The narrative of this coalition government is increasingly threadbare.
As recession gives way to depression, it is possible to see that austerity has not worked.
Industry is in stasis, investment is at an all time low, the attempts to kick start the economy by rewarding the rich has failed and so all that is left is political legerdemain by focusing on Europe, continuing to blame Labour rather than the hubristic bankers and reducing welfare benefits and asking the poorest in society to bail out the wealthy.
Even Nick Clegg is sounding out Ed Milliband as a prospective coalition partner after the next election.
The latest measure to hit the headlines is being introduced by Lord Freud the welfare minister who lives in an eight bedroomed country mansion.
It's not yet the Poll Tax, but it could be!
What is being called the Bedroom Tax is causing a furore on facebook, I shared a picture which came via another facebook friend and received more likes than for anything else I have shared and the piece itself was shared by facebook friends with their friends.
What is the Bedroom Tax.
It affects those who rely on housing benefit for their housing needs and is designed to ensure that their accommodation meets their needs without affording them the luxury of a spare room to house overnight guests or to use, in one case cited in the Guardian of an Artist, to use as a studio, or perhaps for a writer, to use as a Study.
Pensioners are apparently excluded from the legislation.
Whenever Governments seek to pry into their electors affairs so intimately, they risk being punished at the Ballot Box.
But of course as a number of comments on this particular piece of legislation point out, it is full of anomilies.
Children of the same sex, according to the Tory Millionaires who have decided to introduce this legislation, should share a room, but if one of the children has special needs, for whatever reason, there is a complex and hard to calculate allowance, but the net result will be the same, a loss of housing benefit.
Private landlords often have little or no interest in assisting their tenants to maximise income and are likely to have little sympathy if their rental income is effectively reduced by the loss of a percentage of housing benefit, social landlords, on the other hand, could well find themselves in an impossible position trying to square the circle between, tenants financial difficulties and their social needs.
I'm always interested, walking around more historic areas of cities or visiting National Trust properties to see the reminder of the window tax, a similar property tax levied on the number of windows in a property, it is however easier to brick up a window than it is to seal off a room.
Interestingly in rural cumbria, rooms were often added or subtracted, two of my children live in houses where rooms have been added by breaking through into next door and then when family needs changed being sealed off again or in another case the concept of a flying freehold introduced to allow a room to be added above another, the freehold of one property being extended to cover the invasion of another properties air or attic space.
But the principle here is another invasion altogether, the invasion of an individuals or a families personal space.
Doubtless if we wanted to enquire into the living circumstances of one of the millionaires who sit in the cabinet we would be told quite clearly that an Englishmans home is his castle and so it is.
By what right then do they assume to violate the desmesnes of someone whose 'castle' happens to be paid for out of housing benefit, simply because their private circumstances, whatever they are, mean that they need some support in putting a roof over their and their families heads.
In one of my earliest jobs as a very junior Civil Servant as I was sent out by my section head to investigate the circumstances of a claimant.
An anonymous letter had been received saying that the individual was suspected of co-habiting with a partner.
I visited the house, produced my identification and although my heart was not in the task, asked if I could enter the premises.
I was 19, and about to go off to Theological College, the young lady in question, with two young children, not much older than that herself.
I tried to gently steer the conversation around to the question of whether she lived on her own.
Suddenly the room darkened, I turned to see a huge man, his head towering above the door frame which his body filled almost entirely.
He didn't speak, just looked.
Rapidly, like the old News of the World reporters, I made my excuses and left.
Back in the office I filled in my report: No evidence of co-habitation.
After all, like windows and bedrooms, it was no business of mine.
As recession gives way to depression, it is possible to see that austerity has not worked.
Industry is in stasis, investment is at an all time low, the attempts to kick start the economy by rewarding the rich has failed and so all that is left is political legerdemain by focusing on Europe, continuing to blame Labour rather than the hubristic bankers and reducing welfare benefits and asking the poorest in society to bail out the wealthy.
Even Nick Clegg is sounding out Ed Milliband as a prospective coalition partner after the next election.
The latest measure to hit the headlines is being introduced by Lord Freud the welfare minister who lives in an eight bedroomed country mansion.
It's not yet the Poll Tax, but it could be!
What is being called the Bedroom Tax is causing a furore on facebook, I shared a picture which came via another facebook friend and received more likes than for anything else I have shared and the piece itself was shared by facebook friends with their friends.
What is the Bedroom Tax.
It affects those who rely on housing benefit for their housing needs and is designed to ensure that their accommodation meets their needs without affording them the luxury of a spare room to house overnight guests or to use, in one case cited in the Guardian of an Artist, to use as a studio, or perhaps for a writer, to use as a Study.
Pensioners are apparently excluded from the legislation.
Whenever Governments seek to pry into their electors affairs so intimately, they risk being punished at the Ballot Box.
But of course as a number of comments on this particular piece of legislation point out, it is full of anomilies.
Children of the same sex, according to the Tory Millionaires who have decided to introduce this legislation, should share a room, but if one of the children has special needs, for whatever reason, there is a complex and hard to calculate allowance, but the net result will be the same, a loss of housing benefit.
Private landlords often have little or no interest in assisting their tenants to maximise income and are likely to have little sympathy if their rental income is effectively reduced by the loss of a percentage of housing benefit, social landlords, on the other hand, could well find themselves in an impossible position trying to square the circle between, tenants financial difficulties and their social needs.
I'm always interested, walking around more historic areas of cities or visiting National Trust properties to see the reminder of the window tax, a similar property tax levied on the number of windows in a property, it is however easier to brick up a window than it is to seal off a room.
Interestingly in rural cumbria, rooms were often added or subtracted, two of my children live in houses where rooms have been added by breaking through into next door and then when family needs changed being sealed off again or in another case the concept of a flying freehold introduced to allow a room to be added above another, the freehold of one property being extended to cover the invasion of another properties air or attic space.
But the principle here is another invasion altogether, the invasion of an individuals or a families personal space.
Doubtless if we wanted to enquire into the living circumstances of one of the millionaires who sit in the cabinet we would be told quite clearly that an Englishmans home is his castle and so it is.
By what right then do they assume to violate the desmesnes of someone whose 'castle' happens to be paid for out of housing benefit, simply because their private circumstances, whatever they are, mean that they need some support in putting a roof over their and their families heads.
In one of my earliest jobs as a very junior Civil Servant as I was sent out by my section head to investigate the circumstances of a claimant.
An anonymous letter had been received saying that the individual was suspected of co-habiting with a partner.
I visited the house, produced my identification and although my heart was not in the task, asked if I could enter the premises.
I was 19, and about to go off to Theological College, the young lady in question, with two young children, not much older than that herself.
I tried to gently steer the conversation around to the question of whether she lived on her own.
Suddenly the room darkened, I turned to see a huge man, his head towering above the door frame which his body filled almost entirely.
He didn't speak, just looked.
Rapidly, like the old News of the World reporters, I made my excuses and left.
Back in the office I filled in my report: No evidence of co-habitation.
After all, like windows and bedrooms, it was no business of mine.
No comments:
Post a Comment