FLASHBACK to 28 October 2010 and Boris Johnson's comments about "Housing benefits cuts" and "social cleansing” of "London".

FLASHBACK to 28 October 2010 and Boris Johnson's comments about "Housing benefits cuts" and "social cleansing” of "London".
Followed by Lib Dumbs
So was Boris accurate on the facts?
Was he speaking of a policy that he knew was being implemented as he spoke in October 2010?
Or were his critics, including Cons and mainly Lib Dumb “ministers” about right?
Was Clegg right?
Was Cable right?
Or was Douglas Alexander who at the time shadowing the Department for Work and Pensions [DWP] right?
Was Chris Bryant right in echoing Boris Johnson or stating stuff that was the very similar to those Boris Johnson was stating on the issue at the time?
Two years and four months is a significant passage of time to review the “row” and the facts.
Especially so when Chris Grayling, the man who is doomed to end his career in front line politics by abysmally failing is exposed as a shallow user of an “email” account!
Has he just landed from a very obscure place and discovered that a thing called “hacking of emails” is technically possible?
Someone as grossly abusive of other peoples’ basic human rights and who is one of the most notorious attackers of the very concept of human rights, Chris Grayling has come across as additionally unfit for public office with his offensively jingoistic attacks on the unintentionally impoverished.
That “activists” have hacked into his email account makes Grayling a truly pathetic occupant in post.
His email account may have been hacked into.
But what could the alleged hackers find that would deprive Grayling of anything the truly belongs to him?
Contrast the alleged hacking to the open looting and robbery that Grayling has been backing against the “poor”.
What about THEIR losses?
But Chris Grayling is one of those cruel practitioners of the art of publicly paid for posts and powers that does his “job” by adding extra cruelty to the assault project that he has been fronting.
Given that the Department for Want and Poverty-creation [DWP] already specialises as the “civilian army” carrying out some of this century’s foulest violations of universal human rights, Chris Grayling is at once engaged in an additional lying propaganda and is also breaking |English laws, the DOMESTIC English laws concerning basic subsistence rights of people who have been being pushed into low income or no income against their will and through no fault of their own.
If Boris Johnson had, in October 2010, anything like a fraction of the knowledge of what Chris Grayling’s DWP portfolio has been doing then Johnson was not only right to say what he said in October 2010 but that he fully deserved to be supported by all rational, right thinking, fair-minded people on that matter.
[To be continued]

______________________


28 October 2010

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11640219

Boris Johnson criticised for 'Kosovo' benefits remark

Boris Johnson tells BBC London he would not accept "Kosovo-style social cleansing"
Continue reading the main story
Related Stories

Analysis: Who loses out?
Cameron 'sticking to benefit cut'
Clegg fury over 'cleansing' claim

Ministers have criticised Boris Johnson for saying he would not allow "Kosovo-style social cleansing" in London, amid a row over housing benefit reforms.

Many London MPs are concerned the £400-a-week cap will force people out of the city and the Conservative mayor said that would not happen "on my watch".

Vince Cable accused the mayor of using "inflammatory language" while No 10 distanced itself from the comments.

Mr Johnson later said his remarks had been taken out of context.

The row came as MPs debated planned changes to housing benefit, announced in last week's Spending Review, which it is estimated will affect about 17,000 people in London if introduced in full.

Several London-based MPs have attacked the proposed new caps, due to come into effect in April and their likely impact on the poorest people living in the capital.
'Families evicted'

Mr Johnson, who faces re-election in 2012, told BBC London on Thursday morning that "the last thing we want to have in our city is a situation such as Paris where the less well-off are pushed out to the suburbs".

"I'll emphatically resist any attempt to recreate a London where the rich and poor cannot live together," he said.
Continue reading the main story
HOUSING BENEFIT CAP

£250 for a one-bedroom property
£290 for a two-bedroom property
£340 for a three-bedroom property
£400 for a four-bedroom property

Have your say
Commentators debate cap
How does housing benefit work?
Watch the debate live at BBC Democracy Live from 1.15pm

"We will not see and we will not accept any kind of Kosovo-style social cleansing of London.

"On my watch, you are not going to see thousands of families evicted from the place where they have been living and have put down roots."

A number of coalition MPs, many representing London constituencies, have concerns about the cap and have called for a rethink on this and other plans such as the 10% proposed cut in housing benefit for people on jobseeker's allowance for more than a year from 2013 onwards.

Earlier this week Labour's Chris Bryant talked about people "being socially engineered and sociologically cleansed out of London" - a remark criticised by Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg as deeply offensive to people who had witnessed ethnic cleansing in other parts of the world.
'Scaremongering'

On Thursday Mr Clegg said he "very strongly disagreed" with the way that the London mayor had expressed himself while other Lib Dem ministers went further.

Business Secretary Vince Cable accused him of "inflammatory language on a difficult and sensitive issue" while employment minister Ed Davey called on both Mr Johnson and Mr Bryant to withdraw their comments.

"I think Chris (Bryant) and Boris Johnson should apologise," he told BBC One's Question Time. "The language they are using is appalling. It's scaremongering and their analysis is completely wrong. We should have a grown up and adult debate."

Asked about the prime minister's reaction, No 10 said he "does not agree with what Boris Johnson has said or indeed the way he said it".

Vince Cable: 'We have to reform housing benefit'

BBC political editor Nick Robinson said it was inevitable that once Mr Johnson decided to run again for mayor in 2012 he would have to confront Mr Cameron head on at some stage.

Mr Johnson's office later issued a statement saying he had been "quoted out of context" and was confident that negotiations would result in the reforms being introduced with "minimal problems" for London.

"My consistent position has been that the government is absolutely right to reform the housing benefit system which has become completely unsustainable," it said.

"I do not agree with the wild accusations from defenders of the current system that reform will lead to social cleansing. It will not, and if you listened carefully to what I said, no such exodus will take place on my watch.

"But the point I was making this morning is that London has specific needs due to the exceptional way in which the housing market works in the capital and it is my job as mayor to make the government aware of these."
'Ill-thought out'

Ministers have mounted robust defence of the proposals, arguing that the housing benefit bill had got out of control under Labour and people would still be able to claim a maximum of £21,000 a year.
Continue reading the main story
“Start Quote

This is much more than a dispute between David Cameron and Boris Johnson”

Douglas Alexander Shadow Work Secretary

Nick Robinson: Boris v Dave

"That is more than the equivalent of what most working families have to spend on their housing costs," Chief Secretary to the Treasury Danny Alexander told MPs during a debate on the Spending Review as a whole.

According to government figures, 21,000 people will be affected by new caps on the amount families can claim for five, four, three, two and one-bed room properties across the UK including 17,000 in London, the majority of whom are out of work.

Housing minister Grant Shapps acknowledged "some people" may have to move as a result but insisted there would be plenty of other properties in their area that would still be affordable under the new conditions.

But Labour has warned that the changes will be "devastating" for hard-working families on low incomes both in and outside London.

"This is much more than a dispute between David Cameron and Boris Johnson," said Shadow Work and Pensions Secretary Douglas Alexander.

"This is an ill-thought out policy which is going to have significant, indeed, damaging effect on the lives of many thousands of families across the country."

And housing charity Crisis said it was a myth to suggest a cap was needed to tackle spiralling payments and that most recipients were unemployed.

"Overall the bill is not 'out of control'", said its chief executive Leslie Morphy. "Costs have risen because rents have risen, in the main driven by the huge rise in house prices over the last decade and a lack of social housing."

Housing benefit has artificially inflated rents, and hence the "buy-to-let" sector. If benefits are cut, cuts to rents will follow as sure as night follows day, and ultimately nobody will loose out except possibly in the short term.

Peter Wood, Peterborough

I'm sad the Mayor of London using that language about "Kosovo Style", I'm from Kosovo.

Mr Valdrin Hoxha, London

As a medium size landlord who has about 15 tenants, more or less in two bed flats and ALL paying ALL of their own rentals of average £700 per month, plus Council Tax and Services I have to object to any MP, robbing these people of their Tax to pay for out of work persons who live in expensive areas. I do see that families have a need to keep their children in school, but many parts of the country have perfectly acceptable schools and are far less costly for the taxpayer. Let's put the working population first for a change. Give the housing benefit population the option to move to another area and some choice for their family needs, this still shows a caring society - just one that has a limit to how much it can afford.

Mike Meadowcroft, Oxford

I have just had someone resign because she is better off not working. Her partner stays at home to look after the baby, and she was working 20+ hours a week, but the council deduct 100% of what she earns from the housing benefit, so she is actually about £100 a month better off not working.

Mike, Enfield, Middlesex

A few years ago I ended up living in a studio flat with my girlfriend and our baby. The other flats in our block were all brand new one-bedroom flats. I was the only resident working and I was paying £780 for a studio. The other residents were single males on benefits with their rents of £1,300. I remember speaking with the estate agents and they told me the landlords had two types of rent - for those working and those on benefits.

Nathaniel Bernard, London

I completely agree with the government's plans. I was born and brought up in Islington. I had to move away some years ago as I could no longer afford to live there. Why should I subsidise other peoples housing in an area I can no longer afford myself?

Giles Middleton, London
More on This Story
Related Stories

Analysis: Who loses out? 27 OCTOBER 2010, POLITICS
Cameron 'sticking to benefit cut' 27 OCTOBER 2010, POLITICS
Clegg fury over 'cleansing' claim 26 OCTOBER 2010, POLITICS
Housing benefit rebellion threat 25 OCTOBER 2010, POLITICS
Clegg defends housing benefit cut 24 OCTOBER 2010, POLITICS
Benefit cuts: Your stories 03 OCTOBER 2010, UK