In fairness, I'm not sure I do agree it's the government's responsibility to provide what amounts to contents insurance on all of this. I mean, I don't BEGRUDGE them getting it or anything, having said that...
How can people in council houses afford to pay for contents insurance? Anyway, there is a Panorama on this tonight. There is no way I'll be able to sit through it, but please let me know any interesting highlights.
I find it difficult to find the money to pay for contents insurance and I'm on nearly double the median wage... Most of those people will be on less than that (the people I knew in there were a kitchen lunchtime supervisor and a cleaner, as well as knowing 12 of the families in there, most of whom had jobs, but not particularly well paid ones) and fending for families as opposed to me on my lonesome. We live in London, not the Scottish highlands.
The median wage is £27k, so if you're earning double that, surely you can afford £20 a month for contents insurance? Most housing associations have special insurance for their tenants, I know ours was something like £9 a month for £30k coverage, and no excess fee, but still very few took it out. People just didn't see it as a necessity.
I said I find it difficult, along with all the other things I have to pay for, I didn't say I find it impossible. Anyway... this is not really the place for a discussion about the ethics of property insurance. Let's just help these people out!
I wonder if Olly Murs did a deal that if he agreed to have no hoper Louisa Johnson on his single, he wouldn't have to do this?
Nice that Fleur East and Ella Henderson have been released from the Syco Island of Lost Souls to appear on this.
Sorry, but I want to just bring it back to this for a second as I want to say that my entire point was cavaeted with the second part of that sentence- I said I don't begrudge these people a thing, but there isn't an infinite pot of money, #Laboursmagicmoneytree etc. etc. But council housing is one thing, paying bills is very much another. The benefit system is massively flawed, absolutely (which is entirely another question for another day), but I don't believe it's the government's responsibility to basically just provide contents insurance, which is what was intimated earlier here. That sets a dangerous precedent as well. It really cannot be worded or viewed as such. Also, as we've also established, it's really BOLLOCKS to suggest someone who can afford a piano can struggle to pay the £10 a month for contents insurance, Cwej
I thought Kensington was the richest part of the UK - why is a ropey charidee single needed to raise funds?
Because it's one of the most unequal parts of the UK as well, in case most of the victims being poor didn't give that away?
True - but are the rich in Kensington such monsters that they won't donate adequate money to rehouse and compensate the victims? A charidee single won't make much money.
Well seeing as the Kensington and Chelsea Council has reserves of £274,000,000 - according to the Guardian - there is no need for any sort of fundraising for the victims - there is already piles of money to help them. Simon Cowell is a right ghoul - feasting on suffering to sell a few shitty singles that will keep 'Angles in chain' by Geru Horner from number 1.
The thing is, there's a difference between claiming on your contents insurance because the neighbour above got drunk left the and flooded your flat and what happened at Grenfell Tower when it looks as if it was the council's fault that things escalated the way they should. I'm not even sure if they DID have home contents insurance whether this would be covered. So I DO think that it's the council who have to pay out here. Also, a lot of these people probably have NO IDEA what contents insurance even IS, never mind actually having any. I think it IS good that the Government are offering some money but it just seems like a slap in the face when there are civil servants who earn £5,000 in a matter of a fortnight.
Then it's compensation and not contents insurance. Compensation should not be worked out necessarily based on how many receipts you can supply for things in your flat... That should not be the point! Yes, argue that there should be better education surrounding such things (as I said, different argument for different day) because frankly, it's everyone's responsibility to know such things, no? I disagree that because people are "poor" they are also to be considered "stupid" and below such things. Frankly, that's fucking condescending.
