Will the bedroom tax be the new poll tax?

First topic message reminder :

Original at: http://skwalker1964.wordpress.com/2013/01/24/unbelievable-not-1-tory-turns-up-for-bedroom-tax-debate/

The Tories’ complete contempt for ordinary people couldn’t have been more clearly demonstrated than it was in yesterday’s Westminster Hall debate on the onerous, ludicrously-unfair ‘bedroom tax’, which will impoverish millions of struggling people for daring to have a spare bedroom, by deducting benefits.

This includes many people whose children are at university and millions of estranged parents who will be punished for having a room for their visiting children to stay in.

Not one Tory turned up for the debate. Not a single one, apart from the minister who was obliged to attend. Even the pathetic LibDems couldn’t be bothered to make an appearance.




For more details, read Eoin Clark’s excellent blog here.

What a strange world some people live in witchy. Nobody denies that there are some that on occasion have to rely on the state for some support. What as that got to do with the conservatives, anybody that believes the "wannabes" waiting in the wings will even attempt to change one of the policies put forward by the "coalition" (note not tory) lives in a totally red tinted world. Not one government since the 70's has tried to change things for the benefit of the working man/woman. What makes anybody believe things would change under the other socialists?

tlttf wrote:What a strange world some people live in witchy. Nobody denies that there are some that on occasion have to rely on the state for some support. What as that got to do with the conservatives,

Not 100% sure I am gauging your point accurately as the shockingly obvious answer would seem that in this incidence the State & Conservatives would be 1 in the same

anybody that believes the "wannabes" waiting in the wings will even attempt to change one of the policies put forward by the "coalition" (note not tory) lives in a totally red tinted world. Not one government since the 70's has tried to change things for the benefit of the working man/woman. What makes anybody believe things would change under the other socialists?

Blair, in his 13 years in power dismantled the class system almost entirely and gave better options and prospects to women in the workplace, not to mention leveling the playing field for those returning too work after having children. In opening up the Education system he provided not only a means to achieve a better standard of living and a better familial aesthetic by children witnessing their parents going either out to work to earn a living or returning to the Education system to better themselves. This benefit is almost 10 fold, parents who are in low rent housing and who were previously living off the state where offered more than the slander and condemnation of previous Governments~ a way out and a healthy example for the children as opposed to living of the state once they leave school.

I think the above would constitute an attempt to "change things for the benefit of the working man/woman"

The thing is Tlttf.....

That if ever we want a government that is fair to all and that really does care for the weak, the sick, the poor and the old it is NEVER going to be a Tory one.

Most of us here know from experience that the Tories only care about themselves and their own kind and so long as the weak, the sick, the poor, and the old are hidden out of sight they don't give a damn about them either.

As has been said above, If every essential service provided by The State might be called an "act of Socialism" then by that model just about every Capitalist country in the world is a Socialist one.

Of course this is total nonsense as the role of The State, as also already stated, is to ensure that ALL of the people under their control and care are treated fairly.

The Tories for a very long time have been dismantling the role of The State by a million cuts and every minute that they have The State in their hands they are going to keep privatising it until this "role of The State" is reduced to such a small size that the Civil Service will be working in some shed at the bottom of some Tory garden rather than in Whitehall.

The Tories, quite simply, cannot be trusted with the essential State services, ( especially the NHS ), as they have far too many privateer pals waiting in the wings to get their hands on this risk free income.

Regards....

Papaumau.

tlttf wrote:What a strange world some people live in witchy. Nobody denies that there are some that on occasion have to rely on the state for some support. What as that got to do with the conservatives, anybody that believes the "wannabes" waiting in the wings will even attempt to change one of the policies put forward by the "coalition" (note not tory) lives in a totally red tinted world. Not one government since the 70's has tried to change things for the benefit of the working man/woman. What makes anybody believe things would change under the other socialists?

The only WANNABES is Cameron he thinks he is Son of Thatcher, some of his policies are straight out of her papers from the 80s because he can not think up any of his own the economy and no growth is prooof and the nastiness of his policies, you say that no one since the 70s have done anything for the working man/women "What about the Minimum Wage" and what about the NHS after 18 years of Tory neglect waiting list that where 18 MONTHS long people dying while awaiting operations that was sorted out by paying the private health sector to do those operations along side the NHS to get those waiting lists down, and when Labour left office in 2010 they where putting in £111 Billion that is now down to £109 Billion no wonder the NHS is having trouble peope unable to access a GP having to wait for months for out patient appointments I suppose its back to people dying waiting to see a hospitla doctor. Tony Blair did not get everything right but we could put that down to taking the Labour party too far to the right instead of moving more to the left but he did a lot more for the "ENTIRE UK" not just for the chosen few, Cameron is also following The Maggot by selling off the family silver paid for by the TAX PAYER Bitch features sold off Gas Electric phone and rail along with others, and who benefitted from the sale of the family silver Tory MPs Donors and those at the top of the Tory party. I would rather vote for the BNP or EDL than vote Tory or L/D for that matter so if you are trying to convince me to vote Tory NEVER in the creation of Crows Shit would I vote for those shower of W***ERS. :bom: :bom: :bom:

Papaumau wrote:The thing is Tlttf.....

That if ever we want a government that is fair to all and that really does care for the weak, the sick, the poor and the old it is NEVER going to be a Tory one.

Most of us here know from experience that the Tories only care about themselves and their own kind and so long as the weak, the sick, the poor, and the old are hidden out of sight they don't give a damn about them either.

As has been said above, If every essential service provided by The State might be called an "act of Socialism" then by that model just about every Capitalist country in the world is a Socialist one.

Of course this is total nonsense as the role of The State, as also already stated, is to ensure that ALL of the people under their control and care are treated fairly.

The Tories for a very long time have been dismantling the role of The State by a million cuts and every minute that they have The State in their hands they are going to keep privatising it until this "role of The State" is reduced to such a small size that the Civil Service will be working in some shed at the bottom of some Tory garden rather than in Whitehall.

The Tories, quite simply, cannot be trusted with the essential State services, ( especially the NHS ), as they have far too many privateer pals waiting in the wings to get their hands on this risk free income.

Regards....

Papaumau.

GREAT POST PAPAUMAU VERY HONEST AND TRUTHFUL SO I HOPE THE RIGHT WINGERS ON HERE TAKE NOTE AND ARE ABLE TO UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU HAVE SAID.

tlttf wrote:What a strange world some people live in witchy. Nobody denies that there are some that on occasion have to rely on the state for some support. What as that got to do with the conservatives, anybody that believes the "wannabes" waiting in the wings will even attempt to change one of the policies put forward by the "coalition" (note not tory) lives in a totally red tinted world. Not one government since the 70's has tried to change things for the benefit of the working man/woman. What makes anybody believe things would change under the other socialists?

good post, tlttf.........and so very true.

I've never heard of a ridiculous tax. What next, toilet tax?

What next, toilet tax?

Maybe that should just be paid by people on another forum, the name of which escapes me....

I hate the government interfering into people's own private affairs. You might as well invite a mate over to the house at night so that they use the spare bedroom in order to avoid paying the bedroom tax.

starlight. That wouldn't avoid the tax, since presumably either the local council or the DWP will assess how many rooms a family needs for its permanent residents.

(P.S. We shouldn't really call it a bedroom tax - even if most people do - since it offends the sensitivities of some Tories, no doubt some of the same ones who used to incorrectly talk of Gordon Brown's "pension raid", or who libelled Peter Mandelson by calling him a "twice-convicted criminal".)

Ivan wrote:starlight. That wouldn't avoid the tax, since presumably either the local council or the DWP will assess how many rooms a family needs for its permanent residents.

(P.S. We shouldn't really call it a bedroom tax - even if most people do - since it offends the sensitivities of some Tories, no doubt some of the same ones who used to incorrectly talk of Gordon Brown's "pension raid", or who libelled Peter Mandelson by calling him a "twice-convicted criminal".)

PSPS The Tories just do not want us to tell them the truth or even speak the truth, when is a tax not a tax = when the Tories want us to believe they are not taxing us what a shower of DHs

good post, tlttf.........and so very true.

sickchip. Really? There seems to be a lot of inconsistency around at the moment. For you to praise a post from tlttf which refers to “the other socialists”, implying as he does (not for the first time) that Cameron and his cronies are socialists, is way out of line with your usual, and more credible, stance that we’ve been subject to a right-wing, neo-liberal agenda in the UK for more than thirty years.

For anyone to consider Cameron to be a socialist would be laughable if it wasn’t so pathetic. Next month his Marxist tendency will be responsible for a whopping tax cut for millionaires, and it must be why he supports a bedroom tax but not a mansion tax. Had the Tories won a majority at the last election, Comrade Cameron would even have cut inheritance tax for all those ‘pleb’ millionaires, as well as legalising the working class pastime of foxhunting.

Privatisation of the NHS by stealth is no doubt Cameron’s way of ensuring that the proletariat get the treatment they need, rather than only what they can afford. Circumventing the minimum wage by forcing benefit claimants to work in Poundland for nothing is a great way of redistributing wealth. His socialist creed must have been the reason why Cameron kept on bad-mouthing Ken Livingstone during last year’s London mayoral election. I should think Cameron’s constituency office in Witney must be plastered with pictures of Nye Bevan, Clem Attlee and maybe Che Guevera and Fidel Castro as well.

But hold on, I see that tlttf also posted this:-

Not one government since the 70s has tried to change things for the benefit of the working man/woman.

Anyone barking enough to complain that we have two socialist parties in our ‘red tinted world’ must be ultra right-wing and committed to even more inequality, so why would he want a government to help working people??

I happen to think that the Labour government from 1997 to 2010 wasn’t socialist (and Tony Blair never used that word), but it did far more for working people than any Tory government ever would. It introduced a statutory minimum wage and increased it. It brought over a million social homes up to standard and gave workers the entitlement to 28 days paid leave annually. It brought in working tax credits, it cut VAT on domestic fuel to 5%, it doubled spending on state education and trebled spending on the NHS. It increased child benefit by 26% in real terms, set up child trust funds and provided nursery places for three and four-year-olds. It brought in a minimum income guarantee for pensioners and gave them a winter fuel allowance and free prescriptions.

So what is it that tlttf wants, less socialism or more? As I said, there’s a lot of inconsistency here.

History tells us that the British elector does not vote for extremism. Governments run the full gamut from centre-left all the way through the centre and outwards beyond to centre-right.

Which may explain why the "man-in-the-street" doesn't bother to vote, so results are decided by a tiny number of people.

Time for a change.

Deadly, completely behind your comments about the Blair government - whatever they got wrong, they were definitely, in my view, doing something very positive in terms of beginning to tackle the causes of social exclusion and inequality.

.... and then Tony got religion.

Ivan wrote:

good post, tlttf.........and so very true.

sickchip. Really? There seems to be a lot of inconsistency around at the moment. For you to praise a post from tlttf which refers to “the other socialists”, implying as he does (not for the first time) that Cameron and his cronies are socialists, is way out of line with your usual, and more credible, stance that we’ve been subject to a right-wing, neo-liberal agenda in the UK for more than thirty years.

Ivan, I deemed it a good post, and true, on the basis that tlttf stated Labour would not reverse any of the policies/measures introduced by the 'coalition'. You are correct about my 'usual stance'.......and that is the reason I have no faith in any of the main political parties - I have been consistent in that view on these pages and frequently express my frustration with the Labour party.

I praised tlttf for recognising that Labour will make no real difference, and offer no answers, if elected. A view others would do well to take on board.

Well thanks for that sickchip. Has anybody that seems to think the answer is "Labour" got any answers for why they abstained when given the option for voting regarding "The bedroom tax".

Unbelievably some on here are so obsessed with the tree they've totally missed the wood!

why they abstained when given the option for voting regarding "The bedroom tax".

tlttf. Talking out of your backside again, by any chance? Are you thinking (sorry, you don't) of the bill to retrospectively wriggle out of paying compensation to claimants who were forced to do workfare, a bill which at least 40 Labour MPs voted against?

Lets see Ivan we are talking about the so called "Bedroom Tax" aren't we? Labour abstained from voting against it, end of story really. You may huff and puff all you like and as usual chuck in a bit of abuse, doesn't change the facts that you beloved bunch did noting about it.

Labour Party conference (a possible conversation) "Mr Balls what do you think of the policies put forward by the coalition".
"They're a disgrace to everybody in the country, this government has borrowed more than we envisaged".
"What would you do about it".
"Why we'd borrow even more"
End of conversation.

And they said that satire was dead...

tlttf wrote:-
Lets see Ivan we are talking about the so called "Bedroom Tax" aren't we? Labour abstained from voting against it, end of story really. You may huff and puff all you like and as usual chuck in a bit of abuse, doesn't change the facts that you beloved bunch did noting about it.

Why should it be the “end of the story” when you post another of your customary lies? The Labour Party is opposed to the bedroom tax, as this demonstrates:-
http://www.labour.org.uk/bedroomtaxshare

And this demonstrates:-
http://www.labour.org.uk/opposing-the-bedroom-tax

The House of Commons voted 316 for, 263 against, the bedroom tax. Who do you think the 263 were - Tories??
http://www.insidehousing.co.uk/tenancies/government-wins-bedroom-tax-vote/6520565.article

If you have evidence that Labour is not opposed to the bedroom tax, kindly produce it.

Now for the rest of your fictitious posting. What you omit from your imaginary and puerile conversation is that the Tory-dominated coalition is borrowing far more than it envisaged. It’s borrowing to pay ever-decreasing benefits (in real terms) to the hundreds of thousands of public sector workers that it’s thrown out of work. Labour would indeed borrow money – to invest in making the economy grow again.

Before you say it – no, I haven’t mentioned the fall of Constantinople, the price of tea in China, the Battle of Widow McCormack's Cabbage Patch, or any of the countless other ‘red herrings’ that you may try to bring up, so please don’t bother to do so.

It looks straight forward to me Ivan. "Borrowing, renamed invest to grow" your having a laugh.

It seems an ambivalent Labour Party will do nothing to stop bedroom tax
Tuesday 26 March 2013

With regard to welfare cuts being double the predicted UK level, the bedroom tax will cost Scottish tenants £53 million a year and council finances will be put under further strain ("Welfare cuts double level UK predicted", The Herald, March 25).

Labour politicians are mistaken if they think a future UK Labour Government will repeal this legislation designed to solve a problem in London yet applied to Scotland by a UK Government and opposed by 90% of Scottish MPs at Westminster to no avail.

No-one in the UK Labour leadership said they would abolish the bedroom tax and Labour MP Helen Goodman, who sits on the party's National Policy Forum, said the bedroom tax should apply if people have been offered a smaller place to live and turned it down.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/comment/letters/it-seems-an-ambivalent-labour-party-will-do-nothing-to-stop-bedroom-tax.20613171

Papaumau, Wednesday, 20 March 2013, 11:21

The thing is that once all of these, ( as they see it ), "undesirables" are kettled into tight areas of deprivation the crime rates soar and the gangs are formed and get bigger each day and the local cops have a hard job keeping a lid on such places.

 

And crime causes more poverty. In areas of South LA that suffered destruction in 1965 and 1992, unemployment is artificially and permanently high because small business employers were burned out during the two riots. These are not the mega-corporations that often treat employees as serfs; these are the mom and pop establishments that had been part of the community for generations and that would take a chance on a wet behind the ears young person because they knew that they were decent, hardworking, and honest.

I’ve watched South LA for more than (cough)… well, my friend, my fingers won’t type numbers that big that night be translated into an accurate estimate of just how ancient I am, and it had never fully recovered from 1965 when 1992 knocked it back on its economic backside again.

Those that practice turning a blind eye do not realize that they are playing a penny-wise, pound foolish pay me now or pay the piper later game. As the older Texans and Southerners say (take your pick, or pick both), “What goes around, comes around”, and “God don’t like ugly.”

In 1974, the older brother of Valerie Brisco was murdered in a South LA drive-by gang shooting while on his high school track training for an upcoming varsity track meet. This decent, law-abiding, dedicated young student-athlete had already attracted USOOC attention, and was a probable 1976 Olympian. Valerie Brisco, a promising but not particularly dedicated athlete herself at the time, from then on dedicated her track career to her mentor and inspiration, Robert Brisco, and as an Olympian at the 1984 Summer Games in the same Los Angeles California in which her brother was slaughtered, Valerie Brisco-Hooks became a triple Gold Medalist, becoming the first Olympian to win gold medals in both the 200 meter and 400 meter races at a single Olympics while also winning a gold medal in the 4x400 meter relay.

Read Valerie Brisco-Hooks story here. Where it says “Watts”, substitute “South Los Angeles.” Watts is a part of South LA, but not the whole. The high school mentioned in the article is about a mile due west from Watts. I know the high schools cross streets, and I know the names of each street between the high school and Watts.

The Los Angeles (County) District Attorney’s office never prosecuted Robert Brisco’s murderer, and the tragedy received next to no news coverage from the Los Angeles Times, the Los Angeles Herald Examiner, KCBS Channel 2, KNBC Channel 4, KTLA Channel 5, KABC Channel 7, KNX Channel 9, KTTV Chanel 11, or KCOP Channel 13. You might speculate as to why; as one who grew up knowing that those folks up there don’t give a hot damn about is folks down here, I know exactly why this murder was ignored. “After all, it’s just one of them, and they kill each other all the time. Ain’t no skin off our backs.”

The University of California at Los Angeles, UCLA, one of two crowning jewels in the University of California system, is located in a part of Los Angeles called Westwood, long thought to be far removed from the violence of South LA. In 1987, I believe in May, a UCLA student, an Asian, I believe either Chinese American or Japanese American, was murdered in a drive by shooting in Westwood. That murder of a non-Black, non-South LA, non-ghetto-dweller received multi-issues front page coverage from the Los Angeles Times and the Los Angeles Herald Examiner, multi-days lead story coverage from KCBS Channel 2, KNBC Channel 4, KTLA Channel 5, KABC Channel 7, KNX Channel 9, KTTV Chanel 11, and KCOP Channel 13, and intensive, full scale investigation and prosecution from The Los Angeles Police Department and The Los Angeles (County) District Attorney’s Office.

“What goes around, comes around?” You betcha! “God don’t like ugly?” Damned straight!

Other nations have dealt with the situation more sympathetically.
http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-126164916.html


But then you would never put a word like "sympathetic" in the same sentence as "Tory".

I deemed it a good post, and true, on the basis that tlttf stated Labour would not reverse any of the policies/measures introduced by the 'coalition'.

sickchip. LOL. So tlttf is in the know about what Labour will do when it returns to power in 2015, is he? He can’t even get right the fact that Labour voted against the bedroom tax and still opposes it. So from where does he get his knowledge of what the next government will do? Does he get emails from Ed Balls, Mary Creagh and Hilary Benn, as I do? Is he followed on Twitter by members of the shadow cabinet such as Rachel Reeves and Emily Thornberry, as I am? And yet I don’t know what Labour will do because, wisely, the party is keeping quiet about it. The Tories didn’t tell us their plans until after they wormed their way back into office in 2010.

Despite what your new friend tells you, we do know that Labour will repeal at least one of the measures of this government - the Health and Social Care Act of 2012:-
http://liberalconspiracy.org/2013/01/25/the-hugely-significant-speech-by-burnham-yesterday-that-the-media-ignored/

I’m amazed that you can be taken in by someone who tries to tell us that the parties are virtually the same (“all socialists” – if only!) and urges us to vote for so-called independent candidates, just like he doesn’t. He voted for the arrogant, lying, duplicitous, adulterous scumbag called Boris Johnson, and if that doesn’t tell you something, nothing will.

tlttf wrote:-
why they abstained when given the option for voting regarding "The bedroom tax".

Let me just say it one more time for the hard of hearing, Labour voted against the bedroom tax and still opposes it.

To support your lie, you produce an article from a Scottish newspaper, which is speculative from its first two words: “It seems” is hardly convincing, is it? The basis of the argument appears to be that “no-one in the UK Labour leadership said they would abolish the bedroom tax”. Nobody in the Labour leadership has said that they wouldn’t. Finally, the paper finds one Labour MP out of 258 who thinks the bedroom tax should apply if people have been offered a smaller place to live and turned it down. And you think that entitles you to make up stories about how Labour voted in Parliament!

If you throw hundreds of thousands of people out of work because of an ideological hatred of all things public, the bill for benefits will go up, so you have to borrow more to pay it. If you don’t throw people out of work, you can borrow money to invest in projects such as house building, which will provide jobs, reduce the number of people claiming benefit, increase the tax take and, if you build enough houses, reduce rents and therefore reduce housing benefit. Everyone’s a winner. As John Maynard Keynes said: "Look after unemployment and the budget will look after itself".

boatlady wrote:Deadly, completely behind your comments about the Blair government - whatever they got wrong, they were definitely, in my view, doing something very positive in terms of beginning to tackle the causes of social exclusion and inequality.

I agree boatlady, I know that Blair was for some a very difficult pill to swallow with the complete change in direction that he took labour but I have to say that he did a tremendous amount of good, and if it weren't for him I more than likely would never have got a look in at uni. (Thanks for the reply)

tlttf wrote:Lets see Ivan we are talking about the so called "Bedroom Tax" aren't we? Labour abstained from voting against it, end of story really. You may huff and puff all you like and as usual chuck in a bit of abuse, doesn't change the facts that you beloved bunch did noting about it.

Ivan, I apologize to you for replying to this post when it is addressed directly to you, but this is the type of nonsense that gets right up my nose. tlttf, Labour abstained from "Workfare" bill not the "bedroom tax" as you put it because what it came down to was a numbers game pure and simple for both. In regard to the "Workfare bill" they could have went for the guns blazing approach and to quote John Mcclane " Yippee ki-yay, mofo" but what good what that have done for those about to get forced to take yet another one for the team from the coalition? Instead they opted for protecting some of those who will get caught up in this but putting forward their amendments and recommendations and in order for those to be taken on board this was the terms that they needed to agree too!

In your post you reference the huff and puff from the 3 little pigs, as you MAY be aware in that story at the end the house made of bricks was secure as it could be so not amount of energy exerted would never cause any damage ~ Same rule applies no matter how much Labour tried to scream and shout it would certainly have fallen on deaf ears, so they opted for abstaining and got the amendments put through!

With regard to the "bedroom tax" the same approach applies you can scream and shout all you want but when the coalition have the numbers on their side it begins to feel like fighting against the tide! Instead of re-writing history to fit your own ends perhaps a small modicum of truth may help it seem slightly more plausible.

tlttf wrote:It looks straight forward to me Ivan. "Borrowing, renamed invest to grow" your having a laugh.

So I take it that you would rather do what this Incompetent gov't is doing BORROWING more & more just to pay Unemployment benefit and other Welfare benefits connected to Unemployment, plus the DEFICIT just goes up up and up and it is letting the bosses pay less and less in salaries that is why working people have to claim working tax credits which is a burden on the welfare state, whereas the gov't should be getting employers to pay a LIVING wage which would cut the welfare bill and get tax and NI going into the treasury to help pay off the deficit.

The bedroom tax penalises 660,000 households, and a total of nearly 2 million men, women and children are affected. According to the government’s own figures, 63% of those penalised are disabled. Nearly one quarter of those penalised are lone parents.

http://liberalconspiracy.org/2013/03/28/protests-against-bedroom-tax-to-take-place-saturday/

Bedroom tax (spare room surcharge for the tories on here) protest song....


YouTube

Brilliant Astradt1, absolutely BRILLIANT. :affraid:

Being a Scot and hearing that rousing protest song by another Scot to the tune of "Ye Canny throw yer granny aff a bus" has to be the song that will be permanently attached to the resistance against this wicked bedroom tax forever.

I really hope that Cameron and Osborne get to hear that song as if they do it should send them away shaking in their boots.

There is now NO DOUBT that this "Bedroom-tax" is going to become Cameron's "Poll-tax".

Regards.....

Papaumau.

Papaumau wrote:-
There is now NO DOUBT that this "Bedroom-tax" is going to become Cameron's "Poll-tax".

There is a lot of doubt about that. The bedroom tax affects 2 million people out of a population of about 63 million. The poll tax affected everyone.

That doesn’t detract from the wickedness and crass stupidity of the policy, as this example shows:-

Bedroom tax madness as mum faces eviction from home housing chiefs spent £60k making fit for her disabled son:-

“Louise Rennie and her son Luis, 7, who has cerebral palsy and is registered blind, are facing eviction from the specially adapted home in Stranraer if Louise fails to pay the charge imposed by the Department for Work and Pensions. Dumfries and Galloway Housing Partnership spent about £60,000 adapting the home for them three years ago – but now demand that Louise stumps up £80 a month for the two extra rooms created by the extension.

One of the ‘spare’ rooms is used to store equipment for Luis, who can’t walk unaided and has various wheelchairs and walking frames to help him get around. The other is a sitting room where Louise can grab a few moments on her own when respite carers come in to look after Luis.”

More details:-
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/bedroom-tax-madness-mum-faces-1923444

Isn't it strange how the thought of taking a couple of Hundred quid off pensioners in receipt incomes of over £100,000 gets some all hot and bothered, where as taking £700+ quid a year off someone on benefits is described as fair............

Computers lie at the heart of such official tomfoolery. A local Authority instructed to reduce expenditure by x% will feed that into their machinery, whose algorithm will spit out a list of suitable targets. With no human oversight of that process, anomalies will occur.

Be grateful they don't have Capital Punishment as a sanction.

Will the Labour party do anything differently?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jun/09/bedroom-tax-huge-problems-worse


Councils and housing associations forecast huge increases in rent arrears, and the financial problems that would create, which is exactly what has come to pass. In Leeds, the city council has announced that it will reclassify rooms in 837 houses and attempt to avoid the worst – but 7,000 households have been hit, and 2,800 of them are now behind on their payments, so the council is already facing total arrears of £138,000. By the end of the financial year, those losses look set to easily top £1m, which will have profound consequences for the money that can be spent on maintenance and repairs – and, over time, the building of any new homes.

....So, the government's benefits policy is in a mess. Its housing policy is a fiasco, and it is making huge problems even worse. And one big question sits under this. In the event that 2015 sees a change of government, will this be at least one of the cuts that Labour might repeal?

On Friday, I spoke to someone high up in the party who I was told would know the answer. "The government should drop the bedroom tax now," he told me. "But as with everything else, we're not making spending commitments before 2015." On one level, that's a matter of inevitable realpolitik. But in Hartlepool, Redcar, Leeds, Manchester and beyond, it will doubtless look like yet another example of the coldness of modern politics – all despair, and no hope.

Revealed: ‘Big lie’ behind the bedroom tax as families trapped with nowhere to move so cannot avoid new penalty for having spare room
 
Extracts from an article by Emily Dugan:-
 
The government’s justification for its controversial ‘bedroom tax’ has been debunked by new figures showing that up to 96% of those affected have, in effect, nowhere to move. The figures expose the false argument behind ministerial attempts to spin the move as ending the ‘spare-room subsidy’, and confirm campaigners’ claims that it merely penalises poor people.

The policy means that tenants have their housing benefit reduced by 14% if they have one spare bedroom, and 25% if they have two or more spare bedrooms. Yet more than 19 out of 20 families hit by the bedroom tax are trapped in their larger homes because there is nowhere smaller within the local social housing stock to take them. This is shown by figures provided by councils in response to Freedom of Information requests by the Labour Party.

Labour’s Liam Byrne said: “This hated tax is trapping thousands of families, forcing vulnerable people to food banks and loan sharks, and there is now a serious danger it could end up costing Britain more than it saves as tenants are forced to go homeless or move into the expensive private rented sector. Cameron’s bedroom tax is the worst possible combination of cruelty and incompetence. He should drop it now.”

Steve Turner of Unite commented: “These figures show beyond any doubt that Iain Duncan Smith has been misleading the public. He tried to spin the bedroom tax as a way of managing housing stock, but in fact it is a cruel and callous attack on some of the most vulnerable people in our communities.”
 
For the whole article:-
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/revealed-big-lie-behind-the-bedroom-tax-as-families-trapped-with-nowhere-to-move-so-cannot-avoid-new-penalty-for-having-spare-room-8745597.html

I suspect one of the planned effects of the bedroom tax was to get people out of social housing and into the privately rented sector.
Social housing can then be distributed to those who may be more likely to exercise the 'right to buy' - then soon there'll be no social housing any more.

All part of the plan to shrink the state.

Supplementary to the preceding message, Royal Bank of Scotland offered to reduce its debt to The Treasury by a transfer of housing stock acquired as a result of business failures. Whitehall declined the offer on the grounds that the privately-built properties "did not meet with the standards required of social housing."

Naturally.

Of course much of the better level of privately housing is not available to those on benefits as the landlords do not don't want them......

The front page of today's Independent explains how a large percentage of tenants subjected to the penalty bedroom-tax cannot be offered alternative accommodation by their Local Authority.

When's the next flying U-turn going to appear on the horizon?

I'm probably being a little naive on here, wasn't the bedroom subsidy removed to attempt to make people swap with each other, ie; people who had too many bedrooms would swap with those living in overcrowded conditions, according to the gossiping class (on here) there would seem to be nobody living with an overcrowded home. In which case something must be right with the country?