Simon Hughes: Parliament won't approve the Government's housing benefit plans - some of which I oppose

Comments

[Ross J Warren]

Lets hope Simon is right, some of the Houseing benifit "reforms" are wrong.
Osbourne clearly has not taken in the reality of JSA benifit.

[Cleethorpes Rock]

If we were to design a benefits system from scratch and you were to say to someone, "If you fall on hard times or cannot work, the taxpayer will pay you up to the average national salary.", I think 99.9% of right-minded people would say that is a fair system.

It is nonsense to say that this system, ie that being proposed by the coalition is "unfair".

[It doesn't add up...]

Non! Non! Non!

Back to Bermondsey les Deux Eglises, Mr. Hughes. You're out of touch with the public who are thoroughly fed up with government behaving like millionaire sugar daddies for people who tick the boxes. They know it's unfair for Mr. Nur, unemployed bus driver, to live in a £2m Kensington mansion. They know it's unfair that they all they can afford on their earned income is a tiny garret flat for an exhorbitant private rent while their neighbour below in the big rooms is on benefits.

These measures WILL pass. The public think they're a very good idea.

[Cleethorpes Rock]

In my comment above, "fair" should be replaced with "generous".

[T.England. Very working class.]

Oh my gawd he is SO wrong & SO out of touch.
This is a prime example to the majority of the tax paying public that the Liberals can't become the second party, & just when some of us thought they were beginning to stand a fighting chance of doing so, BIG mistake Mr Hughes, more like this & some of us will start to wish the coalition breaks down.

VERY unhappy now :O(

[John Prendergast]

Hughes has just had a bilious attack. lets hope his next attack is fatal. I am jiggered if he thinks he has aright tosquander my money (what little I still have afer the illfare state has squandered so much or so long!)

[Tony Makara]

For a nation to be at peace with itself the government of the day has to protect and look after all of its people. In other words decent Paternalism.

Government should not be in the business of selectively picking on certain sectors of society.

The people of our country are our concern and we have to ensure that they are able to live in security, within settled communities. Unmolested by a government trying to impose social engineering.

[HF]

It only needs the Lib Dem Govt Ministers to vote with all Conservative MPs for them to pass. So WTF is Hughes talking about?

[martin sewell]

It is time to call his bluff.

Not all of Labour would vote with him. Frank Field and Kate Hooey probably see the logic, Brown won't be there and others will be happy to let us have the legislation and then attack us if the problems are greater than we think - or keep quiet if it works out well.

Many Lib Dems are on the payroll vote and the Conservatives must know this is a must win vote.

If you prevaricate it will only encourage this pompous little twerp.

[Victor Southern]

A man who is besotted with his own self-importance but who has fallen at every hurdle. Why he believes that he is the nation's conscience heaven alone knows.

[Patsy Sergeant]

But Simon Hughes is just being Simon Hughes, an opportunist, first and foremost. He is seizing the moment to draw attention to himself, it is nothing to do with the policies, or indeed helping the country! It is just Mr. Hughes trying to make a bid for more attention. He doesn't seem able to grasp the fact that he doesn't inspire even his own party, to entrust him with high office.... Everybody can't be wrong. Why doesn't Mr. Hughes go away and try some Charity work??!!

[1AM]

Simon is wrong on the Housing Benefit cuts. So wrong it is untrue. It's almost as if huge numbers of people in his constituency were welfare dependent and relying on huge sums from the taxpayer and were about to see this ridiculous subsidy removed.

But on the other hand, the coalition's new tenancies will be disastrous. Giving council homes to people on welfare and then taking them away if they get a job has to be up there for most stupid ideas of the government and blows apart the reforms IDS is creating to stop hitting the poor the moment they try to move off benefits (like Labour used to).

[woodsy42]

Actually I think the capping system being proposed is grossly unfair. It still expects that people working full time but on low wages will pay tax to provide benefits that are potentially higher than the low paid worker's income! It remains far too generous.
If people are expected to work and live on minimum wage a benefits cap at minimum wage level would be more appropriate.

[Joshua]

Any defence to this people? http://tinyurl.com/2w2byer

[Andy Newham]

We have just had a tough Conservative spending review; it's hardly surprising there are a few squeaks from the LibDems. If they were 100% happy they'd be Tories.

[Sally W]

I agree competely with "1am" (above) that taking away council houses from people who have a job creates new disincentives to work. Not just doing it - but the FEAR that it will be done. "I daren't get a job coz I'll lose my home and I've got 10 kids to feed and all".

Also - frankly - there will be increasing resentment as the white working class have to hand over their houses to new immigrants. Overall, the scheme will surely create ghettos of new immigrants and the unemployed .. everyone else will have been moved out. Could be explosive a few years down the line.

Having said that, I haven't a better solution!

[Paul Norton]

The one problem I can see with the Housing Benefit rule changes is not the cap on levels, which is perfectly fair and "progressive" (what a horribly Lib Dem word) but instead the change to the age at which a single person is only allowed to receive a single room with shared facilities rate rather than a single bedroom property. This will mean that if you are 25 to 35, single and unable to pay your rent without help, or out of work, you must either share a property or live with your parents. This will put a squeeze on the number of 2 bedroom properties, as many will be forced to house share. That reduces the housing stock available for mostly first time buyers. and will have a knock on effect across the economy. It also implies that if you are under 35 and single you should be living with your parents - my parents would have a fit if I moved home now! Simon Hughes is totally wrong on the point he makes, but these cuts will cause social unrest and very real pain amongst one of the most ignored groups in society - single young men.

[HF]

This housing benefit change will mainly hit inner London areas.

Q: The number of Lib Dem back bench MPs representing such an area?

A: One. Simon Hughes. Hughes is representing his own parochial interest again.

[john parkes]

Lack of money for government expenditure on its present scale forces us all to confront the question of the affordability or otherwise of the existing Welfare State model; and if we think it is wrong, what must be done to put it right. It is clear that the present model is financially unsustainable.
Unfortunately for some, changes will mean their having to face up to a different lifestyle. This might well mean those who have lived on State benefits having to get to grips with the need to find, and keep, paid employment. IDS is now trying to introduce a scheme that will allow those in work to be no worse off than if they had previously been on welfare.
It`s going to be hard and no one has pretended otherwise. The changes here to which Hughes objects are some of the key ones needed to bring State expenditure back within the bounds of practicality. If this plan is not followed through, every other one put forward will also risk being killed by special pleading. We have to face up to the problem sometime; now is as appropriate a moment as any.

[southern softie]

Housing benefit needs reform.The system is not fair to those who try to do the right thing and work to provide for their families.Yet if they go on the dole they can move into an upmarket area and get their sky high rent paid by the taxpayer.
Perhaps the Lib Dems should spare a thought for those people who try to do the right thing.Fairness cuts both ways!

[C H Ingoldby]

I feel angry that i have to pay my own rent and also pay the rent of people living in better houses in nicer areas then me.

The sooner this is pushed through the better.