Bolitics The New Condem Government

[kidlewis]

as one of the chaps on news nigh said, social housing and the benefit system hasn't worked since it was implemented.

it's meant to be the springboard to get people back to being supported by themselves and socially, there shouldn't be this reliance on benefits for long periods of time.

the fact is that the benefit system in this country is a lot more supportive (IMO over supportive to many) than in other countries. You can't compare with the USA because in comparison our benefit system looks like signing over the deeds to willy wonkas chocolate factory.

the benefit system needs to be more fluid and dynamic, ideally on a case by case basis whereby you gather data as normal (with various forms and documents) and you base each persons benefits on their own circumstances.

however that would cost a ridiculous amount to implement, but it's really the only way.

If you blanket any kind of benefit, either by increase or decrease, some people inevitably lose out. then you get this bullshit slagging match between parties on how it's "not fair" but both offer no reasoned debate or alternative.

it's clearly not working now, but appears there is no simple solution or cheap solution to the mess.

[Demitri_C]

What about them? Do they just have to find a new place to live because their housing allowance has been cut to below their rent so now they can't afford to live there?

like i said previously there ARE jobs out there, but alot of people dont want to do certain jobs.

i think they need to come up with a system though that doesnt discriminate against the ones who actively looking for work

[TheDon]

What about them? Do they just have to find a new place to live because their housing allowance has been cut to below their rent so now they can't afford to live there?

like i said previously there ARE jobs out there, but alot of people dont want to do certain jobs.

i think they need to come up with a system though that doesnt discriminate against the ones who actively looking for work

Interesting how you say we should come up with a system that doesn't discriminate, yet are completely in favour of one that massively discriminates.

There's plenty of reason why people could be unemployed for long periods of time though, despite there being "jobs out there".

Ex-offenders for instance, often find it incredibly hard to get a job. Despite wanting to go straight and rebuild their lives many find it impossible due to instantly being ruled out for the slightest offence. Why take a risk on an ex-offender why you have 20 other people queuing up for the job?

Then again plenty of people would just let anyone with the slightest criminal record rot in jail, so maybe that's the solution there!

[CarewsEyebrowDesigner]

Boris Johnson, champion of the working man.

[drat01]

Another bad day of lies and backtracking from this Gvmt, especially when their real ideas are shown up.

First we have the lies that Cameron told the HOP at PMQ about how he claimed Labour MEP's were supporting the EU budget raises

Total lies from Cameron - I wonder if he will apologise?

Then we had Boris with his ethnic cleaning quote. Now once number 10 has told him off he says he was taken out of context, but the evidence shows that not to be the case

Boris Kosovo-style social cleansing

Then we have the admission that the UK was NOT on the brink of bankruptcy so Gideon would keep having people believe

UMUNNA: Do you think it’s accurate to describe the UK as being on the brink of bankruptcy?

TURNBULL: No I don’t. But I think it was essential, for a slightly different reason, to have a deficit reduction programme.

So we have Cameron trying to do a Thatcher and pander to the Euro-sceptics in a blatantly obvious attempt to deflect focus from benefits cuts and all the other crap they are pouring out.

[LondonLax]

Boris Johnson, champion of the working man.

I love Boris, he's brilliant.

[Jon]

Boris Johnson, champion of the working man.

I love Boris, he's brilliant.

I think I could actually vote for Bo-Jo! :shock: :oops:

[kidlewis]

Boris Johnson, champion of the working man.

I love Boris, he's brilliant.

He is awesome, and from my friends living and working in London, he hasn't failed as much as some people hoped or thought he would.

I suppose it's like a villa fan hoping blues get relegated, but when they finish 9th and play reasonably decent football, you're left thinking.... 'shit well that didn't happen did it!?'

[snowychap]

What are the government’s options “going forward” (in that terrible phrase of the moment)?

Well, it would appear that they've gone with the 'honesty box' option (with the threat of a fine, &c.).

In keeping with the blog quoted above, "Good luck with that."

[Awol]

Another bad day of lies and backtracking from this Gvmt, especially when their real ideas are shown up.

First we have the lies that Cameron told the HOP at PMQ about how he claimed Labour MEP's were supporting the EU budget raises

Total lies from Cameron - I wonder if he will apologise?

Total lies? According to your own link the Labour MEP's voted against a 6% rise BUT also voted against a Tory MEP (James Elles) ammendment to freeze the budget at the 2010 level - a real terms cut.

Ten of Labour's thirteen MEPs voted against this despite shadow Europe minister Wayne David saying "it is imperative that we have a freeze on the EU budget".

Hello pot, meet kettle...

Then we had Boris with his ethnic cleaning quote. Now once number 10 has told him off he says he was taken out of context, but the evidence shows that not to be the case

Boris Kosovo-style social cleansing

He said "social cleansing" not "ethinc cleaning", two completely different statements. Not like you to try and (falsely) play the race card, Ian...

I like Boris but this comment was bloody stupid, people were slaughtered in the Balkans and to compare that to a change in housing benefit is absurd.

Then we have the admission that the UK was NOT on the brink of bankruptcy so Gideon would keep having people believe

UMUNNA: Do you think it’s accurate to describe the UK as being on the brink of bankruptcy?

TURNBULL: No I don’t. But I think it was essential, for a slightly different reason, to have a deficit reduction programme.

If your going to C & P from Left Foot Forward" (an impeccable source of unbiased commentary ) at least put the link up, then we could see the part of that quote that you left off:

Gordon Brown, once described by Turnbull as running the Treasury with “Stalinist ruthlessness” was not spared by the former civil servant. Turnbull said Brown’s settlement letters in the 2000 and 2002 spending reviews were “arrogant and offensive” and that the Golden Rule had the effect of worsening boom and bust.

Oops

So we have Cameron trying to do a Thatcher and pander to the Euro-sceptics in a blatantly obvious attempt to deflect focus from benefits cuts and all the other crap they are pouring out.

Do you think when virtually every government department is facing massive cuts that we should be giving hundreds of millions of pounds more per year to the massively corrupt EU? If so I think you're probably in a minority of one.

[drat01]

:-) @ Jon - still pouring out the Tory spin. Cameron lied in the HOC saying that Labour MEP's had voted for a rise in the budget, as teh C4 web site shows that is complete bollox. Admit it Jon he told porkies

The verdict

When Mr Cameron made his point in the Commons, the implication was that Labour MEPs had voted for a six per cent rise in the EU budget. Mr Alexander was even clearer.

They hadn’t: in fact they had voted against. But Labour MEPs opposed a Conservative amendment to freeze the budget at 2010 levels.

By failing to support this amendment, it could be argued, in the Prime Minister’s words, that they were “voting for higher budgets”.

But the amendment never had any chance of going through, given the size of the vote in favour of increasing the budget by six per cent (546 in favour-88 against).

Our verdict has to be fiction on this occasion.

He said "social cleansing" not "ethinc cleaning", two completely different statements. Not like you to try and (falsely) play the race card, Ian...

:-) - Oh dear Jon try and deflect as much as you like. the simple facts are there Boris screwed up. We all remember that Kosovo was a "incident" based on economic principles and not ethnic wasn't it? Pah!

link - Boris was the one that likened this to Kosovo

:-) and more spin and using the now seemingly official line from the ConDem's in trying to deflect. Why not comment about the issue raised and the bollox that Gideon spouted about us backupcy? Or do you still believe what he says was true? If so how come that Turnbull, as you have proven not exactly a Labour favourite, came out with this? To say Oops means and proves nothing.

[Awol]

:-) @ Jon - still pouring out the Tory spin. Cameron lied in the HOC saying that Labour MEP's had voted for a rise in the budget, as teh C4 web site shows that is complete bollox. Admit it Jon he told porkies

What he said was factually wrong, clearly. What he should have pointed out was Labour in London saying one thing ("freeze the EU budget") and Labour's MEP's in Brussels voting against that. Turkeys and Christmas springs to mind.

He said "social cleansing" not "ethinc cleaning", two completely different statements. Not like you to try and (falsely) play the race card, Ian...

:-) - Oh dear Jon try and deflect as much as you like. the simple facts are there Boris screwed up.

I said he did but for some reason you simply ignored it...

this comment was bloody stupid, people were slaughtered in the Balkans and to compare that to a change in housing benefit is absurd.

..and I wasn't deflecting, just objecting to your repetitive attempts to falsely play the race card.

:-) and more spin and using the now seemingly official line from the ConDem's in trying to deflect. Why not comment about the issue raised and the bollox that Gideon spouted about us backupcy?

I don't know how close we were to bankruptcy, but I wouldn't take the word of a lone civil servant as a definitive analysis for or against that proposition.

By the way, why when anyone says something you disagree with are they accused of "Tory spin"? I think they are all muppets and say so regularly, Labour just happen to be more inept than the rest.

[blandy]

Labour's Chris Bryant started this "cleansing" bollex on Tuesday

here

[drat01]

Jon sorry but more and more bollox from you, now "playing the race card". That is just ............. bollox. That was not playing any card at all, and your attempts to make it so, are pretty poor on your part. The facts of the comments as were debated by many yesterday were that Boris mentioned Kosovo, which as you of all people well know was based on racial rather than economic grounds. That was Boris who said that not me, not any of the comments in the media yesterday, so please don't be silly and try and play any sort of race / blame card against me, OK? FTR Boris has a record on being "misquoted" on race issues though, so maybe he should either STFU or actually admit to having issues with race.

The fact that the Civil Servant mentioned in the article - and it was reported on various web sites not just that one you mentioned but nice try at deflection - was a senior "bod" and seemingly had no allegiance to the Labour party, sort of makes his comments of interest do you not think? I am more inclined to believe his version of the events than Gideon's who is showing that he is quite happy to over exaggeration to get through his idealogical cuts.

I mentioned Tory spin because virtually to the letter you are repeating what is coming out of Conservative HQ. The beauty of the internet means that you can see where the quotes originate from. And yes I did :-) at your last sentence

[kidlewis]

Boris in "not towing the tory line" shocker. It's nothing new tbh big wow!

it's a shame no one in NuLab had the balls to stand up to Brown when he made **** ups

[drat01]

Labour's Chris Bryant started this "cleansing" bollex on Tuesday

here

Actually Pete it was started before that. When the policy was announced there was much comment from various people about the impact. Most have based their comments on what they see as movement of people based on social standing. Dependent on which side of the argument you sit, you probably either agree or disagree.

Only Boris was the one that mentioned the Kosovo thing, and as said that was based on ethnic rather than social. It seems from comments today that Boris has been told to back track on his comments.

[Awol]

Jon sorry but more and more bollox from you, now "playing the race card". That is just ............. bollox.

The only person to mention "ethnic cleansing" was you. Ethnic by definition implies race. Maybe you made a mistake and it was unintentional and if so fair enough, just say so. You have over a long period of time directly or indirectly tried to associate the Torys with racism, I thought your comment was just another subtle attempt by you to further that agenda.

I mentioned Tory spin because virtually to the letter you are repeating what is coming out of Conservative HQ.

I have no idea what is or isn't coming out of Conservative HQ, but dragging it back to LHA this comment by Clegg from Blandy's link hits the nail squarely on the head:

"What we are saying is that, for people who receive housing benefit, it is perfectly reasonable for the government to say that it won't hand out more in housing benefit than people who go out to work, pay their taxes, play by the rules will do when they look for housing themselves.

"We are simply suggesting there should be a cap for family homes of four bedrooms of £400 a week. That is £21,000 a year.

"Does he really think it's wrong for people who can't afford to live privately in those areas that the state should subsidise people to the tune of more than £21,000? I don't think so."

I think that ticks the 'fairness' box.

[drat01]

The only person to mention "ethnic cleansing" was you. Ethnic by definition implies race. Maybe you made a mistake and it was unintentional and if so fair enough, just say so. You have over a long period of time directly or indirectly tried to associate the Torys with racism, I thought your comment was just another subtle attempt by you to further that agenda.

Sorry Jon to keep on about this point but that is bollox. Boris mentioned Kosovo, not me not anyone else, just that buffoon who runs London. You can keep trying (and failing) to deflect from that, but that is the simple fact. The fact that you keep trying to have a pop at me about some fictitious keep playing a race card idea, is silly and insulting, but TBH I expect nothing less these days from those who's political bias sways towards the Tory party. shame that you have to try, again, to screw up a debate by silly personal attacks on people

I have no idea what is or isn't coming out of Conservative HQ, but dragging it back to LHA this comment by Clegg from Blandy's link hits the nail squarely on the head:

Hit's what nail exactly? The fact that Boris mentioned a Kosovo Style cleansing or the fact that this IS actually a social cleansing of certain areas of the UK.

Frankly the whole thing is another ill thought out scheme based more on ideology rather than any sort of bettering of the society which we live in. You don't see it like that, luckily many do

[snowychap]

On the housing benefit argument, my real fear at the moment would be that we would end up with London being looked at as a special case and some kind of alteration to the policy purely on that basis (and for the questioning to be dropped by politicians for this reason).

Though HB/LHA recipients in London are going to be affected, on average, more than those in other regions, these others will still be adversely affected.

Most of the stuff that I've seen politicians of all ilks concentrating on is the cap and not the change in LHA rules (30th percentile and the increase to be on the basis of CPI).

There are some assessments of the measures which suggest that it's quite probabe that in some areas this will lead to a sharp drop in the amount of private rented accomodation open to those on even the full LHA amount.

So, to address the point made by Jon earlier As long as clean and safe accomodation is available to LHA claimants then I don't see the problem, there is an argument (possibly one more plausible than the changes 'should help bear down generally on the rental values being met through Housing Benefit' claim of the DWP/coalition) that there won't be in a lot of cases.

Is it ideological or incompetent? I'd say a mixture of both with a larger dollop of the latter, for now.

[snowychap]

...dragging it back to LHA this comment by Clegg from Blandy's link hits the nail squarely on the head:

"What we are saying is that, for people who receive housing benefit, it is perfectly reasonable for the government to say that it won't hand out more in housing benefit than people who go out to work, pay their taxes, play by the rules will do when they look for housing themselves.

"We are simply suggesting there should be a cap for family homes of four bedrooms of £400 a week. That is £21,000 a year.

"Does he really think it's wrong for people who can't afford to live privately in those areas that the state should subsidise people to the tune of more than £21,000? I don't think so."

Except the coalition are not 'simply suggesting' that. It is utterly disingenuous for Clegg (or for Ed Davey on Question Time or for Cameron in PMQs and so on) to concentrate on that one part of their policy.

I note that Clegg has decided to use phrases like 'hand out' and 'play by the rules' for this (not as emotive and inflammatory as 'cleansing', I'll grant but still demagoguery) and that he also is another who doesn't quite understand that housing benefit is not just an out of work benefit.