The language in this may shock and if easily offended dont read on. However when a rocket is needed up peoples arses it’s needed!
Paying social tenants who underoccupy social housing is known as the ‘bedroom tax’ yet we don’t call the overall benefit cap the ‘close your legs you ‘scaggy bitch’ tax? Why? Perhaps the ‘Jade Tax’ would be more suitable particularly to those easily offended and who like Chaucer?
‘Jade’ is an Olde English term for a harlot, a woman of loose morals or in modern parlance the ‘scaggy bitch’ single parent dropping babies like flies to so many different fathers just for the welfare benefits and the council house…you get the (Daily Mail?) picture. Though of course the same situation applies to a good Catholic girl whose husband has just died tragically or has cancer and about to die leaving her with 6 kids – the benefit system doesn’t judge morality after all!
The fundamental flaw in the overall benefit cap (OBC) is a Jade Tax and here’s what I mean as I am amazed this issue has not been taken up and discussed.
Those with 6 children will have to pay their rent from their welfare benefits after April next year, rent which is currently paid for them through housing benefit. That is a fundamental seachange and a tax on having children and is against the inviolable human right to a home as having children equates with being made homeless and perpetuallly!
The OBC limits all benefits to £500pw and works by deducting the amount of welfare benefits from this leaving the remainder or residual amount as the maximum that can be paid towards rent in housing benefit. So the ‘scaggy bitch’ or the good Catholic girl will from next April receive circa £500pw in welfare benefits and zero, nothing, nada in housing benefit. Given that a 4 bed council property, the cheapest option, is priced at £120pw or so as a minimum nationally then where is this £120pw tax going to come from?
Contrast that with the bedroom tax of a 14% or 25% reduction and this is a 100% reduction. So why has it had scant comment across housing?
Yes there are very few families with 6 children I grant you but the OBC overtly penalises large families on benefits (and you will see those in work too) and is the fundamental flaw in the OBC. These large families will become homeless and there is no other viable option to this as they will rack up massive arrears very quickly and what then happens?
The OBC will make EVERY large family homeless due to arrears and that is in the lowest cost housing option in social housing. This is not a large family living in private rented in Kensington; this is the pillar of the local Catholic church community, and Mother Earth in a council house in Hull (or maybe Belfast, Glasgow or Liverpool with their high Catholic populations?)
The OBC is social engineering on a massive scale; it is a huge gender and feminist issue too and I repeat WILL affect and make homeless the ‘scaggy bitch’ (SB) and the Catholic Earth Mother (CEM).
What happens next?
The tenant arrears lead to eviction.
A homeless application is made and the SB and CEM will be found unintentionally homeless and in priority need and the local council will have to rehouse and accept a full homelessness duty. But where do they go? Leave aside temporary accommodation and it huge cost as the interim emergency housing, I mean after that.
If they are found a 4 bed council property or even ‘sardined’ into a 3 bed property the same situation will recur as they will need to pay their rent from their welfare benefit.
Repeated homelessness is the inevitability due to not being able to afford the cheapest possible housing because of the OBC.
What will be the impact on the children and/or on the mental health of the mother? I could go on with many more stating the bloody obvious consequences and questions but one obvious one springs to mind – Who the hell didn’t consider that OBC equals large families will be made homeless perpetually?
The answer is none other than that self-avowed Christian churchgoer, Iain Duncan Smith!
The ONLY answer for the Good Catholic Earth Mother is to get a job and one that pays enough to cover childcare for 6 children. If she takes a minimum wage job she will be able to claim working tax credit and be exempt from the overall benefit cap and so have her rent paid by HB. Yet this apparent £120 saving in having her HB paid won’t cover the childcare costs of 6 children will it and she will be lucky if triple that amount covers it and that low estimate of £360pw is 50% more than her gross salary!!! What was that IDS, you will always be better off in work than on benefit? Really! The Good Catholic Earth Mother will have no choice but not to pay her rent as she needs to pay childcare and feed her family.
Yes with HB direct to tenant even the most avowed Christian who wants to do the right thing won’t have the desired effect at all. The arrears case comes before the court and another eviction. The homeless team may even try and decide this is intentionality on the CEM’s part, but even if they do what happens to the CEM and her 6 children? Where do they live? Where do they go?
- I didn’t see any religious aspects in the OBC impact assessment to this despite the UK having about 6m Catholics? Human Rights Act challenges anyone? I haven’t read any church condemnation of this policy either.
- Don’t BME families have larger families on average? Yes, yet I haven’t seen any challenge to the OBC policy on these grounds have you?
- I didn’t see any gender aspects and risks covered in the OBC impact assessment either? Another HRA challenge anyone?
Oh I see the Good Catholic Earth Mother is just a ‘scaggy bitch’ who should have kept her legs closed IDS! It’s not the governments fault her husband lost his job, contracted cancer or was run over by a bus is it? That’s the basis of this policy which denies all large families a right to a home and massively against their Human Rights. It’s a Jade Tax not a Child Tax then in the governments view?
Reading this and have 5 children or more? What if you lose your job?
One final point to consider that is relevant. The OBC is nothing more than a housing tax too. Now and before it comes in we already have a national welfare benefit tax; dole is £71pw whether you live in London or Land’s End to John O’Groats. It is already capped on a national basis as all welfare benefits are. The OBC is a housing benefit tax and as I outline above its fundamental flaw is a denial of the human right to a home and needs to be challenged legally.
- A 5 child family SB or CEM will only get about £80pw towards rent from next April and the same will happen to them just at a slightly slower rate.
- The systemic flaw which sees the cap rise at a much lower rate of inflation than both welfare benefits and rents will increase the numbers of tenants caught by this partially or in full each year thereafter.
- The cap will also capture all those living with the ‘affordable (sic) rent’ model from next year with 4 children and soon with 3 children (occasionally lapsed Catholics anyone?)
In a few years we will see having children equates with being made homeless.
Perhaps we should start inserting repeat 5 year contraceptives in all women and only allow them to be removed when they can prove they have sufficient financial resources to give birth? Well that’s the thrust of this policy after all!
Perhaps all marriages and relationships should be forced to have a pre-nuptial agreement in them making both parties fully financially responsible for all children and no funding from the state for them?
Maybe the coalition will dictate to the religious leaders of this country to modify the marriage service and remove or amend the rationale for procreation with a financial caveat?
Flippant? – No and if you want to read how much worse this will be for those living in the affordable (sic) rent model look here
How about the quandary judges will face when arrears happen look at this excellent article by Ben Reeve Lewis (and comments as to why its not a London only matter) in the Guardian