SadButMadLad's Blog

Just another blog complaining about anything and everything

Abu Hamza’s council house

The TPA have come out and stated that

“Taxpayers will be ­incensed to hear that thousands are ­being spent on this hate preacher’s home while ordinary families struggle for cash.”
“It’s bad enough that the British ­public may be stuck with this venomous ­character for good”
“But it’s a real slap in the face to have to fund ­large-scale house renovations for someone whose racist ravings were inciting murder”
“It’s a shame that having ­already landed the taxpayer with a hefty legal and benefits bill, this man can siphon yet more money from the public purse.”

Just one point – it’s a council house, not his. So he does not siphon off any money. He does not benefit (other than the house not falling down). Plus it’s not a renovation, it’s a repair to the foundations to stop it, and his neighbours homes, from falling down.

Yeh, I know its not right that he’s in a council home, but that point aside, the council are spending money to keep their investment from falling down.

The TPA have probably been asked for the quote from the Daily Star with little or no background information and with a tight deadline so it can be excused that they might trot out some standard phrase. However they should learn from this and ensure that they don’t just trot out such phrases on the basis of little or no information. It makes the TPA look stupid.

H/t to Tim Worstal

Written by sbml

November 7, 2010 at 17:17

2 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. The council may own the house but he has de facto function use of it. Yet he has to pay no maintainance.
    A regular citizen would have to have paid up cash for the repairs. or sell the house
    Similarly for the future. He need not put away savings for future such problems.

    john malpas

    November 10, 2010 at 04:11

  2. Ah, but a regular citizen renting in the private sector would be in exactly the same situation – no maintainance to pay and no need to save any emergencies as the landlord will pay.

    The only difference is in the level of rent.


    November 10, 2010 at 19:29

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: