks, Secretary Swindon Tenants Campaign Group, Welcombe Avenue, Swindon