removal of the spare room subsidy bulletin 23 sep
Monday, 23 September 2013
Friday, 20 September 2013
A room less than 70 sq ft is not liable for bedroom tax – Fife Council
The following is a press release from Merseyside Federation of Anti-Bedroom Tax Groups:
Following a first-tier benefit tribunal judgement* against Fife Council that a room of less than 70 sq ft is not a bedroom for bedroom tax purposes, an emergency meeting agreed today that this will now become official council policy. Earlier in the week the council announced that it would not appeal against the tribunal ruling. In separate judgements over the last two weeks, the benefit tribunal in Kirkcaldy has ruled that room purpose, usage and usable space are also issues that councils need to take into account in determining a tenant’s liability for the bedroom tax.
Secretary of Merseyside Federation of anti-Bedroom Tax Groups Juliet Edgar says: “This is is an important and very welcome decision. We have always said the process that councils went through in determining bedroom tax liability was fundamentally flawed since they did not take into account the space standards of the 1985 Housing Act or individual circumstances. Fife Council has set a precedent: we now insist that councils on Merseyside follow immediately.”
There are thousands of properties on Merseyside where tenants are paying bedroom tax for room less than 70 sq ft. The 1985 Housing Act space standard says that this is too small to serve as a bedroom for an adult. Councils and housing associations will now have to face up to the prospect of undertaking individual surveys of tens of thousands of social housing properties across Merseyside to record individual room sizes, their purpose and the use that is made of them. It is expected that at least 30% of all bedroom tax decisions will have to be set aside as a result.
Ms Edgar comments: “This is is an exercise that will take months. In the meantime, we demand that all existing bedroom tax decisions are set aside. Why should tenants continue to pay a tax for which they are not liable while councils do the job that they should have done at the outset?”
For further information contact Juliet Edgar on 07528194137
* Judgements SC108/13/01362 and SC108/13/01318. For a more detailed assessment of both judgements and their significance see speye.wordpress.com
Tuesday, 27 August 2013
Bolton at Home concocts ‘no homelessness’ policy for bedroom tax-hit tenants
On August
19th ‘arms length’ housing association Bolton at Home (BH) announced
a ‘no homelessness’ policy to mitigate the impact of the bedroom tax on BH
tenants. This would seem like a tenant-supporting move, but when John Dunn,
assistant director of housing services at BH, spent 7 paragraphs in the
Guardian bemoaning the ‘no eviction’ policies some housing associations (HA) have adopted –in effect arguing for
the necessity of evictions- it becomes clear that the reasoning underpinning
the ‘no homelessness’ policy are wholly economic.
According to BH’s ‘no homelessness’ policy, if a tenant is
evicted over the bedroom tax they’re given the option of moving into “another”
property. The tenant is given
one re-housing offer only and if they turn it down they can basically fuck off
somewhere else.
With 11,000 tenants in Bolton chasing 91 one-bedroom properties, it leaves the policy vacuous. With a shortage of properties to
‘downsize’ to, BH’s only option would be to shift tenants into the private
rented sector. And this, it seems, is what BH intend to do:
“We will use some of the empty properties generated by turnover in our stock to re-house affected tenants, as well as making use of private-sector leasehold properties.”
also BH:
“…would work with the private rented sector and Bolton Council to bring in suitable accommodation where possible.”
According
to BH, though, it all depends on what kind of tenant you are. The narrative
that BH concocts is that they are protecting the tenant from homelessness and
simultaneously other tenants who would be indirectly hit “if rent is not
collected.” But, like all
state-aligned institutions, BH tries to bring tenants into conflict
with each other by dividing them into good/deserving and bad/undeserving:
“’No eviction’ policies do not differentiate between those who can't pay and those who won't pay. It is unfair on those who go on struggling to pay the bedroom tax if others choose not to.”
Dunn does
not mention the possibility that tenants who “won’t pay” might also be
struggling and can’t pay,
preferring to use them as scapegoats for the failure of housing associations to
act in genuine solidarity with all tenants.
Bolton News reported in august
that:
“They [Bolton at Home] said the policy will not apply if tenants are evicted for arrears that are the result of other factors, such as deliberate non-payment.”
While Dunn
has-a-go at folk for focusing on the ‘morality’ of the bedroom tax, he uses his
own courtroom tactics to moralise over the decisions made by BH tenants, and principally how those pesky
tenants, unable to afford the fucking rent and can’t/won’t pay, are damaging
the “service standards”, “credit” and “capital improvement projects” of Bolton
at Home. Well, whoopee-fucking-do!
Meanwhile,
Dunn shows whose side he’s really
on with this mucky little outburst:
“A ‘no eviction’ policy also sets a precedent for landlords. How can they then argue that they are right to evict in cases where arrears are caused by other factors, such as government cuts to tax credits, welfare benefits, increases in non-dependant deductions, and so on?”
The chances are if you’re struggling
with the bedroom tax then you’re probably, -whether you can’t or won’t pay-
struggling with rent full stop, especially if you’re being threatened with
eviction by your HA. So, what
difference does it make if you come under the ‘no homelessness’ policy, or not,
if you’re going to get shunted into private-rented property anyways? Fuck all.
By slapping
the politically loaded term ‘homelessness’ on a mirage-of-a-policy BH merely,
and most likely briefly, score some brownie points with the Boltonian
electorate and council. If they were truly acting in the interests of their
tenants, then they would have adopted a no-evictions policy that protects all
tenants from reform and crisis. Instead, they’ve chosen to divide the Bolton at
Home tenant community and concentrate on protecting their more important capital assets: bricks and mortar.
Monday, 26 August 2013
Combat the Bedroom Tax's Brief Guide to Direct Action
"Harpooned
to the sides of capitalistic society it shall tear and bleed it until the shark
turns the final somersault" - Émile Pouget
"Direct action may be the extreme of violence, or it may be as peaceful as the waters of the Brook of Shiloa that go softly." - Voltairine de Cleyre
Direct action is taking matters into
our own hands
Direct action is not a boycott
Direct action is not dependent on approval from the state
http://ca.ibtimes.com/articles/255711/20111124/occupy-toronto-encampment-taken-longer-occupied-photos.htm#page4
 |
| Protestor shaking hands with a copper |
Direct action is under
the control of the participants
Direct action is not a letter to your MP
Direct action is chasing
bailiffs off
 |
| Local residents prevent bailiffs from entering property in Liverpool |
Direct action is not a petition
Direct action is not, nor never will be,
lobbying the local council
Direct action is expropriation of food to feed your family
 |
| Unemployed take food from Mercadona and Carrefour in mass action in Andalucia |
Direct action is not a foodbank
Direct action is a
wildcat strike
Direct action is not a march from point A to B
Direct action is the Gulabi Gang
Direct action is Anti-Fascist Action
http://libcom.org/history/articles/afa-anti-fascist-actionhttp://libcom.org/history/articles/afa-anti-fascist-action
Direct action is not a symbolic protest
 |
| UKuncut activists outside Nick Clegg's House |
Direct action is fighting for ourselves
Direct action is not about the media
Direct action is not civil disobedience
Direct action is sabotage
Direct action “subscribes to notions
of freedom and autonomy”
Direct action is the "normal function" of working class resistance
(ya)
combatbedroomtax@gmail.com
Sunday, 11 August 2013
Merseyside Bedroom Tax Federation: After The Storm
Repost via Infantile Disorder:
During the spring, the Merseyside Federation of Anti-Bedroom Tax Groups was formed, following weeks of frenzied activity. Neighbourhood-based groups from all across the region sent delegates to meetings in Liverpool town centre, and amidst a buzz of excitement, an anti-oppression motion was unanimously agreed.
But the trouble began when it became clear that one local anti-bedroom tax group - based in Knowsley - had strong links to notorious local fascists. Knowsley sought to join the Federation, and anti-fascists tried to raise the alarm. But at the next Federation meeting, the Knowsley application was steamrollered through by the chair, who refused to allow antifascists permission to air their concerns. The next moment I received a tweet from a jubilant Knowsley admin, threatening to take me to court for my "lies" (I'm yet to hear anything further, by the way). Following this, the Federation Twitter account published statements attacking "the anarchists", aimed at covering up the chair's undemocratic actions.
At a special meeting called to look into whether "the Federation [had] been brought into disrepute", Knowsley's affiliation application was withdrawn, and no-one from that group has attended any further meetings. In the meantime, local groups have continued doing some excellent work, but the issue of what happened at the 1st June meeting has been the elephant in the room at a federal level.
Today, over a tense and very emotional hour and a half, delegates had it out. This was prompted by a motion from one of the local groups, which called for "The activists who have made public statements attacking the Federation" (a reference to those who had called-out the behaviour of individuals within the Federation) to "withdraw them". Further, "all groups agree not to make public statements attacking the Federation or members of the Federation", and later on, "concerns or disagreements to be put in writing and discussed at a full Federation meeting and to agree with the democratic decision at that meeting".
There was lots of back and forth about the merits or otherwise of what antifascists had written in their whistleblowing blog posts, but when one speaker described the motion as "top down", and another characterised it as "policing" what individuals are doing when "we're not the state", it was agreed to amend the resolution to the following:
"The Federation is to unite in practise whenever possible and assist all groups to become bigger and stronger in fighting the bedroom tax and cuts in welfare benefit.
"To agree to a Code of Conduct. Differences should be respected, and all members have a right to express their positions and discuss in a frank, open and respectful way.
"Members should not make personal attacks. The Chairperson to pull members to order when personal attacks are made and if the person persists they be asked to leave the meeting."
The amendment was backed by a majority of three, out of eleven voting delegates. While such a margin shows there are still tensions and suspicions within the group, there was a sense that the air has been cleared somewhat, and hopes that the Federation will be able to put the infighting behind us, so we can get on with the urgent work of challenging the bedroom tax. With fascists unable to spread their divisive poison anywhere near affiliated groups, we can proceed with some confidence.
During the spring, the Merseyside Federation of Anti-Bedroom Tax Groups was formed, following weeks of frenzied activity. Neighbourhood-based groups from all across the region sent delegates to meetings in Liverpool town centre, and amidst a buzz of excitement, an anti-oppression motion was unanimously agreed.
But the trouble began when it became clear that one local anti-bedroom tax group - based in Knowsley - had strong links to notorious local fascists. Knowsley sought to join the Federation, and anti-fascists tried to raise the alarm. But at the next Federation meeting, the Knowsley application was steamrollered through by the chair, who refused to allow antifascists permission to air their concerns. The next moment I received a tweet from a jubilant Knowsley admin, threatening to take me to court for my "lies" (I'm yet to hear anything further, by the way). Following this, the Federation Twitter account published statements attacking "the anarchists", aimed at covering up the chair's undemocratic actions.
At a special meeting called to look into whether "the Federation [had] been brought into disrepute", Knowsley's affiliation application was withdrawn, and no-one from that group has attended any further meetings. In the meantime, local groups have continued doing some excellent work, but the issue of what happened at the 1st June meeting has been the elephant in the room at a federal level.
Today, over a tense and very emotional hour and a half, delegates had it out. This was prompted by a motion from one of the local groups, which called for "The activists who have made public statements attacking the Federation" (a reference to those who had called-out the behaviour of individuals within the Federation) to "withdraw them". Further, "all groups agree not to make public statements attacking the Federation or members of the Federation", and later on, "concerns or disagreements to be put in writing and discussed at a full Federation meeting and to agree with the democratic decision at that meeting".
There was lots of back and forth about the merits or otherwise of what antifascists had written in their whistleblowing blog posts, but when one speaker described the motion as "top down", and another characterised it as "policing" what individuals are doing when "we're not the state", it was agreed to amend the resolution to the following:
"The Federation is to unite in practise whenever possible and assist all groups to become bigger and stronger in fighting the bedroom tax and cuts in welfare benefit.
"To agree to a Code of Conduct. Differences should be respected, and all members have a right to express their positions and discuss in a frank, open and respectful way.
"Members should not make personal attacks. The Chairperson to pull members to order when personal attacks are made and if the person persists they be asked to leave the meeting."
The amendment was backed by a majority of three, out of eleven voting delegates. While such a margin shows there are still tensions and suspicions within the group, there was a sense that the air has been cleared somewhat, and hopes that the Federation will be able to put the infighting behind us, so we can get on with the urgent work of challenging the bedroom tax. With fascists unable to spread their divisive poison anywhere near affiliated groups, we can proceed with some confidence.
Saturday, 10 August 2013
Bedroom Tax Roundup: Ring of Steel & Wirral Rally
Reposts from Infantile Disorder:
Despite heavy rain, a group of Merseyside activists got together at very
short notice on Wednesday morning, to face down bailiffs intent on
snatching and destroying a homeless woman's belongings.
The woman - who is in her fifties and a stroke survivor - had lived at the Knowsley Housing Trust property for many years. Her husband had been killed in an industrial incident, and her children had left home, leaving her home "underoccupied" in the eyes of the government, who hit her with the bedroom tax in April, and her arrears quickly grew.
Knowsley Housing Trust evicted the woman last week. At Saturday's 'Enuf Is Enuf' event in Liverpool city centre, her daughter described how she got on her knees to beg bailiffs not to throw her out of her home. These pleas fell on deaf ears, and she was informed that she had four weeks to remove her property from the house, which was initially left tinned up with pet animals trapped inside. However, on Tuesday the woman was told the bailiffs would be coming for her things today. It was at this point she made her first contact with local anti-bedroom tax activists, and they planned to form a "ring of steel" around the door of the building.
On Wednesday morning, with "ring of steel" in place, a Knowsley Housing Trust van drove past and drove on down the road, but the bailiffs did not call. Clearly, the woman at the centre of it all is still in a desperate situation, but she is receiving solidarity from people determined to help her.
Please let Knowsley Housing Trust know what you think of their behaviour: @knowsleyhousing; 0151 290 7000, https://www.facebook.com/knowsleyhousingkht.
Wednesday, July 24th, 2013
Around fifty people marched from the Woodward Road estate in Rock Ferry,
Wirral, to the local council One Stop Shop yesterday lunchtime, in a
display of defiance against the bedroom tax. A high concentration of
people on the estate are affected by one of the coalition government's
most vicious domestic policies, and with the possibility of evictions
looming, tenants are organising themselves to defend their homes.
The demonstration began at a quarter to twelve, and walked just over a mile to the One Stop Shop, where several residents handed in their latest appeal forms, and signed a petition. The event was entirely self-organised and stewarded by bedroom tax campaigners, with no involvement from police. It was the first Wirral demo of any kind outside of Wallasey and Birkenhead town centre in many years, and all the more remarkable for taking place during the middle of a week day.
Maybe ten people from bedroom tax campaigns across Merseyside made the journey to Rock Ferry to offer their solidarity, but the bulk of the participants were from Woodward Road - an extraordinary achievement for a grassroots community organisation. Women, men and children all played their part to make as much noise as possible, and really announced their group's existence to the rest of Rock Ferry. Some held homemade placards and banners with pride, while others blew whistles and chanted.
One particular chant - so familiar to long-time campaigners - took on a poignant new meaning in the mouths of children on their first ever demonstration. "Whose streets? Our streets!" shouted young people on the streets where they have grown up, but from which they are now threatened with removal for the crime of poverty.
When the procession reached the One Stop Shop, speeches were made appeals were handed in en masse, with staff looking quite bemused and flustered at being greeted by a demonstration at work.
In the scheme of things, fifty people at a demonstration might not seem like a lot, and indeed one passerby who uploaded photos to the 'Wirral Talk' website described it as "Very Small Bedroom Tax March". But what the photographer probably didn't realise was that this was the work of just one estate.
While most 'left' parties focus their attentions on the small proportion of the working class who are unionised, the ruling class austerity onslaught is creating whole communities who have nothing to lose from fighting back. The tragedy is that there are many other Woodward Road estates where people have yet to collectively organise, and where individuals feel desperately alone. May the growing Woodward Road resistance inspire people around Merseyside, and throughout the whole country!
Wednesday, July 31st, 2013
Merseyside Activists Face Down Thieving Bailiffs Despite heavy rain, a group of Merseyside activists got together at very
short notice on Wednesday morning, to face down bailiffs intent on
snatching and destroying a homeless woman's belongings.The woman - who is in her fifties and a stroke survivor - had lived at the Knowsley Housing Trust property for many years. Her husband had been killed in an industrial incident, and her children had left home, leaving her home "underoccupied" in the eyes of the government, who hit her with the bedroom tax in April, and her arrears quickly grew.
Knowsley Housing Trust evicted the woman last week. At Saturday's 'Enuf Is Enuf' event in Liverpool city centre, her daughter described how she got on her knees to beg bailiffs not to throw her out of her home. These pleas fell on deaf ears, and she was informed that she had four weeks to remove her property from the house, which was initially left tinned up with pet animals trapped inside. However, on Tuesday the woman was told the bailiffs would be coming for her things today. It was at this point she made her first contact with local anti-bedroom tax activists, and they planned to form a "ring of steel" around the door of the building.
On Wednesday morning, with "ring of steel" in place, a Knowsley Housing Trust van drove past and drove on down the road, but the bailiffs did not call. Clearly, the woman at the centre of it all is still in a desperate situation, but she is receiving solidarity from people determined to help her.
Please let Knowsley Housing Trust know what you think of their behaviour: @knowsleyhousing; 0151 290 7000, https://www.facebook.com/knowsleyhousingkht.
Wednesday, July 24th, 2013
Wirral Estate Rallies to Oppose Bedroom Tax
 |
| Outside the One Stop Shop. Photo: @rpattinson83 |
The demonstration began at a quarter to twelve, and walked just over a mile to the One Stop Shop, where several residents handed in their latest appeal forms, and signed a petition. The event was entirely self-organised and stewarded by bedroom tax campaigners, with no involvement from police. It was the first Wirral demo of any kind outside of Wallasey and Birkenhead town centre in many years, and all the more remarkable for taking place during the middle of a week day.
Maybe ten people from bedroom tax campaigns across Merseyside made the journey to Rock Ferry to offer their solidarity, but the bulk of the participants were from Woodward Road - an extraordinary achievement for a grassroots community organisation. Women, men and children all played their part to make as much noise as possible, and really announced their group's existence to the rest of Rock Ferry. Some held homemade placards and banners with pride, while others blew whistles and chanted.
One particular chant - so familiar to long-time campaigners - took on a poignant new meaning in the mouths of children on their first ever demonstration. "Whose streets? Our streets!" shouted young people on the streets where they have grown up, but from which they are now threatened with removal for the crime of poverty.
When the procession reached the One Stop Shop, speeches were made appeals were handed in en masse, with staff looking quite bemused and flustered at being greeted by a demonstration at work.
In the scheme of things, fifty people at a demonstration might not seem like a lot, and indeed one passerby who uploaded photos to the 'Wirral Talk' website described it as "Very Small Bedroom Tax March". But what the photographer probably didn't realise was that this was the work of just one estate.
While most 'left' parties focus their attentions on the small proportion of the working class who are unionised, the ruling class austerity onslaught is creating whole communities who have nothing to lose from fighting back. The tragedy is that there are many other Woodward Road estates where people have yet to collectively organise, and where individuals feel desperately alone. May the growing Woodward Road resistance inspire people around Merseyside, and throughout the whole country!
Wednesday, 12 June 2013
Merseyside Anti-Bedroom Tax Federation Go Animal Farm on "The Anarchists"
The following is a repost from Infantile Disorder, covering Merseyside Anti-Bedroom Tax Federation's recent attempts to smear "anarchist" involvement in the anti-bedroom tax campaign on Merseyside:
In a sickening act of deceit, the Merseyside Anti-Bedroom Tax Federation Twitter account has begun attacking "the anarchists" with misinformation designed to cover for the undemocratic actions of the committee in the run-up to affiliating with the fascist-linked Knowsley group. In doing so, it is attacking some of those who first came up with the idea for an anti-bedroom tax campaign, who put in much of the early spadework, and continue to work hard in their communities. It is also labeling all those who oppose the committee as "anarchists", merely because they are consistently standing up for democratic norms and against fascism.
This flurry of tweets came a week ago, in response to a woman from down south who had come across my article 'Affiliating With Fascists and The Poison of 'Left' Opportunism'. She was understandably alarmed and wanted to spread the information. The MABTF account responded with "Don't be drawn in Michelle, anarchists trying to destroy fed and the enormous amount of work gone on", and "@MABTF is vehemently anti-fascist".
The first part of this is just silly. Anarchists and others are angry about the Knowsley affiliation precisely because they are worried that allowing the allies of fascists into the Federation will destroy it, by effectively excluding those particularly targeted by fascists. The second part is true only to the extent that an anti-oppression motion was originally passed by the Federation, with those labelled as "anarchists" to the fore in promoting it. However, this unanimously approved motion was then dismissed as "something to work towards" by the committee's chair, as she pushed for a vote on affiliating Knowsley. So while "the anarchists" are "vehemently anti-fascist", and the anti-oppression motion they drafted certainly was, the Federation cannot be said to be. For the Federation chair, we work towards abolishing oppression by allowing some of the most oppressive scum to be found anywhere a potential seat at the table.
When the woman who posted my article asked why anyone would try to break the Federation, @MABTF declared that "the anarchists" had "been destructive from the beginning and think screaming in peoples faces is debate".
Anarchists tend not to be backward in coming forward about their beliefs, and frustration at opportunism has created a lot of anger, but no screaming in anyone's face has taken place at Federation meetings. This is more fiction.
But even more ridiculous is the claim that "the anarchists" have been destructive of the bedroom tax movement "from the beginning". The truth is that it was an anarchist who came up with the idea of a mass meeting on the bedroom tax last autumn. Those dismissed as "the anarchists" did much of the work building for, organising, and facilitating that meeting, which took place at the Black-E in January. As many local groups sprang out of that central meeting, it was an anarchist who went to each group's initial meeting, giving a Powerpoint presentation on the bedroom tax and his ideas about how it could be fought.
Since then, "the anarchists" have been extremely active in their respective local groups, helping to arrange meetings, going leafleting, taking part in actions/lobbying of local politicians and housing associations, and assisting those who have been filling in appeal forms. This certainly shouldn't get them any special treatment, but it should entitle them to some basic respect.
Though many of "the anarchists" do indeed describe themselves as anarchists, by no means all of them do. Some prefer to call themselves communists, others socialists, and others are quite new to political activism, and do not want to label themselves at the moment, as is their absolute right. But to the committee of Merseyside Anti-Bedroom Tax Federation, anyone who opposes their Machiavellian maneuverings is one of "the anarchists". Anyone who wants open democracy within the Federation is apparently an anarchist. Anyone who consistently opposes fascism is supposedly an anarchist.
The reasons for this are not clear, but there are two main possibilities. For those on the committee who identify as Trotskyists, it is a convenient catch-all political label which they will have used for many years. But perhaps more importantly, in the public consciousness it is normally associated with 'chaos', 'trouble-makers' and even 'bomb-throwers'. This is an idea popularised by the rich and their servants down the years, precisely with the intention of scaring the working class away from militant action in their own interests.
It is a shameful state of affairs for the Merseyside Anti-Bedroom Tax Federation committee to stoop so low.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)