Pink Fire Pointer Because everything looks bad if you remember it

Because everything looks bad if you remember it


Iain Duncan Smith is mad as hell, and he's not going to take it anymore:

Campaigners accused the welfare secretary, Iain Duncan Smith, of "losing his cool" after the cabinet minister launched an extraordinary attack against a charity for challenging the government's proposed housing benefit reforms in the courts, describing the action as "ridiculous … irresponsible behaviour (and) an ill-judged PR stunt" which resulted in "a massive waste of taxpayers' money and court time".

The Child Poverty Action Group (CPAG) had sought to overturn the government's cap on housing benefit, arguing in the high court that such a move would result in the "social cleansing" of expensive areas of the UK.


How dare anyone attempt to use the state and law to anyone's benefit...? Anyone except defence consultants and arms dealers... and Vodafone... and News Corporation... not forgetting the City of London... How dare they point out the likely shortfalls of my policies?

The caps mean that benefits paid to the poor to cover rents cannot exceed £250 a week for a one-bedroom property, £290 for two bedrooms, £340 for three bedrooms and £400 for four bedrooms. The government's own assessment shows that groups affected include people with disabilities, teenage mothers and ethnic minority families.

Charities had argued that the effect would be felt first in the capital, saying 9,000 London households facing would have to leave their homes as a result of the caps – and about 4,600 would be unable to find anywhere else to live "locally".

This could mean upwards of 20,000 children having to move, 14,000 out of their local area, resulting in disruption to education, health and social services.


Oh that's how. It could be argued that the way to reduce the housing benefit bill would be to tackle unemployment, poverty pay, introduce rent control and a building and renovation programme (it's not as if there isn't large unemployment in the construction sector, hey!). But that would involve siding with the poor against employers and landlords, and that would be wrong, wrong, WRONG!