More perspective on housing benefit

DJShaw

As I understand it, those who are out of work and in receipt of huge HB (> £400+/week) generally only receive ~ £60 JSA to live on. Over the past few days I have wondered how many of those in this situation and complaining about potentially having to move our of central london, would if their total benefits (>£460 / week) were put directly into their bank account for them to dispense with as they wish, still choose to spend all but £60 of it on rent. How many, if given this choice, would decide as many working people have, voluntarily move to cheaper accommodation in the suburbs?

Peter From Maidstone

Do we know what percentage opposing a weekly limit are receiving housing benefit, in which case those results should be removed.

toco

This proves the British public understand the concept of fairness as opposed to the BBC who sole aim is to criticise everything the Government does in support of its leftist agenda.This morning's 'Today' programme was an absolute disgrace concerning this issue and the presenters should be relieved of their positions and either sacked or placed somewhere out of earshot of the listening public.

LibertarianLou

To be honest, I'm surprised support for this cut isn't higher than that amongst Labour voters. It's mostly the hard working poor and low-middle income earners that find the size of housing benefit most offensive. But I suppose the party base has changed so much now that it is more a party of rich social democrats who just like to feel like they're living in a 'diverse' or 'culturally interesting' area, without having to actually do it. Most ordinary people think - whether they agree with the specifics of the policy, or think, like Boris, that it could be handled slightly differently - that housing benefit is too high and needs capping. I'm amazed it's taken this long to sort. The shouting isn't coming from the general public, or even the majority of claimants - just look at the disabled lady on NewsNight the other night with Grant Schapps. When he explained the details of the policy, she said, "Oh, that'd be ok then!"

Pot Head

I thought now it was all about "doing what was right, not what was popular"

I thought Rev Montgomerie came across very badly on Today this morning

TrevorsDen

'This morning's 'Today' programme was an absolute disgrace' ... only this morning's ??

Chris lancashire

Hugh Hendry - the Hedge Fund Manager - was absolutely excellent on this last night on Question Time. He expressed perfectly the amazement of many people that HB had been allowed to balloon to the extent it has. In most areas outside of Central London the new cap is generous. Some families may be forced to move, as you would if unsupported families could no longer afford to live in the same accommodation.

HB should represent a safety net - not a menu from which to choose.

TrevorsDen

Shock horror, Sir George Young has just quoted Purnell as saying "the next issue to consider is Housing Benefit so that people on benefit do not end up getting subsidy for rents that those in work could never afford" (see Paul Waugh)

oops - but then Purnell was in Govt at the time.

Methinks Labour's goose is cooked.

TrevorsDen

Oh and PS
Boris has just said
"My consistent position has been that the government is absolutely right to reform the housing benefit system which has become completely unsustainable. I do not agree with the wild accusations from defenders of the current system that reform will lead to social cleansing. It will not, and if you listened carefully to what I said, no such exodus will take place on my watch"

Pettros

From a neutral perspective how is it useful to bring out opinion polls from August & June?!

Woody

Icertainly agree about the BBC, indeed, I think they have given up trying to hide their bias and are putting two fingers up to the government.
I don't think the government help themselves with the way they announce these policies on the hoof and don't explain them properly and this gives the opposition and their supporters the opportunity to start agitating.
The vast marjority of people in this country are not interested in politics unless it affects them personally, hence the (ignorance)from the disabled lady.
I had a leaflet through my door from the Labour party and it was just full of lies and scaremongering. I expect most of my neighbours will believe it because they are mostly elderley and will be frightened by it, which is the level Labour sink to. They are the 'real' nasty party.

Fatbloke on tour

PH

What is the story?
Did you get the short straw?
SpeccyLand works day out?
Productivity has taken a dive today.

TrevorsDen

Then story, Mr Fatponce strutting in front of the mirror, is that Labour in government were going to change "Housing Benefit so that people on benefit do not end up getting subsidy for rents that those in work could never afford"

Stitch that.

Holly ......

Housing benefit is to be cut.
Why do we need it spelling out?
Let them sort it out behind the scenes.
Maybe then the BBC and all the other scaremongering commentators will shut the hell up!
Why do we have to know every little detail?
People can no longer live where they can not
afford and some will have to move to homes they can afford.
Maybe this is an instance where we can quote
that Labour bod..."SO WHAT!"
Oooh,nasty Tory strikes again.
The language being thrown around by Labour and other unsavoury characters is disturbing
and offensive.

dorothy wilson

Another perspective on this is that some people who work hard are still faced with some hard decisions about where they can live. This has just happened to my neighbour.

He is a highly skilled design engineer in a specialist field. He was informed a short time ago that he was to be made redundant because his firm was closing down their local operation. He has now been offered a job with the same firm but at a location too far away to commute on a daily basis.

He now has three choices. The first would be to turn the job down, take the hit on his pension and hope to find similar work locally [not likely].

The second would to be up-root his family and move them away from their wider family, friends and the medical staff who treat his elder son and also disrupt the younger son's schooling.

The third would be for Dad to stay away from home in the week and simply visit at weekends. That would mean leaving his wife with all the responsibility for the children.

Despite this, you never hear this family complain. They simply cope and get on with their lives.

So why should those who rely on the taxpayer to fund their life-style be shielded from life's difficult choices? And why do the left-wing media think these people should be protected from having to make those choices.

Edward McLaughlin

Pot Head

Unsurprisingly, you thought wrong. Could be the haze, open a window.

Andrew Brown

name and shame the greedy rip off landlords. The problem of these central London megabucks rents is really distorting public perceptions of the precious social value of housing benefit.

Had the fair rent tribunals not been abolished, house prices been allowed to rise absurdly, and council houses sold off with a prohibition on rebuilding we would not be in this mess

Andrew Brown

1. The landlords ought to be named and shamed for the extortionate amoutns they knowingly claimed from Housing benefits.
2. Yes the amount is too much HB ought not rise to it but
3. Sale of social housing in the 1980s and since has decimated the choices for the less well off and resultantly a big rise in HB costs has resulted , exacerbated by the impact of absurd house price rises.

Housing is not a lifestyle choice for most poorer people. It is a simple neccesity.

We need social housing and housing benefit, and we also need housing to buy at a price that inspires aspiration. At the moment even the young graduates in a few years time will begin their working life with huge debts and unable to buy homes, perhaps for many years.
Many British people are being priced out of their own future

Cassandrina

Tonight's Question Time was the same old tired and biased format with rent a crowd participation orchestrated by that old Champagne Socialist Dimbleby.
What was refreshing was to hear Sayeeda Warsi demolish all in her path with her erudite comment and grasp of detail.
The most blatent bias was during Dromey's whining on the EU budget conveniently forgetting that Blair came away with nothing from the EU even when he was President. When Warsi pointed out that Labour MEP's had voted for the 6% budget rise, Dromey denied this (which is a fact that at least 5 out of 8 of them voted for it)and Dumbleby as usual did not pick up on Dromey's lie. At times Warsi was fighting all 3 of the contestants and winning.
Of the other 3 panel members I found it surprising that Tariq Ali came out as the most balanced and logical.
Dumbleby is a disgrace and should be fired.