buddug

Pugwash said: 'It is a government decision re the welfare reforms not local councillors so do not blame them as there is very little they can do about it regardless of their political colour.' Local LibDem councillors could all band together and say 'enough' to Clegg and tell him to leave the coalition as this has gone far enough, and that they are working on a local level picking up the pieces of the fallout from these policies. It would have a huge impact. But will they do that? Like hell they will. They have too much to lose. And Pugwash, why the hell should disabled people, or the unemployed for that matter, have to take their cases to 'appeal'? Haven't they got enough on their plate without going through court cases for God's sake? Have you any idea what that's like?

Bon3yard said: 'Shut up Reeko, you're a knob and you smell of wee and cheese.' Oh God, I love you Bon3yard!

Bon3yard said: 'Shut up Reeko, you're a knob and you smell of wee and cheese.' Whoahh! Steady on, old chap! I may well share your sentiments, but do have a care... And as for you, Reeko. I'm afraid it is only a natural human response to feel compassionate and therefore emotional towards those less fortunate than ourselves. James's problem is he's also too rational, while also, like you, lacking in emotional intelligence. Rationality can only get you so far, as your posts have shown... or maybe you're only emotional towards your own situation...

Aha. So you're just bitter about those who have lost their jobs or who become sick or disabled, having any help. You have these pressures, like most of us do, without experiencing disability, illness or unemployment on top of that. You poor bugger. Well, there you go. But God help you if you also lose your job or become disabled. You'll be sorry to learn you'll lose everything you've ever worked for. What sickens me is why do you pretend to hate the bedroom tax, when you actually hate those most vulnerable in society affected by it? You are as much of a fraud as James is.

There is nothing wrong with my grammar, darling. As to the content of your post, I have nothing more to say. If you don't get it, you don't get it. If you live in a council flat with a spare room due to no fault of your own, and then you lose your job or become sick - then you have to leave your home immediately, or live on ?56 a week instead of the paltry ?71. People in social housing who are not unemployed or disabled are not hounded for having a spare room due maybe to a child moving out to go to university or whatever. And by the way, how can you be against the bedroom tax, yet support the bedroom tax? So your child leaves home - then you must leave your home of 20 years or so? Jesus. Talk about social engineering!

If you don't understand the first two sentences Reeko, just read it again. I can't be held responsible for your illiteracy. What I meant is you may not have intended to get James's thread back on track, but the upshot was it would have - if James had not scuppered it by addressing himself to me yet again. But all that's irrelevant. So, for all your hatred of the bedroom tax you still think it's fine for people who lose their jobs or become ill or disabled to lose their homes - nice. Lets hope you're never in that position.

Reeko said: 'I do however agree with James, that it is not sustainable or fair to have people on social housing with spare bedrooms when there is overcrowding elsewhere.' You may not have offered James a get-out, but it was a good way of getting this thread back on track. However, James did not take advantage of it. As to what you say above, is it fair that only people who have lost their jobs and the sick and disabled are forced to leave their council homes if they have the misfortune of having a spare room - e.g. because their children have grown up and left? Overcrowding is a separate matter. More social housing needs to be built asap to deal with that. And think about it, one day you lose your job, or have a serious accident and you are left seriously disabled, both through no fault of your own. Due to this tax you have to immediately leave your home, possibly of many years and memories, or your benefits are cut to an unsustainable level. As if you don't have enough to cope with! It's horrible and cruel. Equally, if you have a mortgage, thanks to the LibDems' support of another 'reform', you immediately go into arrears and face losing your home, because since 2010 they've capped the interest support they give you at 3.64%. Most people's mortgage is more than that, as mine is, at 4.89%, because I thought I was being prudent going onto a fixed rate, where the rates are higher. Social security was meant to be a safety net for workers, so you wouldn't lose your home or face having to go to 'food banks'. Not any more. I notice that James has had a minor, though I'm sure, upsetting accident today. I'm really glad he wasn't seriously hurt. But it just shows how life circumstances could change for anyone in the blink of an eye. There but for the Grace of God... Get well soon, James. And now I'm outta here! (Edited a thousand times because I'm an editor and can't help myself ...)

Well James, since you insist on continuing this, despite my agreeing to requests to get off your thread and the very kind get-out by reeko, this is the context in which you made your unbelievable statement: "Except in understandable situations why should people be given a public susidy to have more bedrooms than they need when we have large numbers of people lving in extreme over crowding in council and privately rented properties?" How on earth does the context mitigate what you said? The reality is that your party does not allow 'understandable situations' to have any bearing on cases - witness the blind man for God's sake who had to take his case to court to avoid a cut in his benefits. So stop pretending everything is hunky-dory. And why do you call benefits 'public subsidies'? And I have recently returned to being a full-time journalist after an 'interesting' break.

Yes it is. I wasn't going to post your pm here, as it was sent to me in private, but since you're denying it, you said: "... why should people be given a public subsidy to have more bedrooms than they need..." 'Public subsidy' indeed! So that's what you think benefits are? Anyway, enough of me on this thread. I'll leave you to continue helping people...

Miss B6 - take pictures, then do demand that contractors come back to made good the work. I always do this and they do come - and eventually a good job is done, usually by the third or fourth time! Get in writing or email what the southwark rep thought of the finished job first if you can, or just as good, an independent surveyor or builder. Southwark has too many cowboys working for them - they'd never have them at their own homes, but they inflict them on us leaseholders. They're also always failing to issue section 20 notices or whatever. It's hilarious. But at least that's an error in leaseholders' favour, for a change. And they're always overcharging due to 'errors'. Always ask for a breakdown of repairs. We were charged for a new gate - after the old gate was wrecked by Southwark's scaffolders! They took that charge and many others off the bill. You have to watch them like hawks. They've dumped Morrisons and now have Mears. It remains to be seen if they're any better. I think there is a new culture at the council where they now want to provide a better standard of work, if only to avoid the hassle of comeback from aggrieved leaseholders. But as Werdna101 said, to use your own contractors after providing a couple of quotes, you must be prepared to 'argue like mad' and stand your ground. Too many people in the housing department believe your home is 'their' property.

I'm sorry, but this just sounds like a total scam. Save the Kids? From what. And 'We save the kids every day'. No information about how they 'save' children, what they do...

Thanks for apology giggirl! I only go after James when he says or does something so spectacularly offensive that I have to have a go. I'm not his stalker - yet! This time he tipped me over the edge when he sent me a PM justifying the bedroom tax, along the lines of 'why should people on benefits have a spare room?'. It was just too much. I thought LibDems only supported the Tory attacks on the most vulnerable in society because they were desperate to stay in power. That's bad enough. But here was our very own James actually believing in these brutal so-called reforms, reforms by the way that are doing untold harm to people in our community of East Dulwich and Peckham.

Any good that James or any other LibDem or Tory councillor may do is being wiped out and undermined by this government with its hateful attacks on the poor, unemployed and sick and disabled - aided and abetted by the LibDems, who it seems from James's condoning of the bedroom tax, actually believe this is the right thing to do. These councillors are just firefighting. People's already difficult lives are being made hell. If they really want to do some good, all LibDem councillors should tell Nick Clegg 'enough' and that the party should leave this coalition. And no, Showboat, I haven't considered being a councillor - I couldn't stomach sitting in the same room as them on a weekly basis. Nor could I bear receiving the perks that they get. But you made a good point!

I'm afraid I'll have to decline James' wonderful offer to shadow him as I have a full-time job. In addition, I know I would find it as interesting as watching paint drying - I spent many years as a reporter on local papers, where one of the more hellish jobs was being forced to attend evening council meetings to report on the shenanigans of these idiots. Having to watch James in action over the Plough Lane wheelie bin invasion or the dog poo bin relocation would be the end of me, fascinating though I'm sure it all is. I would not of course be permitted to witness the more interesting cases involving residents debts or council tax problems due as they'd be matters involving confidentiality. I'm glad, James, that you 'welcome' the outcome of the blind man's bedroom tax court case. But wouldn't it be much more humane if people unable to work due to illness or disability were not hounded by the bedroom tax? Don't they have enough on their plate? But I suppose, James, the ill and disabled, in addition to those people who've lost their jobs, are much easier to attack than say, bankers who caused this crisis, tax avoiders, and MPs fleecing taxpayers by using our money to buy themselves duck islands, belfast sinks and porn...

Yes, he's a great local councillor Singalto, that is if you want a Waitrose or are obsessed by minor traffic regulations! Any real, human issues or distress and you're buggered! He doesn't know how to deal with it. In fact, he doesn't care. It's just tick this box or that. Ideology is his second name. Compassion is outwith his remit. He's actually a waste of space. A careerist politician pandering to big business and the super rich, like the rest of these wasters.

I'd like you answer my question re how many one and two bed properties are available in East Dulwich for the victims of this brutal 'reform'. I think the answer is zero, zilch, nada. How nice that you just give advice that they swap their homes. How would you feel to be forced out of your home the minute you experienced unemployment or illness? And you said: 'The last Lib Dem led council introduced financial incentives to encourage such swapping'. Are those still in place? No, I thought not. So why mention it? There's no point debating the policy with you further. It's like talking to a compassionless brick wall. Initially I thought Lib Dems condoned this repulsive attack on the poor because they had no choice in the face of their Tory masters. It's unbelievable Lib Dem councillors like yourself can actually try to justify it. You think it's ok to simply say, oh well, 'I hope' certain aspects of this law will be amended for the disabled, and 'I agree it's harsh, but' etc, but you might as well say 'let them eat cake'! The Welfare State was intended to be a safety net for people like you and me James, paid for out of our national insurance or failing that, taxes if we got sick or lost our jobs. A safety net that should not involve people being forced to leave their home the minute they lose their job or become ill or disabled.

But southwark has decided not to play ball James. So, have you actually met anyone in East Dulwich going through this - and how many empty one and two bedroom council owned properties are there in East Dulwich? Are there enough for the people affected? I think as a councillor you ought to find out. And do you really think people should be forced out of the homes they know when they're already struggling with disabilities or have just lost their job, which could happen to any of us tomorrow.

Jesus. You have no shame James. So if you're disabled, since this 'reform', you now have the added upset and inconvenience of having to leave your home and find another if you're to have any chance of surviving on the pittance you get. Maybe away from friends, maybe you've lived in that home for many years. Many disabled people need a second bedroom for a carer or equipment etc, witness all the horror stories in the press about how this vile tax is ruining people's lives. People aren't robots, James, unlike yourself. They have emotions. And if you are unlucky enough to lose your job, you immediately have to move home on top of everything else or starve! A single person over 25 gets ?71 a week - that's for food, gas, electric, water, any insurance, phone, broadband, tv licence, clothes, cleaning products, toiletries, loo paper etc. That plummets to ?50 something if you have one spare room - maybe a child has grown up and moved out, or whatever. There's a human cost to all this James. And as many councils are finding out - there are no single bedroom council homes left for all of them to move to! And why should people be forced to leave their homes of many years when misfortune strikes. It's cruel and unnatural.

None of that was due to James. I'm lucky enough to have a job and don't live in council housing. I just happen, like you Pugwash, to feel compassion for others, unlike some, James...

Just wondering James. As you're the councillor who likes to help, would you like to tell us how you're helping your constituents who live in council housing who've been hit by the bedroom tax? i.e. those who have lost their jobs, and the disabled, who have lost a large chunk of their benefits so that they are now living or rather, trying to survive, below subsistence level. Or maybe you're just too busy helping those poor Waitrose-aspiring, road-traffic-obsessed constituents you're so keen on... And maybe you'd like to share with the forum your opinions on the bedroom tax that you shared with me in a PM recently?

Thanks everyone. I was just worried that if I ignored, the bay leaves would come. Seems like it never gets to that. Urgh, what scumbags these companies are, eh?

Thanks for that Pebbles (and everyone else). It's in the bin!

Should I just ignore it then?

Hi. I've just received a civil parking fine from Athena, who patrol Lidl car parks. I overstayed my welcome. Can I just ignore it, or will they eventually send 'bay leaves' round?

Absolutely. Thank you.