Newham council and benefit claimants

Frank the tank

I predicted such a situation could arise with the intro of benefit capping and while I thought even I was being a bit OTT, no it is actually the case. If Newham can get away with it, don't think Stoke will have them though.

But there you go, when I predicted it could lead to such a situation I was a scaremongering lefty tw@t. Well, I'm still a lefty.

CambsNewbie

Pure party politics by Newham council (labour) who announce this in the final run up to London mayor election and local elections. Nothing more..

Frank the tank

CambsNewbie wrote:

Pure party politics by Newham council (labour) who announce this in the final run up to London mayor election and local elections. Nothing more..

I'm not so sure. Fact is it's tory legislation that has even allowed such a situation to be played out.

tim_wand

Sorry Frank, gotta go with Cambsnewbie on this one, its Political Oppurtunism and Profiteering.

I went to the University of East London, and resided for a short while in Newham. The predominent populus retained in social housing are Bangledeshi and there is a high provision of Local Authority housing stock which the authority is keen to sell as much of it is over due refurbishment or redevelopment.

Renewed private investment in this area, wether it be through the Olympics or the redevelopment of Albert Docks or London City airport, means that the Local Authority is keen to cash in on it assets rather than retain it and pay for its upkeep.

Maybe they wont send everyone to Stoke , just near by to Alsgar, just to chear Yossie up.

Frank the tank

Don't appologise Tim, that is your take on it.

All I'm really saying here is I predicted (at the time) the legislation could lead to well off areas clearing out their undesirables. I don't know Newham at all. All I'm saying is tory legislation has allowed such a practice to potentially take place. Whether it actually does or not we'll see.

tim_wand

Frank , really do think this is a case of a local authority attempting to sell off the family silver rather than sustain a legacy.

Housing stock its going to cost a bomb to maintain and refurbish.

Prime city location that devolpers would pay a premium for.

They would never admit to not honouring their remit to social housing in the Borough, but then again if they could counter argue that a cap on benefits means that tennants cant be housed there, then Bingo, they ve got a golden ticket.

Frank the tank

Fair enough, I hear what you say mate and from the (councils POV) it makes sense. But this bit of legislation is letting the council out of ITS responsibilty to house ITS residence.

I still won't move from my perception that this legislation was introduced in order to "cleanse" affluent areas of the unworthy and to ghettoise classes of people. There speaketh the loony left in me.

tim_wand

Absolutley Frank, bet there aren't too many council tennants in Westminster?

Especially after Alan Duncan MP (Conservative Melton and Rutland) exploited the right to buy scheme under his mates Maggies policy to fund tennants to buy as long as he was the leaseholder in the long term ( Alledgedly).

beverick

CambsNewbie wrote:

Pure party politics by Newham council (labour) who announce this in the final run up to London mayor election and local elections. Nothing more..

+1

verylonglegs

Usual party politics nonsense on the radio lastnight, heard an interview with a shadow housing minister who was repeatedly asked if he would scrap the cap that was introduced if they were in government because he steadfastly refused to give a direct answer. He also said the government was totally responsible for the countrys housing crisis, conviently ignoring the 13yrs his mob had in power in which they did everything to exacerbate the situation. And these clowns wonder why turnout is becoming increasingly lower in elections, I can't bring myself to back any of them.

Frank the tank

As I've posted elsewhere VLL anyone/party that does offer an alterative is either lambasted and/or ignored by the electorate. So it's our own fault really.

TheStone

Frank the tank wrote:

But there you go, when I predicted it could lead to such a situation I was a scaremongering lefty tw@t. Well, I'm still a lefty.

Housing benefit cuts are one of the few things I've agreed with. I'd probably go further.

MaxwellBygraves

No doubt that there's plenty of party politics involved, but I also agree with your sentiment with regards to the potential effects of the legislation, Frank.

Pross

Newham is a hole, anyone being shipped out as a result of a Tory policy is likely to vote Tory for the rest of their life (unless they end up in Hull or Corby).

postman

In my day.You got sent to Australia for stealing a loaf of bread.Stoke is not too bad.

Smokin Joe

Pross wrote:

Newham is a hole, anyone being shipped out as a result of a Tory policy is likely to vote Tory for the rest of their life (unless they end up in Hull or Corby).

You're not wrong. I grew up there and it wasn't too bad a place, now it's an absolute sh!thole. They'll be queuing up to leave if they've any sense.

MaxwellBygraves

Frank, good article in the Guardian here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... rning-sign