Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS
  • REVIEWS
  • INSPIRATION
  • COMMUNITY
  • COMPETITIONS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here


Govement u-turn


Paul Morgan e2
13 16.1k 6 England
1 Feb 2013 9:46PM
What do you think of this new bedroom tax that is coming out.

There are many elderly people living in social housing and receiving help through benefits who now risk having this cut.

I thought the government wanted to bring communities together, not break them up, will this be fair.

Edit, just read that those on pension will be exempt, but it can still have the effect of splitting communities and families, especially in small towns.

http://www.channel4.com/news/the-bedroom-tax-the-key-questions

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

1 Feb 2013 10:04PM
There is a person I know who went to the same school as I did, he's never worked, claimed everything possible. He lives in a 3 bedroom end of terrace family home all by himself next door to someone else I know.

Surely if he has to be given anything then it should be a one bedroom property as the 3 bedrooms would be better for a family.

I hope he either has his benefits cut or moves out
answersonapostcard e2
10 12.7k 15 United Kingdom
1 Feb 2013 10:06PM
I can see what they are trying to do but its ill thought out and doesnt allow for common sense to be applied, it set too rigid tick box mentality.
Paul Morgan e2
13 16.1k 6 England
1 Feb 2013 10:11PM
I was watching the news about a couple, one of which is disabled, they need separate bedrooms, there going to loose out, it so wrong.
wrinkles e2
6 351 United Kingdom
1 Feb 2013 10:18PM
It will take a strong Political Party to put England back in the English to cure this countries ill's.Wink
Paul Morgan e2
13 16.1k 6 England
1 Feb 2013 10:20PM
triumphv8 e2
7 453 United Kingdom
1 Feb 2013 10:41PM
Seems sensible to me, why have a family of 5 crammed in a 2 bed house and a couple living alone in a 3 bedroom one - seeing as we are all paying for it I think we have the right to see the best use of the resources we provide.

And I'm sure it would be practical socialism for everyone to swap round to get the best fit - if only these socialists could think of others instead of themselves.
adrian_w e2
7 3.4k 4 Scotland
1 Feb 2013 10:42PM
An interesting comment by our local council. They don't have enough 1 bed properties available to meet the demand from tenants wishing to downsize to beat this tax. Another good idea badly thought through & imposed without the basic groundwork in place to implement it.
answersonapostcard e2
10 12.7k 15 United Kingdom
1 Feb 2013 10:46PM

Quote:At the same time, they want this
Well intended but unworkable, for instance where a community does not want Starbucks/Costa/Tescos 'local' or whatever in their town yet planners go against community wishes. Political rehetoric and policies that are at odds with one another.
Paul Morgan e2
13 16.1k 6 England
1 Feb 2013 10:48PM

Quote:An interesting comment by our local council. They don't have enough 1 bed properties available to meet the demand from tenants wishing to downsize to beat this tax. Another good idea badly thought through & imposed without the basic groundwork in place to implement it


I live in a small town where there is not a lot of social housing, its bad enough for younster leaving home and trying to get on the housing ladder.

Most have to move away from there families.

It would be the same for those living in social housing, there`s not enough smaller properties.

Again, they will be forced to move away.


Quote:Well intended but unworkable


Yes I agree Smile

More views here

http://www.guardian.co.uk/housing-network/editors-blog/2013/feb/01/bedroom-tax-cameron-welfare-policy


Quote:Seems sensible to me, why have a family of 5 crammed in a 2 bed house and a couple living alone in a 3 bedroom one


That family of five might have put themselves in that position, where as the couple living alone in a three bedroomed house are probably doing so because there children have grown up and moved away.
1 Feb 2013 10:56PM
How long will it be, before they start taxing the owner occupier sector on the same basis?
answersonapostcard e2
10 12.7k 15 United Kingdom
1 Feb 2013 10:59PM
Theres not enough HCA money to build more social housing anyway some Housing Associations didnt get a penny in last years allocation , and Section 106 agreements with private developers on very shaky ground - thats another story.
keith selmes
11 7.1k 1 United Kingdom
1 Feb 2013 11:05PM

Quote:In some areas you could wait up to eight years to be housed in a smaller home.
So they make someone pay more unless they move to a smaller home, but it will take 8 years to find one ? Sounds like the government is running a scam.

Quote:there is a national shortage of smaller properties
There could be a clue there as to why people are in homes larger than they need. Seems poorer people have to pay for government planning failure.
triumphv8 e2
7 453 United Kingdom
1 Feb 2013 11:06PM

Quote:They don't have enough 1 bed properties available to meet the demand


Fair point - I'm sure my town has very few 1 bedroom properties - and it's probably only large cities that do.

But then would a childless couple be anywhere on the list for social housing these days. Maybe it's intentional to give preferential housing status to families with kids, and I'm sure those childless couples would think of others and be happy to give up their home so a child could have a safe and secure home.
jembo e2
11 104 United Kingdom
1 Feb 2013 11:10PM
It's Lunatic Politics.

I think the number of honest MP's is proportional to the number of wrongly convicted people in our prisons.
There aren't many.
And they are out to get what they can from the system. Thry have proved that with the 'expenses' scandal.

There are 650 MP's in Parliament.
Why don't we have 4 or 5 apartment blocks in London, with an apartment allocated to a constituency seat. Whoever is elected MP gets the use of that apeartment (at cost) for their term of office. That way rthere would be no switching mortgages and making a cool 1/2 million profit (Mr Mandelson) on the sale of a house that has essentially been paid for by the tax payer.

I bet they'd never vote for that. They'll vote for a huge pay rise while asking everyone else to take pay cuts though.

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.