"Bedroom tax" plight of Middlesbrough soldiers raised with Prime Minister

Darlington and Stockton Times: Alison Huggan with photos of her twin sons who are serving in the Army Alison Huggan with photos of her twin sons who are serving in the Army

DAVID Cameron was confronted today over benefit cuts that threaten to leave two teenage North-East soldiers with nowhere to sleep - but insisted they were “fair”.

Labour leader Ed Miliband raised the case - first revealed by The Northern Echo - of 18-year-old twins Anas and Aaron, from Coulby Newham, in Middlesbrough.

Because the boys have joined the Army, the family has been hit by the so-called ‘bedroom tax’, which will slash housing benefit where homes are ‘under-occupied’.

The shake-up will effectively charge social housing tenants for spare rooms, cutting benefit by 14 per cent for one extra bedroom - or 25 per cent where there are two spare rooms.

Single mother Alison Huggan spoke of how family life had been thrown into turmoil, with the fear that her sons will have nowhere to sleep when they return from barracks.

Threatened with losing £1,000 per year, she approached a housing association about moving to a one-bedroom home – only to be told that none are likely to be available.

One of the strongest criticisms of the so-called ‘bedroom tax’ is that there are no smaller homes for 95,000 affected families in England, with the North-East the hardest-hit area.

In the Commons, Mr Miliband said Ms Huggan’s case showed the policy to be unfair, saying: “The prime minister’s bedroom tax means that, while her sons are away, she will be charged more for their bedrooms.”

He added: “She says ‘I resent the fact that both my sons are serving and protecting their country, and in return will not have a home to come home to when they are granted their much-needed leave’.”

Meanwhile, Helen Goodman (Lab; Bishop Auckland) protested that the ‘bedroom tax’ would leave one of her constituents with £24 a week to live on.

She told Mr Cameron: “She is so anxious about how she will manage that she is receiving cognitive behavioural therapy. Her anxiety is totally understandable.”

But Mr Cameron hit back, insisting the cuts were needed to control the ballooning housing benefit bill - and mirrored Labour’s changes in the private sector.

He said: “If you are in private rented housing and receive no housing benefit, you don't get money for an extra room.

“If you are in private housing and do get housing benefit you don't get money for an extra room.

“So there's a basic argument of fairness. Why should we be doing more for people in social housing on housing benefit than people in private housing on housing benefit?”

Anas has joined the Yorkshire Regiment, while Aaron is a Fusilier, based at Catterick, having recently graduated from Army Foundation College.

The issue was first raised last year, when Tom Blenkinsop, Labour MP for Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland, accused ministers of breaching the military covenant.

Comments (66)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

5:06pm Wed 6 Feb 13

Consett87 says...

When will this Ever end this Horrible Government
When will this Ever end this Horrible Government Consett87
  • Score: 6

5:23pm Wed 6 Feb 13

Voice-of-reality says...

the soldiers receive an income - it is above the minimum wage. Why should taxpayers either subsidise them further (given that pay is already funded by tax) or subsidise the housing bills of their mother. Doctors, nurses and teachers expect to pay for their own accommodation without handouts - why should this family receive special treatment.
the soldiers receive an income - it is above the minimum wage. Why should taxpayers either subsidise them further (given that pay is already funded by tax) or subsidise the housing bills of their mother. Doctors, nurses and teachers expect to pay for their own accommodation without handouts - why should this family receive special treatment. Voice-of-reality
  • Score: -1

6:15pm Wed 6 Feb 13

CandyCrush says...

Voice-of-reality wrote:
the soldiers receive an income - it is above the minimum wage. Why should taxpayers either subsidise them further (given that pay is already funded by tax) or subsidise the housing bills of their mother. Doctors, nurses and teachers expect to pay for their own accommodation without handouts - why should this family receive special treatment.
I totally agree. The military get paid a good wage, can't her sons help her out with the rent if they expect to be frequently staying in her house on leave? Maybe, with her children flying the nest, it is an opportunity to go out and get a full time job, if she is able.
[quote][p][bold]Voice-of-reality[/bold] wrote: the soldiers receive an income - it is above the minimum wage. Why should taxpayers either subsidise them further (given that pay is already funded by tax) or subsidise the housing bills of their mother. Doctors, nurses and teachers expect to pay for their own accommodation without handouts - why should this family receive special treatment.[/p][/quote]I totally agree. The military get paid a good wage, can't her sons help her out with the rent if they expect to be frequently staying in her house on leave? Maybe, with her children flying the nest, it is an opportunity to go out and get a full time job, if she is able. CandyCrush
  • Score: -4

6:28pm Wed 6 Feb 13

Concerned_Of_Darlo says...

I served in the Army for a lot of years and served in three "War Zones". I have never received or expected any handouts due to my service, nor would I expect others to cash in on my behalf.
The entire subject should not be about whether this woman's sons are serving or not. This entirely down to a destructive government, who will target anything or anyone to keep that smug grin on George Osbourne's face.
They sit in their own privately owned 7 bedroom houses, 3 or 4 or which are unused, yet expect others to pay a dividend because they live in a council house. Disgraceful.
This woman has a point regarding this stealth tax but to jump on a bandwagon of military service in the family is not the way to approach it.
I served in the Army for a lot of years and served in three "War Zones". I have never received or expected any handouts due to my service, nor would I expect others to cash in on my behalf. The entire subject should not be about whether this woman's sons are serving or not. This entirely down to a destructive government, who will target anything or anyone to keep that smug grin on George Osbourne's face. They sit in their own privately owned 7 bedroom houses, 3 or 4 or which are unused, yet expect others to pay a dividend because they live in a council house. Disgraceful. This woman has a point regarding this stealth tax but to jump on a bandwagon of military service in the family is not the way to approach it. Concerned_Of_Darlo
  • Score: 5

6:37pm Wed 6 Feb 13

greenfinger says...

can they not send ten pounds per week home to contribute to their rooms? they're hardly getting evicted. if they want a home pay for it!
can they not send ten pounds per week home to contribute to their rooms? they're hardly getting evicted. if they want a home pay for it! greenfinger
  • Score: -3

6:49pm Wed 6 Feb 13

Voice-of-reality says...

Dear concerned...
The difference being that Osborne has worked and paid for his 7 bedroom house (actually it has more than that) whereas these people who are working want a subsidy. A council house should not be for life. A council house should be for 'when in need'. Further, the size of that house should be decided upon by circumstance and circumstances change. 6 bedroom council house is not needed for one person, in the same way that a one bedroom council house is not suitable for 7 people. As 'private owner' families grow, the homeowner moves and may thereafter downsize. Why should the council tenant be any different?
Dear concerned... The difference being that Osborne has worked and paid for his 7 bedroom house (actually it has more than that) whereas these people who are working want a subsidy. A council house should not be for life. A council house should be for 'when in need'. Further, the size of that house should be decided upon by circumstance and circumstances change. 6 bedroom council house is not needed for one person, in the same way that a one bedroom council house is not suitable for 7 people. As 'private owner' families grow, the homeowner moves and may thereafter downsize. Why should the council tenant be any different? Voice-of-reality
  • Score: -11

6:58pm Wed 6 Feb 13

outragedofmiltonkeynes says...

Maybe if she stopped smoking the money could go towards paying her way. Its completely irrelevant how many spare rooms a house has if the OWNER has paid for them. It was a stupid story when it was first printed and even sillier now. Get a job and stop moaning.
Maybe if she stopped smoking the money could go towards paying her way. Its completely irrelevant how many spare rooms a house has if the OWNER has paid for them. It was a stupid story when it was first printed and even sillier now. Get a job and stop moaning. outragedofmiltonkeynes
  • Score: -10

7:06pm Wed 6 Feb 13

Concerned_Of_Darlo says...

Hello Voice.
All great points, except...as a professional politician, how much of Mr Osbourne's house have the tax payer contributed towards and how much does he get billed for No11? That is basically a property belonging to the state (just like a council house). Therefore, I hope both No10 and No11 are subject to the same levy.
God help HM The Queen if they also count Buck House though!!!
Hello Voice. All great points, except...as a professional politician, how much of Mr Osbourne's house have the tax payer contributed towards and how much does he get billed for No11? That is basically a property belonging to the state (just like a council house). Therefore, I hope both No10 and No11 are subject to the same levy. God help HM The Queen if they also count Buck House though!!! Concerned_Of_Darlo
  • Score: 10

7:36pm Wed 6 Feb 13

Duke of Aycliffe says...

This is another Northern Echo "non story." This woman is now in an ideal position to get a job, no child care worries or responsibilities, employers are crying out for this.
George Osborne doesn't live in a council house he owns his private home & No.11 is a state residence. Too many people in this country expect handouts & feel that the world owes them a living. Wrong! You owe the world.
The gravy train is coming to a stop & not before time. How can it be fair that the workers always foot the bill but long term workshy do not. Two examples of this are, dole whingers crying about the so called "bedroom tax" how can these poor vulnerable people afford this?
No one bothers if me & my wife can afford our stupidly expensive council tax bill or that we pay for our young daughter's school dinners. However, my daughter has told my wife & me that children on free school dinners are allowed 2nd helpings, but not the kids who pay. How is that fair? So, I'm fed up hearing about council tenants who can't afford their homes. I would like a six bedroomed house, but I can't afford it & I don't expect someone else to pay my mortgage.
This is another Northern Echo "non story." This woman is now in an ideal position to get a job, no child care worries or responsibilities, employers are crying out for this. George Osborne doesn't live in a council house he owns his private home & No.11 is a state residence. Too many people in this country expect handouts & feel that the world owes them a living. Wrong! You owe the world. The gravy train is coming to a stop & not before time. How can it be fair that the workers always foot the bill but long term workshy do not. Two examples of this are, dole whingers crying about the so called "bedroom tax" how can these poor vulnerable people afford this? No one bothers if me & my wife can afford our stupidly expensive council tax bill or that we pay for our young daughter's school dinners. However, my daughter has told my wife & me that children on free school dinners are allowed 2nd helpings, but not the kids who pay. How is that fair? So, I'm fed up hearing about council tenants who can't afford their homes. I would like a six bedroomed house, but I can't afford it & I don't expect someone else to pay my mortgage. Duke of Aycliffe
  • Score: -8

7:44pm Wed 6 Feb 13

Voice-of-reality says...

Concerned..
when it comes to appropriate numbers of rooms you may recall that Brown and Blair swapped the flats above Nos. 10 and 11 as a consequence of the number of children and bedrooms required. If the lady in question were to do the same - it would be even more of a non story.
Second, when Osborne loses his job he will not keep the flat at No. 11 whereas the woman in question is keeping her taxpayer home
Concerned.. when it comes to appropriate numbers of rooms you may recall that Brown and Blair swapped the flats above Nos. 10 and 11 as a consequence of the number of children and bedrooms required. If the lady in question were to do the same - it would be even more of a non story. Second, when Osborne loses his job he will not keep the flat at No. 11 whereas the woman in question is keeping her taxpayer home Voice-of-reality
  • Score: -6

8:36am Thu 7 Feb 13

Alison Huggan says...

In response to your comments which have been made without knowing my circumstances, I have worked all my life and are unemployed now for the first time as I have just finished a degree, I do 2 voluntary jobs in return for what I claim back from my stamps, my sons who have made the ultimate sacrifice for the likes of you lot who show no respect nor consideration for them and the 1000s of others that serve this country are hit with a double wammy of living costs, now please come back to me and tell me how many of you have to pay for two homes because of your jobs, it would suit you all to suggest that this government should be doing more to get people into work so they dont have to rely on state benefits to pay there way, even though that is why Beveridge set up the welfare system in the first place to assist people seeking work. You are really very shallow minded in your comments regarding my case, although that does not surprise me given the fact you spirt out comments without knowing the full facts, i will continue my fight against this tax for my sons and the thousands of others that serve this country and get no respect for doing so. For the guy who claims he has served in the forces before, my sons dont want hand outs for there jobs that they do, they want David Cameron to keep to his word on the armed forces covenant which he promised not so long ago, i take it your not a fan of the british legion who are challenging the government on many issues surrounding housing for forces and their families
In response to your comments which have been made without knowing my circumstances, I have worked all my life and are unemployed now for the first time as I have just finished a degree, I do 2 voluntary jobs in return for what I claim back from my stamps, my sons who have made the ultimate sacrifice for the likes of you lot who show no respect nor consideration for them and the 1000s of others that serve this country are hit with a double wammy of living costs, now please come back to me and tell me how many of you have to pay for two homes because of your jobs, it would suit you all to suggest that this government should be doing more to get people into work so they dont have to rely on state benefits to pay there way, even though that is why Beveridge set up the welfare system in the first place to assist people seeking work. You are really very shallow minded in your comments regarding my case, although that does not surprise me given the fact you spirt out comments without knowing the full facts, i will continue my fight against this tax for my sons and the thousands of others that serve this country and get no respect for doing so. For the guy who claims he has served in the forces before, my sons dont want hand outs for there jobs that they do, they want David Cameron to keep to his word on the armed forces covenant which he promised not so long ago, i take it your not a fan of the british legion who are challenging the government on many issues surrounding housing for forces and their families Alison Huggan
  • Score: 24

10:59am Thu 7 Feb 13

Voice-of-reality says...

I respond to the primary points you make:
1. Being unemployed does not mean that you are entitled to a council house and voluntary work does not, though highly commendable, help to pay bills.
2. Your sons have not made the ultimate sacrifice - they have chosen a line of employment for which they are paid.
3. You are not having to pay for two homes because of your jobs and neither are your sons. First, when children grow up and leave home they forge their own lives. Secondly, when circumstances change, housing needs change.
4. Beveridge did not set up the welfare system - with regard to stamps and unemployment benefit it was David Lloyd George.
5. Yes, the government should encourage more people into work
6. Respect is earned - it should not just be demanded because of a job that people choose to do.
7. I would agree that the army has a duty of care to house your sons and their family (I know not their marital status). However, the army does not have a duty to provide houses for mothers, aunts, uncles and anyone else whom soldiers may choose to stay with when on leave.
I respond to the primary points you make: 1. Being unemployed does not mean that you are entitled to a council house and voluntary work does not, though highly commendable, help to pay bills. 2. Your sons have not made the ultimate sacrifice - they have chosen a line of employment for which they are paid. 3. You are not having to pay for two homes because of your jobs and neither are your sons. First, when children grow up and leave home they forge their own lives. Secondly, when circumstances change, housing needs change. 4. Beveridge did not set up the welfare system - with regard to stamps and unemployment benefit it was David Lloyd George. 5. Yes, the government should encourage more people into work 6. Respect is earned - it should not just be demanded because of a job that people choose to do. 7. I would agree that the army has a duty of care to house your sons and their family (I know not their marital status). However, the army does not have a duty to provide houses for mothers, aunts, uncles and anyone else whom soldiers may choose to stay with when on leave. Voice-of-reality
  • Score: -4

2:09pm Thu 7 Feb 13

sarahd says...

Very good points made by voice-of-reality.

Alison-Could your sons not pay the shortfall? I know they are not paid a fotune but once the money is taken out of their wages for their lodgings and food (by the army) they do have a decent wedge left to play with.

When my children are working they will have to pay me for board to go towards their usage of the house, utilities and food, as I did when I lived at home.
Very good points made by voice-of-reality. Alison-Could your sons not pay the shortfall? I know they are not paid a fotune but once the money is taken out of their wages for their lodgings and food (by the army) they do have a decent wedge left to play with. When my children are working they will have to pay me for board to go towards their usage of the house, utilities and food, as I did when I lived at home. sarahd
  • Score: -3

5:18pm Thu 7 Feb 13

the-big-yin says...

sarahd wrote:
Very good points made by voice-of-reality.

Alison-Could your sons not pay the shortfall? I know they are not paid a fotune but once the money is taken out of their wages for their lodgings and food (by the army) they do have a decent wedge left to play with.

When my children are working they will have to pay me for board to go towards their usage of the house, utilities and food, as I did when I lived at home.
I think the main point of this story should really be, is that the government has introduced this sensible idea, but without much thought for the councils and private landlords who do not have any 1 or 2 bedroom properties available to for those wanting to leave properties that are too big down size to. It may be an idea for the government to force councils to build more 1 and 2 bedroom houses for this plan to work.
ALSO YOUR SONS SHOULD PAY YOU FOR THEIR ROOMS. I AM EX FORCES AND ALWAYS PAID MY PARENTS MONEY FOR WHEN I CAME ON LEAVE. £30 EACH WEEK EVEN WHEN I LIVED IN GERMANY FOR 5 YEARS. SO STOP WHINGING AND GET ON WITH IT.
[quote][p][bold]sarahd[/bold] wrote: Very good points made by voice-of-reality. Alison-Could your sons not pay the shortfall? I know they are not paid a fotune but once the money is taken out of their wages for their lodgings and food (by the army) they do have a decent wedge left to play with. When my children are working they will have to pay me for board to go towards their usage of the house, utilities and food, as I did when I lived at home.[/p][/quote]I think the main point of this story should really be, is that the government has introduced this sensible idea, but without much thought for the councils and private landlords who do not have any 1 or 2 bedroom properties available to for those wanting to leave properties that are too big down size to. It may be an idea for the government to force councils to build more 1 and 2 bedroom houses for this plan to work. ALSO YOUR SONS SHOULD PAY YOU FOR THEIR ROOMS. I AM EX FORCES AND ALWAYS PAID MY PARENTS MONEY FOR WHEN I CAME ON LEAVE. £30 EACH WEEK EVEN WHEN I LIVED IN GERMANY FOR 5 YEARS. SO STOP WHINGING AND GET ON WITH IT. the-big-yin
  • Score: 10

9:00pm Thu 7 Feb 13

outragedofmiltonkeynes says...

No mention of knocking the smokes on the head and saving £50 a week then Allison?
No mention of knocking the smokes on the head and saving £50 a week then Allison? outragedofmiltonkeynes
  • Score: 4

9:32pm Thu 7 Feb 13

Voice-of-reality says...

'Tis all quiet on the Middlesbrough front.
'Tis all quiet on the Middlesbrough front. Voice-of-reality
  • Score: 1

11:07pm Thu 7 Feb 13

spragger says...

One could guess Red Rob would not understand the difference between a benefit reduction & a tax ..
One could guess Red Rob would not understand the difference between a benefit reduction & a tax .. spragger
  • Score: 1

11:18pm Thu 7 Feb 13

IanfromCrook says...

Voice-of-reality wrote:
I respond to the primary points you make:
1. Being unemployed does not mean that you are entitled to a council house and voluntary work does not, though highly commendable, help to pay bills.
2. Your sons have not made the ultimate sacrifice - they have chosen a line of employment for which they are paid.
3. You are not having to pay for two homes because of your jobs and neither are your sons. First, when children grow up and leave home they forge their own lives. Secondly, when circumstances change, housing needs change.
4. Beveridge did not set up the welfare system - with regard to stamps and unemployment benefit it was David Lloyd George.
5. Yes, the government should encourage more people into work
6. Respect is earned - it should not just be demanded because of a job that people choose to do.
7. I would agree that the army has a duty of care to house your sons and their family (I know not their marital status). However, the army does not have a duty to provide houses for mothers, aunts, uncles and anyone else whom soldiers may choose to stay with when on leave.
Hi, just a note to your points:
1. The lady clearly stated she was recently unemployed.......erg
o was employed.
2. Her sons thankfully have not made the ultimate sacrifice but have in joining up put themselves at that risk for us.
3. No idea.....are soldiers charged for their accommodation?
4. Bit picky.....Churchill Lloyd George and Attlee had a lot to do with it making it a certain that Beverages 5 giants were beaten......Though Tories from Thatcher onward have been trying to resurrect ignorance.
5. I agree also.
6. I agree your point though this extends to MPs and their actions.
7. Fair point.

An extra point I have is although I understand the grievance of this family there are other reasons more persuasive that this is a wholly political weapon.
1. Broken families.......what of shared custody.
2. Foster Carers........alread
y too few.
3. Cost of administration......
....family of four with a boy and a girl start needing 2 bed, when one reaches 9 they need 3 bed, when the eldest leaves 2 bed then 1 bed.....really helps reviving community spirit this constantly moving. Growth in commuting initiated family spread this is another nail in its coffin..........sorr
y meandered......if something costs more than it saves it is not worth it !
Actually the list is endless disabled couples who need equipment.

Love to have a government that actually works for the country not just to play the game and benefit themselves.(all parties)
[quote][p][bold]Voice-of-reality[/bold] wrote: I respond to the primary points you make: 1. Being unemployed does not mean that you are entitled to a council house and voluntary work does not, though highly commendable, help to pay bills. 2. Your sons have not made the ultimate sacrifice - they have chosen a line of employment for which they are paid. 3. You are not having to pay for two homes because of your jobs and neither are your sons. First, when children grow up and leave home they forge their own lives. Secondly, when circumstances change, housing needs change. 4. Beveridge did not set up the welfare system - with regard to stamps and unemployment benefit it was David Lloyd George. 5. Yes, the government should encourage more people into work 6. Respect is earned - it should not just be demanded because of a job that people choose to do. 7. I would agree that the army has a duty of care to house your sons and their family (I know not their marital status). However, the army does not have a duty to provide houses for mothers, aunts, uncles and anyone else whom soldiers may choose to stay with when on leave.[/p][/quote]Hi, just a note to your points: 1. The lady clearly stated she was recently unemployed.......erg o was employed. 2. Her sons thankfully have not made the ultimate sacrifice but have in joining up put themselves at that risk for us. 3. No idea.....are soldiers charged for their accommodation? 4. Bit picky.....Churchill Lloyd George and Attlee had a lot to do with it making it a certain that Beverages 5 giants were beaten......Though Tories from Thatcher onward have been trying to resurrect ignorance. 5. I agree also. 6. I agree your point though this extends to MPs and their actions. 7. Fair point. An extra point I have is although I understand the grievance of this family there are other reasons more persuasive that this is a wholly political weapon. 1. Broken families.......what of shared custody. 2. Foster Carers........alread y too few. 3. Cost of administration...... ....family of four with a boy and a girl start needing 2 bed, when one reaches 9 they need 3 bed, when the eldest leaves 2 bed then 1 bed.....really helps reviving community spirit this constantly moving. Growth in commuting initiated family spread this is another nail in its coffin..........sorr y meandered......if something costs more than it saves it is not worth it ! Actually the list is endless disabled couples who need equipment. Love to have a government that actually works for the country not just to play the game and benefit themselves.(all parties) IanfromCrook
  • Score: 1

11:23pm Thu 7 Feb 13

IanfromCrook says...

the-big-yin wrote:
sarahd wrote:
Very good points made by voice-of-reality.

Alison-Could your sons not pay the shortfall? I know they are not paid a fotune but once the money is taken out of their wages for their lodgings and food (by the army) they do have a decent wedge left to play with.

When my children are working they will have to pay me for board to go towards their usage of the house, utilities and food, as I did when I lived at home.
I think the main point of this story should really be, is that the government has introduced this sensible idea, but without much thought for the councils and private landlords who do not have any 1 or 2 bedroom properties available to for those wanting to leave properties that are too big down size to. It may be an idea for the government to force councils to build more 1 and 2 bedroom houses for this plan to work.
ALSO YOUR SONS SHOULD PAY YOU FOR THEIR ROOMS. I AM EX FORCES AND ALWAYS PAID MY PARENTS MONEY FOR WHEN I CAME ON LEAVE. £30 EACH WEEK EVEN WHEN I LIVED IN GERMANY FOR 5 YEARS. SO STOP WHINGING AND GET ON WITH IT.
Good points......delayed in my saying so had to recover after laughing so much at the thought of a Tory government forcing councils to build houses. Like asking a fox to collect eggs from a hen house.
[quote][p][bold]the-big-yin[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sarahd[/bold] wrote: Very good points made by voice-of-reality. Alison-Could your sons not pay the shortfall? I know they are not paid a fotune but once the money is taken out of their wages for their lodgings and food (by the army) they do have a decent wedge left to play with. When my children are working they will have to pay me for board to go towards their usage of the house, utilities and food, as I did when I lived at home.[/p][/quote]I think the main point of this story should really be, is that the government has introduced this sensible idea, but without much thought for the councils and private landlords who do not have any 1 or 2 bedroom properties available to for those wanting to leave properties that are too big down size to. It may be an idea for the government to force councils to build more 1 and 2 bedroom houses for this plan to work. ALSO YOUR SONS SHOULD PAY YOU FOR THEIR ROOMS. I AM EX FORCES AND ALWAYS PAID MY PARENTS MONEY FOR WHEN I CAME ON LEAVE. £30 EACH WEEK EVEN WHEN I LIVED IN GERMANY FOR 5 YEARS. SO STOP WHINGING AND GET ON WITH IT.[/p][/quote]Good points......delayed in my saying so had to recover after laughing so much at the thought of a Tory government forcing councils to build houses. Like asking a fox to collect eggs from a hen house. IanfromCrook
  • Score: 4

3:21am Fri 8 Feb 13

Voice-of-reality says...

It was of course under a Tory government that the largest number of council houses were built per annum in the post war period - the best year being 1953. Anyhow, concur with your additional points Ian - Huhne is a disgrace and should have to pay all the money he got as an MP - nothing 'honourable' about that man. I also think, that it is worth mentioning, as you rightly point out about the 'ultimate sacrifice' that none of us would wish that to happen to any armed service personnel. This is a difficult case and the big-yin makes some very valuabkle points - clearly a need for some more smaller houses - alas, it was I think, Bevan who inisted that the majority of council housing in the immediate post war shoudl be three bedroom rather than a mix of 1,2 and 3. However, that is all a long time ago and whether the private sector could help in this case is something that I know not - excuse typos - late.
It was of course under a Tory government that the largest number of council houses were built per annum in the post war period - the best year being 1953. Anyhow, concur with your additional points Ian - Huhne is a disgrace and should have to pay all the money he got as an MP - nothing 'honourable' about that man. I also think, that it is worth mentioning, as you rightly point out about the 'ultimate sacrifice' that none of us would wish that to happen to any armed service personnel. This is a difficult case and the big-yin makes some very valuabkle points - clearly a need for some more smaller houses - alas, it was I think, Bevan who inisted that the majority of council housing in the immediate post war shoudl be three bedroom rather than a mix of 1,2 and 3. However, that is all a long time ago and whether the private sector could help in this case is something that I know not - excuse typos - late. Voice-of-reality
  • Score: -1

10:05am Fri 8 Feb 13

IanfromCrook says...

1953....from what I can make out a time when finding a caring Tory with a sense of social responsibly was not as it is now post 1979, about as rare as finding a Great Crested Newt in a city centre.......it may happen but its hard to believe.
1953....from what I can make out a time when finding a caring Tory with a sense of social responsibly was not as it is now post 1979, about as rare as finding a Great Crested Newt in a city centre.......it may happen but its hard to believe. IanfromCrook
  • Score: 1

10:16pm Fri 8 Feb 13

Redcar72 says...

Regarding this article,if Thacher had not decided to try to sell off all the council housing stock in this country maybe just maybe there would be enough council houses of all sizes to go round,then maybe just maybe this stealing of benefits would'nt be needed.
Regarding this article,if Thacher had not decided to try to sell off all the council housing stock in this country maybe just maybe there would be enough council houses of all sizes to go round,then maybe just maybe this stealing of benefits would'nt be needed. Redcar72
  • Score: 2

10:51pm Fri 8 Feb 13

Voice-of-reality says...

Utter nonsense. The size of council houses is the issue - not the sale of them. The size of them was decided well before Thatcher and the sale of council houses also started in 1946 (again predating Thatcher's tenure as Prime Minister). The problem in this case is of people thinking they have a specific council house for life; rather than, as the rest of the nation does, changing accommodation as circumstances change.
Utter nonsense. The size of council houses is the issue - not the sale of them. The size of them was decided well before Thatcher and the sale of council houses also started in 1946 (again predating Thatcher's tenure as Prime Minister). The problem in this case is of people thinking they have a specific council house for life; rather than, as the rest of the nation does, changing accommodation as circumstances change. Voice-of-reality
  • Score: 3

11:14pm Fri 8 Feb 13

IanfromCrook says...

Voice-of-reality wrote:
Utter nonsense. The size of council houses is the issue - not the sale of them. The size of them was decided well before Thatcher and the sale of council houses also started in 1946 (again predating Thatcher's tenure as Prime Minister). The problem in this case is of people thinking they have a specific council house for life; rather than, as the rest of the nation does, changing accommodation as circumstances change.
Lack of housing is the problem.............
and Thatcher was to blame tying the hands of councils so they could not replenish stock sold in 'right to buy schemes'. Before the 1950s a lot of the privately rented housing stock were families living in one up one down back to back houses with outside loos. The politicians THEN worked for the people to get them out of the disease ridden squalors.
Would not happen now.................
..........
http://england.shelt
er.org.uk/__data/****
ets/pdf_file/0009/39
537/GenerationSqualo
rreport8.3.05.pdf
[quote][p][bold]Voice-of-reality[/bold] wrote: Utter nonsense. The size of council houses is the issue - not the sale of them. The size of them was decided well before Thatcher and the sale of council houses also started in 1946 (again predating Thatcher's tenure as Prime Minister). The problem in this case is of people thinking they have a specific council house for life; rather than, as the rest of the nation does, changing accommodation as circumstances change.[/p][/quote]Lack of housing is the problem............. and Thatcher was to blame tying the hands of councils so they could not replenish stock sold in 'right to buy schemes'. Before the 1950s a lot of the privately rented housing stock were families living in one up one down back to back houses with outside loos. The politicians THEN worked for the people to get them out of the disease ridden squalors. Would not happen now................. .......... http://england.shelt er.org.uk/__data/**** ets/pdf_file/0009/39 537/GenerationSqualo rreport8.3.05.pdf IanfromCrook
  • Score: 0

8:13am Sat 9 Feb 13

Thorrr says...

I am currently serving in the armed forces. Accommodation is provided for all serving personnel for those that want it at a subsidised rate. In that fact alone, the government is honouring its commitment to the military convenant. I am sure there are many out there in private employment who would want the benefit of the level of subsidy we in the armed forces receive. In the past when I have visited by parents, there have been times when I have had t sleep on the floor etc. but I have left home, it is not my house anymore - I've grown up so do not require a permanent bedroom at my mums place, just on the off chance I may visit.
I am currently serving in the armed forces. Accommodation is provided for all serving personnel for those that want it at a subsidised rate. In that fact alone, the government is honouring its commitment to the military convenant. I am sure there are many out there in private employment who would want the benefit of the level of subsidy we in the armed forces receive. In the past when I have visited by parents, there have been times when I have had t sleep on the floor etc. but I have left home, it is not my house anymore - I've grown up so do not require a permanent bedroom at my mums place, just on the off chance I may visit. Thorrr
  • Score: 4

9:00am Sat 9 Feb 13

Jonn says...

While some of you seem to think the bedroom tax is a great idea, along with the abolishment of the council tax benefit in April, you will see a major increase in homelessness and families simply being put up in B&B's and hotels, all at YOUR local councils massive expense. Most housing and council tax benefit claimants are actually IN WORK so any 'workshy scrounger' tag you apply is nonsense.
I have just searched on Rightmove for the availabilty of affordable 1 bedroom rental properties in Darlington, there are 9.
As long as the poorest are seen to be giving a good kicking though, that's the main thing.
While some of you seem to think the bedroom tax is a great idea, along with the abolishment of the council tax benefit in April, you will see a major increase in homelessness and families simply being put up in B&B's and hotels, all at YOUR local councils massive expense. Most housing and council tax benefit claimants are actually IN WORK so any 'workshy scrounger' tag you apply is nonsense. I have just searched on Rightmove for the availabilty of affordable 1 bedroom rental properties in Darlington, there are 9. As long as the poorest are seen to be giving a good kicking though, that's the main thing. Jonn
  • Score: 0

3:28pm Sat 9 Feb 13

Voice-of-reality says...

Thus this woman can be moved - save herself money and her house be given to a deserving family needing the space (and all without any recourse to hostels).
Thus this woman can be moved - save herself money and her house be given to a deserving family needing the space (and all without any recourse to hostels). Voice-of-reality
  • Score: 3

6:16pm Sat 9 Feb 13

the-big-yin says...

IanfromCrook wrote:
the-big-yin wrote:
sarahd wrote:
Very good points made by voice-of-reality.

Alison-Could your sons not pay the shortfall? I know they are not paid a fotune but once the money is taken out of their wages for their lodgings and food (by the army) they do have a decent wedge left to play with.

When my children are working they will have to pay me for board to go towards their usage of the house, utilities and food, as I did when I lived at home.
I think the main point of this story should really be, is that the government has introduced this sensible idea, but without much thought for the councils and private landlords who do not have any 1 or 2 bedroom properties available to for those wanting to leave properties that are too big down size to. It may be an idea for the government to force councils to build more 1 and 2 bedroom houses for this plan to work.
ALSO YOUR SONS SHOULD PAY YOU FOR THEIR ROOMS. I AM EX FORCES AND ALWAYS PAID MY PARENTS MONEY FOR WHEN I CAME ON LEAVE. £30 EACH WEEK EVEN WHEN I LIVED IN GERMANY FOR 5 YEARS. SO STOP WHINGING AND GET ON WITH IT.
Good points......delayed in my saying so had to recover after laughing so much at the thought of a Tory government forcing councils to build houses. Like asking a fox to collect eggs from a hen house.
Very very true....Our Con / Dem government are too busy sucking up to other countries, whilst in the process ruining ours with these stupid and very dangerous rounds of austerity....
I firmly believe that the way out of this new recession is to get the country building again...How many not for profit groups could we get to build new housing for those desperate to rent where their families live, instead of forcing them to move away...
Stop companies who are wanting to build to sell straight on, and have companies who are willing to build and allow those in need of a home to rent from them.....Also this new change in benefits should be scrapped, as there are no 1 and 2 bed houses for people to down size to.......
[quote][p][bold]IanfromCrook[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]the-big-yin[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sarahd[/bold] wrote: Very good points made by voice-of-reality. Alison-Could your sons not pay the shortfall? I know they are not paid a fotune but once the money is taken out of their wages for their lodgings and food (by the army) they do have a decent wedge left to play with. When my children are working they will have to pay me for board to go towards their usage of the house, utilities and food, as I did when I lived at home.[/p][/quote]I think the main point of this story should really be, is that the government has introduced this sensible idea, but without much thought for the councils and private landlords who do not have any 1 or 2 bedroom properties available to for those wanting to leave properties that are too big down size to. It may be an idea for the government to force councils to build more 1 and 2 bedroom houses for this plan to work. ALSO YOUR SONS SHOULD PAY YOU FOR THEIR ROOMS. I AM EX FORCES AND ALWAYS PAID MY PARENTS MONEY FOR WHEN I CAME ON LEAVE. £30 EACH WEEK EVEN WHEN I LIVED IN GERMANY FOR 5 YEARS. SO STOP WHINGING AND GET ON WITH IT.[/p][/quote]Good points......delayed in my saying so had to recover after laughing so much at the thought of a Tory government forcing councils to build houses. Like asking a fox to collect eggs from a hen house.[/p][/quote]Very very true....Our Con / Dem government are too busy sucking up to other countries, whilst in the process ruining ours with these stupid and very dangerous rounds of austerity.... I firmly believe that the way out of this new recession is to get the country building again...How many not for profit groups could we get to build new housing for those desperate to rent where their families live, instead of forcing them to move away... Stop companies who are wanting to build to sell straight on, and have companies who are willing to build and allow those in need of a home to rent from them.....Also this new change in benefits should be scrapped, as there are no 1 and 2 bed houses for people to down size to....... the-big-yin
  • Score: 0

9:25pm Sat 9 Feb 13

johnny_p says...

Alison Huggan wrote:
In response to your comments which have been made without knowing my circumstances, I have worked all my life and are unemployed now for the first time as I have just finished a degree, I do 2 voluntary jobs in return for what I claim back from my stamps, my sons who have made the ultimate sacrifice for the likes of you lot who show no respect nor consideration for them and the 1000s of others that serve this country are hit with a double wammy of living costs, now please come back to me and tell me how many of you have to pay for two homes because of your jobs, it would suit you all to suggest that this government should be doing more to get people into work so they dont have to rely on state benefits to pay there way, even though that is why Beveridge set up the welfare system in the first place to assist people seeking work. You are really very shallow minded in your comments regarding my case, although that does not surprise me given the fact you spirt out comments without knowing the full facts, i will continue my fight against this tax for my sons and the thousands of others that serve this country and get no respect for doing so. For the guy who claims he has served in the forces before, my sons dont want hand outs for there jobs that they do, they want David Cameron to keep to his word on the armed forces covenant which he promised not so long ago, i take it your not a fan of the british legion who are challenging the government on many issues surrounding housing for forces and their families
I don't wish to be rude Alison- but you've got a degree? A degree in what? Certainly not English.

You can't find work- even as a graduate? And your two sons who despite being paid by the Army can't contribute to the home they return to?

This is another Northern Echo nonsense story.
[quote][p][bold]Alison Huggan[/bold] wrote: In response to your comments which have been made without knowing my circumstances, I have worked all my life and are unemployed now for the first time as I have just finished a degree, I do 2 voluntary jobs in return for what I claim back from my stamps, my sons who have made the ultimate sacrifice for the likes of you lot who show no respect nor consideration for them and the 1000s of others that serve this country are hit with a double wammy of living costs, now please come back to me and tell me how many of you have to pay for two homes because of your jobs, it would suit you all to suggest that this government should be doing more to get people into work so they dont have to rely on state benefits to pay there way, even though that is why Beveridge set up the welfare system in the first place to assist people seeking work. You are really very shallow minded in your comments regarding my case, although that does not surprise me given the fact you spirt out comments without knowing the full facts, i will continue my fight against this tax for my sons and the thousands of others that serve this country and get no respect for doing so. For the guy who claims he has served in the forces before, my sons dont want hand outs for there jobs that they do, they want David Cameron to keep to his word on the armed forces covenant which he promised not so long ago, i take it your not a fan of the british legion who are challenging the government on many issues surrounding housing for forces and their families[/p][/quote]I don't wish to be rude Alison- but you've got a degree? A degree in what? Certainly not English. You can't find work- even as a graduate? And your two sons who despite being paid by the Army can't contribute to the home they return to? This is another Northern Echo nonsense story. johnny_p
  • Score: 5

7:35am Sun 10 Feb 13

Thorrr says...

Alison - can you please explain how you are paying for two houses?
Alison - can you please explain how you are paying for two houses? Thorrr
  • Score: 4

7:43am Sun 10 Feb 13

greenfinger says...

Alison obviously prefers if we pay for her spare rooms and not her sons. Lovely woman, heart in the right place! Id be embarrassed if i was her sons. they'll probably be the talk of the army not just the north east. Clearly too greedy to contribute anything to the family home. lovely lads she's brought up. must be like their mother and want us to pay for it. what a horrible cretin she sounds.
Alison obviously prefers if we pay for her spare rooms and not her sons. Lovely woman, heart in the right place! Id be embarrassed if i was her sons. they'll probably be the talk of the army not just the north east. Clearly too greedy to contribute anything to the family home. lovely lads she's brought up. must be like their mother and want us to pay for it. what a horrible cretin she sounds. greenfinger
  • Score: 4

9:06am Sun 10 Feb 13

Jonn says...

greenfinger wrote:
Alison obviously prefers if we pay for her spare rooms and not her sons. Lovely woman, heart in the right place! Id be embarrassed if i was her sons. they'll probably be the talk of the army not just the north east. Clearly too greedy to contribute anything to the family home. lovely lads she's brought up. must be like their mother and want us to pay for it. what a horrible cretin she sounds.
So, you are paying for her spare rooms are you? Seems you have chosen to ignore the bit where Alison mentioned she has worked all her life until recently so would have been contributing.
You really have fallen for the Government propaganda big time haven't you.
Do you not mind that the Banks have robbed each and every one of us to the tune of tens of thousands of pounds?
[quote][p][bold]greenfinger[/bold] wrote: Alison obviously prefers if we pay for her spare rooms and not her sons. Lovely woman, heart in the right place! Id be embarrassed if i was her sons. they'll probably be the talk of the army not just the north east. Clearly too greedy to contribute anything to the family home. lovely lads she's brought up. must be like their mother and want us to pay for it. what a horrible cretin she sounds.[/p][/quote]So, you are paying for her spare rooms are you? Seems you have chosen to ignore the bit where Alison mentioned she has worked all her life until recently so would have been contributing. You really have fallen for the Government propaganda big time haven't you. Do you not mind that the Banks have robbed each and every one of us to the tune of tens of thousands of pounds? Jonn
  • Score: -2

9:35am Sun 10 Feb 13

simmo707 says...

BROKEN BRITAIN UNDER TORIES – GOVERNMENT CONTROLLED MEDIA
A collective Government mind set is about as bright as a 2 watt bulb .Number 10’s memo of ‘push the Horsemeat Scandal’ has obviously gone out to all and sundry ,granted it wants investigating we the consumer want to know what we are eating .But what about genetically modified crops we are given no choice .It won’t be long before a death is reportedly linked to this issue because we the public are still smarting over more serious concerns we have .Government and Media can turn a blind eye to the many deaths caused by ATOS and mismanaged Hospitals ,the Beg for your Benefits syndrome “it is not an entitlement “ .The new Justice Bill ,taking away even more of our rights ,but for them to detract from a golden PR opportunity such as this issue to keep the Public ‘focused’ must be milked until another distraction to real concerns appear .You can kid some of the people some of the time ,but not all the people all the time .
www.brokenbritainund
ertories.com
BROKEN BRITAIN UNDER TORIES – GOVERNMENT CONTROLLED MEDIA A collective Government mind set is about as bright as a 2 watt bulb .Number 10’s memo of ‘push the Horsemeat Scandal’ has obviously gone out to all and sundry ,granted it wants investigating we the consumer want to know what we are eating .But what about genetically modified crops we are given no choice .It won’t be long before a death is reportedly linked to this issue because we the public are still smarting over more serious concerns we have .Government and Media can turn a blind eye to the many deaths caused by ATOS and mismanaged Hospitals ,the Beg for your Benefits syndrome “it is not an entitlement “ .The new Justice Bill ,taking away even more of our rights ,but for them to detract from a golden PR opportunity such as this issue to keep the Public ‘focused’ must be milked until another distraction to real concerns appear .You can kid some of the people some of the time ,but not all the people all the time . www.brokenbritainund ertories.com simmo707
  • Score: 1

9:55am Sun 10 Feb 13

johnny_p says...

simmo707 wrote:
BROKEN BRITAIN UNDER TORIES – GOVERNMENT CONTROLLED MEDIA
A collective Government mind set is about as bright as a 2 watt bulb .Number 10’s memo of ‘push the Horsemeat Scandal’ has obviously gone out to all and sundry ,granted it wants investigating we the consumer want to know what we are eating .But what about genetically modified crops we are given no choice .It won’t be long before a death is reportedly linked to this issue because we the public are still smarting over more serious concerns we have .Government and Media can turn a blind eye to the many deaths caused by ATOS and mismanaged Hospitals ,the Beg for your Benefits syndrome “it is not an entitlement “ .The new Justice Bill ,taking away even more of our rights ,but for them to detract from a golden PR opportunity such as this issue to keep the Public ‘focused’ must be milked until another distraction to real concerns appear .You can kid some of the people some of the time ,but not all the people all the time .
www.brokenbritainund

ertories.com
What is that?

Horse meat. Genetically modified crops. ATOS. Hospitals. Justice Bill.

Everything in there apart from the actual subject being discussed.

Simmo707- you're a copy and paste clown.
[quote][p][bold]simmo707[/bold] wrote: BROKEN BRITAIN UNDER TORIES – GOVERNMENT CONTROLLED MEDIA A collective Government mind set is about as bright as a 2 watt bulb .Number 10’s memo of ‘push the Horsemeat Scandal’ has obviously gone out to all and sundry ,granted it wants investigating we the consumer want to know what we are eating .But what about genetically modified crops we are given no choice .It won’t be long before a death is reportedly linked to this issue because we the public are still smarting over more serious concerns we have .Government and Media can turn a blind eye to the many deaths caused by ATOS and mismanaged Hospitals ,the Beg for your Benefits syndrome “it is not an entitlement “ .The new Justice Bill ,taking away even more of our rights ,but for them to detract from a golden PR opportunity such as this issue to keep the Public ‘focused’ must be milked until another distraction to real concerns appear .You can kid some of the people some of the time ,but not all the people all the time . www.brokenbritainund ertories.com[/p][/quote]What is that? Horse meat. Genetically modified crops. ATOS. Hospitals. Justice Bill. Everything in there apart from the actual subject being discussed. Simmo707- you're a copy and paste clown. johnny_p
  • Score: 4

10:06am Sun 10 Feb 13

DOGLAWRENCE says...

I have read with interest all the Commenfs on this Lady and her Plight but can't understand why it is in the Paper as her Sons will easily afford to pay for her .
I am 55 and live in a Three Bedroom Council house having outlived both my Parents I had a Stroke and became Epileptic in 2007 my only Friends are my two Dogs .
A third of my Brain was Damaged at the time and I am Severely Depressed but because I have not Self Harmed myself can not get any Suport from Mental Health Services .
So Basically on the 1st of April my Spendable income will be £35 if I am Lucky .
The Woman who Features in this Debate should Consider herself Lucky as her Sons ( if they have a Conscience ) will no doubt Pay her the Short Fall in her Rent .but my Life will end up been Destitute and Home Less .
I have read with interest all the Commenfs on this Lady and her Plight but can't understand why it is in the Paper as her Sons will easily afford to pay for her . I am 55 and live in a Three Bedroom Council house having outlived both my Parents I had a Stroke and became Epileptic in 2007 my only Friends are my two Dogs . A third of my Brain was Damaged at the time and I am Severely Depressed but because I have not Self Harmed myself can not get any Suport from Mental Health Services . So Basically on the 1st of April my Spendable income will be £35 if I am Lucky . The Woman who Features in this Debate should Consider herself Lucky as her Sons ( if they have a Conscience ) will no doubt Pay her the Short Fall in her Rent .but my Life will end up been Destitute and Home Less . DOGLAWRENCE
  • Score: 1

11:15am Sun 10 Feb 13

outragedofmiltonkeynes says...

DOGLAWRENCE wrote:
I have read with interest all the Commenfs on this Lady and her Plight but can't understand why it is in the Paper as her Sons will easily afford to pay for her .
I am 55 and live in a Three Bedroom Council house having outlived both my Parents I had a Stroke and became Epileptic in 2007 my only Friends are my two Dogs .
A third of my Brain was Damaged at the time and I am Severely Depressed but because I have not Self Harmed myself can not get any Suport from Mental Health Services .
So Basically on the 1st of April my Spendable income will be £35 if I am Lucky .
The Woman who Features in this Debate should Consider herself Lucky as her Sons ( if they have a Conscience ) will no doubt Pay her the Short Fall in her Rent .but my Life will end up been Destitute and Home Less .
And yours is the type of story which is worth reporting on and it seems that you are a deservng case with a genuine need for extra help.
[quote][p][bold]DOGLAWRENCE[/bold] wrote: I have read with interest all the Commenfs on this Lady and her Plight but can't understand why it is in the Paper as her Sons will easily afford to pay for her . I am 55 and live in a Three Bedroom Council house having outlived both my Parents I had a Stroke and became Epileptic in 2007 my only Friends are my two Dogs . A third of my Brain was Damaged at the time and I am Severely Depressed but because I have not Self Harmed myself can not get any Suport from Mental Health Services . So Basically on the 1st of April my Spendable income will be £35 if I am Lucky . The Woman who Features in this Debate should Consider herself Lucky as her Sons ( if they have a Conscience ) will no doubt Pay her the Short Fall in her Rent .but my Life will end up been Destitute and Home Less .[/p][/quote]And yours is the type of story which is worth reporting on and it seems that you are a deservng case with a genuine need for extra help. outragedofmiltonkeynes
  • Score: 2

11:34am Sun 10 Feb 13

Jonn says...

outragedofmiltonkeyn
es
wrote:
DOGLAWRENCE wrote:
I have read with interest all the Commenfs on this Lady and her Plight but can't understand why it is in the Paper as her Sons will easily afford to pay for her .
I am 55 and live in a Three Bedroom Council house having outlived both my Parents I had a Stroke and became Epileptic in 2007 my only Friends are my two Dogs .
A third of my Brain was Damaged at the time and I am Severely Depressed but because I have not Self Harmed myself can not get any Suport from Mental Health Services .
So Basically on the 1st of April my Spendable income will be £35 if I am Lucky .
The Woman who Features in this Debate should Consider herself Lucky as her Sons ( if they have a Conscience ) will no doubt Pay her the Short Fall in her Rent .but my Life will end up been Destitute and Home Less .
And yours is the type of story which is worth reporting on and it seems that you are a deservng case with a genuine need for extra help.
And don't forget clause 99 which will be introduced in April. This means it will now be virtually impossible for anyone declared fit for work by the ATOS scam medical to challenge the decision at a tribunal. Too many people have been appealing so they change the rules again. A disgusting Government with blood on their hands.
[quote][p][bold]outragedofmiltonkeyn es[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DOGLAWRENCE[/bold] wrote: I have read with interest all the Commenfs on this Lady and her Plight but can't understand why it is in the Paper as her Sons will easily afford to pay for her . I am 55 and live in a Three Bedroom Council house having outlived both my Parents I had a Stroke and became Epileptic in 2007 my only Friends are my two Dogs . A third of my Brain was Damaged at the time and I am Severely Depressed but because I have not Self Harmed myself can not get any Suport from Mental Health Services . So Basically on the 1st of April my Spendable income will be £35 if I am Lucky . The Woman who Features in this Debate should Consider herself Lucky as her Sons ( if they have a Conscience ) will no doubt Pay her the Short Fall in her Rent .but my Life will end up been Destitute and Home Less .[/p][/quote]And yours is the type of story which is worth reporting on and it seems that you are a deservng case with a genuine need for extra help.[/p][/quote]And don't forget clause 99 which will be introduced in April. This means it will now be virtually impossible for anyone declared fit for work by the ATOS scam medical to challenge the decision at a tribunal. Too many people have been appealing so they change the rules again. A disgusting Government with blood on their hands. Jonn
  • Score: 1

12:26pm Sun 10 Feb 13

DOGLAWRENCE says...

outragedofmiltonkeyn
es
wrote:
DOGLAWRENCE wrote:
I have read with interest all the Commenfs on this Lady and her Plight but can't understand why it is in the Paper as her Sons will easily afford to pay for her .
I am 55 and live in a Three Bedroom Council house having outlived both my Parents I had a Stroke and became Epileptic in 2007 my only Friends are my two Dogs .
A third of my Brain was Damaged at the time and I am Severely Depressed but because I have not Self Harmed myself can not get any Suport from Mental Health Services .
So Basically on the 1st of April my Spendable income will be £35 if I am Lucky .
The Woman who Features in this Debate should Consider herself Lucky as her Sons ( if they have a Conscience ) will no doubt Pay her the Short Fall in her Rent .but my Life will end up been Destitute and Home Less .
And yours is the type of story which is worth reporting on and it seems that you are a deservng case with a genuine need for extra help.
It would be nice if Icould get extra help but as I have Problems managing my Finances even now , after the 1st April I will be wishing my Stroke had been Fatal then at least I would be Stress Free
[quote][p][bold]outragedofmiltonkeyn es[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DOGLAWRENCE[/bold] wrote: I have read with interest all the Commenfs on this Lady and her Plight but can't understand why it is in the Paper as her Sons will easily afford to pay for her . I am 55 and live in a Three Bedroom Council house having outlived both my Parents I had a Stroke and became Epileptic in 2007 my only Friends are my two Dogs . A third of my Brain was Damaged at the time and I am Severely Depressed but because I have not Self Harmed myself can not get any Suport from Mental Health Services . So Basically on the 1st of April my Spendable income will be £35 if I am Lucky . The Woman who Features in this Debate should Consider herself Lucky as her Sons ( if they have a Conscience ) will no doubt Pay her the Short Fall in her Rent .but my Life will end up been Destitute and Home Less .[/p][/quote]And yours is the type of story which is worth reporting on and it seems that you are a deservng case with a genuine need for extra help.[/p][/quote]It would be nice if Icould get extra help but as I have Problems managing my Finances even now , after the 1st April I will be wishing my Stroke had been Fatal then at least I would be Stress Free DOGLAWRENCE
  • Score: 0

8:04pm Sun 10 Feb 13

johnny_p says...

DOGLAWRENCE wrote:
outragedofmiltonkeyn

es
wrote:
DOGLAWRENCE wrote:
I have read with interest all the Commenfs on this Lady and her Plight but can't understand why it is in the Paper as her Sons will easily afford to pay for her .
I am 55 and live in a Three Bedroom Council house having outlived both my Parents I had a Stroke and became Epileptic in 2007 my only Friends are my two Dogs .
A third of my Brain was Damaged at the time and I am Severely Depressed but because I have not Self Harmed myself can not get any Suport from Mental Health Services .
So Basically on the 1st of April my Spendable income will be £35 if I am Lucky .
The Woman who Features in this Debate should Consider herself Lucky as her Sons ( if they have a Conscience ) will no doubt Pay her the Short Fall in her Rent .but my Life will end up been Destitute and Home Less .
And yours is the type of story which is worth reporting on and it seems that you are a deservng case with a genuine need for extra help.
It would be nice if Icould get extra help but as I have Problems managing my Finances even now , after the 1st April I will be wishing my Stroke had been Fatal then at least I would be Stress Free
My full sympathy with your current condition, but as you admit your case is not the same as hers. She has two working sons now who simply want somewhere to stay when they come home on leave.

As for yourself, wouldn't you be better placed in a smaller council house, leaving your current (larger) house available for a family? It would be far more manageable for you too.

It also sounds like you have issues regarding your state of mind and so could politely suggest you speak to a health care professional about you feelings?
[quote][p][bold]DOGLAWRENCE[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]outragedofmiltonkeyn es[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DOGLAWRENCE[/bold] wrote: I have read with interest all the Commenfs on this Lady and her Plight but can't understand why it is in the Paper as her Sons will easily afford to pay for her . I am 55 and live in a Three Bedroom Council house having outlived both my Parents I had a Stroke and became Epileptic in 2007 my only Friends are my two Dogs . A third of my Brain was Damaged at the time and I am Severely Depressed but because I have not Self Harmed myself can not get any Suport from Mental Health Services . So Basically on the 1st of April my Spendable income will be £35 if I am Lucky . The Woman who Features in this Debate should Consider herself Lucky as her Sons ( if they have a Conscience ) will no doubt Pay her the Short Fall in her Rent .but my Life will end up been Destitute and Home Less .[/p][/quote]And yours is the type of story which is worth reporting on and it seems that you are a deservng case with a genuine need for extra help.[/p][/quote]It would be nice if Icould get extra help but as I have Problems managing my Finances even now , after the 1st April I will be wishing my Stroke had been Fatal then at least I would be Stress Free[/p][/quote]My full sympathy with your current condition, but as you admit your case is not the same as hers. She has two working sons now who simply want somewhere to stay when they come home on leave. As for yourself, wouldn't you be better placed in a smaller council house, leaving your current (larger) house available for a family? It would be far more manageable for you too. It also sounds like you have issues regarding your state of mind and so could politely suggest you speak to a health care professional about you feelings? johnny_p
  • Score: 2

10:33pm Sun 10 Feb 13

Jonn says...

DOGLAWRENCE wrote:
outragedofmiltonkeyn

es
wrote:
DOGLAWRENCE wrote:
I have read with interest all the Commenfs on this Lady and her Plight but can't understand why it is in the Paper as her Sons will easily afford to pay for her .
I am 55 and live in a Three Bedroom Council house having outlived both my Parents I had a Stroke and became Epileptic in 2007 my only Friends are my two Dogs .
A third of my Brain was Damaged at the time and I am Severely Depressed but because I have not Self Harmed myself can not get any Suport from Mental Health Services .
So Basically on the 1st of April my Spendable income will be £35 if I am Lucky .
The Woman who Features in this Debate should Consider herself Lucky as her Sons ( if they have a Conscience ) will no doubt Pay her the Short Fall in her Rent .but my Life will end up been Destitute and Home Less .
And yours is the type of story which is worth reporting on and it seems that you are a deservng case with a genuine need for extra help.
It would be nice if Icould get extra help but as I have Problems managing my Finances even now , after the 1st April I will be wishing my Stroke had been Fatal then at least I would be Stress Free
This Government really have gone way too far with their dispicable treatment of ill and disabled people but do not them get to you. You are not alone in your plight, hundreds of thousands are being treated just like you are.
Look on the Black Triangle website, sign their e petitions, join their facebook page and you will find hundreds of testaments just like yours.
I have seen lie after lie, in Parliament, coming from the mouths of Cameron and Duncan Smith over these reforms, how they are getting away with I do not know. Even when directly confronted with actual individual cases of people comitting suicide over benefit cuts, they simply wave it away. With a bit of luck, this Governments cowardly actions towards it's most vulnerable citizens will result in it's downfall very soon after April as social unrest will ensue.
Keep you head up.
[quote][p][bold]DOGLAWRENCE[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]outragedofmiltonkeyn es[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DOGLAWRENCE[/bold] wrote: I have read with interest all the Commenfs on this Lady and her Plight but can't understand why it is in the Paper as her Sons will easily afford to pay for her . I am 55 and live in a Three Bedroom Council house having outlived both my Parents I had a Stroke and became Epileptic in 2007 my only Friends are my two Dogs . A third of my Brain was Damaged at the time and I am Severely Depressed but because I have not Self Harmed myself can not get any Suport from Mental Health Services . So Basically on the 1st of April my Spendable income will be £35 if I am Lucky . The Woman who Features in this Debate should Consider herself Lucky as her Sons ( if they have a Conscience ) will no doubt Pay her the Short Fall in her Rent .but my Life will end up been Destitute and Home Less .[/p][/quote]And yours is the type of story which is worth reporting on and it seems that you are a deservng case with a genuine need for extra help.[/p][/quote]It would be nice if Icould get extra help but as I have Problems managing my Finances even now , after the 1st April I will be wishing my Stroke had been Fatal then at least I would be Stress Free[/p][/quote]This Government really have gone way too far with their dispicable treatment of ill and disabled people but do not them get to you. You are not alone in your plight, hundreds of thousands are being treated just like you are. Look on the Black Triangle website, sign their e petitions, join their facebook page and you will find hundreds of testaments just like yours. I have seen lie after lie, in Parliament, coming from the mouths of Cameron and Duncan Smith over these reforms, how they are getting away with I do not know. Even when directly confronted with actual individual cases of people comitting suicide over benefit cuts, they simply wave it away. With a bit of luck, this Governments cowardly actions towards it's most vulnerable citizens will result in it's downfall very soon after April as social unrest will ensue. Keep you head up. Jonn
  • Score: 1

10:55pm Sun 10 Feb 13

Jonn says...

johnny_p wrote:
DOGLAWRENCE wrote:
outragedofmiltonkeyn


es
wrote:
DOGLAWRENCE wrote:
I have read with interest all the Commenfs on this Lady and her Plight but can't understand why it is in the Paper as her Sons will easily afford to pay for her .
I am 55 and live in a Three Bedroom Council house having outlived both my Parents I had a Stroke and became Epileptic in 2007 my only Friends are my two Dogs .
A third of my Brain was Damaged at the time and I am Severely Depressed but because I have not Self Harmed myself can not get any Suport from Mental Health Services .
So Basically on the 1st of April my Spendable income will be £35 if I am Lucky .
The Woman who Features in this Debate should Consider herself Lucky as her Sons ( if they have a Conscience ) will no doubt Pay her the Short Fall in her Rent .but my Life will end up been Destitute and Home Less .
And yours is the type of story which is worth reporting on and it seems that you are a deservng case with a genuine need for extra help.
It would be nice if Icould get extra help but as I have Problems managing my Finances even now , after the 1st April I will be wishing my Stroke had been Fatal then at least I would be Stress Free
My full sympathy with your current condition, but as you admit your case is not the same as hers. She has two working sons now who simply want somewhere to stay when they come home on leave.

As for yourself, wouldn't you be better placed in a smaller council house, leaving your current (larger) house available for a family? It would be far more manageable for you too.

It also sounds like you have issues regarding your state of mind and so could politely suggest you speak to a health care professional about you feelings?
So, where would you suggest this man start, considering his poor physical and mental health, plus his lack of money?
[quote][p][bold]johnny_p[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DOGLAWRENCE[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]outragedofmiltonkeyn es[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DOGLAWRENCE[/bold] wrote: I have read with interest all the Commenfs on this Lady and her Plight but can't understand why it is in the Paper as her Sons will easily afford to pay for her . I am 55 and live in a Three Bedroom Council house having outlived both my Parents I had a Stroke and became Epileptic in 2007 my only Friends are my two Dogs . A third of my Brain was Damaged at the time and I am Severely Depressed but because I have not Self Harmed myself can not get any Suport from Mental Health Services . So Basically on the 1st of April my Spendable income will be £35 if I am Lucky . The Woman who Features in this Debate should Consider herself Lucky as her Sons ( if they have a Conscience ) will no doubt Pay her the Short Fall in her Rent .but my Life will end up been Destitute and Home Less .[/p][/quote]And yours is the type of story which is worth reporting on and it seems that you are a deservng case with a genuine need for extra help.[/p][/quote]It would be nice if Icould get extra help but as I have Problems managing my Finances even now , after the 1st April I will be wishing my Stroke had been Fatal then at least I would be Stress Free[/p][/quote]My full sympathy with your current condition, but as you admit your case is not the same as hers. She has two working sons now who simply want somewhere to stay when they come home on leave. As for yourself, wouldn't you be better placed in a smaller council house, leaving your current (larger) house available for a family? It would be far more manageable for you too. It also sounds like you have issues regarding your state of mind and so could politely suggest you speak to a health care professional about you feelings?[/p][/quote]So, where would you suggest this man start, considering his poor physical and mental health, plus his lack of money? Jonn
  • Score: -1

11:13pm Sun 10 Feb 13

IanfromCrook says...

Every sympathy to DOGLAWRENCE however the government is kicking everyone at the bottom from the not so well off to the most vulnerable. It is of no use what so ever for people to get in the mindset I think you have just been nudged think yourself lucky cause by comparison I had a good kicking from the ConDems. Put the blame squarely where it should be with the government.
Complained to e petitions, not that they do any good, because I suspect they are watering down the complaints by allowing duplicate petitions (against their rules). 14 separate petitions to abolish bedroom tax.
Although I realise signing one is like xxxxxx in the wind with this government.
Every sympathy to DOGLAWRENCE however the government is kicking everyone at the bottom from the not so well off to the most vulnerable. It is of no use what so ever for people to get in the mindset I think you have just been nudged think yourself lucky cause by comparison I had a good kicking from the ConDems. Put the blame squarely where it should be with the government. Complained to e petitions, not that they do any good, because I suspect they are watering down the complaints by allowing duplicate petitions (against their rules). 14 separate petitions to abolish bedroom tax. Although I realise signing one is like xxxxxx in the wind with this government. IanfromCrook
  • Score: 0

3:30am Mon 11 Feb 13

Davidwillis says...

The word tax has been misused in this whole 'bedroom tax' campaign. Tax is where you pay a share of the money you earn to government. A cut in benefit is not tax, it wasn't your money to begin with. Bedroom tax is just left wing propaganda, by people who have no recognition on the financial limits this country has.
If a single person is living in a house you should pay for it yourself. I have to take in a lodger in my spare room to pay my mortgage.
In the exact story above, surely the sons have a registered home where they are registered to vote, have bills sent to etc. If that is their mothers address, she should not be affected by this, if they have a home elsewhere surely the two of them can pay mother the money they're losing out.
Housing benefit reform is needed, some needy families are in bedsits waiting for accommodation while single people are in houses that are more than they need funded by taxpayer. Plenty of young people are working hard and can't afford they own homes. And if the government continued to subsidy without limit it would push house prices and rent up higher making it harder for everyone.
People living on subsidised accommodation at taxpayers expense, should be encouraged to downsize if possible or be allowed to take on a lodger, if they not willing to do either they have to be prepared to pay more like the rest of us.
The word tax has been misused in this whole 'bedroom tax' campaign. Tax is where you pay a share of the money you earn to government. A cut in benefit is not tax, it wasn't your money to begin with. Bedroom tax is just left wing propaganda, by people who have no recognition on the financial limits this country has. If a single person is living in a house you should pay for it yourself. I have to take in a lodger in my spare room to pay my mortgage. In the exact story above, surely the sons have a registered home where they are registered to vote, have bills sent to etc. If that is their mothers address, she should not be affected by this, if they have a home elsewhere surely the two of them can pay mother the money they're losing out. Housing benefit reform is needed, some needy families are in bedsits waiting for accommodation while single people are in houses that are more than they need funded by taxpayer. Plenty of young people are working hard and can't afford they own homes. And if the government continued to subsidy without limit it would push house prices and rent up higher making it harder for everyone. People living on subsidised accommodation at taxpayers expense, should be encouraged to downsize if possible or be allowed to take on a lodger, if they not willing to do either they have to be prepared to pay more like the rest of us. Davidwillis
  • Score: 1

7:31am Mon 11 Feb 13

Jonn says...

Davidwillis wrote:
The word tax has been misused in this whole 'bedroom tax' campaign. Tax is where you pay a share of the money you earn to government. A cut in benefit is not tax, it wasn't your money to begin with. Bedroom tax is just left wing propaganda, by people who have no recognition on the financial limits this country has.
If a single person is living in a house you should pay for it yourself. I have to take in a lodger in my spare room to pay my mortgage.
In the exact story above, surely the sons have a registered home where they are registered to vote, have bills sent to etc. If that is their mothers address, she should not be affected by this, if they have a home elsewhere surely the two of them can pay mother the money they're losing out.
Housing benefit reform is needed, some needy families are in bedsits waiting for accommodation while single people are in houses that are more than they need funded by taxpayer. Plenty of young people are working hard and can't afford they own homes. And if the government continued to subsidy without limit it would push house prices and rent up higher making it harder for everyone.
People living on subsidised accommodation at taxpayers expense, should be encouraged to downsize if possible or be allowed to take on a lodger, if they not willing to do either they have to be prepared to pay more like the rest of us.
You and many others need to get this assumption out of your head that everyone claiming a benefit has done so since birth, never contributed to the system and are being funded by you. People who have worked for 20, 30, 40 years are now finding themselves jobless or broke. 90% of all new HB claims in the last 2 years were made by people who are in work. Just because someone is claiming HB doesn't mean they are getting ALL their rent and council tax paid, it could be a small percentage to make up a shortfall.
Where do you suggest all these single people to go to live? 1 bed accomodation is very scarce. Darlington BC pay a maximum of £50 pw HB for anyone under 35 and £75 for 35 and over. I quickly searched on the Rightmove website and there are nine 1 bed properties in the whole of Darlington that are affordable.
[quote][p][bold]Davidwillis[/bold] wrote: The word tax has been misused in this whole 'bedroom tax' campaign. Tax is where you pay a share of the money you earn to government. A cut in benefit is not tax, it wasn't your money to begin with. Bedroom tax is just left wing propaganda, by people who have no recognition on the financial limits this country has. If a single person is living in a house you should pay for it yourself. I have to take in a lodger in my spare room to pay my mortgage. In the exact story above, surely the sons have a registered home where they are registered to vote, have bills sent to etc. If that is their mothers address, she should not be affected by this, if they have a home elsewhere surely the two of them can pay mother the money they're losing out. Housing benefit reform is needed, some needy families are in bedsits waiting for accommodation while single people are in houses that are more than they need funded by taxpayer. Plenty of young people are working hard and can't afford they own homes. And if the government continued to subsidy without limit it would push house prices and rent up higher making it harder for everyone. People living on subsidised accommodation at taxpayers expense, should be encouraged to downsize if possible or be allowed to take on a lodger, if they not willing to do either they have to be prepared to pay more like the rest of us.[/p][/quote]You and many others need to get this assumption out of your head that everyone claiming a benefit has done so since birth, never contributed to the system and are being funded by you. People who have worked for 20, 30, 40 years are now finding themselves jobless or broke. 90% of all new HB claims in the last 2 years were made by people who are in work. Just because someone is claiming HB doesn't mean they are getting ALL their rent and council tax paid, it could be a small percentage to make up a shortfall. Where do you suggest all these single people to go to live? 1 bed accomodation is very scarce. Darlington BC pay a maximum of £50 pw HB for anyone under 35 and £75 for 35 and over. I quickly searched on the Rightmove website and there are nine 1 bed properties in the whole of Darlington that are affordable. Jonn
  • Score: -1

8:54am Mon 11 Feb 13

simmo707 says...

BROKEN BRITAIN UNDER TORIES – BOTTLELESS BULLINGDON BOYS
Cameron ,Gideon and cohorts have obviously refuelled with hot air recently as their empty nonsensical policies are more publicly aired through the Media .5 million unemployed people must apply for a handful of jobs or be sanctioned .Create some .500,000 people have to downsize their homes or suffer paying the bedroom tax although there are only a handful of available smaller premises .Build some .Gideon has lowered the pensioner Tax threshold so more of their money goes towards pensions .Get to grips with the Banks .Contaminated horse meat will not be banned ,until a few deaths occur .But what the Media don’t headline are changes in the Law the Cameron crowd are making behind our backs new Employment Law ,Secret Courts both not in the interest of the Public ,if the Media aren’t controlled why aren’t our interests highlighted instead of Hot Air .
www.brokenbritainund
ertories.com
BROKEN BRITAIN UNDER TORIES – BOTTLELESS BULLINGDON BOYS Cameron ,Gideon and cohorts have obviously refuelled with hot air recently as their empty nonsensical policies are more publicly aired through the Media .5 million unemployed people must apply for a handful of jobs or be sanctioned .Create some .500,000 people have to downsize their homes or suffer paying the bedroom tax although there are only a handful of available smaller premises .Build some .Gideon has lowered the pensioner Tax threshold so more of their money goes towards pensions .Get to grips with the Banks .Contaminated horse meat will not be banned ,until a few deaths occur .But what the Media don’t headline are changes in the Law the Cameron crowd are making behind our backs new Employment Law ,Secret Courts both not in the interest of the Public ,if the Media aren’t controlled why aren’t our interests highlighted instead of Hot Air . www.brokenbritainund ertories.com simmo707
  • Score: 2

9:41am Mon 11 Feb 13

Aycliffeangel says...

My son trained with one of Allison's boys. He earns about £1,200 a month after accomadation and tax have been taken off his wage. They can afford to pay the shortfall between them.
My children have to pay as we own our own house, if they want me to keep their room then they pay otherwise we downsize.

Allison's boys haven't done the ultimate scacrfice one hasn't even finished phase 2 after going AWOL. He's someone I wouldn't want on the fighting for me or I'm sure no soldier will want him watching their back either.

Allison has a degree in Criminology (same as me) and in the north east there are very few jobs that this degree is needed.

I don't like the forces being used in this way, it trivialises our army and its irrelevant that her boys are in the army. There is nothing wrong with being asked to pay towards a house.

this story is taking away the real plight of those it will affect. There is very little sympathy for someone whose sons earn as much as my husband and can afford to pay.
My son trained with one of Allison's boys. He earns about £1,200 a month after accomadation and tax have been taken off his wage. They can afford to pay the shortfall between them. My children have to pay as we own our own house, if they want me to keep their room then they pay otherwise we downsize. Allison's boys haven't done the ultimate scacrfice one hasn't even finished phase 2 after going AWOL. He's someone I wouldn't want on the fighting for me or I'm sure no soldier will want him watching their back either. Allison has a degree in Criminology (same as me) and in the north east there are very few jobs that this degree is needed. I don't like the forces being used in this way, it trivialises our army and its irrelevant that her boys are in the army. There is nothing wrong with being asked to pay towards a house. this story is taking away the real plight of those it will affect. There is very little sympathy for someone whose sons earn as much as my husband and can afford to pay. Aycliffeangel
  • Score: 3

1:34pm Mon 11 Feb 13

greenfinger says...

Jonn wrote:
greenfinger wrote:
Alison obviously prefers if we pay for her spare rooms and not her sons. Lovely woman, heart in the right place! Id be embarrassed if i was her sons. they'll probably be the talk of the army not just the north east. Clearly too greedy to contribute anything to the family home. lovely lads she's brought up. must be like their mother and want us to pay for it. what a horrible cretin she sounds.
So, you are paying for her spare rooms are you? Seems you have chosen to ignore the bit where Alison mentioned she has worked all her life until recently so would have been contributing.
You really have fallen for the Government propaganda big time haven't you.
Do you not mind that the Banks have robbed each and every one of us to the tune of tens of thousands of pounds?
i'm entitled to my own opinion John and that is these two lads should be paying the shortfall not the taxpayer. Why on earth should they avoid paying for a subsidised house?
[quote][p][bold]Jonn[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]greenfinger[/bold] wrote: Alison obviously prefers if we pay for her spare rooms and not her sons. Lovely woman, heart in the right place! Id be embarrassed if i was her sons. they'll probably be the talk of the army not just the north east. Clearly too greedy to contribute anything to the family home. lovely lads she's brought up. must be like their mother and want us to pay for it. what a horrible cretin she sounds.[/p][/quote]So, you are paying for her spare rooms are you? Seems you have chosen to ignore the bit where Alison mentioned she has worked all her life until recently so would have been contributing. You really have fallen for the Government propaganda big time haven't you. Do you not mind that the Banks have robbed each and every one of us to the tune of tens of thousands of pounds?[/p][/quote]i'm entitled to my own opinion John and that is these two lads should be paying the shortfall not the taxpayer. Why on earth should they avoid paying for a subsidised house? greenfinger
  • Score: 1

2:46pm Tue 12 Feb 13

hullgodfreyshire says...

Voice-of-reality wrote:
Dear concerned...
The difference being that Osborne has worked and paid for his 7 bedroom house (actually it has more than that) whereas these people who are working want a subsidy. A council house should not be for life. A council house should be for 'when in need'. Further, the size of that house should be decided upon by circumstance and circumstances change. 6 bedroom council house is not needed for one person, in the same way that a one bedroom council house is not suitable for 7 people. As 'private owner' families grow, the homeowner moves and may thereafter downsize. Why should the council tenant be any different?
you seriously need a swift kick up the backside, you tory plonker.
THIS BEDROOM TAX is going to be caMORON s poll tax.
the death nell of the tory party. The libdems have already committed suicide by siding with these silver tough liars , come the next election there will be a slaughtering of the tory vote.This is just further proof that the tory party only look after the rich, and enjoy kicking the poor and disabled. How else can they justify giving the rich a tax rebate of £40,000 and at the same time expect ANY body in a council house to pay a bedroom tax for unoccupied bedrooms.
By the way the idiot that thought up this tax has a 14bedroom mansion AND a 4 bedroom holiday home, WHERE IS HIS BEDROOM TAX.
[quote][p][bold]Voice-of-reality[/bold] wrote: Dear concerned... The difference being that Osborne has worked and paid for his 7 bedroom house (actually it has more than that) whereas these people who are working want a subsidy. A council house should not be for life. A council house should be for 'when in need'. Further, the size of that house should be decided upon by circumstance and circumstances change. 6 bedroom council house is not needed for one person, in the same way that a one bedroom council house is not suitable for 7 people. As 'private owner' families grow, the homeowner moves and may thereafter downsize. Why should the council tenant be any different?[/p][/quote]you seriously need a swift kick up the backside, you tory plonker. THIS BEDROOM TAX is going to be caMORON s poll tax. the death nell of the tory party. The libdems have already committed suicide by siding with these silver tough liars , come the next election there will be a slaughtering of the tory vote.This is just further proof that the tory party only look after the rich, and enjoy kicking the poor and disabled. How else can they justify giving the rich a tax rebate of £40,000 and at the same time expect ANY body in a council house to pay a bedroom tax for unoccupied bedrooms. By the way the idiot that thought up this tax has a 14bedroom mansion AND a 4 bedroom holiday home, WHERE IS HIS BEDROOM TAX. hullgodfreyshire
  • Score: 0

3:51pm Tue 12 Feb 13

the-big-yin says...

DOGLAWRENCE wrote:
outragedofmiltonkeyn

es
wrote:
DOGLAWRENCE wrote:
I have read with interest all the Commenfs on this Lady and her Plight but can't understand why it is in the Paper as her Sons will easily afford to pay for her .
I am 55 and live in a Three Bedroom Council house having outlived both my Parents I had a Stroke and became Epileptic in 2007 my only Friends are my two Dogs .
A third of my Brain was Damaged at the time and I am Severely Depressed but because I have not Self Harmed myself can not get any Suport from Mental Health Services .
So Basically on the 1st of April my Spendable income will be £35 if I am Lucky .
The Woman who Features in this Debate should Consider herself Lucky as her Sons ( if they have a Conscience ) will no doubt Pay her the Short Fall in her Rent .but my Life will end up been Destitute and Home Less .
And yours is the type of story which is worth reporting on and it seems that you are a deservng case with a genuine need for extra help.
It would be nice if Icould get extra help but as I have Problems managing my Finances even now , after the 1st April I will be wishing my Stroke had been Fatal then at least I would be Stress Free
Have you thought about looking for a smaller place that you could manage?
There is help out there...
good luck.............
[quote][p][bold]DOGLAWRENCE[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]outragedofmiltonkeyn es[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DOGLAWRENCE[/bold] wrote: I have read with interest all the Commenfs on this Lady and her Plight but can't understand why it is in the Paper as her Sons will easily afford to pay for her . I am 55 and live in a Three Bedroom Council house having outlived both my Parents I had a Stroke and became Epileptic in 2007 my only Friends are my two Dogs . A third of my Brain was Damaged at the time and I am Severely Depressed but because I have not Self Harmed myself can not get any Suport from Mental Health Services . So Basically on the 1st of April my Spendable income will be £35 if I am Lucky . The Woman who Features in this Debate should Consider herself Lucky as her Sons ( if they have a Conscience ) will no doubt Pay her the Short Fall in her Rent .but my Life will end up been Destitute and Home Less .[/p][/quote]And yours is the type of story which is worth reporting on and it seems that you are a deservng case with a genuine need for extra help.[/p][/quote]It would be nice if Icould get extra help but as I have Problems managing my Finances even now , after the 1st April I will be wishing my Stroke had been Fatal then at least I would be Stress Free[/p][/quote]Have you thought about looking for a smaller place that you could manage? There is help out there... good luck............. the-big-yin
  • Score: 1

4:04pm Tue 12 Feb 13

DOGLAWRENCE says...

the-big-yin wrote:
DOGLAWRENCE wrote:
outragedofmiltonkeyn


es
wrote:
DOGLAWRENCE wrote:
I have read with interest all the Commenfs on this Lady and her Plight but can't understand why it is in the Paper as her Sons will easily afford to pay for her .
I am 55 and live in a Three Bedroom Council house having outlived both my Parents I had a Stroke and became Epileptic in 2007 my only Friends are my two Dogs .
A third of my Brain was Damaged at the time and I am Severely Depressed but because I have not Self Harmed myself can not get any Suport from Mental Health Services .
So Basically on the 1st of April my Spendable income will be £35 if I am Lucky .
The Woman who Features in this Debate should Consider herself Lucky as her Sons ( if they have a Conscience ) will no doubt Pay her the Short Fall in her Rent .but my Life will end up been Destitute and Home Less .
And yours is the type of story which is worth reporting on and it seems that you are a deservng case with a genuine need for extra help.
It would be nice if Icould get extra help but as I have Problems managing my Finances even now , after the 1st April I will be wishing my Stroke had been Fatal then at least I would be Stress Free
Have you thought about looking for a smaller place that you could manage?
There is help out there...
good luck.............
Would like a Smaller Place ie Bungalow but because Epilepsy is not Serious , according to R.D.C am not allowed a Bungalow , and besides where are there any Council Properties available for Single People with Animals . Perhaps R.D.C can wave a Wand and Magic them out of Thin Air ??
[quote][p][bold]the-big-yin[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DOGLAWRENCE[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]outragedofmiltonkeyn es[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DOGLAWRENCE[/bold] wrote: I have read with interest all the Commenfs on this Lady and her Plight but can't understand why it is in the Paper as her Sons will easily afford to pay for her . I am 55 and live in a Three Bedroom Council house having outlived both my Parents I had a Stroke and became Epileptic in 2007 my only Friends are my two Dogs . A third of my Brain was Damaged at the time and I am Severely Depressed but because I have not Self Harmed myself can not get any Suport from Mental Health Services . So Basically on the 1st of April my Spendable income will be £35 if I am Lucky . The Woman who Features in this Debate should Consider herself Lucky as her Sons ( if they have a Conscience ) will no doubt Pay her the Short Fall in her Rent .but my Life will end up been Destitute and Home Less .[/p][/quote]And yours is the type of story which is worth reporting on and it seems that you are a deservng case with a genuine need for extra help.[/p][/quote]It would be nice if Icould get extra help but as I have Problems managing my Finances even now , after the 1st April I will be wishing my Stroke had been Fatal then at least I would be Stress Free[/p][/quote]Have you thought about looking for a smaller place that you could manage? There is help out there... good luck.............[/p][/quote]Would like a Smaller Place ie Bungalow but because Epilepsy is not Serious , according to R.D.C am not allowed a Bungalow , and besides where are there any Council Properties available for Single People with Animals . Perhaps R.D.C can wave a Wand and Magic them out of Thin Air ?? DOGLAWRENCE
  • Score: 1

4:15pm Tue 12 Feb 13

greenfinger says...

getting too much money if you can afford to keep animals!
getting too much money if you can afford to keep animals! greenfinger
  • Score: 2

4:31pm Tue 12 Feb 13

DOGLAWRENCE says...

greenfinger wrote:
getting too much money if you can afford to keep animals!
Should try them your self are better than People and help with Severe Depression which you do not seem to have ever had
[quote][p][bold]greenfinger[/bold] wrote: getting too much money if you can afford to keep animals![/p][/quote]Should try them your self are better than People and help with Severe Depression which you do not seem to have ever had DOGLAWRENCE
  • Score: 1

5:08pm Tue 12 Feb 13

greenfinger says...

i get quite depressed listening to other peoples dogs bark tbh! the government will starve them to death, hopefully!
i get quite depressed listening to other peoples dogs bark tbh! the government will starve them to death, hopefully! greenfinger
  • Score: 1

5:10pm Tue 12 Feb 13

greenfinger says...

Work beats depression fast than anything i know other than exercise imo. sitting in the house talking to an animal is the shortcut to the nut house.
Work beats depression fast than anything i know other than exercise imo. sitting in the house talking to an animal is the shortcut to the nut house. greenfinger
  • Score: 1

6:06pm Tue 12 Feb 13

outragedofmiltonkeynes says...

A persons own mind can be their worst enemy and if doglaurence is struggling then harmless words on a screen can cause untold suffering. Exercise does help though and support is out there if you need it and derogatory remarks about your situation really are just harmless words to be forgotten and not dwelled upon.
A persons own mind can be their worst enemy and if doglaurence is struggling then harmless words on a screen can cause untold suffering. Exercise does help though and support is out there if you need it and derogatory remarks about your situation really are just harmless words to be forgotten and not dwelled upon. outragedofmiltonkeynes
  • Score: 1

6:34pm Tue 12 Feb 13

Jonn says...

the-big-yin wrote:
DOGLAWRENCE wrote:
outragedofmiltonkeyn


es
wrote:
DOGLAWRENCE wrote:
I have read with interest all the Commenfs on this Lady and her Plight but can't understand why it is in the Paper as her Sons will easily afford to pay for her .
I am 55 and live in a Three Bedroom Council house having outlived both my Parents I had a Stroke and became Epileptic in 2007 my only Friends are my two Dogs .
A third of my Brain was Damaged at the time and I am Severely Depressed but because I have not Self Harmed myself can not get any Suport from Mental Health Services .
So Basically on the 1st of April my Spendable income will be £35 if I am Lucky .
The Woman who Features in this Debate should Consider herself Lucky as her Sons ( if they have a Conscience ) will no doubt Pay her the Short Fall in her Rent .but my Life will end up been Destitute and Home Less .
And yours is the type of story which is worth reporting on and it seems that you are a deservng case with a genuine need for extra help.
It would be nice if Icould get extra help but as I have Problems managing my Finances even now , after the 1st April I will be wishing my Stroke had been Fatal then at least I would be Stress Free
Have you thought about looking for a smaller place that you could manage?
There is help out there...
good luck.............
If he lives in the Redcar and Cleveland Council district then he has no chance. If you watched Inside Out a couple of nights ago, you would have found that they have ONE property available for a single tennant.
[quote][p][bold]the-big-yin[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DOGLAWRENCE[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]outragedofmiltonkeyn es[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DOGLAWRENCE[/bold] wrote: I have read with interest all the Commenfs on this Lady and her Plight but can't understand why it is in the Paper as her Sons will easily afford to pay for her . I am 55 and live in a Three Bedroom Council house having outlived both my Parents I had a Stroke and became Epileptic in 2007 my only Friends are my two Dogs . A third of my Brain was Damaged at the time and I am Severely Depressed but because I have not Self Harmed myself can not get any Suport from Mental Health Services . So Basically on the 1st of April my Spendable income will be £35 if I am Lucky . The Woman who Features in this Debate should Consider herself Lucky as her Sons ( if they have a Conscience ) will no doubt Pay her the Short Fall in her Rent .but my Life will end up been Destitute and Home Less .[/p][/quote]And yours is the type of story which is worth reporting on and it seems that you are a deservng case with a genuine need for extra help.[/p][/quote]It would be nice if Icould get extra help but as I have Problems managing my Finances even now , after the 1st April I will be wishing my Stroke had been Fatal then at least I would be Stress Free[/p][/quote]Have you thought about looking for a smaller place that you could manage? There is help out there... good luck.............[/p][/quote]If he lives in the Redcar and Cleveland Council district then he has no chance. If you watched Inside Out a couple of nights ago, you would have found that they have ONE property available for a single tennant. Jonn
  • Score: 0

6:36pm Tue 12 Feb 13

Jonn says...

greenfinger wrote:
Work beats depression fast than anything i know other than exercise imo. sitting in the house talking to an animal is the shortcut to the nut house.
You have obviously never sufferered depression then.
[quote][p][bold]greenfinger[/bold] wrote: Work beats depression fast than anything i know other than exercise imo. sitting in the house talking to an animal is the shortcut to the nut house.[/p][/quote]You have obviously never sufferered depression then. Jonn
  • Score: 1

7:06pm Tue 12 Feb 13

greenfinger says...

Jonn wrote:
greenfinger wrote:
Work beats depression fast than anything i know other than exercise imo. sitting in the house talking to an animal is the shortcut to the nut house.
You have obviously never sufferered depression then.
wrong again john, unless of course your infinite wisdom is far superior to that of my GP. hth
[quote][p][bold]Jonn[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]greenfinger[/bold] wrote: Work beats depression fast than anything i know other than exercise imo. sitting in the house talking to an animal is the shortcut to the nut house.[/p][/quote]You have obviously never sufferered depression then.[/p][/quote]wrong again john, unless of course your infinite wisdom is far superior to that of my GP. hth greenfinger
  • Score: 1

7:15pm Tue 12 Feb 13

johnny_p says...

hullgodfreyshire wrote:
Voice-of-reality wrote:
Dear concerned...
The difference being that Osborne has worked and paid for his 7 bedroom house (actually it has more than that) whereas these people who are working want a subsidy. A council house should not be for life. A council house should be for 'when in need'. Further, the size of that house should be decided upon by circumstance and circumstances change. 6 bedroom council house is not needed for one person, in the same way that a one bedroom council house is not suitable for 7 people. As 'private owner' families grow, the homeowner moves and may thereafter downsize. Why should the council tenant be any different?
you seriously need a swift kick up the backside, you tory plonker.
THIS BEDROOM TAX is going to be caMORON s poll tax.
the death nell of the tory party. The libdems have already committed suicide by siding with these silver tough liars , come the next election there will be a slaughtering of the tory vote.This is just further proof that the tory party only look after the rich, and enjoy kicking the poor and disabled. How else can they justify giving the rich a tax rebate of £40,000 and at the same time expect ANY body in a council house to pay a bedroom tax for unoccupied bedrooms.
By the way the idiot that thought up this tax has a 14bedroom mansion AND a 4 bedroom holiday home, WHERE IS HIS BEDROOM TAX.
I've saved your comment. Guess I'm free to repost it should your prediction "come the next election there will be a slaughtering of the tory vote"?

You're safe here. Ranting and raving with your red friends, but your views don't necessarily reflect the views of the country. Labour certainly haven't represented the (manual) working man like myself, nor the middle classes but seemed to be more concerned with their wealthy friends in the banking sector. We've got better memories than you would think....
[quote][p][bold]hullgodfreyshire[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Voice-of-reality[/bold] wrote: Dear concerned... The difference being that Osborne has worked and paid for his 7 bedroom house (actually it has more than that) whereas these people who are working want a subsidy. A council house should not be for life. A council house should be for 'when in need'. Further, the size of that house should be decided upon by circumstance and circumstances change. 6 bedroom council house is not needed for one person, in the same way that a one bedroom council house is not suitable for 7 people. As 'private owner' families grow, the homeowner moves and may thereafter downsize. Why should the council tenant be any different?[/p][/quote]you seriously need a swift kick up the backside, you tory plonker. THIS BEDROOM TAX is going to be caMORON s poll tax. the death nell of the tory party. The libdems have already committed suicide by siding with these silver tough liars , come the next election there will be a slaughtering of the tory vote.This is just further proof that the tory party only look after the rich, and enjoy kicking the poor and disabled. How else can they justify giving the rich a tax rebate of £40,000 and at the same time expect ANY body in a council house to pay a bedroom tax for unoccupied bedrooms. By the way the idiot that thought up this tax has a 14bedroom mansion AND a 4 bedroom holiday home, WHERE IS HIS BEDROOM TAX.[/p][/quote]I've saved your comment. Guess I'm free to repost it should your prediction "come the next election there will be a slaughtering of the tory vote"? You're safe here. Ranting and raving with your red friends, but your views don't necessarily reflect the views of the country. Labour certainly haven't represented the (manual) working man like myself, nor the middle classes but seemed to be more concerned with their wealthy friends in the banking sector. We've got better memories than you would think.... johnny_p
  • Score: 1

7:56pm Tue 12 Feb 13

Jonn says...

greenfinger wrote:
Jonn wrote:
greenfinger wrote:
Work beats depression fast than anything i know other than exercise imo. sitting in the house talking to an animal is the shortcut to the nut house.
You have obviously never sufferered depression then.
wrong again john, unless of course your infinite wisdom is far superior to that of my GP. hth
GP's, what do they know. Try going for an ATOS medical assessment. They disregard GP's opinions and cure you of all your illnessess in 15 minutes.
[quote][p][bold]greenfinger[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Jonn[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]greenfinger[/bold] wrote: Work beats depression fast than anything i know other than exercise imo. sitting in the house talking to an animal is the shortcut to the nut house.[/p][/quote]You have obviously never sufferered depression then.[/p][/quote]wrong again john, unless of course your infinite wisdom is far superior to that of my GP. hth[/p][/quote]GP's, what do they know. Try going for an ATOS medical assessment. They disregard GP's opinions and cure you of all your illnessess in 15 minutes. Jonn
  • Score: 0

9:17pm Tue 12 Feb 13

IanfromCrook says...

Jonn wrote:
greenfinger wrote:
Jonn wrote:
greenfinger wrote:
Work beats depression fast than anything i know other than exercise imo. sitting in the house talking to an animal is the shortcut to the nut house.
You have obviously never sufferered depression then.
wrong again john, unless of course your infinite wisdom is far superior to that of my GP. hth
GP's, what do they know. Try going for an ATOS medical assessment. They disregard GP's opinions and cure you of all your illnessess in 15 minutes.
ATOS ....Is that Another Tory Organized Salary
[quote][p][bold]Jonn[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]greenfinger[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Jonn[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]greenfinger[/bold] wrote: Work beats depression fast than anything i know other than exercise imo. sitting in the house talking to an animal is the shortcut to the nut house.[/p][/quote]You have obviously never sufferered depression then.[/p][/quote]wrong again john, unless of course your infinite wisdom is far superior to that of my GP. hth[/p][/quote]GP's, what do they know. Try going for an ATOS medical assessment. They disregard GP's opinions and cure you of all your illnessess in 15 minutes.[/p][/quote]ATOS ....Is that Another Tory Organized Salary IanfromCrook
  • Score: 0

10:03pm Tue 12 Feb 13

greenfinger says...

Jonn wrote:
greenfinger wrote:
Jonn wrote:
greenfinger wrote:
Work beats depression fast than anything i know other than exercise imo. sitting in the house talking to an animal is the shortcut to the nut house.
You have obviously never sufferered depression then.
wrong again john, unless of course your infinite wisdom is far superior to that of my GP. hth
GP's, what do they know. Try going for an ATOS medical assessment. They disregard GP's opinions and cure you of all your illnessess in 15 minutes.
never been for one, i always knew work and exercise was the right answer for me! you cannot underestimate how important it is to interact with other individuals. After a while you realise that they're are many people far worse off than yourself and eventually pick yourself up and move on in life. sitting around feeling sorry for yourself is a massive contributor to depression. motion rids emotion! remember that, it's a fact!
[quote][p][bold]Jonn[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]greenfinger[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Jonn[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]greenfinger[/bold] wrote: Work beats depression fast than anything i know other than exercise imo. sitting in the house talking to an animal is the shortcut to the nut house.[/p][/quote]You have obviously never sufferered depression then.[/p][/quote]wrong again john, unless of course your infinite wisdom is far superior to that of my GP. hth[/p][/quote]GP's, what do they know. Try going for an ATOS medical assessment. They disregard GP's opinions and cure you of all your illnessess in 15 minutes.[/p][/quote]never been for one, i always knew work and exercise was the right answer for me! you cannot underestimate how important it is to interact with other individuals. After a while you realise that they're are many people far worse off than yourself and eventually pick yourself up and move on in life. sitting around feeling sorry for yourself is a massive contributor to depression. motion rids emotion! remember that, it's a fact! greenfinger
  • Score: 1

10:45pm Tue 12 Feb 13

outragedofmiltonkeynes says...

Can we get back on topic for a minute? Id still like to know if Alison has stopped smoking to save money so she can pay for the extra bedrooms she doesnt need.
Can we get back on topic for a minute? Id still like to know if Alison has stopped smoking to save money so she can pay for the extra bedrooms she doesnt need. outragedofmiltonkeynes
  • Score: 1

11:59pm Tue 12 Feb 13

johnny_p says...

outragedofmiltonkeyn
es
wrote:
Can we get back on topic for a minute? Id still like to know if Alison has stopped smoking to save money so she can pay for the extra bedrooms she doesnt need.
In fairness we don't know if she smokes, but even if she does it's pretty irrelevant.

Alison hasn't made a very good case here for the (incorrectly named) "Bedroom Tax".
[quote][p][bold]outragedofmiltonkeyn es[/bold] wrote: Can we get back on topic for a minute? Id still like to know if Alison has stopped smoking to save money so she can pay for the extra bedrooms she doesnt need.[/p][/quote]In fairness we don't know if she smokes, but even if she does it's pretty irrelevant. Alison hasn't made a very good case here for the (incorrectly named) "Bedroom Tax". johnny_p
  • Score: 0

12:56pm Wed 13 Feb 13

sazyjaded says...

I cannot understand why this is such a big story. I am an armed forces wife and we are due to be made redundant come June. My husband has served 7 years, following in the footsteps of his father who did 22. We have a young son and a baby on the way, when I have enquired about a council house due to us being made redundant and having to give up our home, I have been told the only 3 bed council homes available in Darlington will be on Redhall, and not a chance in hell will I be moving there! Whilst you will all say yes but your husband will have a good payout..he will get around 20k, which will have to provide us with a house, furniture along with paying for food clothes nappies heating water works etc until he and hopefully myself can get full time jobs. I have no qualms with people who need housing benefit or need the bedrooms they have, but the fact is, this woman has two sons in the army who do not live there for the majority of the time and if they don't want to pay her £10 a week to keep their bedroom then give it up! When i go and stay at my parents house we pay to stay(although it is privately owned we still give my mum board). The point is, the soldiers only pay £20-30 a month for staying on the barracks anyway so I hardly think theyv been given a bad term being asked to pay a £10er a week!
I cannot understand why this is such a big story. I am an armed forces wife and we are due to be made redundant come June. My husband has served 7 years, following in the footsteps of his father who did 22. We have a young son and a baby on the way, when I have enquired about a council house due to us being made redundant and having to give up our home, I have been told the only 3 bed council homes available in Darlington will be on Redhall, and not a chance in hell will I be moving there! Whilst you will all say yes but your husband will have a good payout..he will get around 20k, which will have to provide us with a house, furniture along with paying for food clothes nappies heating water works etc until he and hopefully myself can get full time jobs. I have no qualms with people who need housing benefit or need the bedrooms they have, but the fact is, this woman has two sons in the army who do not live there for the majority of the time and if they don't want to pay her £10 a week to keep their bedroom then give it up! When i go and stay at my parents house we pay to stay(although it is privately owned we still give my mum board). The point is, the soldiers only pay £20-30 a month for staying on the barracks anyway so I hardly think theyv been given a bad term being asked to pay a £10er a week! sazyjaded
  • Score: 0

3:54pm Wed 13 Feb 13

thehatman says...

johnny_p wrote:
hullgodfreyshire wrote:
Voice-of-reality wrote:
Dear concerned...
The difference being that Osborne has worked and paid for his 7 bedroom house (actually it has more than that) whereas these people who are working want a subsidy. A council house should not be for life. A council house should be for 'when in need'. Further, the size of that house should be decided upon by circumstance and circumstances change. 6 bedroom council house is not needed for one person, in the same way that a one bedroom council house is not suitable for 7 people. As 'private owner' families grow, the homeowner moves and may thereafter downsize. Why should the council tenant be any different?
you seriously need a swift kick up the backside, you tory plonker.
THIS BEDROOM TAX is going to be caMORON s poll tax.
the death nell of the tory party. The libdems have already committed suicide by siding with these silver tough liars , come the next election there will be a slaughtering of the tory vote.This is just further proof that the tory party only look after the rich, and enjoy kicking the poor and disabled. How else can they justify giving the rich a tax rebate of £40,000 and at the same time expect ANY body in a council house to pay a bedroom tax for unoccupied bedrooms.
By the way the idiot that thought up this tax has a 14bedroom mansion AND a 4 bedroom holiday home, WHERE IS HIS BEDROOM TAX.
I've saved your comment. Guess I'm free to repost it should your prediction "come the next election there will be a slaughtering of the tory vote"?

You're safe here. Ranting and raving with your red friends, but your views don't necessarily reflect the views of the country. Labour certainly haven't represented the (manual) working man like myself, nor the middle classes but seemed to be more concerned with their wealthy friends in the banking sector. We've got better memories than you would think....
The correctly maligned 'bedroom tax' and the changes to council tax benefits will be another blow to the poorest in society while the rich see income tax on their high earnings cut by 5%. Housing Futures Research found that 42% of the 660,000 households to be hit by the bedroom tax already struggle financially. A staggering 72% have disability and/or health problems. Yet the government wants to take 14% of your housing benefit if you are in social housing and deemed to have one 'spare room' and 25% for two or more. This crazy attack will see people forced out of cheaper social housing because of a shortage of single bedroom properties, and into the private sector where soaring rents will mean their housing benefit claim actually rises!
You can start the fightback here
www.cantpaywontpay.o
rg
[quote][p][bold]johnny_p[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]hullgodfreyshire[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Voice-of-reality[/bold] wrote: Dear concerned... The difference being that Osborne has worked and paid for his 7 bedroom house (actually it has more than that) whereas these people who are working want a subsidy. A council house should not be for life. A council house should be for 'when in need'. Further, the size of that house should be decided upon by circumstance and circumstances change. 6 bedroom council house is not needed for one person, in the same way that a one bedroom council house is not suitable for 7 people. As 'private owner' families grow, the homeowner moves and may thereafter downsize. Why should the council tenant be any different?[/p][/quote]you seriously need a swift kick up the backside, you tory plonker. THIS BEDROOM TAX is going to be caMORON s poll tax. the death nell of the tory party. The libdems have already committed suicide by siding with these silver tough liars , come the next election there will be a slaughtering of the tory vote.This is just further proof that the tory party only look after the rich, and enjoy kicking the poor and disabled. How else can they justify giving the rich a tax rebate of £40,000 and at the same time expect ANY body in a council house to pay a bedroom tax for unoccupied bedrooms. By the way the idiot that thought up this tax has a 14bedroom mansion AND a 4 bedroom holiday home, WHERE IS HIS BEDROOM TAX.[/p][/quote]I've saved your comment. Guess I'm free to repost it should your prediction "come the next election there will be a slaughtering of the tory vote"? You're safe here. Ranting and raving with your red friends, but your views don't necessarily reflect the views of the country. Labour certainly haven't represented the (manual) working man like myself, nor the middle classes but seemed to be more concerned with their wealthy friends in the banking sector. We've got better memories than you would think....[/p][/quote]The correctly maligned 'bedroom tax' and the changes to council tax benefits will be another blow to the poorest in society while the rich see income tax on their high earnings cut by 5%. Housing Futures Research found that 42% of the 660,000 households to be hit by the bedroom tax already struggle financially. A staggering 72% have disability and/or health problems. Yet the government wants to take 14% of your housing benefit if you are in social housing and deemed to have one 'spare room' and 25% for two or more. This crazy attack will see people forced out of cheaper social housing because of a shortage of single bedroom properties, and into the private sector where soaring rents will mean their housing benefit claim actually rises! You can start the fightback here www.cantpaywontpay.o rg thehatman
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree