Housing Benefit Cuts?

[User removed 4]

But the point is (as we've mentioned on here many times before) the political decisions taken now will be driven by decisions made 20 or 30 years ago.

The sell off of council housing and the block on investing the income into new housing has caused this decision. I read that people say 'if this were proposed from scratch nobody would stand for it' but it isn't. We're playing politics with real people's lives here. Let's not forget that if there were enough reasonable social housing available and the more desirable council houses hadn't been sold then we wouldn't be having to make this decision now.

Once again the rich will get richer (and landlords included) and the poor can put up with it. It would seem that the Neil Kinnock (not my favourite politician I must say) vision of a conservative Britain is coming to pass

I agree with pretty much all of your post until the predicatable droning about the rich getting richer etc, the sellng of council houses was a disgraceful policy which have never agreed with.

 

[Tooting Gull]

I will always speak up for working class communities,these changes will simply mean that housing benefit will no longer be paying for people to live in houses they could never afford if they were working, it is pure and simple scaremongering to suggest it will lead to the wholesale destructon of communities.

It's a bitch, that scaremongering. Like before the election when people accurately predicted the scale of the cuts. They were just scaremongers too.

 

[beorhthelm]

the "community" issue is a bit of an emotional red herring imo, one of the first things people from inner London areas do when they have the money/opportunity is move out of the area, to the suburbs or bordering counties.

 

[User removed 4]

It's a bitch, that scaremongering. Like before the election when people accurately predicted the scale of the cuts. They were just scaremongers too.

Really perceptive those 'scaremongers' werent they ? Helen f***ing keller would've known the size and scale of cuts that had to be made, hardly a state secret were they ?

 

[ROSM]

I agree with pretty much all of your post until the predicatable droning about the rich getting richer etc, the sellng of council houses was a disgraceful policy which have never agreed with.

sorry bushy. I think Cheese Rolls has made the point far better than I did when I referred to the rich getting richer.

 

[Tubby Mondays]

Just sort of policy that the residents of Bermondsey voted Simon Hughes in for I say. Im sure hes looking forward to getting out and about in his constituency and explaining this one away.

 

[Barrel of Fun]

the "community" issue is a bit of an emotional red herring imo, one of the first things people from inner London areas do when they have the money/opportunity is move out of the area, to the suburbs or bordering counties.

I don't see it as being a red herring at all. I think you underestimate the importance of a community. If anything, I would say that life has got worse with the erosion of a community.

 

[Dandyman]

the "community" issue is a bit of an emotional red herring imo, one of the first things people from inner London areas do when they have the money/opportunity is move out of the area, to the suburbs or bordering counties.

Nice bit of snobbery there.

For those that think this is scaremongering this is from the very sober CIH:

Housing Leaders Warn Crisis to Deepen with Housing Benefit Cuts | CIH Press Release

Housing leaders are gearing up for a double hit from the planned housing benefit reform. The proposed changes threaten hardship for individuals and could have a knock-on effect on new housing supply, according to members of the Chartered Institute of Housing (CIH).

Following the proposed reforms to housing benefit announced in the Emergency Budget in June, members of the UK Housing Panel express concerns over rising demand for social housing as reduced income threatens to impact new affordable house building. The proposed reforms are also expected to increase the risk of poverty and rent arrears unless landlords take action to increase support, welfare and debt advice.

In the third quarterly report from the UK Housing Panel, professionals who record key measures of housing supply and demand, affordability and housing quality, members were asked to assess the possible impact of the proposed cuts to housing benefit on their business.

Over three quarters of respondents (78 per cent) said that the cuts could result in increased rent arrears. A further 66 per cent of respondents highlighted the risk of an increase in bad debts as a result of the changes to housing benefit. And 54 per cent said they believe that there could be a rise in the number of evictions unless spiralling arrears can be prevented.

Over half of respondents agreed that the proposed cuts in housing benefit could lead to increased pressure on housing registers (54 per cent) and a higher demand for services (53 per cent). At the same time, over two thirds of respondents (67 per cent) highlighted the risk of reduced income as a likely impact of the housing benefit cuts.

CIH is doing extensive work with MPs and officials to ensure the potential impacts are fully understood and to reduce the worst consequences of the proposed reforms.

CIH Chief Executive Sarah Webb said: "We understand the need to make savings on the welfare bill, but these proposed tweaks, which have little impact on expenditure but a massive impact on claimants, are not the way to proceed. They run contrary to the government’s own welfare reform plans and will hit individuals hard. They will also place real pressure on private and social landlords and local authorities across the UK."

 

[Dandyman]

Just sort of policy that the residents of Bermondsey voted Simon Hughes in for I say. Im sure hes looking forward to getting out and about in his constituency and explaining this one away.

I think Mr Hughes, who is one of the more liberal LibDems, is far from happy with getting into bed with CMD in the first place. These cuts as you rightly say will not be popular in Southwark & Old Bermondsey and may yet light the fuse that blows the ConDems out of power.

 

[Tooting Gull]

Really perceptive those 'scaremongers' werent they ? Helen f***ing keller would've known the size and scale of cuts that had to be made, hardly a state secret were they ?

I see. So when those lefty scaremongers disagree with you and they turn out to be right, you knew all along. And if they're wrong, wouldn't we hear about it...I don't remember many Tories were whooping and slapping each other on the back in the election campaign shouting 500,000 public sector jobs were going.

And with respect, I think most people would agree Helen Keller was highly intelligent, achieving things and having insight while deaf, blind and unable to talk that you will never have. Just because you can't see, it doesn't make you stupid. Someone to respect, rather than ridicule.

 

[Castello]

I see. So when those lefty scaremongers disagree with you and they turn out to be right, you knew all along. And if they're wrong, wouldn't we hear about it...I don't remember many Tories were whooping and slapping each other on the back in the election campaign shouting 500,000 public sector jobs were going.

And with respect, I think most people would agree Helen Keller was highly intelligent, achieving things and having insight while deaf, blind and unable to talk that you will never have. Just because you can't see, it doesn't make you stupid. Someone to respect, rather than ridicule.

and yet so many with very good eyesight are so blind to what is truly going on here.

 

[Tubby Mondays]

I think Mr Hughes, who is one of the more liberal LibDems, is far from happy with getting into bed with CMD in the first place. These cuts as you rightly say will not be popular in Southwark & Old Bermondsey and may yet light the fuse that blows the ConDems out of power.

If only. Hes pissing in the wind unfortunately. As is that Johnson dunderhead. Its going to take a bit more than this, and a bit more than I thought to dislodge them. Cant wait until Sheffield goes to the polls next year though. Lib Dem council, Smegs backyard, and they will be wiped away. And in many other councils too.

 

[beorhthelm]

I don't see it as being a red herring at all. I think you underestimate the importance of a community. If anything, I would say that life has got worse with the erosion of a community.

Nice bit of snobbery there.

maybe it is, but for who? i dont mind either way.

i respect the community ideal, just have observed how people tend to migrate away from the inner city as the opportunity presents. a mate lived in Bermondsey all his life, his dad and 3 sisters have all left, his girlfriend's family have similarly all moved out of Wapping where they grew up. their reasons are many, and they all talk about the community too, yet all sought a better life (in their opinion) for their families somewhere else. Another community replaces the old, people join new communities else where. waves of immigration over time have meant places and their communities change, but now we think its time to set them in stone?

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

the "community" issue is a bit of an emotional red herring imo, one of the first things people from inner London areas do when they have the money/opportunity is move out of the area, to the suburbs or bordering counties.

This might have been the case, but then the nation decided they liked living in city centres. In fact I did the exact opposite of what you suggest, as did a lot of my friends, I slowly moved from the fringes of London to the centre.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

I'd quite like to live in one of those big houses off the back of Dyke Road but I can't because my income doesn't allow me to. So I'll have to make do with Hangleton.

I'd like to eat out every night at the citys best restaurants but I can't as my income doesn't allow me to. So I'll have to make do with ensuring I budget tightly when doing my monthly shop and every now and then I might be able to afford to eat out.

Maybe the state could top up my income so I could actually live where I wanted and eat how I wanted

I fail to see why anyone should expect the state to provide anything but the very basics as a fail safe. Therefore all benefits should be capped at a certain level. While £400 might not be the correct level the principle itself is a sound one. That said £400 a week is nearly £21k a year which is more than I pay for my mortgage AFTER being taxed on my income that pays said mortgage.

 

[User removed 4]

I see. So when those lefty scaremongers disagree with you and they turn out to be right, you knew all along. And if they're wrong, wouldn't we hear about it...I don't remember many Tories were whooping and slapping each other on the back in the election campaign shouting 500,000 public sector jobs were going.

And with respect, I think most people would agree Helen Keller was highly intelligent, achieving things and having insight while deaf, blind and unable to talk that you will never have. Just because you can't see, it doesn't make you stupid. Someone to respect, rather than ridicule.

Nothing to do with 'lefty' scaremongers, the tories were as open, if not more than labour about cuts, and why start a sentence 'and with respect' when you mean nothing of the sort ? before you start questioning my insight, have a look at your own , my helen keller analogy never questioned her intelligence, or ridiculed her, i just used it to demonstrate the obviousness to everybody the size and scale of cuts that would be needed, you, however , didnt want to see that, it would have scuppered your 'nasty tory' retort.

 

[Barrel of Fun]

I'd quite like to live in one of those big houses off the back of Dyke Road but I can't because my income doesn't allow me to. So I'll have to make do with Hangleton.

I'd like to eat out every night at the citys best restaurants but I can't as my income doesn't allow me to. So I'll have to make do with ensuring I budget tightly when doing my monthly shop and every now and then I might be able to afford to eat out.

Maybe the state could top up my income so I could actually live where I wanted and eat how I wanted

I fail to see why anyone should expect the state to provide anything but the very basics as a fail safe. Therefore all benefits should be capped at a certain level. While £400 might not be the correct level the principle itself is a sound one. That said £400 a week is nearly £21k a year which is more than I pay for my mortgage AFTER being taxed on my income that pays said mortgage.

What about key workers? Carers and such like that have very low wages compared to the cost of living?

 

[Dandyman]

I'd quite like to live in one of those big houses off the back of Dyke Road but I can't because my income doesn't allow me to. So I'll have to make do with Hangleton.

I'd like to eat out every night at the citys best restaurants but I can't as my income doesn't allow me to. So I'll have to make do with ensuring I budget tightly when doing my monthly shop and every now and then I might be able to afford to eat out.

Maybe the state could top up my income so I could actually live where I wanted and eat how I wanted

I fail to see why anyone should expect the state to provide anything but the very basics as a fail safe. Therefore all benefits should be capped at a certain level. While £400 might not be the correct level the principle itself is a sound one. That said £400 a week is nearly £21k a year which is more than I pay for my mortgage AFTER being taxed on my income that pays said mortgage.

The government is additionally telling social landlords to charge up to 80% of market rates which will in put into effect will also drive lower income families out of the inner cities. Couple that with their plansd to gerrymander constituencies and impose fixed term parliaments regardless of votes of confidence and this begins to stink of that same corrupt practices employed by Lady Porter back in the 1980s.

 

[beorhthelm]

This might have been the case, but then the nation decided they liked living in city centres. In fact I did the exact opposite of what you suggest, as did a lot of my friends, I slowly moved from the fringes of London to the centre.

true. as did I, before moving to the suburbs. did you move there for the community or for the facilities, amenities and work? i suppose some might say they are the same, i'd beg to differ on that (facilities are generic and common to other areas).

 

[mona]

Dandyman

The social mix of central Brighton has changed incredibly in the past two decades largely due to Grauniad reading, mid-high earners who have moved down from London.
What is the difference?

In London itself, the Isle of Dogs was 100% socially cleansed in the 1980s.
This issue is an old issue that was ignored by the liberal left consensus until the tories looked to cut housing benefit.