Advertisement
17,000 face benefits crunch
Reporter: Andrew Rudkin
Date online: 12 February 2013
COUNCILLOR Abdul Jabbar, Oldham’s cabinet finance chief, talks exclusively to Chronicle reporter ANDREW RUDKIN about how the welfare reforms from bedroom tax to benefit capping could hit thousands of working-age Oldhamers hard.
NEARLY 17,000 households across Oldham will be affected by plans to abolish full council tax benefit from April — leaving claimants to find a budget-crunching £250 a year in bands A and B.
Residents who receive 100 per cent discount will have to pay up to 25 per cent of the bill under the new Council Tax Support Scheme.
Around 28,000 local people currently receive council tax benefit. Nearly 11,000 are of pensionable age and are unaffected; but 16,814 households will be hit.
Councillor Jabbar today called the Government’s axing of council tax benefits and transferring the responsibility to councils “crazy”.
Each authority must develop a local scheme with 10 per cent less money — a £3million shortfall.
Councillor Jabbar said: “This is absolutely crazy. They have reduced the council tax benefit we used to get by £3 million and said go away and develop a scheme.
“If this was was the only thing we were ask to do, fine; we could probably find other sources to support it. But this year we are already saving £25 million. Next financial year it’s about £19 million and the year after that about £20 million.
“I’m not exaggerating when I say this presents a very difficult challenge. It is going to hurt people — there is do doubt about that.”
Four months ago, Councillor Jabbar said Oldhamers would lose £25 million a year in the reforms, but this has now risen to £28 million.
Councillor Jabbar said ministers had passed on the “dirty work” to local authorities: “All the changes will be administered by us and the letterhead informing them will be that of Oldham Council.
“The Government’s excuse is we have to balance the national deficit. Is hitting the poorest the way to do it?”
Where cuts will hit
Estimated yearly shortfalls on working age claimants in Oldham (pensioners not affected)
£464,000 — 124 households affected, all with children: The Government is introducing a limit on the total benefit most working-age can receive.
£1.7 million — 2,526 social tenants: your entitlement to housing benefit will be reduced if you rent from a housing association and have “spare” bedrooms.
£3 million — 16,814 households: Those who receive 100 per cent council tax benefit will have to pay more towards their council tax.
£11 million — 4,000: Replaces Disability Living Allowance (DLA). Many might lose their entitlements.
£2.1 million — 1,665 people: The Government is hoping to move people from Incapacity Benefit to Jobseekers Allowance.
£130,000: The Social Fund is run by local authorities through jobcentres, on behalf of the Department of Work and Pensions. It will have a reduced budget.
£4.6 million — 4,232 16-18 year olds: the Education Maintenance Allowance, used to support young people continuing education, was scrapped in 2011.
£2.58 million: A number of changes were introduced in 2011 amounting to this much being removed from the welfare budget.
£2.8 million — Currently paid for over 58,000 children: A three-year freeze on benefit paid has another year to run.
Comments
Why does Cllr Jabbar have a problem with the council being responsible for allocating housing stock?
No one is being taxed. What is so wrong with being expected to live in a property that has the number of bedrooms you actually need? Why should there be spare capacity unless people are willing to pay for it?
Cllr Jabbar need sto realise the benefits bill is a labour legacy of 'money for everyone for anything'
Why does Labour object to scrapping universal benefits I wonder?
Labour really have left this Country in a mess, Cllr Jabbar should be holding is party to account not bleating about tough decisions.
Cllr Jabbar, I have an answer for you. All those working age benefit claimants could have an option, they could go and WORK for a living like the rest of us. They could pay into the system rather than take from it! Whats happening here is the government attempting to make working more lucrative than spending a lifetime on ill founded Labour hand outs. I am all for it. I cannot believe 17,000 homes across Oldham actually pay zero council tax and cost the taxpayer millions each year on top.
Here we go again. Moan, moan, moan. Playing politics with peoples lives to get votes by blaming others. LIB/LAB/CON are all an utter disgrace. LAB created this unholy mess by spending all the fake income in the boom leaving us with a MASSIVE deficit when the income collapsed. CON/LIB then come in and cut welfare - correct, but then do nothing on immigration, EU, foreign aid, PC lunatics, etc. The UK has been turned into an utter disaster by Lib/lab/con traitors only interested in themselves.
"100% council tax benefit" ; does that mean they pay absolutely nothing at the moment, but are no doubt receiving the most back? Fantastic - about time they started paying something into the system.
what a load of cobblers!
the only thing here are reforms.
reforms that have been needed for far too long.
for too long too many have enjoyed the perks of the free money avaliable. it has encouraged the wasters and the lazy to live a life of riley.
all the while the hard working tax payer has to fund these wasters.
labour did nothing in their 13 years to try and curb this.
so now when the coalition try to fix the problem labour play the sympathy card!
not at all fooled!
Jabbar is not being straight with people. Firstly, let me make one point. The so called "bedroom tax" is not a tax,but a reduction in benefit compared with what was paid during the fiscally incontinent Labour years.It applies only to tenants of social housing who have their subsidised rents further subsidised by housing benefit. Only those who have at least one spare bedroom will see a reduction.
Why should tenants who are mainly or entirely dependent on benefits expect taxpayers to fully fund properties that are bigger than they need?
Those who live in private rented accommodation are not allowed to receive housing benefit to cover the cost of spare bedrooms.
The Housing Benefit budget is approx £23bn.
Even Labour admits the housing benefits bill is out of control.
No-one should take Jabbar seriously until he recognises the scale of the problem his Government left behind.
What this report doesn't tell is that those in band H will have to pay £45 per week! Perhaps Cllr Jabbar might like to explain how someone receiving £54pw benefit is supposed to pay this monsterous amount?
Surely everyone should pay SOMETHING for services provided by the Council.I am amazed to see so many expect so much and pay so little or nothing at all. P.S. how much is paid to Cllr Jabbar and his colleagues every year for doing what was once done more for serving the community rather than being a nice little earner.
Yes Mr Cameron we are all in this together!, and were do the rich fit into the equations?, as for the DLA of the 80% taken of it, and after challenging the decision 70% are reinstated on the benefit, the agency that deals with this does not care because it makes £2,500 per person even if the appeal is upheld, a total waste of tax payers money. of the rest they are supposed to help they are forgotten about and left to fend for themselves, and some 5% attempting suicide!. Nice one Mr Cameron!.
...and thus the touch-paper of popular civil-dissent was lit.
Bedroom Tax?? It's not a tax! Since when has receiving less benefits been a tax? Also this is the way that the housing benefit (Local Housing Allowance) is issued in the Private Rented Sector. Why should it be any different for the Social Rented Sector?
Firstly we need to separate the people in work in a lowed paid job where the employers need to be forced to pay the living wage,and the scroungers who have never worked and have no intention of working,and also the young girls who think that having children is a business,and a means to obtaining a free furnished flat they can have as many children as they like the taxpayer will pay,you can see these people daily on Jeremy Kyle who think the country owes them a living but hopefully not for long.
Good to see the usual lovely, magnanimous posters on here
COUNCILLOR Abdul Jabbar.Welcome to the real world, where the genuine tax payers of Oldham are sick and tired of paying for the upkeep of your supporters who are dragging this once great Town into a state that it is in today.I live in hope.
@shaun mcgrath..thus the workers got fed up of the workshy & scroungers. You need to look at the demographic time bomb this country faces,
@road rocket I know a single woman who lives off benefits in a 3 bed council house. Her mother lives alone on the same estate in a 3 bed ex-council house.
There are no doubt thousands more just like her. With the tremendous housing pressure there is, can you give me one reason why people should live in properties that are bigger than they need at other's ex
How can some places find a way to give 100% benefit it a joke now it`s a post code lottery it a plan to push out people onto other areas
I wonder failsworthian if you have ever run a business? I suspect not, as you'd have it bankrupt in no time!
Why should employers be expected to fund politicians stealth taxes? if the politicians stopped taxing lifes essentials then there wouldn't be a need for a 'living wage'. Gas & Electric are treated in the way petrol is with so many 'levys' is't impossible to find out just how much tax there really is. Television tax used to fund govt projects the list goes on & on.
Perhaps now those who have never paid full Council Tax will now know how everybody else feels, especially those who pay full Council Tax. Is Cllr Jabbar scared? Perhaps he is scared of people waking up to see how much Labours Council Tax rises are kicking people in the teeth and hitting them in the pocket. It seems Labours client voters are being taken of taxpayer funded drip feed.
Always good to see the same old people use a tenuous link in order to moan about the same old things!!! When will people stop going on about how the deficit came around and try to come up with constructive arguments about how it is trying to be sorted?? Very clear that this is the Govt making local councils look like the bad guys here to save themselves p.s. this is a global economic crisis that Labour can't be wholly responsible for!!!!
P.p.s when will people on here recognise that the deficit is increasing under the current government instead of looking backwards and continually blaming Labour???
Yes Mr Cameron we are all in this together!, and were do the rich fit into the equations?, as for the DLA of the 80% taken of it, and after challenging the decision 70% are reinstated on the benefit, the agency that deals with this does not care because it makes £2,500 per person even if the appeal is upheld, a total waste of tax payers money. of the rest they are supposed to help they are forgotten about and left to fend for themselves, and some 5% attempting suicide!. Nice one Mr Cameron!.
Oldham Scotland. Has someone who is fortunate to earn over £42k a year, I have now been hit with 40 percent tax bracket due to the Tories reducing the amont of which this tax is applicable. They also raised the amount for which people will pay tax to almost £3k a year. Has a high end earner, I do not mind giving more in tax, what I do mind is giving it to work shy job dodgers who spend my tax on booze, fags and drugs.
The housing shortage was created by the tories this i know coz i am one, they gave us the right to buy thus creating a shortage of housing stock, i bought my council house i would have been daft not to at the price i got it, thats not the issue the issue is the council should have used that money to biuld more houses rather than fritter it as they obviously have.
Kezzer, spending money on booze fags & gambling actually keeps money in the UK economy! spending it on fancy electronics doesn't.
A couple of areas Cameron doesn't seem to want to challenge are the unmarried mothers, who have kids simply so they don't have to work, and receive a great deal of benefits, and pensioners who account for the vast majority of the social security budget - around 60% This will grow as their level of benefits increase.
Kezzer, I am in the 45% tax bracket, I did not want a tax cut neither need one. I would neither put you in the rich bracket . What irritates me is the fact that the rich get away with murder, tax avoidance, claiming of benefits etc they do not need. The conservatives would bring back work houses if they could, anythingfor ffree labour for their rich mates.
This change only affects people in council properties or what is called now social housing. Anyone in a private rented property only ever got housing benefit for the rooms they needed not for the rooms in the house. This change makes it fair.
Totally concur with OLDHAM SCOTLAND, one of the few posters to talk sense. By far the majority – and you know who you are – talk out of your rectum. @ProDriver & @timberwolf - how about showing a bit more compassion for those less fortunate than yourselves – sorry, you’d have to possess a heart for that!
kezzer40. the feeling is mutual.
i dont mind paying tax. as long as it goes on short term help to those who have unfortunately lost their jobs.
but i too mind a great deal when that money goes on wasters who do nowt to contribute to the running of this country!
years take take take from scroungers has resulted in the collective pot for this sort of help being effectively empty.
had labour managed the welfare state properly in the first place, these sorts of reforms would not have been needed
ProDriver: "... With the tremendous housing pressure there is, can you give me one reason why people should live in properties that are bigger than they need..." ++++++ Are you including all the owner occupied homes in that question - including yourself?
If Labour had not left our country in such a terrible mess strong measures would not be necessary now. The fact that our Labour masters on OMBC have no flair or vision - except for statues of Eric Sykes - tells us all we need to know. As a tax-payer I am pleased that some politicians (regardless of party) finally have the guts to tackle the scroungers ....
The problem is of both camps, those who who are rich and screw the last penny out of HMRC in tax avoidance schemes and then we have the few on benefits who have no intention of ever working. I personally think the intentions of this government are correct but they are making an awful mess of getting there.
@orangepeel. I would argue the housing shortage has alot more to do with mass immigration, high divorce rates and the demand for social housing has risen because of a DELIBERATE policy of Nu Labour to ramp up house prices with loose money policy making them totally unaffordable to first time buyers. Something the dummies in power now are determined to continue and something that will end in tears far worse than now.
Shaun Mcgrath, who are the "less fortunate"? Those of us who choose not to work and play the benefit system? The less fortunate in my opinion are the mugs who work hard and are taxed to the eyeballs to keep these people in a cushy lifestyle. If you do not work because you do not want to then your choices should be limited and the tax burden for the working person thus reduced. The benefits system abuse is way out of control. I do not favour the derogatory comment you made, please refrain.
@roadrocket You seem to miss the point that no one is subsididising my home & I pay full council tax.
@oldhamscotland of course you are in the 45% tax bracket. PAYE or self employed?
@Flake Have you not seen the hysteria at all attempts so far to introduce welfare reform?
@Bramble 'Global economic crisis' is a Brownite excuse. How is huge & wasteful overpspending in the public sector the fault of anyone but those doing the spending?
@timberwolf - what about the 'derogatory comments' you make, regard those in receipt of benefits? Are these not individuals with feelings and emotions?
You and your ilk seem to imagine that you have the God-given right to be judge and jury over people you know nothing about, whose particular (often tragic) circumstances are unknown to you.
Before you start becoming all indignant over my comments, take a long (thoughtful) look at your own.
Firstly this is not about people paying Council Tax for the first time, it is about those on very low incomes being expected to pay something. Secondly there are more unemployed than there are jobs, so people can't simply choose to work.
I could go on about other lies and propoganda about economic matters, but I'll settle for just asking people if their opinion would change if all these changes applied to those on pensions?
@HomerJay. Brown has already raided our pensions to waste on welfare and non jobs. Labour bankrupted us through fiscal incompetance
@prodriver, the vast majority of benefit spending is on pensioners, and many have contributed little or nothing to deserve it. Cameron is actually increasing this benefit rather than reducing it! It's a similar story with unmarried mothers, their benefits are not being reduced. I assume by hysteria at welfare reforms you mean the disgraceful attack on the disabled this govt has undertaken, killing many in the process? Now there an area which they shouldn't have touched.
Flake.- by your sturdy defence of disability benefits, you are implying that there is not one bogus claimant. Whilst I applaud the areas you stated should be subject to benefits reduction, I take the view that all areas of the welfare budget should be investigated including those on disability. Where I do agree with you is in respect of scrapping the current examination system which shows no compassion or common sense and is there as a target based, tick box exercise, one size fits all exercise
Shaun, my comments are far from derogatory. Those able to work should not be provided with the same lifestyle as those who do work. If you can work but choose not to, then your benefits should be a bare minimum. No complaining about spare room cutbacks and benefit reduction, join the real world and work 50 hours a week to then have the taxman take the majority from you to pay those who would rather stay in bed.
@prodriver how can you claim the global economic crisis is a Brownite term? What do you think happened in Greece, Portugal, Spain and the American mortgage market? As a reminder again the deficit has grown under the coalition despite mass cuts to public spending!!! Some of the blame does lie with private sector businesses and not just the Labour government
ah but Bramble, the deficit would have been far greater had we stayed with labour in control!
everyone knows it. even some labour polititians admit it.
britain has faired better than other in surviving the global economic crash.
but it probably wouldnt have if we'd carried on the way we where going.
And yet Nick Clegg and the IMF have both said the cuts are too drastic and detrimental and spending on capital projects should have been undertaken. Sweden has increased borrowing to allow more tax cuts for the low paid to allow increased expenditure in to the economy so maybe we should realise that massive cuts aren't a viable working option
the answer is clearly there!
nick clegg and the imf.
would you trust either of them?
Hang the rich !!!
@fedupoldhamer yes I would trust the IMF but am inclined to agree with you about Nick Clegg!! I like how you have ignored the point about Sweden as it contradicts your usual rant about Labour
Have Your Say
Good econmics. give everyone less money to spend on anything which could boost GDP. well done mr cameron.
By DARTH @ 12/02/2013 12:28:47