To wonder if Labour really will scrap the bedroom tax?

[GaryShitpeas]

Not going to go into why i am against it but I am. Doesn't affect me ATM as not on Hb but I probably will need to be in the future.

But I personally will be voting labour for this reason alone ....this is the first time I've ever voted (to my shame) because I want it gone. But I wonder if they'll actually keep their promise.....

Not sure if they will or not. But it's not a tax but the withdrawing the subsidising of spare rooms. A subsidy which isn't available to those who privately rent. But I agree with having exemptions which should also be available to private renters.

Yes. Chelsea is full of council renters and HB claimants. Stuffed with them.

The private rented sector is out of control in the SE. The housing market in the SE is a disgrace. THAT is the real problem that needs addressing. Fucking over people on benefits is the modern equivalent of throwing slaves to the lions: bread and circuses, and a very nasty smokescreen.

I would love to see the tax withdrawn (and I like calling it a tax - and I think I might call it the poor people's tax - because it is a tax just for the poor, by definition).

To answer the OP, no, I don't believe Labour will rescind the bedroom tax.

The only party that has public ally stated it will overtiurn the bedroom tax is UKIP, because it makes no sense to expect people to move out of their current relatively cheap social housing into expensive private rentals just because they may have more bedrooms than they need.

Regardless of whether the tax/ subsidy is good/bad The duomo it's if it mean it does not necessarily save public money.

Can someone please explain to me the difference between Housing Association property and Council house? Serious question.

really??

Some social housing is owned and maintained directly by the local authority (council), although nowadays most social jousting has been transferred by the councils to Housing Associations which are not for profit providers of social accommodation.

Both are registered social landlords and have to abide by certain rules.
When the Minimum Homes standards came in many LA couldn't afford to adhere to them, so they sold them off to HA's (new ones were sometimes set up as ALMO - Arms Length Management Organisations which have possession of the homes and the responsibility for them for a period of time (like a long length lease) to allow them to access EEC grant money which LA's couldn't apply for.
The HA work closely with the councils (if you have choice based lettings, these are usually overseen by the council on behalf of the various HA's) as the LA have the legal onus on Statutory Homelessness.

No he can't trade because the government won't pay the two bed rate for him. There's no way he can make up the shortfall out of the £72.40 he gets a week in JSA. That's exactly the point I was trying to make

what? Trade with the family that only has a 1 bed.

Yes. Chelsea is full of council renters and HB claimants. Stuffed with them.

all London boroughs have many people on HB.

The private rented sector is out of control in the SE. The housing market in the SE is a disgrace. THAT is the real problem that needs addressing.

Agreed. they have to do a lot more to encourage building. don't just pass planning down to councils, where NIMBYism is rife, really encourage building.

the bedroom tax has the whiff of a witch hunt of sorts. it's obviously not going to solve the housing problem, but is popular with some people. however, it's a step. and it would be a bigger step if pensioners had to downsize.

Loved the nochalent comment in response to the ridiculous expenses MPs claim in regards to their second homes. Which is obviously tax payer funded. In that 'governments are the same all over' do you not see what's wrong with that statement? 'Government always fucks us over, so what, let's start blaming and demonising these people here who claim HB and have the audacity to have a spare bedroom?'
It's time people opened their eyes and saw what is the biggest cost to our country is and people on benefits are way at the bottom of the list.

Nothing 'nonchalant' about that statement... It was a serious statement. It's wrong what govt's do ivo what they let their MPs get away with.

And no-one is saying demonise people who claim HB. Not one. Please read properly. It is the entitled attitudes of people expecting the govt/tax payers to pay for them that is not appreciated.eg: If you choose to have 4 children make sure you can afford to have them... Feed, clothe and house them. Yourself. Not expect the tax payer to bale you out.

How that makes me, and those like me, who assume responsibility for our own lives 'self righteous' I don't know.

One thing I'd like to see is for single "under-occupiers" to be able to share social housing without being penalised for subletting. That would help with the lack of 1-bedroom properties (as two people would be in a 2-bedroom property) and help tackle the social isolation that often affects single people, and enable people to remain in their own homes for longer.
Then again, that would involve joined-up thinking so is unlikely to happen...

The social housing in Kensington and Chelsea is mainly Peabody, isn't it? Large numbers of flats, look like mansion blocks? Predate the welfare state and still going strong.

Agree with thecatfromjapan

Thank you WetAugust and foslady. Appreciate the explanations.

"I've been mugged so my neighbour should be mugged too"

Does it surprise you that some people would like like things to be fairer across the boards for all those in receipt of housing benefit and/or council tenants?

If you found out a colleague on exactly the same wage as you was getting twice the tax credits or Christmas bonus just "because", wouldn't you be a weeny bit peeved?

Yeah I get that saucyjack but then why not campaign to make it fairer for private tenants? Instead of ooh we've got it so shit, therefore let's make it shit for social tenants too (Not you specifically SJ, just people in general that think us in council housing have it far too good and would like to have us made worse off. you know, put our rent up to make us skinter, make our tenancies shorter so our dc suffer when they have to move house and schools all the time etc etc )

We do have it good tbh, not going to lie, I'm lucky as hell to have my house. As Private renters do often get a really shit deal and I think they should get far longer tenancies, more rights, fairer rent etc and it's that that people should be up in arms about.

But it isn't essentially unfair to only pay for the size property a claimant needs Gary. That's what it boils down to.

And you lot up North in your under-occupied houses might be living the life of Riley ... ;-), but down here where you spend years in homeless accommodation to wait for a concrete shoebox, the social housing situation really isn't so good.

And no-one is saying demonise people who claim HB. Not one. Please read properly. It is the entitled attitudes of people expecting the govt/tax payers to pay for them that is not appreciated.eg: If you choose to have 4 children make sure you can afford to have them... Feed, clothe and house them. Yourself. Not expect the tax payer to bale you out.
I have four children. I'm on benefits. I didn't expect dh to become seriously ill at 39 and be unable to walk by 44. We were both lecturers.
It can happen to anyone.

Dawn change can happen to anyone and that is what the system is for - however there are many people on here and in the country who have children without any expectation of being able to afford to keep them.