Hume wrote:Tarrmaker,
When you describe it like that it almost sounds reasonably. However, I don't think the motivation for the underoccupancy charge is the way you have described it.
If it was truely about freeing up larger houses there would be a drive to get 'non benefit recipient' council tenants with spare rooms to move to smaller properties too and I don't think that is the case. This is an attack purely on benefit recipients and it is widely accepted that there are insufficient properties for these people to move to should they wish to avoid the reduction in their benefits/the tax.
Even if there were, the social devastation that would go along with thousands of people uprooting from homes they have lives in for decades would be huge.
Its simply a move to cut benefits as there is very little alternative for those affected to avoid it. If it was about freeing up space then why not incentivise those with spare room to move to smaller properties?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests