| Topic: | If you missed your chance 1st time around.. | |
| Posted by: | George Knox | |
| Date/Time: | 04/10/11 12:29:00 |
| Yes it's where a right to family life comes in. That is supposed to be set against the national interest. You wonder how many families lives are dysfunctional because of a severe shortage of housing. It might be argued by a clever lawyer, that the national interest demands consideration being given to the quality of family life in a larger context. But I don't know the legal precedents. However perhaps Theresa May should also be thinking about this if she does attempt to adjust how the right to family life is considered by the Courts. As I say this is very harsh. But on the other hand I think it very hard on young people who do have some skills or qualifications and do work but whose housing prospects are very dire. Does the fact that working people who pay towards the upkeep of long term benefit claimants not give the workers a slight priority over the non workers. Perhaps Vanessa might have a view? Also rents in London have gone through the roof and you may pay well over £1,000 per month for a two bed flat in west London. If these instead are occupied by people whose culture it is to rely long term on Benefits, then it is becoming unfairer by the minute that we have to fund even higher Housing Benefit bills. Only a few years ago the average funding provided to a Benefit claimant for putting a roof over their head was around £7,000 p.a. That was before Landlords racked up the rents (and the government did nothing to control the rises). Imagine how much the bill has increased recently. You may also be aware that Council Housing rents are due to be increased above inflation following a Coalition decision. Somewhere something has got to give because the country cannot for ever afford this constant rise (in real money terms) of housing rents (which are then funded by HB). |