Nicola Smith
Today’s Budget contains some severe cuts in Housing Benefit. The Budget reveals that from October 2011 Local Housing Allowance (LHA) will be set at 30 per cent of local rents. It is currently set at the median of local rents. This means that in any given area the amount available to pay for housing for eligible claimants will fall significantly.
Shelter in Scotland have said:
This is at a time when nearly half of LHA claimants are already making up a shortfall of almost £100 a month to meet their rent. By ripping out this support from under their feet it will push many households over the edge, triggering a spiral of debt, eviction and homelessness.
Further changes are also proposed. There will be cuts in the rates that will be paid for larger properties, which accommodate families. From next April LHA will be capped at £250 for a one bedroom property, £290 for a two bedroom property, £340 for a three bedroom property and £400 a week for a four bedroom property.
Jobseeker’s Allowance claimants who are in reciept of Housing Benefit will also be penalised – from April 2013 after they have been claiming JSA for a year they will have their Housing Benefit entitlement cut by 10 per cent – presumably meaning that they have to move house, become homeless or pay the extra with their £65 a week JSA.
Details on the impacts of these changes will become apparent over the next few days. But it seems highly likely that they will lead to LHA recipients being marginalised into the worst accommodation in the poorest areas, or to it being impossible for families to be accomodated at all – which will mean that the costs of temporary and bed and breakfast accommodation, as well as social service budgets, will rocket.
Comment made by Melanie on Jul 1st 2010 at 11:09 pm:
isn’t it funny that a parent of a 4 year old thinks CHB should be cut at 10, you obviously have not experienced the rate teenagers grow, my 13 yearold is 6ft tall and as big as any man. He costs more to feed, dress than any infant who can be provided for for next to nothing!!! Compulsary secondary school kit costing upto £500 and a possible £35 educational grant etc…as for housing a family with 10 children who live in a 6 bed house are sleeping at a ratio of 2:1 in each room, now it seems you and your child sleep at a ratio of 1:1, yes you could share a 1 bed flat but you don’t. The reason some families need bigger than 3 bed properties is that 3rd bedrooms are too small to accomodate more than 1 person. People are all to quick to point the finger at larger families, why 5 dolies is the same as one family of 5, 5 families claiming childcare element of tax credit costs the governmnet even more. what the government should do is stop selling off the council houses, if you can afford to buy a house then go private, leave the council house stock for the less wealthy so as they can afford to pay their rents, rents set by the government, money saved from ridiculous housing benefit payments can go back into new council housing. Then if people do so wish to live in a nice detached property, in a posh area they should be prepared to pay the price of higher rents. It is all too easy to point the finger at certain groups in society, but there are individual circumstances for every one. It is society as a whole that needs looking at. I think on close inspection, all governments could save alot of money , thats waisted such as paying more for a confrence dinner than many people live on per year.
Comment made by Alex on Jul 2nd 2010 at 6:30 am:
Inside Information,
I’m afraid to say that you’re talking a load of clap-trap.
First of all, benefit rates for those on DLA, ISA, ESA and JSA (contribution based and non contribution based) vary considerably. Some of that is based on age.
Take me. I am on IBJSA and receive £65.45 pw which is £261.80 pcm. I receive mortgage interest payments which are cheaper than the grottiest one bedroom flats in the whole of the city where I live and CTB. Have you been able to find an NHS dentist recently who is taking on new patients? The only thing that I have had recently were vitamin supplements prescribed by my doctors, because my health was suffering. I don’t smoke or drink, unless a friend brings around a bottle of wine or we go to the local quiz and they’ll all whip around for me. Embarrassing yes, but what goes around comes around.
My bills come first. Gas, electricity, water, telephones, internet. Why? The phones are vital for my job search, as is the internet. All of my job applications are made online and the amount that I would spend in paper and stamps would far outweigh the cost of the internet. Buildings and contents insurance. Television licence is a last priority. Way too busy for TV. I sold my car as it was a non essential. It’s a pain, but I live with it. Travel to the JCP fortnightly which is £5.00 return because some friend of humanity stole my well secured bicycle outside there and I can’t afford a new one. So out of that princely sum, I’m left with between £5-10 per week for food, toiletries, house cleaning stuff.
Luckily, I grow my own vegetables, so that saves a few pennies. I’m involved in a community project to encourage unemployed people to start growing their own – not only does it give a bit of socialisation, but it keeps them busy as well as reaping the rewards. A lot of unemployed people lose faith and at the moment, the mood I detect is rock bottom.
I go to the local pub on Tuesdays for quiz nights. I know the owners as I was a private consultant for their business and turned it around for them. I always know that I’ll get a free meal on those nights because they respect me for what I did for their business. Same with a couple of other businesses too, a couple of whom sent me hampers at christmas.
If I didn’t have those lifelines, I’d be up the proverbial without a paddle. So where you can say that there’d be a surplus in benefit, you’re living in cloud cuckoo land. Clothing grants for interview are discretionary, not mandatory. Loans for white goods, etc are interest free, but loans nontheless, although if someone later gets a job, the infastructure in being able to claw back those loans are nigh on useless as the resources available to pursue them are just not there.
And no, I have no loans, overdraft or credit cards. I live within my means and it’s bloody tough, but I’m trying to educate people how to budget.
I spent a lot of time canvassing for the last election and actually spent time talking to people who were on benefits. I listened as opposed to talk at them – all sorts of people. At first it was difficult, because you get someone with a posh voice on their doorstep and they wonder what they have in common with you. Appearances can be deceptive and when I said that I was in the same boat as them, they warmed to me. As a result, I’ve got over 50 people now involved in community grow, the kids get to meet each other and help out and it brings smiles to people’s faces.
From what you’ve said, it seems to me that people like you and not I should have their benefits examined. Get a 1 bed flat then. I challenge you. After all, we’re all in the same boat. Stop being a hypocrite and tarring everyone with the same brush!
Comment made by Andrew on Jul 2nd 2010 at 9:38 am:
Melanie, the reason why some people point their finger at larger families on benefits is that they don’t understand why some people who are supported by the state – and NOT the ones who are single because of abuse, bereavement or hard luck – but the one’s who keep on having children they don’t support are considered irresponsible… People who keep having children and then expect the council to keep finding ad funding larger and larger properties every time they have another child… IF THEY WANT TO KEEP PRODUCING CHILDREN, GO OUT AND GET A JOB AND PAY FOR THEM! And that doesn’t apply to people who have just fallen on hard times and are trying hard to survive… Responsible families end up being penalised because of irresponsible parents who have no intention of supporting the large families they produce!
Comment made by Alex on Jul 2nd 2010 at 11:33 am:
Agree with you, Andrew. I wouldn’t dream about having children at the moment. And besides, you can get free contraception, which is less expensive than the finished article.
Comment made by Melanie on Jul 2nd 2010 at 12:50 pm:
Yes i agree that some people are irrisponsible, but my point is that there is a problem throughout. Alot of abuse is targeted at families especialy single parent families (who can’t be doing too much of the reproducing) but not at families where mom and dad is there at the school twice a day, or the fit 18-25 year olds that are claiming and out of work, (the ones that don’t try to get trained or employed). There are alot of people who don’t pass on the money to the children and i do think that monies paid to provide for children should be put onto an photo id’d debit card that is only accepted in certain shops. for example the milk & veg tokens can’t be spent in asda to buy bleach and hairspray – you have to buy the product. If the government could come up with a scheme that couldn’t be abused that is. Although i am not saying all monies just a portion of the tax credits as it is also necessary to have cash to live to. This would deter the people who may be having exrta kids for extra cash. I would say that most parents who are claiming some sort of benefit, what ever it maybe don’t actualy go and have a baby for a possible extra 40-50 per week, there is alot of work that goes into parenthood and it is an 18 year commitment minimum. Now is not a good time to have a baby and I hope all the children who are born into this era are able to be looked after well with a good standard of living conditions. I do stand by what I say about rent, my 4 bed house costs 94 per week so it is not the house rents that is the problem, it is the area that is being lived in and i don’t have any idea how we are going to get to a system where there is affordable rents in all areas without extra social housing being built. I fear that alot of people are going to suffer because of LHA/HB cuts and loose there homes, then become undesirable tennants for other landlords and end up stuck in a catch 22 situation, ‘cant afford to pay rent, can’t get a job or benefits – no address’ etc… Not everyone wants to uproot to another part of the country, (luckily – or not, I live in a deprived area so the housing costs are not too bad). My niece pays £600 a month for a studio bedsit, just 10 miles away she is not eligable for benefits and it is crippling her financialy, but it is her choice as there are 1 bed flats within 10 miles for around £350. At the end of the day we all make choices that we live with, sometimes life is hard but lashing out at other vunerable groups will not make ones own situation any better. I have often thought that it might be a good idea for people to have the option of oping out the taxes that go towards paying benefits as long as they are never eligable to claim ctc, is, jsa, dla, ca, ib, cctc, wftc and cb, (pre welfare state) this would reduce the money comming in for benefits but also reduce the amount going out as well as ctc and wftc and cctc costs would be slashed dramaticaly and people who moan would stop moaning. Although this would not work as there would come a time when people who opted out would become destitue. I like to try and think of possible solutions to make improvements and be constructive, sounding out abuse does nothing but cause offence and unrest in people and it does not help anyone. For anyone who has not read my other posts, I am not at work myself currently as I am a carer, this is why I can be online in the middle of the day. I am also training, over the next 5-6 years to become a social worker, not because I think i will be getting extra money (or even a job because of both my son’s needs and the current job cuts in social services), but because it is what I am passionate to do. I care about society and I was blessed with the ability to achieve academicaly (I already have an Engineering Degree). Some people are not this lucky and their way of life has been inbred into them, they don’t see past their estate, without aspirations the majority repeat their parents mistakes so focusing on the facilities and opportunities availiable to less well off children is money well spent in my book, as they are the future of this country and will be running it when we are all heading into our old age. Any way I have digressed a little away from the original topic of HB cuts. Does anyone have any good ideas that would be a better solution than the government has come up with?
Comment made by Andrew on Jul 2nd 2010 at 1:02 pm:
You are quite right, Melanie! The kind of system you propose would target the money on the children and also, as you say, a lack of affordable social housing has caused a lot of this problem and now that the new coalition government have cut the social house building budget it will only mean more pressure on housing = yet higher rents! I think there’s no easy answer; I do get annoyed when I see people abusing the system and unfortunately it’s the few who give everyone else a bad name and allow the government to tar everyone with the same brush!
But what to do – in trying to target a minority of serial abuses the overwhelming majority of genuine and needy claimants suffer…
Comment made by Melanie on Jul 2nd 2010 at 1:06 pm:
I agree, perhaps each case should be investigated but i bet this would cost millions to set up as well.
Comment made by Andrew on Jul 2nd 2010 at 2:21 pm:
Whatever happens to LHA – we can all rest assured that whatever money the Governments saves in Benefit cuts will simply be wasted elsewhere, ie, they’ll probably find another unneccesary war to fight! They’ve already blown £21 Billion in Afghanistan so it won’t be too difficult for them to find another black hole to waste the LHA savings in… Perhaps the money they save could be ploughed into a national social house building scheme to provide employment and apprenticships for younger workers… Or maybe that’s a too dum – much is to pay people to be unemployed and then chastise them for being out of work!
Trackback made by Housing Benefit cuts will make people homeless and drive them away from jobs | ToUChstone blog: A public policy blog from the TUC on Jul 2nd 2010 at 4:36 pm:
[...] Nicola has reported, the Budget introduced a number of severe cuts in HB and each of these will increase [...]
Comment made by paul on Jul 3rd 2010 at 12:33 am:
Lest we forget, who drove British industry abroad – the Government, who’s fault is it there is so little employment – the government- who is now penalising and driving ‘the poor’ into severe poverty – the government. Who sends billions of pounds abroad and spends billions keeping illegal immigrants – the government…..what next concentration camps for benefit claimers?? Provide the jobs and people will work, make mp’s buy their own homes or pay rent and not claim it back.
Be like ww1 all over again, I know lets start ration books too and make benefit claimants wear striped uniforms with a big D on the back so the richer folk know they are a dolite…Thanks David ‘fourth Reich’ Cameron you blind fool – you try to live on £65 per week you swine, probably spend that on lunch for one day…come the revolution…!!!
Comment made by survivor on Jul 5th 2010 at 12:41 am:
If your husband almost smashes your skull has affairs while you are pregnant and rapes u do u have to stay with them or leave them and you and your children starve because u are too depressed to get a job
Comment made by Michelle on Jul 5th 2010 at 3:43 pm:
Unfortunately i found myself a single mum when my ex partner kicked me out of his house with my baby. I had no rights to the house and in my area the council waiting list is a joke so i had no choice but to private rent and claim housing benefit. I work and receive decent maintenance from my ex but i am so worried about the proposed cuts. I live in kent in a fairly cheap area in a 2 bed terraced house, so hardly extravegent. If i cant pay my rent where are the council going to house me and my daughter? What needs to be addressed is the government allowed so much of their housing stock to be sold and now there is not enough council property. Obviously as i am in a private rent house now i’d be bottom of list if i go on council list.
Comment made by Alexander gardner on Jul 6th 2010 at 2:34 am:
There is no difference from someone on benefits sitting on their backside all day and a so called footballer or executive earning £100.000 plus a week, no one says anything about that.
I work hard for the measly amount of money i get a month, then i see these so called stars and big bosses earning all this easy money, i wonder if the conservatives will bother cutting their expenses, not a chance, cos the upper class fools are the ones who voted them back in, how can so many people be so stupid !.if you want a reason for this mess just look at the banks and these idiots over spending on their credit cards, and just a few too many outsiders in the country sending their money back home, not to mention the fact that these so called people are allowed to claim benefits when they go back abroad.
Why not stop that instead of kicking the poor when they are down, i don’t condone scroungers on benefits, but it is the overpaid so called stars that do the damage.
Think about that !.
I have a school friend who earns just shy of £200 per week, and when he has paid things off for the month has roughly £34 left of his sallary, so he is working just to exist, and then you see all these fat cats and over paid never beens, funny how these sort of people never get penalised !, yes we have become lethargic and stupid.
We could also start by sending 100.000 people back home to their own country.
And here is the choker for everyone !, my school friend has a polish boss, and this chap has only been with the company for 8 months, and my friend has been there 22 years, talk about the soul being ripped out of this country and its workers, we do need to toughen up, but in the right area’s, there are too many do gooders saying we need them, it is a load of cobblers, my gran and grandad said that we would be over run one day, and they were bloody right !.
Most of us are too scared to say what we really think, well i am not, these immigrants have to go, There is a part of our solution !,it is our money they keep sending abroad, have a look in to that one people, they are shafting us slowly but surely, and no government has got the bottle to do anything about it.
And as for the fools who voted this pathetic government in, think about this, in your own words, can you think of one thing they have done to cut the richest in this countries expenses ?.
There is a simple plan for the overpaid, never got their hands dirty in their lives blobs, tax them 80p in the pound if they bring in more than £100.000 per annum, see how they like that, our debt will go down quicker than a porn star on a date !.
We can but dream, these a******s get away with it when the conservatives are in, and tell me something can anyone justify £150.000 per week for kicking a bag of wind around on a football pitch ?.
Is that fair on all the people who do real work in the real world ?, no it isn’t !.
As long as i live to 60 i don’t care, that will be enough for me, cos after that age the way things are going you will be better off in a 6 sided box, at least there they cant harm you any more.
When will we ever learn the conservatives like blaming people on benefits cos they are a easy target, what about all the money wasted on the development of nuclear warheads, something which i hope we never need, and probably will not !.
That takes the biggest amount of tax out of the average wage packet, what a complete waste, and they say us humans are at the top of the food chain for being the most intelligent, i would put most forms of life above us, myself included !.
Do animals pour millions of barrels of crude oil in to the gulf of mexico each day ?, no, just dumb greedy idiots.
It all comes down to the greed of the few who get endless streams of money for doing nothing, and anyone who thinks that they deserve it, is either one themselves, or has the intelligence of a single celled creature, just !.
No english citizen should have to work just to keep their heads above water, whilst there are people spending £1000 a night in restaurants and clothes that would feed a family for a month, it is not on, i have never claimed benefits, but like i said, i can understand why people do, who wants to work just to exist, and not even be able to afford a holiday in this country, i know several people in this boat, and it makes me sick 60 hours a week and all you got to show for it is debt.
My wage is decent, we would all want more, but there should be a minimum of £350 after stoppages per a week for 40 hours in this country, and that is only fair, and a lot of people get paid a lot less than that for 40 hours, it is a disgrace !.
tax the rich like i said, 80 p in the pound, that will wipe the smile of their faces.
Wouldn’t everyone agree ?.
Thank you !.
Comment made by Tokyo Gaijin on Jul 6th 2010 at 12:24 pm:
@ Alexander Gardner
Of course there is a difference between someone on benefits sitting around on their backside and footballers, executives etc. The pay of footballers and every person that works in the private sector are set by the people who own and / or manage those businesses. If people don’t like it they can stop paying to watch whichever football team they happen to follow or stop buying products from whichever company they think is overpaying their managers etc. Of course the government can’t and won’t do anything about footballers pay, an nor should it. On the other hand taxpayers don’t have a choice on paying their taxes to allow people to live off benefits so the government has the prime responsibility to address that.
As for your friend it seems that whatever skills he has are worth what he’s being paid, maybe he should get some newer more valuable skills.
I’m guessing you think it’s wrong that your friends boss has only been with the company 8 months ? or is the problem his nationality ? Anyway length of service has nothing to do with whether you should be promoted, the only consideration should be ability.
If the UK starts to become protectionist and start sending people back to their home countries what do you think other countries will do to the British people who live and work there ? What about the positive effects the “polish plumbers” have had for people who use those services ?
High rates of tax have been tried before, they didn’t work then, they have even less chance of working now when people and businesses are far more mobile. The important measue of tax is how many pouns you get in not what the % rate is. Lower taxes = more money collected, higher taxes = less.
Minimum wages will just cost more jobs. just look at companies like Dyson who had to move manufacturing overseas to stay competitive, also notice they do thheir design in the UK. Also remember the French idea of having a maximum hours of working each week so that unemployment would be reduce, what they forgot was that this made the products manufactured too expensive, so they didn’t sell, so companies and their workers suffered. In the end they dropped that law.
People who spend money in restaurants, shops etc are creating jobs and paying vat, what’s wrong with that ?
Maybe it isn’t fair that some people are paid so much but life isn’t always fair, never has been, never will be.
Communism and socialism have both been tried and both failed. capitalism isn’t perfect but it’s better than the other choices.
Comment made by Consicence on Jul 7th 2010 at 2:57 pm:
I am afraid families often need to claim housing benefit despite working full time as the average London wage does not cover the cost of renting in the private sector especially in London.
Private rents are priced high due to high demand not because they are particularly lavish.
Housing shortage in is due to the 1980′s Conservative policy of right to buy policies on council housing and other social housing.
Council housing which was put in place post world war 2 to deal with homelessness and over crowding following the blitz.
So now society is suffering because social housing building programmes have been inadequate in recent years under Labour and there still remains a massive property shortage in the south east where there is most employment.
When something is in demand it costs more so unless we as a state, provide decent, affordable housing then we will have a high benefits bill as people who cannot afford to get on the housing ladder turn to the private sector.
The cost will be higher if families are evicted and housed in over priced hostels or B& B.
There is no solution to the problem by cutting benefits or punishing low earners, the entire regulation of private rents and affordable housing requires urgent consideration to prevent misery and trauma to families.
Comment made by Nicola Smith on Jul 7th 2010 at 3:05 pm:
People commenting here may be interested in this analysis that has been published by the rents service (now the VOA). It shows how LHA is likely to change as a result of the Budget:
http://www.voa.gov.uk/LHADirect/LHA-emergency-budget-news-2010.htm
Comment made by Felicity on Jul 8th 2010 at 11:47 pm:
Thank you all for your comments. I no longer feel like I am alone in a sinking boat. But I am still at a loss at what to do and how to get out of this situation I find myself in.
Comment made by Tony Brasic Skint on Jul 11th 2010 at 12:15 am:
Cant believe some of the comments im reading on here, What is it with you stupid middle & upper class fools?…You all seem to forget a very important detail…WE DIDNT CAUSE THIS! therefore why the hell should we be the ones who are penalised and subjected to all the cuts? Bankers are still getting their bonuses even though they are the ones that caused this collapse, with the help of Brown failing to regulate the banks…yet it is us the people who have to pay for their greed and stupidity. Heres an idea…why dont we pull all our troops out of both of these illegal wars ..that way we save the lives of our soliders and save around 10-15 billion.
People..if we dont put a stop to this consolidation of the wealth now…we will never have the chance again…stop being a fool and learn to think for yourselves…and ask yourself….IS IT FAIR?
and to those idiots who agree with the government…see you on the battlefield when we decide to riot..im taking your house and your car..see how you like it.
Comment made by Andrew on Jul 11th 2010 at 12:28 am:
To Tony Brasic Skint… You seem to be forgetting that the middle and upper classes along with ordinary working people are paying the taxes which pay the benefits and bailed out the banks! When the banks were making huge profits and being taxed by Gordon Brown to spend on benefits etc I suppose you weren’t complaining then? The banks aren’t making money now so the Government hasn’t got it to keep paying out benefits – it’s just the reality of life: the truth is there’s no such thing as a free lunch and if one person is living on benefits (for whatever reason) then someone else is paying for it. I don’t agree with many of the budget cuts but I know many people who could work but choose not too: this pushes up the total benefits bill and as we now all know, the genuine claimants are going to suffer in order to both deal with the deficit and target those who simply won’t pull their weight and work. I think it would be better for the Government to target the workshy and not tar everyone with the same brush. But we all need to understand money doesn’t grow on trees and my housing benefit is tax that someone else has paid…
Comment made by clare fernyhough on Jul 11th 2010 at 11:47 pm:
It’s easy to kick the dog when you’re having a bad day….
To turn the tables, imagine a housing bill that would enforce under occupancy and pricing for both public and private ownership individuals! I believe this was the case after the Russian revolution; suddenly people who had lived very comfortably found that according to government regulation, even one of their bedrooms was deemed too big for them to occupy: how that outraged the civilized world!
No, as a previous commentator explained, communism doesn’t work, and especially when you realise that in Russia ‘some were more equal than others’ in relation to certain officials’ lifestyles. Nonetheless, capitalism, as we have observed over our lifetimes, deems that some are more equal than others andthat doesnt work either, but at least a form of socialism in this country has endeavored to protect the most vulnerable in society, not altruistically however, but as referred to in many peer reviewed journals, the welfare state came about because the establishment feared the consequences, namely the social unrest observed in other European countries. The ‘benefits’ therefore were deemed as finance streams accumulated by this country from those who could afford to pay and from the national earned wealth, that then redistributed to those least able to improve their social and financial situation in life.
In 1979 a new housing act provided ‘secure tenancies’ in this country. It was recognised that every person not able to purchase their own property was entitled to the security of a permenant family home, even to the extent that a particular family home could be bequethed to another family member, that the individual had a right to improve their rented property, to take in lodgers and have the ‘right to buy’. It was a decent move by created by a civilized society, but outraged the upper, middle and working classes then as now. Nonetheless, some councils deliberately refused to inform their tennants of their rights, and refused all sorts of requests in order to maintain the properties to an appropriate standard.
I have lived in my home now for 23 years; most of my adult life. The council housing stock in the early 80′s was in poor repair; in my property, there was no central heating, no kitchen, of poor repair and decoration and the garden was little more than a building and dumping site. Over the years, my neighbours and myself have saved to repair and maintain such properties spending many thousands of pounds: I put a kitchen in, changed the electrics, I put central heating in, I cleared and maintained the garden, I paid and continue to pay for repairs that are refused as they are based on 1950′s living standards. I have always been sad that I could not go further and buy my property, but I didn’t mind spending my money on the property to make it comfortable and pleasant to live in as I had the security that as a ‘secure tennant’ I could live here for the rest of my life whether the property was under occupied or not.
Over the years I have received varying levels of housing benefit according to my income; I am very ill with a deteriorating condition and sometimes I need extended time off work due to this. I and many people I know are devastated by the implications of the budget especially in connection with the ‘under occupancy and LH rule’. The thought of being forcibly evicted from the homes we have worked hard to maintain and having to start again, possibly in a property of a delapidated state, fills us with dread. It has personally taken all of the 23 years I have lived here to afford to improve it to an acceptable standard on what little disposable income I have had from time to time. Is it our fault that not one penny of the money raised from the sale of social housing went toward new social housing? Is it our fault that we are poor? Have we been duped into improving our homes only to hand the keys over to those that are better off?
Researching the government booklets and guidelines concerning the new cuts and rules on the .gov websites makes for interesting reading. It seems that ‘secure tenancies’ will be abolished where presently, tenants have to be offered a property with equal security of tenure. Whereas local authorities and housing associations had an obligation to find equal appropriate secure housing, they are apparently being told that if a tennant is affected by an under occupancy rule, they have no obligation to help them to obtain suitable alternative accommodation, they only need to prove that this accommodation exists in the wider area and it is up to the tenant to explore this and make necessary arrangements. As the ‘thin end of the wedge’, perhaps they will expand this concept to those that occupy private homes that they pay interest on a mortgage. Also consider that once a tennant or homeowner is forced to leave, if for example they cannot make up the shortfall in rent or mortgage interest, they automatically lose security of tenure, and they then fall under the LH allowance rules which, as have been discussed above, are not adequate. A complete and utterly brilliant trap!!
I live in a ‘two bedroom and a box room house’. I was conned into low paid work with ‘top ups’ when my husband left me, but knew that when the kids grew up, I would lose all these top ups so I decided to educate myself in hopes of a professional career. I was also at the beginnings of an undiagnosed neurological condition and so could not continue in menial or even call center or office based work, but I managed financially through my degree by taking in ironing and doing it in bits according to how much pain or exhaustion I was suffering. It is obvious now that I was also conned into getting a degree; even though I have a good degree, there just isn’t the work out there since the recession (I worked freelance and taught a few students from home until the work dried up), and despite all of the disability legislation, companies cannot accommodate severely disabled workers. The only hope I have is that if the economy improves, I may be able to teach again at home: the thing is, my teaching studio, filled to the brim with musical equipment, is in the second bedroom and if I am forced to move, I will have no place to work; there must be so many people like myself, who call this place ‘home’ and feel quite desperate at the thought of starting all over in middle age having to afford carpets, curtains, paint etc on a small income again. I started out living in a dump, and it looks like that I will end up in a dump, with no remuneration or consideration for the improvements and care I have taken of my home, or any consideration for the fact that it IS my home by current hard fought for law 40 years since.
I recently emailed Polly Toynbee about the situation, and in her column in the Guardian this weekend she made the point that the budget will not affect her financial situation: ‘not one penny’ she stated. A study recently reported that tax evasion costs the government 100 billion pounds every year, more than enough to plug the public financial black hole: seems like there are many others getting ‘something for nothing’ in this society or who will be minimally affected by these sweeping budget cuts. Whilst I agree with all the above concerning trimming the welfare state and have seen first hand how people have ‘played the system,’ a blanket law that oppresses every housing benefit claimant when other measures could be introduced to fill this ‘black hole’, is commented on by other countries’ media as ‘unecessarily sadistic’. As Glenda Jackson stated in a commons debate a few days ago about the idea that ‘we’re all in this together’: …But we are NOT: there is no one sitting in this chamber… who is in danger of losing their home because of the changes with regard to housing benefit’.
No, not one of them or they wouldn’t even consider passing such a regressive law. Factor in how many people even working professionally, cannot afford a home to call their own any more. Even newly trained doctors could not afford to live in my area based on multiples of their income. Village terraces 10 years ago in my area sold for a fraction of the price they are now valued at, and these homes were traditionally owned by ordinary factory workers or those working in our now lost industries. These homegrown industries didn’t outsource their industries in order to be competetive as some suggest, they outsourced in order to make more profit, and as a country, us being part of the ‘European Experiment’ inaugarated in the early 1940′s and progressively diminishing our ability of a nation to ‘pay our way’ in the world, is what has brought this about; some well known commentators say that this was always the plan, to bring the UK to its knees. Yes, now even the middle classes and middle income workers are being affected and will also be hammered by this budget. Did you know that professions are now ‘time and motioned’ just like the working classes are? Even a local vicar is required to fill in a form detailing what he is doing every 15 minutes; similarly a NHS counsellor I know, police et al. It seems that Marx’s predictiction that eventually there will be no class system, just the super rich and the underclasses will eventually come to pass. Is this housing bill designed for the middle classes who cannot afford a home in for them to claim our now vastly improved social housing? Without going all ‘conspiracy theorist’, it seems that the only people who will afford to rent decent (not luxurious) homes will be those with the appropriate income, undoing decades of advances for the rights of the undercalsses to live in a decent housing. The London issue, and some other expensive areas is perhaps a seperate but equally desperate issue, but as commented above, ghettoising is not a solution, and any move to evict people on a massive scale will without any doubt lead to civil unrest as indicated by many orgnaisations who support and regularly publish research regarding the poor and the social organisation of Britain.
Perhaps anyone reading this will think I am being over dramatic, but I’ve lived through a previous conservative government and if you have too and have at anytime experienced life on benefits under their rule, then you know what is to come: yes, they got the deficit under control previously but the social cost is still being felt today and this time round, it will not just be the abject poor who will be affected. As suggested by other commentators, the measures are designed to ‘divide and rule’, to cause mayhem and suffering in order to placate the middle classes. That a family living on £50,000 per year was able to claim tax credits is a true disgrace; child benefit equally. When I was young, my wealthy friends had their child benefit books signed over to them to spend on whatever they wanted. The welfare handed out to the well off over the last 30 years is unacceptable, NOT the support of the some of the poorest and ignorant in society who never had a chance from birth onwards, so that at the very least, they could have a home provided by means of the state: a ‘necessary evil’.
If we all are really ‘in this together’ then at the very least, ALL should be entitled to a place to call ‘home’ regardless of social standing. We have to ask, with all the wealth that has passed through our system over the last 40 years just why there is not enough housing for all. Additionally, sometimes in society we have to tolerate those who ‘play the system’; we seem to do this in all aspects of society, but not in relation to the poor and ignorant. By all means, give people dignity; for all those claiming JS for example, the current £65 is equal to about 6 hours of labouring work for a man or woman, so provide them with 6 hours community work: I know many would jump at the chance. I am disabled and now need to work from home, so enable disabled people or single parents to work flexibly from home perhaps doing telephone and administrative work and encouraging industries to explore this actually low cost option so that they can ‘earn’ their benefits and retain some kind of dignity in relation to the rest of the population. There is so much that can be done to allow people on benefits to flourish; the government has asked public sector workers for their opinion on cuts or better ways to administer the public sector, why not canvass benefit claimants, not ‘talking down’ to them via the despicable companies used to supposedly get them back into work, but enabling claimants to bring about changes themselves thereby saving money in the process!!
Yes, it’s easy to kick the dog when you’ve had a bad day. The trouble is that if you kick the dog it ends up biting back, and I know from enquiring in my neighbourhood that not one of them is prepared to give up their home. Perhaps this is what the government want so that they can renege on the forthcoming freedom bill; who knows?
For the spelling police, I apologise if my syntax or spelling did not meet your requirements! Since the advent of computers, my spelling leaves a lot to be desired: if only this was the problem in our society eh?
if you have read this far, well done!! I’ve bored myself with it and my neighbours for many years! lets just hope that if we are all ‘in this together’ we can come to some kind of consensus and not be goaded into blaming eachother, but finding innovative ways of sorting out our national finances and the social organisation of this country without resorting to bringing about abject poverty for the many millions who will most definately be affected by housing benefit reform.
Comment made by DANNY BOY on Jul 14th 2010 at 9:53 pm:
all these people complaining, the british will never learn they have no backbone, you still vote these gangsters into power, then moan at the consequences, this country is finished full stop, 95 years of the same old bullshit, red then blue red then blue, the laughing stock of the world from sport to politics, low pay highest prison population, highest crime record, highest divorce rate, highest teenage pregnancy, out of control immigration the toilet of europe i predict riots & mass redundancies across the country within 2 years thats if you finally all wake up and show these bastards some balls, the people of this once great nation want too start making history and stop living in it, by taking its country back from the parasites of westminster and bulldoze the place, this country needs a revolution and a peoples leader or we are all doomed
Comment made by Ty on Jul 16th 2010 at 2:31 am:
Yeah there are people who abuse the system. They should be penalized. But you must be a complete moron to generalize benefit claimants. Personally, I hate it. i have always worked until now, and now I can’t afford rent.. ON A MATCHBOX MIGHT I ADD.. for those of you who seem to think we all live in mansions.. I can barely even afford food after covering rent and basic utilities. It’s no picnic so stop kidding yourselves. I had the same biggoted ideas.. WHEN I HAD MONEY! And yes, civilizations have risen and collapsed since recorded history and before that.. Shit even when we worked, there was a line of tossers waiting to collect every last penny! SO personally I can’t wait for the collapse of this sesspit. The sooner the better!
Comment made by clare fernyhough on Jul 17th 2010 at 7:02 pm:
True ‘Danny Boy’, but the whole point of the development of laws to protect the vulnerable was to avoid such social unrest hopefully making this country at least bearable to live in. You are right that this country has gone down the pan socio politically, but many believe that this was the plan right from the beginning of the ‘European Experiment’ in order to bring the UK to it’s knees, proven by more recent laws like the 24 hour drinking legislation.
The problem is that as things have generally improved for the poor over time, and as the ‘consumer society’ has established, people have become more ignorant, less interested in politics and how it affects them personally, and less inclined to ‘stick their heads above the parapet’, so I suppose in some ways you are correct: these laws will serve to wake people up politically. But, add this apathetic atttitude to the draconian restrictions on the right to protest and call a public meeting (only if the police and local council say that you can depending on what the subject is, size of demonstration cards etc) and the increasingly powerless unions (if in fact you are allowed to join a union), just how are people supposed to fight this? How can we unite when there are so many restrictions that iscolate us so they can pick us off one by one and so many different people affected by the budget that everyone will be fighting their own particular corner? If for example, I went on a legal protest and there was trouble and for some reason I was lumped in with the trouble makers, I could lose my tenancy anyway. Year on year, governments have brought about measures that MAKE people comply socially in relation to protest. It is illegal to encourage the population with regard to mass civil disobedience for example, so it would be illegal for me to set up a website asking the whole population not to pay the council tax, or call a public meeting to ask people to withhold income tax (although some individuals are pushing the boundaries with regard to current income tax law).
When in history has a revolution brought about a fair society for all? A ‘people’s uprising’ is no solution; it would risk many peoples’ lives and could lead to a police state very quickly. I don’t know if you are aware, but according to the Lisbon Treaty governments can call on the other member states’ armies and police forces when there is social unrest? The numbers who were prepared to fight, wouldn’t stand a chance with such opposition. On the other hand, I doubt people will accept these reforms ‘lying down’ so to speak and I do agree with your sentiments that this whole stinking arrangement for governments has run its course.
I have always said that the biggest vote counted should be the ‘no’ vote, those who refuse to vote because, as you imply Danny, they know there is nothing worth voting for any more. It wouldn’t have mattered if Labour had won the election, as they have tried to bring in the very same housing measures many times during the last few years; in fact, you could say that all the preparation work was done for the Conservatives in this regard as the booklet printed after the budget was almost exactly the same as Labours’!
The very same organisations who managed to lobby to stop the government from bringing those laws in previously however, will do so again and hopefully the housing benefit reform bill will be severely watered down. Meantime, we individually need to lobby our M.P.s, registering our concerns in the appropriate dignified and legal mannner (you can follow the finance bill as it progressess through parliament and make your own submissions), we need to support our family and friends through this, and by doing so, the government have no excuse to retaliate in any way.
Lets hope then that we can get a peaceful resolution with regard to this eh?….
Comment made by Nikola on Jul 22nd 2010 at 6:14 pm:
People are so quick to judge, ITS NOT EASY FOR ANYONE!!!. I don’t know how the cuts are going to personally effect me but all I can do is try and adapt.
I am one of these people that you would all look down on. Born with Autism I am on benefits and expecting my first baby. Why shouldn’t I have the chance to have children and try to lead a Normal life. Needing extra help shouldn’t be a crime.
When I was a kid I was abused and that made my Autism worse I also suffer from mental health problems and my husband has Autism and Attention Deficit disorder.
I personally have been to unviercity with one to one care thoughout. Achieved qualifications and at one point had 3 voluntary jobs. I hope to in the future go back to my voluntary work when baby is born and hope that will eventually lead to employment.
Gud for you if you had a normal life and your lucky of not to be born with disabilities but unfortuantly I havn’t had that and to top it up i have no family. I was fostered and my partener family are all dead.
With disabled people its one step at a time sometimes sepcailly if you have a mental disabilitiy such as autism. I look after my husband who is worse effected and probably be never able to work. I still plan to take little steps in order to fit in as much as I can in socieity one that excluses me from the start.
So I chose to have my kids first? I only plan to have the one so i can experience motherhood and it would be loverly to think i can work and support the family after that. Its playing it by ear. Your lucky if your mind allows stress levels. Mine doesnt and its a constant battle between being able to do the best i can and doing too much that i break down then i end up costing the goverment more money cos i need care!!!. its being sensible with the abilities you have and only i know my limitations. If i were able to in the future when baby goes to school find a Job that never changes that hours are the same and are between 9.30 – 2.30 three times a week i would jump at the chance and try it out weather that cleaning or carework. There are jobs i can’t do tho because my autism causies problems such as working with money as i can’t read numbers and anything in crowds of people that involves communication with loads of mainstream people at once. All this limits my employablity and at the moment because I only just stable im best off on beneifits but not forever. I feel bad about this.
I now also got to consider the whole family and its worth thinking if my routine chances that effects my husband too and unlike a lot of you who have family its not easy when you know you go no one to fall back on and life is a risk and that fact is harder to think about when you have autism.
at the end of the day it does effect everyone. some more then others but why should we judge eachother?
Im glad people don’t have to live like I do. Im also glad i am the way I am because it could be a lot worse. you can always see people worse off then you. why should we be bitter.
I hope to teach my child early to make the best of its abilities whether thats hopefu8lly being completely independant and have a good job when its an adult or just learning to live. When i was diagnosed with autism i didn’t expect to ever get married go uni or have kids. Im doing all that and more and hopefully more. some people just slower at moving then others. My husband who prob always be on benefits its such an achievement for him to be married and be a dad and if he can do that in his life he achieved soo much more then what was expected. Im sorry that rich have to pay for us to live and i personlly try and make ti up by helping other disablild children. I know that no everyone is like that tho and some do get stuck on benefits that can work. but why do they do that cos they got nothing to live for and its a bad place to be. my next door nabours if the chat shows are not on choose to take drugs and shout abuse at anyone who walks past there window. What a rubbish life for them i look at them and feel sorry for them cos they are stuck worse then i am cos at least im trying. Poor them who given up. Whats the point in living if you can’t try and socialize in soceity and be part of the bigger picture.
Comment made by Roz Rayner-Rix on Jul 25th 2010 at 9:20 pm:
I am a pensioner living alone. I have nothing, I am on Pension Credits as no-one told me that paying married woman’s stamp was worthless if the couple split up and the woman remarried. Now after the breakdown of my second marriage I am divorced and struggle to make ends meet. I am certain there are thousands like me.
If I have to try to find a further £48 a month I will suffer. As it is we are all paying for these totally unnecessary wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. They are costing billions, and should never have happened in the first place.
Why should people who have been made unemployed by the financial collapse and do not agree with these wars be made to suffer hardships at all?
The country should be treating them in a responsible manner.
There will be increased crime and suicides to deal with that will cost more than any housing benefit cuts revenue.
Damn this stupid democracy, more like hypocrisy.
Time to start caring for each other not killing millions of innocent people and then taking all we have to pay for it.
Its called responsibility…