Upload a photo Upload a video Upload an mp3 Upload an event

News


Bedroom Tax Protest Takes Place At Court

Tuesday August 20 2013


Protestors make their way to court Protestors make their way to court


PROTESTERS of the so-called 'bedroom tax' made their way to Barnsley Magistrates' Court on Tuesday morning.

Having already staged numerous protests, the Barnsley Campaign Against the Bedroom Tax group came together on the same day that one affected person was in court.

George Arthur, one of the group's members, owns his home so isn't directly affected by the tax, but has sympathy for friends who are.

"There's one person in court today and six others this month," he said.

"It's morally reprehensible. We've had over 4,000 people sign our petition but like me, many of those aren't affected, but they've seen the hurt this tax has caused and so they too feel strongly about it."

The group believe the tax is an attack on the poorest people by a government which is made up of some of the richest in the country. 

They're calling on the council to reclassify houses to reduce the number of bedrooms that can be charged for. So far, the council has refused, despite council leader Sir Steve Houghton expressing his sympathy to the group when they presented him with their petition.

Some council tenants have seen their housing benefit cut if they have a spare room, leaving them afraid they will struggle to make ends meet.

Barnsley Trades Council has thrown its weight behind the group's efforts. Dave Gibson, senior vice chairman, said it would lead to more people being pushed into poverty.

He added: "Barnsley Trades Council is committed to campaigning against this.

"That's why we have set up a benefit justice sub-committee. We fully support the anti-bedroom tax stance and are confident the government can be defeated if we mobilise strongly enough."

Michael Dugher, MP for Barnsley East, said: "The government don't like us calling it a 'bedroom tax', they wan't to call it a 'spare room subsidy' but that's a bit like saying the poll tax was a community charge.

"This is one of the most nasty, cruel things the government has done.

"It's completely incompetent as it's not going to save the government the money it thinks it will. I urge them to rethink and we'll keep the pressure up on the government."

Tenant Susan Moore, 55, from Athersley North, said she cannot afford to pay the extra £9.50 per week for her spare room.

She downsized from a three-bedroom house in June following a kidney transplant.

"I just don't know what's going to happen - I can't afford it. That room gets used every weekend, as I have 21 grandkids."

On a walk round the town centre after the protest, it's clear that the tax is still a big talking point among residents. Sharon Moore, 61, of Dodworth, said she hopes protesters' efforts pay off.

"Obviously it's affecting a lot of people, so they should be able to make their feelings heard," said Sharon, who's not affected by the tax but knows people who are.

"I think the council need to step up. What'll happen if eviction notices are given and people don't have anywhere to go?"

Disagreeing, James Quinn, 33, from Monk Bretton, said: "I own my own home, work hard for it, and if I want another bedroom I'd have to pay thousands more for one if I moved my family to a different house."

What do you think to the bedroom tax? Have your say below.

Leave a comment
comments powered by Disqus
66 Showing 66 comments

Reply Posted by mandy on Tuesday August 20 2013 at 11:06
Downgrade to a smaller house or get off your arse and get a job!! simples...

Reply Posted by Alex on Tuesday August 20 2013 at 12:47
Now then Mandy, can you tell me how you would downgrade if the council haven't got the properties for you? Most people in Barnsley are in Social housing of some sort and most work. Now talking of "arses" Why don't you get your head out of yours.

Reply Posted by young sprout on Tuesday August 20 2013 at 13:11
How wrong you are Alex.

1. Only last week Helen Jagger the Chief Executive of Berneslai Homes said that there were properties available with fewer bedrooms which tenants were able to downsize to if they so wished.

2. It is not true to say that 'most people in Barnsley are in social housing' I can assure you that the vast majority of people live in a property which is owner occupied. Something to which everyone should aspire.

Reply Posted by Angry on Tuesday August 20 2013 at 13:16
There are no smaller houses, don't believe council when they say there is, and my neighbour, does work but still has to pay for box room, I myself are not affected, but disagree with it der

Reply Posted by young sprout on Tuesday August 20 2013 at 13:28
Please let me correct you. Your neighbour is not having to pay anything as a result of them having a spare bedroom. What is happening is that they are no longer receiving the spare bedroom subsidy which they were previously in receipt of.

Reply Posted by russ on Tuesday August 20 2013 at 13:40
Someone was asking for the info on 'Barnsley' housing stock? They said they didn't have a problem with smaller properties to downsize to. Here's the result, just in....
Barnsley: 1. How many one bedroom general needs properties do you have available to Let (voids) this week? Bedsits - 9, 1 bedroom - 12
2. How many tenants are deemed to be under-occupying, and needing one bed
accommodation? 1423
3. How many people are already on the waiting list for one bedroom
properties? 284 requesting bedsit. 2550 requesting a 1 bed.freedom of imformation somebody is lying somewhere

Reply Posted by Alex on Tuesday August 20 2013 at 15:41
Most people in barnsley do live in some sort of social housing. Some people lose their houses through divorce or other means, which are by far not their fault. Some people (usually men) have kids from these broken homes, they need somewhere to sleep, even if it's not all the time. Are you telling me that these people should'nt have their kids? because as far as the courts go, they will not allow kids to stay overnight without a room. As far as "aspire" goes, I think the Government should be "aspiring" to get people out of poverty, and not put them further into it.

Reply Posted by young sprout on Tuesday August 20 2013 at 16:05
You are just so wrong. I can assure you that the vast majority of people live in a property which is owner occupied. I am not quite sure why you make reference to divorced men/ broken homes/ kids etc. as this is totally irrelevant.

I am sure that the government are doing all they can, in extremely difficult circumstances, to make life better for everyone. Let me ask you, what are certain individuals doing to help themselves? From where I am standing, they are doing very little and expect others to continually bail them out.

Reply Posted by Alex on Tuesday August 20 2013 at 16:22
I was referring to people "usually men" who have to leave their house and find other accommodation when there is a breakup. The accommodation they find is usually "rented".

young sprout who do you live with, your mam and dad? because thats how it's getting over to me.

Reply Posted by young sprout on Tuesday August 20 2013 at 16:40
I am not sure of the relevance, but I do own my own property and have done so for many years.

Reply Posted by nichola on Wednesday August 21 2013 at 11:51
if your neighbour works then they shouldnt have to pay the bedroom tax rate unless they still claim housing benefit and there is guidelines about how small a bedroom should be for them to pay

Reply Posted by sarah on Wednesday August 21 2013 at 13:41
i agree every1 got anot time and chance to move why should you have spare rooms when there people what need them its same with saying mi grankids need a spare room for them coming weekend why should benfits pay for a room for 2 days weekend get a air bed for gran kids go im in a social house n agree with every think whats been done n change next there want to stop giving all people on drug n drink money to get of there facer dont make sence

Reply Posted by sarah on Wednesday August 21 2013 at 13:42
get a job n pay bet them what say there cant pay all smoke are drink are have sky cut back on all ya shit n pay

Reply Posted by sarah on Wednesday August 21 2013 at 13:43
you had time to down grade get up n look for a swap

Reply Posted by sarah on Wednesday August 21 2013 at 13:45
i agree alex is wrong people just dont want to move there lazy

Reply Posted by sarah on Wednesday August 21 2013 at 13:47
bull shit there loads smaller houser

Reply Posted by sarah on Wednesday August 21 2013 at 13:49
a kid dose not need a room to its self alex to spend the nite are weekend heard sofa are air bed in your bed room are whos every bed room

Reply Posted by sarah on Wednesday August 21 2013 at 13:50
alex ya talk shit i live in a cousial flat 2 bed rooms and i pay councial tax n i agree with it my sister as a 3 bed room with 1 kid its not fair there people shareing rooms 6 people in a room what need rooms

Reply Posted by Alex on Wednesday August 21 2013 at 15:30
Been through it, done it, know about it. The courts said "extra bedroom".

Reply Posted by Alex on Wednesday August 21 2013 at 15:49
Sarah, get out of your bubble. Not everyone on benefits are on drugs, watching Sky tv, drinking and God knows what else you think their up to.

Before the Government announced the "bedroom tax" you and no one else ever mentioned how well off the people on benefits were, if that were the case, I'd be on it.

Reply Posted by Craig on Tuesday August 20 2013 at 11:09
It's not a case of wanting an extra bedroom it's being charged for ones that are there. I own my home but would object to a tax on an empty room. Funny how quickly a mansion tax was dropped

Reply Posted by young sprout on Tuesday August 20 2013 at 13:31
If you own your own home and pay your own way in life and do not claim state handouts, you will have nothing to worry about. It's not an issue.

Reply Posted by sue on Tuesday August 20 2013 at 13:45
Yet, young sprout. Theyre out to get us all in some form or other.

Reply Posted by young sprout on Tuesday August 20 2013 at 14:42
Sue, why do you think that?

Reply Posted by Craig on Tuesday August 20 2013 at 11:10
Not everybody that lives in social housing is unemployed

Reply Posted by Daz on Tuesday August 20 2013 at 11:20
So, it means the people affected have a few less beers a week, and a few less cigs a day. Oh, the tragedy!! Jesus Christ. Yes, it stinks but get on with it. Move so a family that needs it can live there.

Reply Posted by Jon Doh on Tuesday August 20 2013 at 11:20
9.50 a week that's three pints of beer, damn the injustice

Reply Posted by Jon Doh on Tuesday August 20 2013 at 11:21
Oh Argos are selling two man tents for £12.50

Reply Posted by brezza on Tuesday August 20 2013 at 11:22
this doesnt affect me but i think it is a cruel and nasty tax that is so very unfair to people on low incomes any tax which could make a person have to move from their home which they have lived in for years having spent time ,money and effort to make it into a decent home has got to be wrong ! this is not the way to solve housing problems caused by letting too many immagrants in the country

Reply Posted by Fred on Tuesday August 20 2013 at 21:33
Brezza, Firstly and most important it's not 'their' home, it's rented property. Secondly, it's always the immigrants fault!

Reply Posted by Craig on Tuesday August 20 2013 at 11:29
Wonder how long it would take for the 'I' word to appear? 9.50 is a lot for people on low income - again a mansion tax would probably have raise more funds - wouldn't miss it as most of them have had a massive tax cut

Reply Posted by Jane on Tuesday August 20 2013 at 12:07
What's so unfair about the tax is that people having to pay up are the people least able to afford to do so and what's more there are no smaller properties to move in to . . . . unjust and unfair by anyone standards, that's presuming people have any moral standards and judging by some comments sadly not !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This tax doesn't effect me but am not dumb enough to realise anyone can loose their job and fall on hard times , so enjoy all you "am alright Jacks !

Reply Posted by Craig on Tuesday August 20 2013 at 12:09
Well said Jane - used to be community spirit years ago - nobody cares now.

Reply Posted by Rick on Tuesday August 20 2013 at 12:16
How can you tax someone on something there getting for doing nothing be thankful your getting help in the first place

Reply Posted by jane on Tuesday August 20 2013 at 12:31
Getting something for nothing ???er rather think not ! a rather sweeping statement .based on ignorance , hows about receiving assistance to enable people to survive in the premeditated current climate . .by a fat lardy set of toffs who coincidently just happen to be millionaires with multitudes of spare bedrooms pertaining to their vast property collections . . .. . and just what do they do ???? apart from trade in disruption and greed !

Reply Posted by Me on Tuesday August 20 2013 at 12:53
Mandy shut up you thicko! If government said it was ok to charge 40 a week you d agree you moron..

Reply Posted by young sprout on Tuesday August 20 2013 at 12:59
As has been said previously, there is no such thing as a bedroom tax. Quite simply, people on state handouts are only receiving the benefit based on the number of bedrooms that they need. There is surely nothing wrong with that. Should I be in the position of needing state handouts I would be grateful that my fellow citizens were contributing and making it possible for me to obtain them.

Benefit claiments are not having their bedrooms removed/demolished or bricked up, it is just that they will not receive additional benefit for bedrooms that they do not need.

The government are right, it is a 'spare room subsidy' and it should not be paid to benefit claimants.

Everyone has to take responsibility for their own actions and people who are socially responsible should not be expected to have to pay for the excesses of others.

Reply Posted by Malcolm day on Tuesday August 20 2013 at 13:08
Thats it people argue among yourselves thats just what the ruling establishment want disunity in the working class. This crisis was caused by those greedy parasites that Gambled billions of public money on the global stock markets,whilst the "working class" (WORKING OR NONE WORKING) all this is about making the working class pay for the Crisis caused by the Rich since 2008 the start of the economic crash, the rich have been stuffing there Fat bank accounts with your money. The world crisis is the objective process behind this crisis more extreme cases are Egypt and countries like Greece.

Reply Posted by Charles on Tuesday August 20 2013 at 13:21
That's not right at all. The real reason for the indebtedness of the country is excessive spending by successive governments, especially those in recent times presided over by messrs Blair and Brown. Quite simply they spent hundreds of billions of pounds that the country did not have. Like we all surely know, there comes a time when spending significantly more than we earn catches up with us. This happened four years ago and since that time the country has needed to 'tighten it's belt' There is much more 'belt tightening' to come as the measures taken so far have only reduced the deficit, while the overall debt position of the country has not been addressed.

Reply Posted by Tom on Tuesday August 20 2013 at 15:26
All money is a matter of belief. And judging by the collapse in Sterling, not many people believe in it anymore. People's savings are literally evaporating, in order to prop up house prices and the balance sheets of the banks.

Reply Posted by Charles on Tuesday August 20 2013 at 15:53
I'm afraid that these are just ridiculous comments. If you personally do not believe in sterling I would be pleased to provide you with an address where you can forward any unwanted monies.

Interest rates are low as the Bank of England attempts to encourage both business and individuals to borrow and invest in order to stimulate the economy. I cannot see this policy changing in the foreseeable future, say three years at least. Individual companies are currently prospering, but the finances of the state are dire. Additionally, the average person in employment is possibly as well off now as they have ever been. In particular due to relatively low inflation (for the UK) and low interest rates (for the UK)

Reply Posted by Stevo on Tuesday August 20 2013 at 17:52
Charles, Garbage again as usual!

Thatcher was responsible for nearly bankrupting the country when she set the wheels in motion for the move from manufacturing to the service industry.

Our country has never recovered since irrespective who has been in power.

Reply Posted by Stevo on Tuesday August 20 2013 at 17:57
AND in reply to your post above about the economy and the "alleged" Labour overspend, If the previous Labour government wouldn't have bailed out the banks and introduced quantitative easing then the country WOULD be bankrupt end of!

Funny that you Tories blame Labour for "overspending" isn't it when the previous Tory government who were in power last time spent MORE than the Labour years.
More Tory lies, and spin.

Reply Posted by how much would you have earned working instead of protesting - over £9 maybe. USe that passion and effort to help yourselves not beg for handouts with a banner in hand on Tuesday August 20 2013 at 14:16
It's not tax. It's less money given for something they don't use to enable people who do need what they don't use can access it

Reply Posted by tom on Tuesday August 20 2013 at 15:06
If it is a 'spare room subsidy', then how come the bedroom tax exceeds the rental differential with respect to bedrooms between properties...
Rents are set by the government, and they differ based upon the number of bedrooms. Yet the bedroom tax exceeds the differential.
E.g. a 3bed is £15 more than a 1 bed per week in Barnsley, but the bedroom tax for somebody deemed to need only one room is £20 a week if they are in a 3bed...

Why does it not apply to pensioners? (They aren't likely to have any children and require a bedroom)
Why aren't married couples who plan on having a child exempt?
Why is there no bedroom tax for people who are claiming SMI?
Why is there no bedroom tax for people who exercised the right to buy?
What about bedrooms in the private rented sector?
What about bedrooms in owner occupied and mortgaged housing?
Should people getting compo for HS2 be applied a bedroom tax in the compo formula? - Why will they get paid a premium?
If there is a lack of social housing, why do they continue to sell it off?
Why have they just increased the RTB discount?
Why did they demolish 100 of 1000s of council homes across the country?
What about people who have paid for their property many times over in rent before finding themselves unemployed?
Why aren't we building enough home to house our population?

Why isn't there a garden tax - people in flats pay the same but get no garden?
Why isn't there compensation for people who are overcrowded?
Why doesn't the tax take int account size of bedrooms?
Why doesn't the tax take into account the size of properties (some are bigger than others?)
Why do some houses have dining rooms, and others do not?
What about homes with garages?
What about homes with cellars?
What about homes with lofts?
What about homes in more expensive areas?
What about about homes that haven't had decent homes works?
What about homes with more windows?

What about homes in areas of low housing demand due to high unemployment?

etc. etc.

I'm not totally against the idea of property taxation. In fact I am 100% in favour of a property tax. But the bedroom tax is not a property tax (nor is the council tax). It is a perverse form of taxation that is highly regressive and hammers the poorest. It doesn't even do what it was designed to. In some parts of the country we now have single people being crammed into hostels and rows of empty family houses.

We need to bring back the system of rates, schedule A tax, a land value tax.

We also need to have a massive council house building program. We need a home for every UK citizen. And if we are to invite immigrants to the country, we also need to have houses for them.

Nobody in the UK should be homeless, everybody should have a roof over their heads, and as time goes on, we should build bigger and better housing. We have the smallest houses in Europe! And they are getting smaller and people are being forced to share them.

This is not progress, this is not fairness, this a return to Dickensian times. This is the re-birth of the slums. The lower classes are being denied a roof over their heads. They have no right to build, there is no free-market, they are at the mercy of the state and it's rigging of the housing market.

If we want to improve living standards of the British people, we need to build more housing, we need to build better housing. We need to introduce PROGRESSIVE housing taxes.

Instead, our government have knocked down housing, sold it off, subsidised mortgages (the whole reason we are in the biggest financial crisis EVER - the effect upon GDP is now worse than the great depression - and ironically practically all of the GDP growth since 2007 in the UK has come from an increase in 'imputed rents' - imputed rents don't even exist, they are a number representing rents which the government assumes homeowners pay to themselves - there is no economic activity or trade whatsoever, yet this number contributes to GDP and is about to exceed the entire social security bill!), and kept restrictions on building to force up house prices, and cause an artificial shortage of homes.




Reply Posted by Tom on Tuesday August 20 2013 at 15:19
If a single person on benefits returns to work (part time work, agency work on 0 hour contract) and earns more than a fiver, they face 100% Marginal Deduction Rates. That means for every £1 they earn, they lose £1 in benefits. The MDR falls after £71.70 to 85%.

Essentially to pay a bedroom tax of £20 a week, you have to work 25 hours at minimum wage of £6 an hour, to avoid your income falling below what the government says is the 'minimum amount a person requires to live on'.

You have to work 25 hours to have a real term increase in income of £20, to pay off the real term decrease in income resulting from a £20 a week bedroom tax.

This is before taking into account travel costs, work clothing costs etc.

Universal credit should address this perverse situation somewhat, and people should be able to earn about £2 an hour in real terms, and so have to work 10 hours to pay the bedroom tax.
However housing costs will continue to increase above inflation as mandated by government. People will still be expected to sign on, and look for work. And as has been the trend, over the past few years, as housing costs rise in real terms, whilst wages fall in real terms, even more workers will be forced onto to housing benefit.

We have people being forced to work 20+ hours a week for a bedroom (that's 1000+ hours a year). Yet the total labour involved in building these houses some 50-60 years ago was just 800 hours.

Bow down to your landlord masters people of Barnsley and the rest of the UK, you have been enslaved. Property is King.

In London, some so called 'social' rents (weekly) already exceed a full time workers weekly wages. Full time workers require housing benefit :/


Reply Posted by WEDGE OF JOYLAND on Tuesday August 20 2013 at 19:26
About time the just stop moaning the scroungers an just accept the have to pay it

Reply Posted by craig on Wednesday August 21 2013 at 15:15
I love the way the government has moved all the blame onto benefit claimants and yet three years down the line there's 120 billion pound in tax owed by businesses in the uk - worldwide figure amounts to 43 trillion - could solve a few problems with those kind of figures

Reply Posted by Jan on Wednesday August 21 2013 at 15:59
Well said Craig. After reading these comments the current government has done it's job well, with the divide and rule tactic.
I can't believe all these people who are working/don't claim benefits? (not even tax credits) have the 'higher than mighty' attitude.
Personally the bedroom tax doesn't affect me, but it does effect people and to be honest I don't know how the people effected are going to feed/cloth and pay the bills. I feel for them as it is a struggle when earning a living. I wouldn't want to be in their shoes.
Billions could be saved if the government went after the fat cats.

Reply Posted by sarah on Wednesday August 21 2013 at 16:47
Can I just ask a sensible question..... what is the difference between a council tenant and a private tenant living in a 3 bed house only using 2 ....answer.. the private tenant has to pay for the extra room (if on benefits) what makes council house tenants special...

Reply Posted by Jan on Wednesday August 21 2013 at 17:04
On the other hand Sarah: A council tenant in a 3 bedroom property has to downgrade to a 1 bedroom property because of bedroom tax: Council can not provide a 1 bedroom property so tenant finds private 1 bedroom property to rent. Council rent for 3 bedroom property £70 per week: private rent for 1 bedroom property £80 per week. Housing benefit will pay for the 1 bed private rent but not for the 3 bed council rent. Who's the winner?

Reply Posted by sarah on Wednesday August 21 2013 at 18:21
i still think its fair on everyone that if you have a spare room in whichever house you have you pay the extra rent, a person on benefits in a private rented house might have to pay more than £15 a week but still gets the same amount of benefit that someone in a council house does so its the private tenant that loses out on a financial basis and if the council will pay £80 for a 1 or 2 bed private house why not do that the tenant wont have to pay the extra for rooms theyre not using.

Reply Posted by lol on Wednesday August 21 2013 at 19:34
send um down the law is the law

Reply Posted by lucy on Thursday August 22 2013 at 08:22
I have a friend who lost his job then his marrage broke down they gave him a 2 bed flat that had been empty for a whlle because you have to be over 40 to live there he pays the bedroom tax every week but that means 2 days a week he cant afford a meal so just has a sandwich , he has just spent the last 3 weeks very ill the doctor says his weight is dropping off him because he has such a poor diet with a 30 lnch waist he cant afford to lose any more weight so I have been making him dinners a couple of times a week is this what its comet to we all should b able to eat

Reply Posted by bob on Thursday August 22 2013 at 13:53
the majority of people who come on these sites who insist that people on benefits are leading a life of luxury while they are going out to work 12hrs a day 7 days a week just to survive are either the biggest set of liars walking,or the biggest set of idiots walking.i dont care what anybody says, i work 50hrs a week in an hard physically exhausting job to keep a roof over my families head and food on the table and im telling you now if i truely believed that i could live the sort of life some of you lot state,pride or no pride i would not be going out to work every hr god sends,never seeing my kids and struggling to pay my bills,i noticed that when the lady on one of these rip the benefit claiments to death debates, challenged anyone who was working to live on the same money she did for 6 month paying exactly the same bills as she did no one took her up on the challenge i wonder why

Reply Posted by Mick on Thursday August 22 2013 at 18:59
What do these idiots think protesting will do? Do they think a Labour goverment will come in and abolish it? Deluded fools. It's here to stay, get used to it.

Reply Posted by Jase on Sunday August 25 2013 at 11:27
What a disgrace seeing these so called protesters camping in a town centre park on a saturday night. They were drinking, they were loud and were a complete disgrace. It was just an excuse to get pissed!

Low life in all its glory.

Reply Posted by lol on Monday August 26 2013 at 10:48
ITS get a job and go to work tax thats what needed instead of freebys and handouts

Reply Posted by Educated. on Wednesday August 28 2013 at 09:56
Tax? A Tax? Definition: 'Compulsory contribution to state revenue, levied by the government on workers' income and business profits'
Receiving state benefits and having the allowance reduced because you are a individual person living in a 2+ bedroomed house is not a tax.
The argument: There is no jobs!! This can be answered here:
A quick search for 'Barnsley' displayed: 66151 jobs.
No harm in putting the effort in. Getting your C.V. up to scratch and actually trying to get a job.
On another note the individuals should have thought about this when they pissed about and sacked school off.

Reply Posted by Stevo on Wednesday August 28 2013 at 16:00
Tell me exactly where did you find the figure of 66151 jobs and what was the search criteria you used?

I have just searched and the most i could find within the towns radius was 100 odd?

Reply Posted by Educated. on Wednesday August 28 2013 at 20:21
Steve, the WAB site doesn't allow web links in the comment. But just go onto Job Centre website > Job search > then just type Barnsley in the location / Town field. Then this displays all the jobs in the borough.

Reply Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday August 28 2013 at 11:53
A tax is where you pay a deduction on something you have earned. So this cannot possibly be classed as a tax.. it is simply just not giving people as much free money as before. Don't forget that this method of assessing how much housing benefit is given depending on the bedroom requirements of an individual / couple / family has been applied to housing benefits claimants renting in the private renting sector (as oppose to council) for at least the last 10 years. It is only now being applied to council properties. To be fair.. it doesn't really matter whether benefits claimants are or are not living the life of luxury.. it is still free money paid for by those who pay actual tax on wages they have earned. So really I have no sympathy as I am one of many paying for your extra bedroom.

Reply Posted by Mark on Wednesday August 28 2013 at 12:12
Well said Anonymous. Your comments are very relevant.

In life we all have to be responsible for our own actions and we should not expect other people to continually bail us out. Where do benefit claimants think that the money is coming from?

Reply Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday August 28 2013 at 21:02
Yes but realistically it shows only 16221 within 10 miles of Barnsley! When people say there are no jobs they really mean there is there are no jobs which will be handed to them on a plate and that they can just have fun at. Jobs are hard work and require dedication and effort, something which is sadly lacking in most benefits claimants.. On one hand they could go to a CV workshop and find out how to present themselves smartly and practice interviewing techniques, get a job at the bottom and then work hard and eventually after years of hard work be promoted again and again. On the otherhand benefits are easier and claimants can stay at home and get free money...

Reply Posted by Flapper on Monday September 2 2013 at 13:14
Send um down there all benefit scroungers.

Reply Posted by Flapper on Tuesday September 3 2013 at 08:39
Its only the people on Benefits thats keeping the Cnennells and the Silkstone open.