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


Town Hall Protest Opposing Bedroom Tax

Monday March 11 2013

Town Hall Town Hall

PROTESTERS took to the Town Hall on Friday opposing the 'bedroom tax" in Barnsley.

From April 1 housing benefit for tenants other than pensioners will be cut if they're living in a home judged to be bigger than their needs.

Organisers say hundreds of local people have already joined the group Say No to Bedroom Tax and they plan weekly protests and marches to highlight their fears.

Jo Makinson, a 42-year-old single mum from Shafton, was one of the people who protested.

"It's already a struggle financially on job seekers' allowance," she said. "I've tried cutting back on gas and electric bills and shop in the bargain reduced bins in the supermarket."

She's set to lose £12 a week from next month as her three-bedroom house is deemed too big for her needs with one five-year-old son.

"In those circumstances to lose £12 a week is a fortune and I don't now what I am going to do. It's not as if there are loads of two bedroom council houses available in Shafton because there are not."

Leave a comment
comments powered by Disqus
30 Showing 30 comments

Reply Posted by Matt on Monday March 11 2013 at 11:17
dont argue.

Reply Posted by Mark King on Monday March 11 2013 at 11:27
I had to give up my 3 bedroom house that I had lived in for 22 years or pay £20 a week. We are expecting an influx of Romanian travellers in April, is this what it's all about?

Reply Posted by Fred on Tuesday March 12 2013 at 21:57
Diduums, it wasn't your house in the first place, my 3 bedroom house cost £835 a month, if and when the mortgage rate goes up can easily be over £1000 a month, trying stopping out of the pub or cut down on the fags that will save your poxy £20. Get real ! Or you could just blame the Romanians !

Reply Posted by Stevo on Sunday March 17 2013 at 19:27
FRED, £835 a month mortgage
Tell m how the hell do you sleep at night paying that much out EVERY month?

Reply Posted by lez on Monday March 11 2013 at 19:25
it makes you think with all these romanians coming here they will have to find them somewhere to live even overstepping familys on waiting lists but the goverment know its impossable for everyone to move to somewhere smaller to acommadate familys or romanians so we dont know where these thousands of people to our shores will go but all this is about is coming through the back door to cut benefits to take back some money of claimments its an excuse to give you less nothing more northing less this unelected dictatorship dont want a welfare system i still think there is worse to come with the universal credit comes in so when everyone goes on that to start with thats a monthly payments as now fortnightly so i bet when you get your last fortnightly payment that will have to last you a month till next payment is due so beware more unfair rules will hit everyone even harder all i say is remember all this election time with your ballot paper in your hand but be carefull who you vote for or this grim reaper could come back in another form

Reply Posted by Grim reaper on Monday March 11 2013 at 19:26
Why do people in social housing fall into the trap of thinking that the property belongs to them? They belong to the council funded by tax payers. Tax payers are having their pensions raided, wages reduced and they still have expensive bills to pay including mortgages or private rent.
Whilst I do have sympathy for families on reduced incomes suffering, I find it laughable that the masses can march for this so called cause but will not give a stuff for causes related to workers rights eg pensions or strikes. Nor will the majority of them vote or care about politics.

Reply Posted by Fred on Monday March 11 2013 at 20:41
Grim reaper, at last some one who talks sense.
Not only are the houses not theirs, the money they use to pay their subsidised rents with, comes from our taxes!

Reply Posted by Mick on Monday March 11 2013 at 20:54
I don't take any pleasure from the upset that this will cause but I do think the policy is mainly reasonable. It is bringing council housing into line with housing benefit for private landlord properties. With that you are told how much benefit you are entitled to (based on number in household) then it is up to you to find a property within your budget, or supplement it from other income if you want a more expensive property. No one should be entitled to a home for life at the taxpayers expense. People with mortgages have to move to a smaller house if there circumstances change or may end up evicted if they can't pay the mortgage. It's not nice, but it is fair.

Reply Posted by Mick on Tuesday March 12 2013 at 13:28
Govt have announced important amendments today. Foster parents & parents of armed forces will be protected as will parents of a disabled child who for medical reasons cannot share with a sibling. After this I think the rest of the policy is fair. www.parliament.uk/documents/commons-vote-office/March-2013/12-3-13/6.WorkandPensions-HousingBenefitreform.pdf

Reply Posted by hard worker on Tuesday March 12 2013 at 15:08
for gods sake when are the low paid workers going to stop blaming everything thats wrong in this country on benefit claiments,wake up and smell the coffee. cameron and his cronies dont give a shit about us after hes milked the benefit system dry and fetched these people to their knees hes going to turn on us,this moron as succeeded in distracting low paid workers so that they are not actually noticing whats is happening to them.and yes i am one of these low paid workers

Reply Posted by Charles on Tuesday March 12 2013 at 16:02
I really think that 'hard worker' should be directing his anger at Gordon Brown and Ed Balls as they were the people who allowed the country to get in to this mess. Cameron (for all his faults) and his current government colleagues are the ones who are attempting to clean up the mess that those two left behind. You should also be blaming Brown and his colleagues for introducing the minimum wage as its introduction has led to it becoming not the minimum wage, but the benchmark for millions of workers who would in all probability have been able to comment higher rates of pay had the minimum wage not been introduced. Still, if you want to support benefit scroungers from your modest pay, that is up to you.

Reply Posted by Jayne on Tuesday March 12 2013 at 20:29
Grim reaper you are correct. Why are people acting like these houses are there's. you have not saved for it, you do not pay a mortgage on it, you live in it for free. I pay a mortgage on a house I can afford and that's that. I fancy going out marching on the streets because me, my husband and my 2 boys want a 6 bedroomed house thanks oh and I don't want to pay for it, I want it for free. Anyone going to support me... No I guess not. Come on people you are getting a home for nothing, you are getting benefits to keep you and your children. What more do you want. Oh and btw I do not agree with kicking people out of their homes to just house more foreigners and I strongly believe the elderly should be left well alone.

Reply Posted by donna on Tuesday March 12 2013 at 20:51
be nice to get a 4 bed house lol x .... it stinks!!! u see it an hear it everyday ppl r suffering in this country an still they bring more in tut tut ,,,, then charge us more to pay for them to get a 2 mill house cos they didnt like it where they was !!!!! STINKS i know where my votes going next time

Reply Posted by guesty mcguest on Wednesday March 13 2013 at 07:58
Charles howmuch has the deficit come down since the condems came in?

It's gone up by a third, thats a faster rise than when brown and blair were in power...

Reply Posted by Charles on Wednesday March 13 2013 at 10:07
I'm sorry 'guesty mcguest' but what you say is simply not true. You need to distinguish between the deficit and the debt. The debt is the long term debt which the country has. The deficit is the current excess of expenditure over income. The deficit has been cut substantially by this government, but not by enough to stop the long term debt rising. There needs to be more cuts and/or income generation for the deficit to fall further. Only when we are able to create a current surplus (income higher than expenditure) can we, as a country, start to reduce our long term debt. Politically this is unpleasant, but it has to be done for the benefit of the country and future generations.

Reply Posted by hard worker on Wednesday March 13 2013 at 10:51
its not a case of supporting benefit scroungers charles i prefer to think of it as helping people less fortunate than myself the ones who are genuine who arnt in good health who genuinely cant find work, yes theres scroungers on benefits but theres also people where i work who are bone idol and getting paid the same as me while other people carry them and do there work for them,and in my eyes that makes them just as bad as the ones who scrounge off benefits and yes the debt needs to be reduced but not at any cost ,no matter what our personal opinions these people are human beings.the kids that this is affecting are not to blame for their parents actions,and yes i know there are people on benefits who seem to have it all,i also know people on benefits that are struggling every day just to survive,does that mean we should punish the innocent for the guilty.ther are muggers out there who are attacking people every night does that mean we should put everyone on a curfew to stop this happening,no and why because its wrong to punish the innocent because of the actions of the guilty

Reply Posted by Guesty Mcguest on Wednesday March 13 2013 at 15:04
Charles my apologies, Cameron did the same didn't he?

The deficit has fallen £159.0bn in 2009-10 to £121.6bn in 2011-12.

The debt has risen £811.3bn - or 55.3% of GDP - in 2010 to £1,111.4bn - or 70.7% of GDP - in 2012.

Which figure is scarier?

There can be no income generation without growth, no growth without investment, chicken and egg scenario, George Osborne is failing.

Triple dip here we come.

Reply Posted by Guesty Mcguest on Wednesday March 13 2013 at 15:18
Id also like to point out that public spending exploded in 2006 - 2008, a direct result of the banking crash - bailouts anyone? before that Labour spending was inline with tory spending 1991 - 1996, infact labour reduced the inherited tory deficit in 1997 was in surplus in the years 1999 - 2001.

I'm not a labour supporter btw I just work on facts.

Theres a lovely graph on the guardian site

Reply Posted by harles on Thursday March 14 2013 at 18:55
Yes, of course the fact that the labour government (rightly) chose to bail out the banks added to both the deficit and hence the debt. But spending by The Blair and Brown governments went way, way beyond the income which was being generated at the time

Of course the debt of the country will continue to rise until such time as the deficit has been wiped out and a surplus of current income over current expenditure has been achieved. At the present time and for the forseeable future (at least) there is no prospect of debt being reduced. One way to reduce the deficit would be to generate inflation in the economy, although this would have other serious consequences.

Now why does it not suprise me that you get your information from the Guardian!!!!

Reply Posted by sharon on Thursday March 14 2013 at 19:20
Foster carers are exempt up to a point. If they have more than one bedroom used for foster children they'll only get one bedroom paid for they'll have to pay the rest themselves

Reply Posted by katie on Thursday March 14 2013 at 19:29
Sorry but i have to say this theres gunna be more deaths cos of people who are depressed and suicidal due to strugglin to feed their own kids etc x

Reply Posted by Dannyboy on Thursday March 14 2013 at 20:09
The bedroom tax is abhorrent, there is a big social house in London paid for by tax payers with 70 bedrooms that will not be subject to to this divisive levy, it's called Windsor castle. This is a typical Tory ruse to set poor against poorer, divide and rule.

Reply Posted by Tracey on Thursday March 14 2013 at 20:17
I'm pretty sure the Queen isn't claiming housing benefit to pay for Windsor Castle!!!

Reply Posted by Grim Reaper on Thursday March 14 2013 at 22:15
@ Danny the tax is not abhorrent. It is reasonable. Why drag the Queen or Londoners into it?
@Katie. There are plenty of folk topping themselves due to financial worry and very few are on benefits. Most are workers worrying about having their mortgaged home repossessed.
This is not the fault of immigration or low paid workers. This situation has come about due to national debt. There are too many people on benefits who should not be and they are claiming too much.
If you all care so much then get out of bed next time voting comes around or go and get retrained or further education to get a job or lower your expectations and take whatever is on offer. Stop making excused because your money is being reduced. Just make cuts in your lifestyle. Low paid workers have to do just that.
( For example, how much does cigs cost, internet, booze, name brand clothes, etc?)

Reply Posted by hard worker on Friday March 15 2013 at 10:48
i was listening to a song yesterday which went "think of your fellow man,give them a helping hand,put a little love in your heart,and the world would be a better place". i happen to think this is what this country needs.love as got to be better than hate every time

Reply Posted by guesty mcguest on Friday March 15 2013 at 17:19

look at this link and tell me I'm wrong, labour spending under blair and brown was pretty much the same as major and thatcher minus the bailout years where it exploded, as for using the guardian I am ashamed but if you look at the forum they had omitted the years where there was a labour surplus. WAB doesn't let you post links but google guardian deficit diagram and youll see

Reply Posted by Charles on Friday March 15 2013 at 22:34
guesty mcguest,

Government spending under Blair and Brown was significantly higher than under Major and Thatcher. Not only that, but thousands of capital projects were not paid for. These projects were developed under PFI (Private Finance Initiative).
For example, (and I realise that we are going off the original subject) all the new schools which have been developed across the Borough have not been paid for. They have been financed by the private sector and we are now paying for them over the next twenty five years. By using this method of funding we will be paying well, well in excess of what we really should be. You can surely see from this simple example that Barnsley Council have saddled us and future generations with an unacceptable level of debt and I am not sure that the public at large fully appreciate that. The buildings (and how ugly many of them look) may well be there and in use, but we ,as council tax payers have not yet paid for them. Change is certainly required in the town hall, there is no question of that.

Reply Posted by Nat on Saturday March 30 2013 at 17:16
I witnessed one of these marches in the town today. It was embarrassing, you made the town look worse than it usually does.

Reply Posted by lez on Tuesday April 2 2013 at 19:49
we have been hearing and writing about the bedroom tax how fair or not fair this is well i dont think this is right do you all know if not i will tell you sex offenders pedos and rapists living in large houses and cannot have anyone living with them and its considerd its hard to home them are EXEMPT from the bedroom tax so hows that fair then to people who will be paying foe their rooms nobody can justify this tax now it needs scrapping and looking at again

Reply Posted by Harry on Tuesday April 2 2013 at 21:13
So they're planning weekly protests and marches eh!
Get to work like the rest of us instead. I havent got time for such luxuries.........too busy going to work!
The time has come, the gravy train has stopped, get a job and pay your own way!

ipso Regulated