Oh sure, you can always find a small number of of individuals who are apparently shafting the system - I say apparently because upon closer inspection you see that the individual concerned is renting private accommodation because her local authority is unable to find her a suitable home - thats your first problem right there.

The father of six of her children is allegedly not paying her any child support at all - thats your second problem right there.

Look at the breakdown of her "benefits" and you'll see that there is nothing there that could be perceived as "scrounging" or "shirking", indeed if she got her act together and worked for a small number of hours a week she'd probably find that she'd qualify for Working Tax Credits too.

But of course its just so much simpler when you can vilify the individual person instead and use words like "hardworking good tenants" to turn groups against each other.

Unfortunately there are many who are too lazy or stupid to attempt to strip off the lacquered veneers.
They are content at being outraged without any intention of digging or delving deeper, it just doesn't suit them.
Sad but very true.

And unfortunately the lazy and stupid include local councilors and MP's too - aided and abetted by newspaper editors.

Indeed.
I'm by no means limiting it to the hard of thinking on the Sin Bin.

Just to update you all – Barry has not further replied to my tweeted questions, since responding with a curt 'yes' to my question of whether he knoew that 80% plus of all housing benefit is paid to people who are in work.

I think you'll find it's the good ol" British taxpayer who is paying the rent on this six bedroomed property, not this workshy, but extremely fertile individual. I would hope that her local council could offer a perfectly adequate 4 bedroomed house from their local stock, or provide an explanation as to why she hasn't been offered one.



More of a CSA problem I would think.



So, in Chicken World, reaching the age of 37 without contributing anything into the system via a job, is not considered as scrounging or shirking? How odd. I'll admit, with seven kids she hasn't neglected that side of her contribution to british society, but are you seriously suggesting there is any danger of her being vertical long enough to to hold down a job? What would you have to earn to bring home a similar salary that matched her benefits, or bettered them to provide a bit of encouragement? 45k....50K? And her qualifications for that, is what?



Vilify is a tad emotive, but in any case, why should those hardworking good tenants who make up 80 percent of claimants, not feel ticked off when they read about cases like above? Or hear the banal nonsense quoted in defence of the current benefit set up?

Have you met her? If not, how do you know she is "workshy"? Just because she hasn't worked in 20 years doesn't imply she is.



So still a problem though



In Rumpel World, not knowing the first thing about someone appears to give you a licence to describe someone as shirking or scrounging. Are you a Tory Minister by any chance?



I assume you've done a poll of these 80% of tenants to confirm they are hardworking and are ticked off by this?

Personal responsibility is so passé, yes?

I think you'll find that I'm perfectly aware of that, which is why I highlighted the fact and mentioned that it appears in the breakdown of her monthly payment, the fact that the council can't provide housing for her is not unusual, the fact that they then have to resort to private accommodation, more than likely at an inflated rate, is also not unusual.

If the facts of the report are to be believed then she'll potentially be facing a penalty under the "bedroom tax" as at least six of those kids should be shared across three of the bedrooms.





Again I hesitate to use this woman's specific case to either defend or attack her, I don't know her but I'll assume that because she has allowed her photo to be used then she has at least been interviewed by a reporter and to be fair to the Mail its not a complete hatchet job on her, you however seem perfectly happy to label her as one of Camerons Shirkers Army ?

Lets not refer to her specifically but instead take an example of a married female with a number of children who chooses to stay and home and raise those children rather than working, there are no reports that her kids are feral or anything other than normal well behaved kids, so she's pretty much the Tory blueprint for the "perfect wife", one who is prepared to set aside ambition and career in order to be a home-maker, mother and role model to her children.

Then her husband abandons her and the children and fails to contribute to their upbringing, she loses the family home and has to seek social housing from the local council and fall back on social security to simply survive.

What is she now ?

Under this system? Set up for life. Apparently.

And your solution ?

I take it that the caring part of you (even hypothetically) got lonely and went away?

To the fact that someone who hasn't worked in 20 years can receive a level of benefits that equates to a salary of circa 40k/50k?

Oh, I think a root and branch review of the current system may just be in order. Surely even the most moist of Liberals,, would agree that there is a need to make work and contributing to society a tad more attractive than living on Benefits?

That is not to suggest they all be thrown into a poorhouse. Heaven forbid. We are a rich and caring enough Nation, are
we not Jerry?

Chris, I have not replied to inane chatter simply because i am a caring person, but when you have the wit, or intelligence to raise a valid point, rest assured i will.

There's a certain irony here, since you seemed to ignore almost all of the points in Jerry's post and simply respond with a soundbite.

Indeed, at no juncture have you offered anything like an alternative approach that deals with the issues.