London Riots (ETA post #23: Brits, please sign the petition to axe rioters' benefits)

[Miss Z]

The country now seems to be returning to normal, thank goodness. Yet, now comes the debate as to why this happened, the excuses, and the finger-pointing.

I am getting so infuriated watching the news. As the heat dies down, so reporters are getting the view from the 'other side', and interviewing the people who either condone the violence or sympathise with it.

I watched a newsclip the other night that made my blood boil. It showed a standoff between a mother from what was described as a disadvantaged community, and the owner of a pharmacy which had been damaged and looted.

Mostly, the clip showed this woman being rude to this man as she defended the young people who were rioting. She said it was down to the fact that there weren't enough community centres to give these kids something to do, and in her words 'what else were they supposed to do?'. She finished her little speech by telling the pharmacy owner, who was quite rightly shocked at her comments, that it was people like him who were to blame, and to 'shut up and jog on'. This she said in front of her young children.

People like her disgust me no end. If she is so self-righteous that she has the caption 'mother' under her name in the news report, then perhaps she should bloody well start acting like a mother and do things with her kids herself instead of leaving them to run amock and expecting the community to provide. That way, perhaps they would learn some family values that would lead to some decency and respect.

I'm also sick of the phrase 'people caught up in the riots' (used to describe those who were doing the rioting, as opposed to citizens who became surrounded by the riots as you might expect). I'm sorry, they made the conscious decision to riot. The excuse that people did what they did because everyone else was doing it, is just pathetic, and I believe once again shows the 'level' of these people.

It's more heartening to hear of other mothers who have seen pictures on the news, social media, or otherwise, of their children rioting and marched them straight to the nearest police station. Sadly, that kind of parent appears to be in the minority.

Not that it's only been kids involved in this mess, but they are the main concern to the nation right now, since it is so shocking that kids barely out of primary school must feel so little for their cities and this country.

For once, I really support our Prime Minister at this time. I just watched an interview with him on our local news, and quite frankly I am elated that he doesn't pussyfoot around trying to be PC about the reasons why people rioted. He doesn't believe that it was an uprising of an underclass disgusted at an unfair government. I don't believe that the general public buy that one either. It was a bunch of selfish, stupid individuals who saw an opportunity to cause trouble for their own personal gain, and more such individuals across the country who were dense enough to follow suit.

One of the questions in this interview was regarding convicted rioters losing their council housing (housing offered by local councils to poorer residents at a fraction of rental costs the average citizen pays). DC was asked that surely he thought embracing these people in the community would do more good than throwing them out of it, and that this proposal was unfair. His response was that they should have thought about that before they showed their disrespect for the taxpayers in the community that fund their housing. Damn right.

Meanwhile, the e-petition, to stop people who have been convicted in connection with the riots receiving state benefits, has more than 150,000 signatures. This would apply to all who have received a sentence, including those whose sentence is non-custodial, i.e. those who would still receive government handouts.

I have now been able to sign it, and urge any other Brits and UK residents to sign it too. No-one who shows such a lack of respect for their government, and the tax-payers of this nation, deserves to be funded by them.

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/7337

(I think the spelling mistake is testament to the hurried fury in which it was made ).

/rant

[ChrisH]

... (housing offered by local councils to poorer residents at a fraction of rental costs the average citizen pays).

Regardless of whether or not rioters should be evicted from their council housing, I would like to take issue with you in regard to your apparent view on council housing.

Council houses were built and operated by local councils to supply uncrowded, well built homes on secure tenancies to primarily working class people at reasonable rents.

It is not offered to 'poorer residents', a vast amount of council house tenants are decent hard working people. In fact it is not 'offered' at all, it has to be applied for and can be by anyone.

Also, the rent charged is reasonable but not 'at a fraction of rental costs the average citizen pays' as you have stated.

[ChrisH]

Rioters family first to be kicked out

The middle class 'rioters' revealed: the millionaires daughter, the aspiring musician and the organic chef, all in the dock.

[Miss Z]

Chris,

I would never, ever, dispute the fact that the vast majority of council house residents are hard-working and decent. I'm a little hurt that you would assume I think otherwise.

I'll grant that my use of 'offered' was wrong. I understand that council house has to be applied for and I sent out the wrong impression - that was a mistake on my part.

I'm right in thinking, though, that one is refused a council house if one has serious behavioural offences? And that anti-social behaviour, it is made clear, results in eviction?

As for prices, all I can say is that they seem to be considerably lower than average rents in my area. Perhaps indeed that is a reasonable rent for the housing here, and prices are different elsewhere. Personally, I find many rental prices very unreasonable (and I won't even go into how much my London flat sucks out my bank balance every week!).

Thank you for posting those articles. I find this quote sums up my feelings well:

'Most residents on our housing estates are decent law-abiding citizens who will have been sickened at the scenes they witnessed on their TV screens this week. Many will have seen their places of work trashed at the hands of these rioters. As much as anything else we owe it to them to send out a strong signal that this kind of violence will not be tolerated.'

I’ve been debating this on facebook too – I think the decent folks who receive benefits, council housing, whatever, would be appalled to think that those who have rioted, and shown such lack of care towards their communities, are entitled to the same level of help as them. When I worked in the charity shop, plenty of people I got to know well only bought their clothes from us, because they couldn’t afford high street prices. Would they thus go and smash up the big brand stores, out of spite? No, since they have dignity, something which is exclusive of class, IMO.

As for the ‘middle class’ rioters, they deserve the book thrown at them just as hard. University students? Take away their student loans and grants. The children of well-off families – well even they receive some degree of child benefit, which I believe they should then lose for that child. There’s got to be ways of punishing these people that sends out a message of zero tolerance across all levels of society.

All these people, regardless of their place in society, have demonstrated that they do not respect their fellow man, our communities, our police force, and our government, and have gone about their gripes in a most despicable and shameful way. Thus, I believe that none of them are owed anything by the society which they have chosen to spurn.

[ChrisH]

Chris, I would never, ever, dispute the fact that the vast majority of council house residents are hard-working and decent. I'm a little hurt that you would assume I think otherwise.

I'll grant that my use of 'offered' was wrong. I understand that council house has to be applied for and I sent out the wrong impression - that was a mistake on my part.

Zara, I am sorry that you felt a little hurt, my intention was only to point out that not all council house tenants are the 'poorer residents' you wrote of. Of course there are a portion of such that are at the level of income, or non-income, that require aid in the form of housing benefit but, believe it or not, income is not a huge part of the criteria for obtaining a council house.
In my area they have a points system for allocation of council accommodation, the more points you have the higher the chance of obtaining a home. Even then it depends if there is one vacant that fits your needs, also the waiting lists are very long. You may find the following link about the points system interesting. http://www.wrexham.gov.uk/english/co...ing/points.htm

I'm right in thinking, though, that one is refused a council house if one has serious behavioural offences? And that anti-social behaviour, it is made clear, results in eviction?

You are right, there is an exclusion policy.

Ineligible for Allocation (Exclusion)
Exclusion from the Housing Register may apply if you (or joint applicant) or a member of the household is guilty of serious unacceptable behaviour at the time of application, for which Housing Services have or could have obtained an Outright Possession Order.

This behaviour can include:
· Rent Arrears outstanding
· Nuisance or annoyance caused by family members
· Conviction for using a property for illegal or immoral purposes
We will check with relevant organisations and people about any unacceptable behaviour. If your application can be accepted onto the Register after this investigation, we will advise you by letter. However, if it is considered that exclusion should apply, we will pass a formal report to the Exclusion Panel, which is made up of Council Officers. We will advise you in writing giving the reason if the Panel decide that you are to be excluded from the Register. You can be excluded from the Housing Register for an indefinite period, but will have the opportunity to ask for a review if behaviour has improved or changed.

Again, yes, eviction can take place for anti-social behaviour. This link contains the information. Tenancy Enforcement You will need to scroll down to the bottom to open in a pdf or other document reader to access it in its entirety.

As for prices, all I can say is that they seem to be considerably lower than average rents in my area. Perhaps indeed that is a reasonable rent for the housing here, and prices are different elsewhere. Personally, I find many rental prices very unreasonable (and I won't even go into how much my London flat sucks out my bank balance every week!).

I wouldn't argue that the rents for council houses are a lot lower than for private property but disagree that they are 'a fraction' as your previous post stated.

All these people, regardless of their place in society, have demonstrated that they do not respect their fellow man, our communities, our police force, and our government, and have gone about their gripes in a most despicable and shameful way. Thus, I believe that none of them are owed anything by the society which they have chosen to spurn.

We have an accord on that.

[Miss Z]

Again, yes, eviction can take place for anti-social behaviour. This link contains the information. Tenancy Enforcement You will need to scroll down to the bottom to open in a pdf or other document reader to access it in its entirety.

Thanks for the link - I see it does indeed state that severe cases of ASB result in eviction. Looks like we both would consider rioting to fall under that category. I suppose that, as it stands, the rule applies only when such persons commit ABH in their neighbourhood, rather than the larger community? Because in which case I can see how people would have an escape clause should they be threatened with losing their house... and all the more reason for something like the e-petition to force the government to be decisive about how convicted rioters should be punished.

Sorry I got a little pissy. Benefits, and by whom they are received, has always been a raw topic for me. My explanation of council housing was rushed, and I apologise if it caused any offence.

[wombat2u2004]

This guy has something interesting to say...hee hee

http://www.youtube.com/v/9pAC0YSmK0g?hd=1