Bishop of Bath and Wells joins attack on benefit cuts

“Oh I see, just re-read Roger's post - they must've run out of room on the fag packet.”

“Curiouser and curiouser. Parents of children serving with the armed forces will now be exempt. I don't think very many children serve in the armed forces anyway, but assuming they mean dependents who intend to return home after a deployment, it seems a little odd to exempt only those whose employer pays for their accommodation anyway.

If your child goes off to uni or has to take contract/temporary work away from home, you lose your benefits (and/or spare room). But if your child joins the forces, you get to keep them (and/or it). I wonder why?”

“Will IDS be paying a bedroom tax for the extra rooms he no doubt has in his tax payer subsidised 2nd home? Or will he be good enough to move out and give it to a family that needs it? Oh look, there's hell freezing over.........”

“Bedroom tax 'in chaos' after Iain Duncan Smith announces exemptions"

http://tinyurl.com/d4d9kqz

That what comes of making up policies on the back of a fag packet.

.”

“@ mhelenmary: this is not a tax. What this reform actually does is equalise the position between people in private rented and social housing."

The difference is that private tenants will have little difficulty finding smaller accommodation appropriate for their needs. There is a massive shortage of smaller properties in the public sector and few tenants will have the option of moving to a smaller property unless they transfer to the private sector (where they'll cost the taxpayer an average of £30/week more to house).

.”

“I've no idea, but surely it cannot be disputed that social housing residents subsidised by taxpayers should not be moved to accommodation more suited to their needs, so freeing up space for others who need it?"

No social housing residents are 'subsidised' by the taxpayer. There is cross-subsidy within the public housing sector but overall it generates a profit for the Treasury - over £500 million in 2010/11. By contrast £8 billion was paid to private tenants in Housing Benefit, in effect a subsidy for private landlords.

As has been pointed out ad nauseum, the bedroom tax is charged regardless of whether or not there is suitable alternative housing available. It's not unreasonable to penalise those who refuse to accept a reasonable offer (and many would probably be happy to downsize anyway) but that's not what's happening. There are cases of people being re-housed in 2-bed flats because no 1-bed ones are available, only then to be stung with a penalty.

.”

“Jezer is invited along to the bedroom tax protest in Bath to learn first hand how this tax will cost the taxpayer millions more. It's an economic nonsense. Build more homes, don't shuffle around the few into homes that don't even exist.”

“Jezer, it might be considered fair not to offer accommodation with surplus rooms to new tenants, or to move people to a smaller property somewhere close - but that's not what's happening. People with a spare room are simply having their benefits cut without being offered an alternative. Tax is a fairly accurate description.

The big worry is what comes next. If those in power can arbitrarily decide that the poor are not allowed a spare room, what comes next? Heating? An inside toilet? Why should the taxpayer subsidise a whole kitchen when they can only afford to eat crisps and microwaved horseburgers anyway? Why waste money on electricity that'll just be wasted watching Embarrassing Bodies or playing on the free Playstation?

Meanwhile, the bosses and shareholders of taxpayer-funded public service companies are allowed to charge whatever they like, and own as many houses as they like, with as many bedrooms as they like. Our own chancellor was in Europe recently defending these state-parasites' right to six-figure bonuses whilst the less fortunate are resorting to foodbanks because they cant even afford horseburgers.

In your obviously intelligent opinion, do you really think this is a fair situation?”

“@ mhelenmary: this is not a tax. What this reform actually does is equalise the position between people in private rented and social housing. Private tenants on Housing Benefit - whatever their particular circumstances or special needs - have never been able to claim for properties with what is defined in the regulations as excess bedroom space, despite the fact that they are probably paying higher rents for comparable properties.”

“Yes of course I see your point about families with special needs, but surely there are many others who do not require extra space that could be released to benefit others?”