Have a say on council tax benefit cuts in North East Lincolnshire
MORE than 10,000 people in North East Lincolnshire will receive 24 per cent less in benefits to pay their council tax bills.
This is the situation facing residents as the council is forced to find ways to cover a £1.6 million cut to cash from the Government.
-
10,500 people could receive 24% less help to meet bills.
From April next year, the grant given to councils across England to meet the cost of council tax benefit will reduce by ten per cent.
This equates to a £1.6 million decrease to the money available here in North East Lincolnshire, so the council is asking residents to give their views on the introduction of a new scheme.
PURCHASE ANY NEW FREESTANDING WASHING MACHINE AND RECEIVE FREE CONNECTION AND DISPOSAL OF OLD.
***** HOLDERNESS ROAD STORE ONLY *****
Terms:
t's & c's
CONNECTION TO EXISTING , CORRECT AND ACCESSIBLE PIPEWORK ONLY
OLD MACHINE MUST BE DISCONNECTED PRIOR TO ARRIVAL
THIS VOUCHER MUST BE PRESENTED TO RECEIVE FREE CONNECTION AND DISPOSAL
Contact: 01482 423080
Valid until: Sunday, June 30 2013
The authority is asking your thoughts on the introduction of a localised council tax support scheme for the 22,000 claimants in the area, which is affordable within the remaining grant.
This means that roughly 10,500 people will receive about 24 per cent less benefit to help meet their council tax bill.
Pensioners, individuals in receipt of disability benefit and families with children under five years old will still receive the same level of support as within the existing system.
A support fund of £160,000 would be created to provide emergency support to people in dire need of financial help as a result of the changes.
NELC rejected an option to consult on keeping the council tax support programme the same as the current benefit scheme, and meeting the cost of the reduced government grant through increased council tax or cutting other services.
North East Lincolnshire Council's portfolio holder for finance, governance and support services, Labour councillor Darren Billard, said: "These are the first of many Government cuts which will affect those who receive welfare benefits, and I would strongly urge everyone to have a look at the proposals.
"The council has carefully considered the needs of the vulnerable people and the requirements put on us by central government, including the council's dependency on council tax income.
"We have put forward a proposal to protect those in receipt of disability benefit and those with children under five, including pensioners.
"We do believe it is vital that all of these groups receive support from us, not only for them but also to reduce the longer-term impact on the wider community."
The Liberal Democrats believe that preferred option is also the best available in the current economic climate.
Councillor Andrew De Freitas said: "I support this option chosen by the council.
"Part of it includes having £160,000 available for emergency support, which is also the best that is available."
Councillor Keith Brookes, the leader of the Conservative group, said: "Expenditure increased from £2 billion to £4.3 billion from 1998 to 2010 under the Labour government.
"Welfare spending in cash terms also doubled in the last year Labour was in control. This resulted in £192 billion in welfare payments.
"The spending was more than the combined defence, education and health spending.
"We need to get people back into work. The most any family will get is £26,000 from the state, when you put all the benefits together.
"What we need to do now is wait and see which scheme supports genuine people who need it."
Angie Ridgwell, the interim chief finance officer at NELC, added: "We are advised to consult on a specific scheme, which we have done.
"We want as many people as possible to look at the proposals and let us know what they think."
Cleethorpes Michael Breckon, 63, said: "I don't think it's right to make a few individuals suffer because of Government cuts.
"If anything, our council should choose an option which will solve the council tax benefit issue at a price which means everyone is affected."
To find out more and have your say on the new proposal, visit www.nelincs.gov.uk/counciltaxconsultation before Friday, October 12.
A final decision will be made by early November, and the changes will be introduced from April 2013.
Air your views by commenting on this article.
Comments
by EnlightendOne
Thursday, September 27 2012, 11:14PM
“Animal_owner - boo hoo to all those people living in cheap big houses that might have to downsize as a consequence of a reduction in their unearned benefits. Welcome to the world of people that pay their way and if their income circumstances mean they can't afford to live in their house they HAVE to move - that's real life! Wouldn't we all like extra bedrooms after all!”
by animal_owner
Thursday, September 27 2012, 2:45AM
“Hmmm 2005 NE Lincs council give away their housing stock to Shoreline which was a form of revenue and nearly immediately moan about short falls in income and money from central government being cut. Then Shoreline have known about this coming in that if there is spare bedrooms your housing benefit will be cut from 2011 but only bothers in June this year to tell tenants that it will effect but pensioners can keep their 4 bedroomed houses without loss of housing benefit, now the council are announcing cutting council tax benefit and yet again it does not affect pensioners who happen to get around £135 per week. I feel sorry for those that are unable to work because of ill health but are not classed as disabled and are being told they are fit to work and also facing having to move, yes pack up a house to move into smaller premises to be able to afford to live and then on top of that are hearing that they won't get full help with their council tax. I can see more people jumping off tall buildings because of being pushed to the edge of dispair because of the council making cuts to help that people that genuinely need it get, £71 pound does not go far once bills are paid and with rising prices for gas, electricity and food people are already in dire straights. People whose children have left home are now going to be in the position of being unable to help those children if the relationship breaks up because they will not have even one spare room to put them up in until they can get on their feet again so they are going to be homeless and supposedly there is not enough homes to go round and the banks won't lend at the moment for mortgages, or those with elderly relatives that need round the clock care because of the same reason. As for the people that are continually having kids so they have one under 5 so that they get all the benefits and don't have to work that would soon be remedied if they only got for the first child as I know a few who do this so they do not have to work for a living as the Job Centre do not force these people to work. There are some people that make out they are not living with a partner who is working and then claiming benefits as a single parent that is causing the problems.”
by EnlightendOne
Wednesday, September 26 2012, 10:48PM
“98,000 on three full time union conveners - now there's a saving without getting out of bed - but would our labour administration dare to act to save all council tax payers”
by ImmArthur
Wednesday, September 26 2012, 2:28PM
“What about making benefits entirely related to work done for the community? Zero contribution, zero benefits, 40-hr week, pay benefits at a higher rate than people are on currently, so it is seen as a real incentive. The extra money will come from not paying the slack druggies anything.
Arthur, Immingham”
by 7Cs_of_rhye
Wednesday, September 26 2012, 10:34AM
“First of all how many of us think that the two options offered for consideration are the only actions available to the council? Or, as I suspect are they trying to pull the wool over our eyes?
Presumably by one comment in the article they are either proposing to raise taxes or cut benefits.
I'd say it's likely to be a slick way of making us think there's no other way of tackling it.
Has it not been considered that if central Government is reducing money it provides in grants, it has done some review on how much waste and mismanagement goes on in council administration. Giving away properties at bargain basement prices is just one instance which comes to mind.
It too may think the obvious way for councils to help make up this shortfall would be to cut some of the excessive executive pay and the wasteful salaries paid to outside hit-men paid to do the council's dirty work.
There are more options available than we're given to chose from.”
by PhilOssifer
Wednesday, September 26 2012, 7:45AM
“Get rid of all the slackers, spongers & druggies .. then there might be some more funds in the pot for the old and vulnerable.”
by Deafman
Tuesday, September 25 2012, 10:51PM
“Like the council will listen to our comments They don't even listen to themselves... How do they expect people on 71.00 a week to pay this
If its all down to saving money why dont they reduce the number of counsellors in the wards why do they need three”
by Deafman
Tuesday, September 25 2012, 10:51PM
“Like the council will listen to our comments? They don't even listen to themselves... How do they expect people on 71.00 a week to pay this?
If its all down to saving money why dont they reduce the number of counsellors in the wards why do they need three?”
by Deafman
Tuesday, September 25 2012, 10:51PM
“Like the council will listen to our comments? They don't even listen to themselves... How do they expect people on £71.00 a week to pay this?
If its all down to saving money why dont they reduce the number of counsellors in the wards why do they need three?”
by williampink
Tuesday, September 25 2012, 8:10PM
“grimrich
I believe 25% of all council tax goes towards council pernsions.”