Iain Duncan Smith Has Spoken Out For Landlords

Reply to the comment left by "philip allen" at "24/06/2017 - 13:47":

I know who brought it in but Theresa May and Philip Hammond looked at it and decided to keep it. There is no point keep harping on about Gideon we need to make Theresa May responsible so that she is pressurised into repealing it. She is the decision maker now. The more distance there is between her and Section 24 the harder it will be to get her to u turn. I voted Tory your post seems to imply I voted for Corbyn.

I han't read all these comments, but IDS was the main pillock who bought in Universal Credit & Benefit cuts etc.
In the last 6 months, he saying they've gone too far.

Why do we on the ground know what's right & wrong, yet Mr Pillocks at the top of the Fairy tree han't got a clue what & how their decisions will affect?

If all u Landlords can last out, I can see in another 4 years the Govt will come begging to us as the population increases along with rents.

Reply to the comment left by "Mick Roberts" at "24/06/2017 - 17:30":

I used to know somebody who knows him. His view was that he was a very decent man doing an impossible job.
IDS and family are extremly wealthy he does not need to do the job.

If we're going to delay action until we find a politician that:

a) Supports the repeal of Section 24

and

b) Is a really nice, genuine honest person

I think we can all give up now.

I've sent emails to IDS, the housing minister, my own MP AND Theresa May and entitled it 'Social Housing - another disaster'. I also took on board what was said about letters and have posted letters to all of them too. You never know.

Reply to the comment left by "philip allen" at "24/06/2017 - 13:47":

There is no hope of repeal of S24. Landlords voted for tories en masse in 2010 and 2015 and fro brexit in 2016. Made your bed etc..

Once a new tax is implemented it is never repealed.

This is just the start of the squeeze - landlords have no friends in the media nor the public

Reply to the comment left by "Mick Roberts" at "24/06/2017 - 17:30":

IDS's quite sensible argument was that a huge amount of expensive administrative complexity was involved in giving people a variety of different benefits, allowances and credits for which they qualified while at the same time taxing some of them on their wages, giving with one hand and taking away with the other in a system which often meant people were only marginally better off working than claiming, so that there was no incentive to get a job. The whole idea was to simplify an unwieldy system so that instead of recipients having to make multiple claims, a far more rational and efficient method would be to establish the entirety of their circumstances so that overall entitlement calculations could be performed and a single sum to cover everything paid out. Though theoretically laudable, this failed to take account of the enormous variety of indivual circumstances and that the claimants' circumstances were in constant flux: singles becoming couples, new children being born and older ones leaving education, partners leaving or joining the household, jobs changing or hours of work varying from week to week, claimants reaching pensionable age, rents changing. people falling ill or sick people getting better etc. A computer programme which could cope with all this might eventually have been perfected after much trial and error. However, at the same time changes were being made to the system itself: benefit caps, housing benefit freezes, tinkering with disability and sickness entitlements to encourage claimants into work, payments made monthly in arrears rather than fortnightly etc., etc., while simultaneously moving the admin. from one department to another, so that experienced administrators were lost and new staff struggled to reinvent the wheel. Sadly. many of the most vulnerable in society have suffered in the resultant chaotic rollout of UC. Good theory - shame about its execution.

Reply to the comment left by "Property Wannabee" at "24/06/2017 - 19:54":

We have no friends, the Tories have no friends. They need to be our friends.

Reply to the comment left by "david porter" at "24/06/2017 - 20:55":

Landlords carry no political clout and no media clout - they will always vote tories. This is just like the self employed / contractors voting tory in the hope of getting rid of IR35. The tories took the policy and doubled down enforcing contractors in the public sector to go through stringent checks and introducing the dividend tax to make the contractor gig less profitable.

The politico class give not a shit for the landlords - they'd rather the whole industry in the hands of big corporate friends who provide big party donations and future non-exec directorships for the politicians who greased their success.

Reply to the comment left by "Property Wannabee" at "24/06/2017 - 19:54":

On Clause 24 this is the most high profile Tory yet that has spoken against it so there is hope that as the consequences bite something may be done though probably fudged for headlines.
Re Elections speak for yourself, Landlords shouldn't be assumed to always support one party. I for one having looked at the interests of those pushing brexit (globalists, ex city, london politicians and a few wealthy individuals) voted remain.
I voted against the torys this election - they don't deserve my vote and I can't see myself voting for them in future but I will always vote

Reply to the comment left by "Old Mrs Landlord" at "24/06/2017 - 19:56":

I totally agree it was a good idea, unfortunately the execution with treasury cuts and benefit caps has made a farce of it. Not to mention that the utter failure of the responsible departments to properly spec and commision the IT system has been budget blowingly tragic. Government desperately needs to recruit some in-house expertise to manage projects and costs rather than relying on expensive and seemingly useless special advisors, external consultants and sub contractors who keep upping their charges and run rings round government contract wise. Yes it was a big project but America sent a man to the moon years ago with the sort of computing power we now have in a smart phone. Project and cost management skills seem entirely lacking in recent governments.