Bedroom Tax

Started by rabbit, September 23, 2012, 05: PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

rabbit

During a meeting at 10 Downing Street, Councillor Wells was directed by Mr Cameron towards Eric Pickles

Expressing his concern at the new tax, Mr Wells was assured by Mr Pickles that Hartlepool residents would not be unduly affected by the tax. Does that mean that they would be DULY effected? Pickle`s opinion does not exactly tally with the views of Housing Hartlepool either.

quote from the Mail:

"He assured me that safeguards are in place which will prevent people from being unduly affected by the new regulations.

"I have got it from the horse's mouth that people in Hartlepool would not be unduly affected."

Housing Hartlepool figures reveal 1,048 of their tenants – including 450 families – will see housing benefit slashed with the tenants having to make up the difference.

Households' under occupancy will see their benefit slashed by either £13 a week, for one bedroom, or £22 for two bedrooms.


So, who is right, Pickles/Cameron or Housing Hartlepool?

Stig of the Seaton Dump

Is this going to hit the Queen too ? ...ridiculous for me to suggest it, ridiculous to say we are in this together.
I don't believe it.

steveL

#2
This marks the return of the nasty party to me - if it ever went away, that is.

Cameron's response to Wells seems to have been 'go away, please' and I think Pickles response amounts to 'Hartlepool won't be affected more than anyone else . . . we treat all you plebs the same'

I was interested in Wells' need to mention the by-election.
Diplomacy is the ability to tell someone to go to hell in such a way that they look forward to the trip.

Stig of the Seaton Dump

Would it not be better to encourage people to occupy houses that meet their needs ?

If you have a large number of single people that used to be parents of large families holding onto family houses why not offer them a carrot in the form of a grant to help them make a smaller premises nice and homely for them to move into, rather than a stick to beat them further into poverty with ?

I don't believe it.

marky

#4
The Civilised Option:
A couple bring up their kids in a 3 bedroom 'council house' which isn't really a house - it's a home. The kids eventually grow up and fly the nest and the couple have a few years together in peace and quiet before the husband passes away. The woman is left alone in the house with her memories. If she's lucky, her grown-up offspring come home now and then to stay a few days and when grand kids arrive on the scene, they come to stay too for the odd day or two. She may be on her own but she still feels to be an important part of the family with a useful role to fulfill.
Eventually, she decides that the house is too much to look after and she makes the major decision to move into something smaller and more manageable. This makes her 3 bedroomed house available to a new family.

The Tory Option:
When the kids fly the nest, a letter in a brown envelope arrives telling them that their housing benefit has been cut and they'll have to make up the difference some other way. When the husband passes on, another two brown envelopes arrive: one telling her that her pension income has dropped and the other reminding her that she is living in a house with too many bedrooms for her needs.
She decides to give the house up, not because she is ready to do so yet - too many memories - but because she feels she is being forced out and is being to made to feel guilty for denying others the benefit of the extra bedrooms.
She ends up in a one-bedroomed bungalow, wondering what the hell happened. She doesn't get to see her family as much as she'd like because she can't accomodate them and the chance to have her grandkids stay over now and then when her own offspring fancy a break or night out has gone out of the window. She doesn't feel like she is so useful any more and instead feels she has become 'Granny' - someone to visit on a Sunday for an hour or two for tea and ham sandwiches.

I think a widow in this situation should give up her house but only when she decides and is ready to do so either because she can't manage it any more or because she herself thinks the extra bedrooms are a bit of a waste. Substitute the word 'home' for the word 'house' and everything becomes just a little more callous. The Tories have never been able to appreciate this and they never will.
 

testing times

oh stop moaning - she's probably only a Pleb, anyway.  ;)