All these 'promises' yet STILL no mention of removing Bedroom tax.

[AnyoneForTARDIS]

He must think we're thick.

Last time all the promises that never came to be.

At least taking off the BT for disabled would go some way to redeem himself.

but nope, once again the disabled are forgotten.

spot on , Grateful ! my point exactly.

bloody scumbag, hes just miliing it isn't he, trying to ingratiate himself to get the votes.

just seeing bit on news saying he knows as a real family about the probs of the NHS.

SHIT. BILE. he and his private medical staff. bloody hypocrite.

well it appears WE are the thick ones as on the news all the reporters, presenters and guests are praising him to the hilt.

what a wonderful speech.

what a brilliant man.

a perfect family man.

really cares about his country.

yes had to listen a few times to see who they were talking about and it was him they were spraying with gold!

It's all media spin. the media think that but the people don't. Watch what happens in the by-elections, people won't vote for him or his party.

I don't know why Clegg doesn't leave, 1- hes hardly seen anyway, DC wants all the attention, and 2-surely hes not going to agree on everything DC says, he seems a teeny tiny minute bit more with at least a toe in the real world.

I agree that the 'bedroom tax' should not affect people with disabilities. BUT it really pisses me off that it's called a bedroom tax.
Renters in private lets have always has this 'bedroom tax'. It's basically that you can only claim hb for the amount of rooms you need. What's wrong with that?!

yes, fair enough if theres one person in 5 bedroom or something, and thinking back to the \Georgians they taxed windows so people bricked up 'extra' windows to avaoid tax.

It's not tax. It's saying that someone can only claim benefit for the amount of rooms they need.

YoMr which would be fine if it applied to new tenancies only. Or there were suitable smaller properties locally with removal costs paid for.

It's not that, YoMrWhite, you could only ever claim HB for the amount of bedrooms you were entitled to.

The bedroom tax is an extra penalty on top of that.

No true YoMr a private renter receives a certain amount of money Lha the number of bedrooms is irrelevant.

Could you explain that to me please BoulevardOfBrokenSleep as that's not how I understand it.

soontobesix that's not true. As a family of four we are only entitled to apply for the cost of a 3 bedroomed house. And the LHA for a 3 bedroom is the maximum we can claim. Which falls way short of the rent.

This is from shelter:
What is 'bedroom tax'?

Since 1 April 2013, new housing benefit rules mean you won't be able to get housing benefit to pay for all of your rent if your home has 'spare bedrooms'. This is being called the 'bedroom tax', but letters from the council may call it 'size limit rules', 'under-occupancy' or 'under-occupancy rules'.

So you're incorrect BoulevardOfBrokenSleep. It's NOT a tax.

Ok. But that's the same for private renters and always has been? So I'm a bit perplexed by the arguments about it really. The LHA we are entitled to is about 650 and our rent is 775. Private renters have always had to top up.

Private renters are often on benefits too.

I was private renting on HB and only was able to claim for a 2 bed, but we alsways needed a specially adapted place for disabilities, took years to get a council place with one, was on full HB till greedy guts decided to tke poor peoples money to line his own pockets and charge for the tiny hardly there adapted room.

so now I have to pay extra for the privelage of having a luxury mansion in their eyes!

Yomr yes but if you lived in a cheaper house with four bedrooms nobody would reduce your Lha.

YoMr private renters where I live do not have to top up rent Lha covers it all. Stop making sweeping statements that may only apply to your own circumstances.

I don't have statistics but I do know personally quite a few families that have swapped houses because of the bedroom "tax" meaning they still got the space they needed and bigger families were finally able to have the space they needed.

I was one of those families and it worked the opposite for us in the respect that our disabled son was finally able to have his needs met due to having a property suitable for the adaptations he needs.

I know another family that had the same thing, they were in a tiny 2 bed house with their daughter who is restricted to a wheelchair and their 2 other children, they swapped to a large, 3 bed bungalow and now the little girl can get around and have a bedroom with a lifting aid and she can access the washing/toilet facilities by herself.

It's a shame you don't hear about these things on the news.

Obviously it needs major improvements but it does work for some.

In defence of labour and lib dems, they have already voted for a new law which partly reverses the "bedroom tax" which would mean that people who could not be found a smaller home would be exempt from the cuts, as well as disabled people who need a spare bedroom or who have adapted homes. It is not law yet but it could well get through.

oonToBeSix

YoMr private renters where I live do not have to top up rent Lha covers it all. Stop making sweeping statements that may only apply to your own circumstances.

There are no cheaper houses where I live. Private renting sucks. It's massively expensive and there's no security.
That is NOT a sweeping statement.

LHA will only cover what they are 'entitled' to claim for. The same as the 'bedroom tax'.

Please tell me why it should be different for social housing?

Yours is a sweeping statement more than mine actually.

"Private renters where I live do not top up"

Sweeping.

I can assure you the majority of private renters top up.