[michael21]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-24182448

Labour has said it will reverse controversial changes to housing benefit if it wins the next election.

Ed Miliband said the reduction of support for social tenants in England, Scotland and Wales deemed to have surplus bedrooms was unfair.

Critics of the shake-up have dubbed it a "bedroom tax" but ministers said they are tackling "spare room subsidies" not available in the private sector.

Labour said it would fund the change by blocking tax cuts for businesses.

The announcement comes with the Labour Party conference about to start in Brighton.

'Wrong, iniquitous and not working'
Since April, social housing tenants with spare rooms have either had to pay more in rent or move somewhere smaller.

For months Labour has argued the change is wrong, unfair and penalises disabled people in particular, but had not committed itself to reverse the policy should it gain power after the election.

But Mr Miliband has now said the change would be paid for by scrapping a tax break for hedge funds and the Treasury's new shares-for-rights scheme.

The Labour leader said the benefit change was "wrong, iniquitous and was not working". He told the BBC that two-thirds of those affected were disabled and would struggle to find anywhere else to live.

"We are serving notice that we will end the 'bedroom tax'," he said.

The BBC's political correspondent Ben Wright said the move will cheer Labour's rank and file and please critics within the party who say it urgently needs clear policies.

But the Treasury claims Labour's figures fail to add up and that this policy would be funded by a tax on pensions and more borrowing.

"Labour's first policy commitment, after three years of waiting, is more spending on housing benefit, funded by a tax on pensions and more borrowing," said Treasury Minister Sajid Javid.

"Despite promising 'discipline' on borrowing, Ed Miliband has shown he is too weak to deliver."

The government insists the £23bn a year housing benefit bill must come down, and will press Labour to explain how it would do that.

time to say freck off to david cameron

[joeysteele]

This is more like it and one thing I have been hoping to hear from Labour, a good move definitely and I am just surprised it has taken so long.

I hope though, this move may actually force the Govt to get rid of it now, before the next election. It should never have been brought in in the first place, by anyone.

[Tom4784]

Empty promises to woo voters, Labour and the Tories are as bad as each other.

[michael21]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

This is more like it and one thing I have been hoping to hear from Labour, a good move definately and I am just surprised it has taken so long.

I hope though, this move may actually force the Govt to get rid of it now, before the next election. It should never have been brought in in the first place, by anyone.

this is the best move by far Labour is the way to go

[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

Empty promises to woo voters, Labour and the Tories are as bad as each other.

That would be my concern, just take a look at Tory "pledges" from before the last election. Not to mention the lib dems :/.

However, in this case, going back on the promise would enrage a chunk of their core support. Whereas the Tories made policies designed to sway traditional Labour voters and then said "oops sorry there's no money so we're going back on everything we promised" - but still delivered to their core Tory supporters. Mostly.

Promising to reverse bedroom tax and then not doing so would all but guarantee a single term for the next lab govt., it would be a stupid political move, so they won't do it.

plus the bedroom tax is ineffective and economically worthless, the money taken from people is spending money, it comes straight OUT of potential consumer sales, I.e. half of it goes to the govt coffers anyway in VAT and corporate taxes where they're not being dodged. utterly retarded policy. So theres no real financial implication in reversing it. the purpose of the bedroom tax is not to save money... it's a political chess move, part of a tactic that is (thankfully) starting to backfire on Mr Osbourne.

[Kazanne]

He's full of ****!

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

That would be my concern, just take a look at Tory "pledges" from before the last election. Not to mention the lib dems :/.

However, in this case, going back on the promise would enrage a chunk of their core support. Whereas the Tories made policies designed to sway traditional Labour voters and then said "oops sorry there's no money so we're going back on everything we promised" - but still delivered to their core Tory supporters. Mostly....

Hardly. Tory supporters are leaving in their droves. Membership of the party has declined year on year since Cameron took over as leader and have dipped dramatically since they got in. That's bad news for the Tories, they get no funding other than their supporters.

As for Miliband... to quote the immortal words of Mandy Rice Davies, he would say that, wouldn't he.

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

That would be my concern, just take a look at Tory "pledges" from before the last election. Not to mention the lib dems :/.

However, in this case, going back on the promise would enrage a chunk of their core support. Whereas the Tories made policies designed to sway traditional Labour voters and then said "oops sorry there's no money so we're going back on everything we promised" - but still delivered to their core Tory supporters. Mostly.

Promising to reverse bedroom tax and then not doing so would all but guarantee a single term for the next lab govt., it would be a stupid political move, so they won't do it.

plus the bedroom tax is ineffective and economically worthless, the money taken from people is spending money, it comes straight OUT of potential consumer sales, I.e. half of it goes to the govt coffers anyway in VAT and corporate taxes where they're not being dodged. utterly retarded policy. So theres no real financial implication in reversing it. the purpose of the bedroom tax is not to save money... it's a political chess move, part of a tactic that is (thankfully) starting to backfire on Mr Osbourne.

I completely agree with what you say above. This is a policy that should never have been brought in at all and for me full shame on the Lib Dems for ever supporting the policy.
I have yet to meet a Lib Dem councillor who even thinks this should have been supported by his MP colleagues in Parliament.

The Conservatives have not listened at all to all of the criticism and warnings as to this policy and have been given plenty time to scrap it yet chosen not to do so.

As you say, Labour would be crazy to promise to reverse it and then not do so, just about all the Labour party think it should be scrapped and I would hope fair minded voters who also see this as a totally rotten and very badly planned policy.
I really hope Labour does win the election now and that this gets reversed along with other heartless measures brought in by this heartless Govt against those weakest in society do get reversed or compassonately amended at least.
No way will Labour not reverse this if they win, I feel 100% sure of that now.

Alao watch the hypocrisy of the Lib Dems if their votes were needed,(hopefully they won't be), that if Labour do win, where they then support reversing the bedroom charge too.

[Kizzy]

I hope they do too, it has been a little late in coming, maybe that means they thought about it for longer that the current government did? Which at a guess was about 2 mins.....
They could U turn but no rich contributor to the tory party has asked them to.

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

I hope they do too, it has been a little late in coming, maybe that means they thought about it for longer that the current government did? Which at a guess was about 2 mins.....
They could U turn but no rich contributor to the tory party has asked them to.

I think they really have thought about it and also of course there is no support for this policy from Labour or Lib Dem councillors all over the Country and it is also surprising how many Conservative Councillors don't like it either from the ones I have come across.

If it is still in place in 2015 then I am sure Kizzy we can rely on Miliband and Labour to get the ridiculous thing done away with once and for all and I would believe Ed Miliband a hundred times over anything David Cameron or Clegg would ever say.

[Kizzy]

Agreed but I do wish he wasn't such an all or nothing guy, he was great at the last conference and inspired great confidence then disappeared!
The government are making it incredibly easy for him at present, there are so many negatives to focus on lately.
One area I would love to see tackled is energy, read of another 8% hike today... this has to be stopped?

[Josy]

Why is my name in the title? I'm not even affected by bedroom tax

Anyway if this ends up to be true then it's great news for those that are affected by it and those that have ended up in arrears through it all.

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Agreed but I do wish he wasn't such an all or nothing guy, he was great at the last conference and inspired great confidence then disappeared!
The government are making it incredibly easy for him at present, there are so many negatives to focus on lately.
One area I would love to see tackled is energy, read of another 8% hike today... this has to be stopped?

I do get what you mean Kizzy, he isn't really inspirational and does seem to allow others to set the agenda.
I do think he is a good strategist though and I also think he knows how to likely win and just needs to get the right format for putting that into practice.

This policy is a real good and strong start.
I like most other things he is saying too really.

I guess there is little they can do as to energy prices, that is the price paid for the disastrous privatisation of the energy companies unfortunately.
I am not really a supporter of nationalisation but I do now think energy is something that should be back under State control.
The privatisation arguments were all a big con in my view it seems from all I have read as to that selling off of them.

[Kizzy]

There is one thing he could do, he could restore the feed-in tariff for solar energy.
Back in 2011 this was reduced from 21p to 11p per unit, I'm not at the moment able to provide links to information but basicallly this decision stopped the roll out of solar panels for social housing across the UK.
Those in private ownership who purchased panels could dramatically reduce their bills also, nationalisation may be astep too far but legislation can be amended?...

[Suze]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

Empty promises to woo voters, Labour and the Tories are as bad as each other.

Maybe so, but this current government won't reverse stuff, so do we take that chance with Labour? If they go back on that promise, we will be no worse off and know at least to give other parties a chance come the following election, if they do keep that promise however it will be good for many. However, the bedroom tax ix only part of the problem, and other pledges need to be made and kept also.

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by Suze

Maybe so, but this current government won't reverse stuff, so do we take that chance with Labour? If they go back on that promise, we will be no worse off and know at least to give other parties a chance come the following election, if they do keep that promise however it will be good for many. However, the bedroom tax ix only part of the problem, and other pledges need to be made and kept also.

Very strong points Suze and I also hope for a great deal more as to policy being outlined on more of the welfare reforms and also other issues.

I am not against welfare reform and the simplification of claiming and paying benefits,what I am against is this Govts discrimination and total lack of any compassion as to the reforms they have made.
No matter who or how many organisations are warning and highlighting the dangers and unfairness of their reforms the sad thing is they just refuse to listen and take anything on board.

I hope for a full new look to the welfare reforms from Labour when in power and that they will amend and ensure compassion and fairness is at the heart of whatever is left in place.

I also hope to hear this week of the plan Andy Burnham had last year as to once in power again that he,if Health Secretary again in a Labour Govt; will repeal all he can of the top to bottom NHS reforms this Govt made.
Despite them stating clearly in the election campaign that there would be no across the board reforming of the NHS by them.

No way can I see Ed Miliband and Labour not scrapping the bedroom charge though, it would be I bet one of the very first things they do.
My worry is now,how many people though will have even more debt/arrears and possibly be even homeless before the 2015 election because of this ridiculous and heartless measure by this Coalition Govt..

[Toy Soldier]

The fact that they've piled in with everything at once is ridiculous. I agree with you that there was a need to simplify the system and change it to make more sense (the whole world pays rent and utilities monthly... benefits are paid every 4 weeks. It's ALWAYS been stupid!!) but they should have made that transition without meddling with anything else and confusing everything. If they worked on making the system airtight to ***actual fraud*** they would save billions, more than they're making out of things like the bedroom tax, that take away money that genuine people actually need.

They should have reformed and modernised the system completely, and THEN started to look at whether there's any fat to be trimmed if necessary. Or, radical idea here, they could look at reigning in the soaring cost of living and absolutely ridiculous rent levels so that people wouldn't need so much money just to scrape by.

I was talking to an elderly lady about the bedroom tax a few weeks ago... she mentioned that when she first got her (social) house her rent was something like £100 a month and has risen to £270 a month. I think she nearly dropped when I told her that my rent (exactly the same size of house - average sized semi-detached house, but a private rental) is £550 a month :/. And this is in commuter-town Scotland... if you start looking at places like Edinburgh / Glasgow / Manchester - you could probably pay double that for the same place. As for London... doesn't even bear thinking about.

Housing is a huge part of the massive benefits bill, and it's so massive because housing costs are completely ridiculous. My family moved house when I was 13, so only 15 years ago, into a detached 4 bedroom house and their mortgage was significantly less than I pay in rent per month... for a house that they would actually own at the end of it.

[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

I also hope to hear this week of the plan Andy Burnham had last year as to once in power again that he,if Health Secretary again in a Labour Govt; will repeal all he can of the top to bottom NHS reforms this Govt made.
Despite them stating clearly in the election campaign that there would be no across the board reforming of the NHS by them.

The current govt. have scuttled the NHS - it's irreparably broken, in my opinion deliberately. I don't think the next government in power could fix it even if they wanted to... as was the intention. The money that would need to be pumped into it to even repair the damage that's been done would be astronomical. To elevate it to a truly world-class service would be practically impossible.

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

The current govt. have scuttled the NHS - it's irreparably broken, in my opinion deliberately. I don't think the next government in power could fix it even if they wanted to... as was the intention. The money that would need to be pumped into it to even repair the damage that's been done would be astronomical. To elevate it to a truly world-class service would be practically impossible.

It is going to need a lot of investment you are so right there into it to bring it back to where it was again but I still believe it is possible under the right Govt.
These reforms have caused massive confusion, have been hurriedly brought in and have caused delays likely not seen before as to NHS care.
Still, a vast majority of NHS workers don't want these reforms.

What posessed the Lib Dems to ever allow any of them to be implemented is beyond me.
Reforms no one voted for, neither of the Coalition parties had in their manifesto and also David Cameron stating clearly that there would be no top to bottom reforms of the NHS under his Govt.

Certainly for me,(and it was why I couldn't bring myself to vote Conservative in 2010),as to the NHS, the Conservatives and now also the Lib Dems can not be believed as to it or their word trusted either.

[michael21]

Originally Posted by Josy

Why is my name in the title? I'm not even affected by bedroom tax

Anyway if this ends up to be true then it's great news for those that are affected by it and those that have ended up in arrears through it all.

hi mr Miliband

i agree it good news if true

[DanaC]

They should look at removing the proposed hard cap to benefits as well.

By having an absolute limit on the total benefits package, with nothing in place to limit rents, they place people wholly at the mercy of landlords.

£500 per week cap for a household sounds fine, until you take into account the soaring cost of rents. There's only so much economising a family can do. And the biggest cost to any family is something they have very little control over.

They sell it to the public on the grounds of 'fairness'. Why should people in work, possibly earning less than £500 per week, pay for families to live in houses they themselves could not afford. But the cost of implementing these changes is so much greater than any savings gained. Not to mention that many of those affected are in fact working.

Instead of ensuring that people on benefits remain poorer than people in work, they should be concentrating on ensuring that people in work are richer than people on benefits.

[Kizzy]

I agree, there was in the past legislation to protect those in the private rented sector from unscrupulous landlords, what happened to that?....
Maybe that's an area that could be looked at too before we go totally full circle to the good old bad old days of 'us and them'.

[Marc]

I hear Josy has celebrated by eating a whole tub of Ben and Jerry's

[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by DanaC

They should look at removing the proposed hard cap to benefits as well.

By having an absolute limit on the total benefits package, with nothing in place to limit rents, they place people wholly at the mercy of landlords.

£500 per week cap for a household sounds fine, until you take into account the soaring cost of rents. There's only so much economising a family can do. And the biggest cost to any family is something they have very little control over.

They sell it to the public on the grounds of 'fairness'. Why should people in work, possibly earning less than £500 per week, pay for families to live in houses they themselves could not afford. But the cost of implementing these changes is so much greater than any savings gained. Not to mention that many of those affected are in fact working.

Instead of ensuring that people on benefits remain poorer than people in work, they should be concentrating on ensuring that people in work are richer than people on benefits.

I agree, I don't disagree with the hard cap in principle because of how benefits for children work... I.e. a static increase "per child" that doesnt reflect the true financial situation. The financial hit of going from zero children to one child is massive... But the impact of adding a second child is much smaller, and a 3rd even less.

Also the hard cap is, at least, only on benefits and not on money earned on top of that (e.g. a family with someone earning 6k, the hard cap is 32k total not 26k).

HOWEVER, my problem with it is that it doesn't factor regional differences into it AT ALL. I lived in small-town Lancashire for a few years and the rent prices were pretty low... You could get a decent house for 450 pcm. Where I am now you can't really rent a family home for under 550... And in the south of England that'll barely get you a bedsit.

And yet... The cap is the same everywhere? How does that make sense? I personally think 26k after tax is ample to support even a larger family on... In areas where housing is reasonable. We were in a situation where people with 7, 8+ children were getting the equivalent of 50,000 or more which is genuinely ridiculous and unsustainable.

But if you're pumping out 1000 pounds a month on rent because of the area you live in, it must be nearly impossible on 26k? Not to mention that the cost of living in general is higher in London. The hard cap should take local housing averages into the equation. It's the only thing that makes sense.

[Kizzy]

That's why the cap was effectively considered social cleansing in the capital. Instead of solving social issues or looking at private rents and how out of line they are now they just ousted whole families splintering communities.
Creating an ever wider 'north/south' 'us/them' gulf.