Bedroom/spare room tax to be stopped.

Well that’s gone well for them then.

[edit] particularly as the libdem members of the government were instrumental in voting the revised legislation through.

Probably the ultimate example of IDS’s ridiculous free-market ideology driving policy, without something as awkward as reality intruding on proceedings. Totally non-sensical, and cruel, targeting as it did the very weakest in society. A massive percentage of those effected were the disabled, or full time carers

I notice the Lib Dems have suddenly developed a social conscience. Now theres an election coming up. Pity its been missing for the last 4 years eh

I notice the Lib Dems have suddenly developed a social conscience. Now theres an election coming up. Pity its been missing for the last 4 years eh

It’ll disappear again if they get the slightest sniff of a coalition…

particularly as the libdem members of the government were instrumental in voting the revised legislation through.

Why wait until now?

Glad it has passed to the next stages but lets not forget the bedroom tax wouldn’t even exist if it wasn’t for the Lib Dems voting for it in the first place.

Why wait until now?

because there’s an election coming…

*Awaits the Better Together headlines about the good things coming out of Westminster*

because there’s an election coming…

Wait what?

Next you’ll be telling me that my local Lib Dem MP pushing for the dualing of the A1 again is only because it’s election time again. I know he’s done it every election for the last 30 years or so but I’m sure that can’t be right.

The policy was the wrong solution to the very real problem of people being housed in oversized properties and the imbedded cost of this. The real solution is to have a supply of 1, 2 and 3 bedroomed social housing stock so that single people/couples go into 1 or 2 bedroomed properties (ie cheaper) and those that need more space or special access/needs get the right sort of property (ie more expensive)

technically it wasn’t an actual tax but rather a reduction of benefits.
</pedant>

It really has led to some truly perverse outcomes. Namely an increase in the Housing Benefit bill as people downsize from cheap council houses to smaller, but far more expensive private sector rented flats. Wasn’t reducing the benefits bill the whole justification for this ludicrous policy in the first place? The more cynical might suggest that diverting more taxpayers money into the hands of the (tory voting) buy-to-letters, and re-inflating the housing market, was the actual aim.

But IDS is the most stubborn, pig-headed half-wit even amongst this shower of idiots. Absolutely refusing to countenance anything that clashes with his ideology, even when the mountainous evidence is staring him in the face. A complete moron!!!

I’m just wondering how many more billions he’ll spaff on his Universal Benefit charade before he has to admit its completely unworkable, and abandons the whole thing. Theres a certain inevitability about it, but once again his evangelical belief in ludicrous free-market ideology tells him thats what should work. Even though it doesn’t, and the whole programme is an ineptly managed shambles

Excellent, so those claiming HB in the social housing sector are back to being on more beneficial terms than those having to rent in the private sector because the social housing is taken up by single people/couples in big family houses.

It was a very blunt instrument that tried and failed to deal with a very problematic symptom of the real underlying problem, ie a complete failure of successive governments to invest in social housing.

The whole housing market in this country is now completely dysfunctional. If you set out to create something from scratch that failed so completely on just about every conceivable level*, you’d be hard pushed to better the present ‘system’

* apart from private landlords making a killing, obviously

I’m spending too much time on here being brainwashed into thinking binners is right on these things

@binners, since the decision to pay housing benefit to claiment and not direct to landlord the supply of private rental property to those on benefits has reduced dramatically. Everyone I know with rental property will not let to those on benefits, too many have experience of the property being damaged and tennets a PITA

@john, indeed bedroom tax is just the media headline

It was a very blunt instrument that tried and failed to deal with a very problematic symptom of the real underlying problem, ie a complete failure of successive governments to invest in social housing.

This !

binners – Member
I notice the Lib Dems have suddenly developed a social conscience. Now theres an election coming up. Pity its been missing for the last 4 years eh

desperation, they know they are gubbed, sold themselves down the river for a taste of power.

@binners, since the decision to pay housing benefit to claiment and not direct to landlord the supply of private rental property to those on benefits has reduced dramatically.

Indeed Jambalaya. Yet another one of IDS’s fantastic ideas. Even in the inglorious recent history of parliament, has there ever been anyone this stupid put in charge of a major government department?

Hmm, I’ll agree with some of Binners points but:

Namely an increase in the Housing Benefit bill as people downsize from cheap council houses to smaller, but far more expensive private sector rented flats

Surely cancelled out by the fact you’ve just freed up a property, and can move in someone who was previously in another even more expensive private sector rented flat, or possibly even more expensive B&B?

Actually, tbe changes jambalaya mentions were introduced with Local Housing Allowance by the previous Labour regime. One of several problems that were forecast at the white paper stage by those who deal with such things in tbe real world.

I could go on but the Civil Service Code and the threat of gross misconduct charges prevent me….

In some places councils were talking of demolishing larger properties, as there was no demand for them, and no smaller social housing for people to ‘downsize’ to . And nobody could afford to pay the bedroom tax for the bigger properties, so they’re just stood empty.

Another example of IDS’s ideologically driven myopia

Well, if you’ve got one area with a massive surplus of empty family houses, and another area with a massive shortage of family houses… Then it points to another massive failure by successive governments too 🙁

Indeed. We now have 2 countries, with increasingly decoupled economies. london and the South East, and The Rest.

And its serving neither very well

I’m sure that spaffing 700 squillion pounds on a fancy choo choo track will soon resolve all that though 🙄

For what its worth, I think one of the problems there is (well meaning) intervention

Prices, wages and rents in the South would be unsustainable without tax credits and housing benefit – withdraw that and companies would have to raise wages or move out of the SE.

That would be the radical market led solution, its one of those traps that if you proposed it you’re labelled an extreme right wing nutter, (far to the right of the Tories FWIW) who is only interested in punishing the poor through austerity.

Tax credits should be changed at the moment government is effectively subsiding employers.

The minimum wage should be raised to the living wage.

Back to the bedroom tax, I simply think it is wrong to suddenly force people out of their homes, where they may have lived for some time, it is a totally crass and cruel thing to do.

Some people will say it has to be done because there is a shortage of certain types of properties. However that is not the fault of those living in the those homes so why penalise them?

Absolutely! The vast majority of housing benefit goes to people in full time employment, but not paid a living wage. So we are, as taxpayers, subsidising companies who won’t pay a living wage. In large swathes of the economy, the minimum wage has just become the wage, by default.

And as a double whammy, a lot of those companies benefitting from this taxpayer subsidy are the ones structuring their tax affairs so that they don’t actually pay any! The whole system is ****ed!!!

Double pedant – not a tax and only closer to abolition is my understanding. Bloody mess whatever.

Otherwise, as you were…. 😉

It’s a ‘subsidy’ according to IDS

Which, even by government ‘Unspeak’ terms (blame Blair for this too), is an interesting use of the word

It’s a good bill though, yes? Better than scrapping the policy entirely in my opinion.

– only penalises those who refuse to downsize, to allow a family to use their big house, when offered a smaller place
– exemptions for adapted properties (this was a damn stupid oversight in the original policy)

They should extend both of those ideas to those in private rented accommodation as well.
Really hope the bill is passed. Doubt it will be though.

They should extend both of those ideas to those in private rented accommodation as well.

Why?

Can’t those who rent privately do whatever they like with their money? If they choose to rent somewhere bigger than they really need that’s their affair and no one else’s…

The minimum wage should be raised to the living wage.

A living wage for who living where? A living wage for a single parent in London would be higher than a living wage for a 19 year old in Morpeth.

They should extend both of those ideas to those in private rented accommodation as well.

Yep I’m looking for a place for me, it’s either going to be 2 bedroom with a garage or 3 bedroom so I can store everything and my office.
Private means get what you can afford.
Supported means get whats appropriate for your needs. The policy wasn’t right but the intent was. Housing people in the wrong houses is not good, it means you can’t put people who need bigger houses in them. The other problem is not enough houses in the places where people want/need to live.

far from gone .. i think more people should read further than the headlines..

if this private members bill is passed.. it goes to the lords.. who will delay and delay

and then and if it is passed the bill is to remove the subsidy for those who are disabled and those for whom there are no smaller properties..

i work in the social housing and many many one and two bedroom properties lie empty as no one will move in..they even have big ‘to let’ signs outside begging folks to give em a go.. so they offer one to bill and veronica .. they say i m not living there.. and ‘pay’ bedroom tax.. as for the ‘disbaled’ it only applies to those adults who require a seperate hospital type bed.. not very many there..

I blame it on Thatcher! Well for once this is true as her “Right to Buy” policy meant that tens of thousands of mainly 2 or 3 bed council homes were sold, leaving us with a shortage of these family-sized homes today.

Well I agreed with the bedroom tax. If a family want an extra room, pay for it, like I have to.

If you don’t need the extra room, move along.

F****** freeloaders