Bedroom tax

So this is being printed tomorrow:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/bedroom-tax-victim-commits-suicide-1883600

A little bit sensationalist. Thoughts go out to her family and the lorry driver though.

Its a sad story but I I do wonder about this bit...

On the Thursday before she died – when she wrote the farewell letters – Stephanie had phoned her son to say she was struggling to cope.

He promised to get help and next day phoned her GP.

Stephanie came home from the GP’s surgery with sleeping tablets.

..and whether those might have been a catalyst for this too.

Mothers get upset when their kids leave home anyway, being poor and in bad health compounds that, kid leaving home leading to a benefits shortfall adds to that further... + she was then living alone, contemplating suicide... then the sleeping pills get added into the mix... prob not great for a person already at a low point.

While the article has put a slight spin on it it seems she was offers £2000 to help with moving costs and was found a bungalow (which apparently wasn't suitable - though I'm rather skeptical of the 30 mins from nearest bus stop claim). She was still a single person living in a three bedroom house - expecting the state to carry on funding that situation isn't reasonable... if anything the negative stories and labeling this a 'bedroom' tax is partly to blame for people feeling hard done by as a result of this policy... when in reality, if you're being subsidised by the rest of society, then occupying a three bedroom property when there are others on the waiting list in need of accommodation simply isn't on.
 
Newsnet Scotland said:
Tories admit bedroom tax is designed to save money

A Tory welfare minister has admitted the Bedroom Tax is designed with the main aim of saving money - despite repeated claims from the party that it is based on fairness and is a means of reducing council house waiting times.

Speaking in a debate in the House of Lords, David Freud (pictured), a former investment banker who was first brought into government as an advisor to Tony Blair but then switched to the Conservatives, admitted that the main purpose of the measure was to reduce government expenditure on benefits.

Mr Freud said: "My Lords, the policy as it stands is designed, first, to save money. We are looking to save £500 million a year here, which is within the context of the overall saving of £2 billion that we are trying to make over two years."

The comments come despite a number of claims from senior government members that the aim of the bedroom tax is to ensure that the best use is made of social housing.

Sitting in the House of Lords as Baron Freud of Eastry, Mr Freud was appointed as the coalition government's welfare reform minister in 2012. Shortly after his appointment he suggested that lone parents, people on sickness and disability benefits and other benefits claimants are too comfortable and were able to "have a lifestyle" at the expense of the state. He added that the benefits system was "dreadful" as it discouraged people from "taking risks" in order to improve their situation.

Mr Freud's claims in the House of Lords on Wednesday came 6 weeks after the bedroom tax was introduced. Organisations and charities working to combat poverty and social exclusion say it has had a damaging effect on the poorest and most disadvantaged in our society, while the richest enjoy a cut in taxes.

Commenting, SNP spokesperson for Work and Pensions Dr Eilidh Whiteford MP said:

"Lord Freud has let the cat out of the bag- and revealed the true agenda of the UK Government. But Scottish Government research shows that the extra costs imposed on the public purse mean that the Bedroom Tax won’t actually save any money- as well as being grossly unfair and damaging to families.

"People on the lowest incomes are paying the price for structural problems affecting the supply of affordable housing in the south of England. The Bedroom Tax is also unworkable - instead of addressing the underlying problems, it undermines the ability of social landlords to invest in the kind of affordable housing that is so badly needed.

"The real way for the UK Government to save money is to beat unemployment through economic growth and jobs- which the Tory/LibDem coalition is failing to deliver on. In Scotland, the Scottish Government's policies are helping to support record job creation. Westminster are using the poorest in society as scapegoats to deflect from their economic failures.

"The Bedroom Tax will be imposed on Scotland despite over 90 per cent of Scottish MPs voted against it.

"Lord Freud's comments give us an insight into the Tory agenda - no wonder inequality in the UK is growing faster than anywhere else.

"In Scotland we have an opportunity to change, so that we make our own democratic decisions. To vote No in next year's referendum would mean leaving Scotland at the mercy of the Westminster system, which on any measure is failing. With independence we have the opportunity to do things differently and better - and we will scrap the Bedroom Tax in an independent Scotland."
 
They'd have been better off with a car tax for those with more than one car or bigger cars than they need, especially as they're always banging on about man made global warming. Give them another few years...
 
That's been my whole point ALL ALONG,

These cuts don't seem to be saving that much money but causing so much misery? It's like the universal credit scheme.... it's cost the government LOADS to implement.. for what? to force part time workers onto workfare and claim you'll find them a full time job when in some places there ARE NOT ANY JOBS.

GODDAMNED ridiculous WTF
 
That's been my whole point ALL ALONG,

These cuts don't seem to be saving that much money but causing so much misery? It's like the universal credit scheme.... it's cost the government LOADS to implement.. for what? to force part time workers onto workfare and claim you'll find them a full time job when in some places there ARE NOT ANY JOBS.

GODDAMNED ridiculous WTF

Is that what universal credit is doing?

I hear people saying that part-time workers are going to be forced to leave their jobs or sign on etc but where is this stipulated?, I can't seem to find any concrete information on it.

I'm currently between part-time and full time hours atm so obviously this is raising my eyebrows, are you telling me I'm going to be told to leave my job to do workfare?
 
Is that what universal credit is doing?

I hear people saying that part-time workers are going to be forced to leave their jobs or sign on etc but where is this stipulated?, I can't seem to find any concrete information on it.

I'm currently between part-time and full time hours atm so obviously this is raising my eyebrows, are you telling me I'm going to be told to leave my job to do workfare?

It will effect all those on benefit including in work benefits such as tax credits, housing benefit, C.T benefit, so if you're on a low wage that is topped up in sum way then according to Lord Freud, the banker turned welfare minister
“The fact that those in work will come under the ambit of the JobCentre Plus for the first time as a result of universal credit gives the government radical new opportunities.”

Read about it here.

http://www.boycottworkfare.org/?p=2347

and here

http://johnnyvoid.wordpress.com/2012/06/19/how-universal-credit-will-destroy-part-time-work/
 
Last edited:
conditionality on universal credit applies to all people earning less than the equivilent of 37.5 hours at minimum wage.
 
Its a sad story but I I do wonder about this bit...



..and whether those might have been a catalyst for this too.

Mothers get upset when their kids leave home anyway, being poor and in bad health compounds that, kid leaving home leading to a benefits shortfall adds to that further... + she was then living alone, contemplating suicide... then the sleeping pills get added into the mix... prob not great for a person already at a low point.

While the article has put a slight spin on it it seems she was offers £2000 to help with moving costs and was found a bungalow (which apparently wasn't suitable - though I'm rather skeptical of the 30 mins from nearest bus stop claim). She was still a single person living in a three bedroom house - expecting the state to carry on funding that situation isn't reasonable... if anything the negative stories and labeling this a 'bedroom' tax is partly to blame for people feeling hard done by as a result of this policy... when in reality, if you're being subsidised by the rest of society, then occupying a three bedroom property when there are others on the waiting list in need of accommodation simply isn't on.

This just reminds me of the Nurse who committed suicide after the call from the Aussie radio station. Just because someone blames another party for their suicide doesn't add anything to the debate.

If you don't work and don't help yourself then don't blame everyone else when you can't have what you want or are subject to powers outside your own control. Where were her family when this happened? Why hadn't they helped her our financially. Why does she deserve to live where she wants regardless of her space needs.
 
If you take money from the government then you have to dance to their tune.

Just like they bleed me dry every pay day, all you can do is vote for someone else and hope they make your life easier.
 
Is that what universal credit is doing?

I hear people saying that part-time workers are going to be forced to leave their jobs or sign on etc but where is this stipulated?, I can't seem to find any concrete information on it.

I'm currently between part-time and full time hours atm so obviously this is raising my eyebrows, are you telling me I'm going to be told to leave my job to do workfare?

I forget where I've read it, but it's been written on boycott workfare that it seems like there is more to universal credit than meets the eye. They basically want to force part time works to go sign on like everyone else... which of course means you are now subject to sanctions as well.
 
I forget where I've read it, but it's been written on boycott workfare that it seems like there is more to universal credit than meets the eye. They basically want to force part time works to go sign on like everyone else... which of course means you are now subject to sanctions as well.

www.guardian.co.uk/society/2013/jan/21/universal-credit-benefits-work-longer

The above covers it, essentially conditionality applies to all those who earn less than a threshold, currently set at full time hours on minimum wage, with expectations that you should try and increase your income to the specified level, whether via pay improvements or hours increases.

I still think that a better system would be one based on universal entitlement rather than conditionality.
 
www.guardian.co.uk/society/2013/jan/21/universal-credit-benefits-work-longer

The above covers it, essentially conditionality applies to all those who earn less than a threshold, currently set at full time hours on minimum wage, with expectations that you should try and increase your income to the specified level, whether via pay improvements or hours increases.

I still think that a better system would be one based on universal entitlement rather than conditionality.

Still even that isn't that clear and a lot seems to be based on what "could" or "may" happen.

What would the above mean for someone like myself?, it says,

"Nearly 1m people who are in work and claim benefits may be required to work longer, increase their earnings or face losing access to the new universal credit"

Which sounds like I would lose my housing benefit as that is becoming part of the universal credit, so if this is true I would be essentially homeless, I'm working between 20 and 28 hours a week atm.

I've looked all though here https://www.gov.uk/government/polic...supporting-pages/introducing-universal-credit

And can't really find any real information on this, where is the official rules regarding part time/low paid workers?

It seems nobody really knows.
 
Last edited:
Still even that isn't that clear and a lot seems to be based on what "could" or "may" happen.

What would the above mean for someone like myself?, it says,

"Nearly 1m people who are in work and claim benefits may be required to work longer, increase their earnings or face losing access to the new universal credit"

Which sounds like I would lose my housing benefit as that is becoming part of the universal credit, so if this is true I would be essentially homeless, I'm working between 20 and 28 hours a week atm.

I've looked all though here https://www.gov.uk/government/polic...supporting-pages/introducing-universal-credit

And can't really find any real information on this, where is the official rules regarding part time/low paid workers?

It seems nobody really knows.

Best guess is that it will be finalised based on the results of the pilot scheme before full rollout.
 
Wait a minute, it doesn't make sense, if I'm not entitled to universal credit for working under full-time hours then I would just get my boss to lay me off and claim full benefits, this doesn't add up.

I think you have missed something here. you absolutely would be entitled to universal credit. however, part of the conditions of claiming would be that you look to improve your earnings, and both carrots and sticks would be utilised as part of that.
 
Ahh ok, thanks for straightening that out for me, that doesn't seem to bad I suppose, I find all this benefit stuff quite complicated.

But if you think you'll be able to continue with your current situation then think again, you'll be harassed by the job centre if you don't find longer hours or better paid work, sanctions will then follow, loss of benefits.
 
Back
Top Bottom