In response to Antony Calvert’s attack of Wakefield’s struggling working population. I would like to say that his was a rather short-sighted and monotonous opinion that serves no useful purpose, as a paid representative.
Has the gentleman in question ever thought that this massive debt is in no way imaginable the fault of the people who have to use social housing? Do the words ‘social housing’ not give him a clue? I put it to Mr Calvert that the fault of the considerable debt may lay at the feet of our over-generous housing management, mainly council?
This bulky housing benefit debt may just be the fault of past bad management? I don’t know, but, I find this proposition sits easier on my shoulders than just ‘sheep like’ blaming those who are least able to defend themselves, the disabled, the weak and the sick. Also, those that manage the housing benefit are they not to shoulder some of the blame for not controlling spending?
My wife says, quite rightly, that the ‘spare room’ comes in handy for a myriad of reasons. From being the bedroom of the carer who stays odd nights in the week. To relatives’ children staying overnight to gives a poorly mum a well deserved rest. This also serves as a much-needed and valued social function, unlike our learned friend.
Finally, Mr Calvert, for your information,the definition of tax is as follows...A compulsory contribution to state revenue, levied by the government on workers’ income and business profits or added to the cost of...
Therefore, ‘spare room subsidy’ or ‘bedroom tax’ what ever way you wish to shuffle it to suit your own needs, this is still factually speaking very much a tax on the poor.
G L Hall