Advanced search

£12bn Welfare Cuts - Speculation and Information

(130 Posts)
olgaga Thu 25-Jun-15 11:08:15

I've been reading the recent threads about this on here with interest. I came across this article by Robert Joyce of the Institute for Fiscal Studies.

Do have a read. We won't know the full extent of what is planned until 8 July when we hear the new Budget, but we do know that Tax Credits and Housing Benefit are in the firing line, along with an expected reduction in the Universal Credit Cap of £26,000 to £23,000.

I haven't posted this to provoke an argument, more to try to provide some authoritative information for those seeking possible answers, and to express my sadness at what I fear will be the impact.

Here are some of the highlights of the article, in my words:

Yes there will be an extension of free childcare, to enable you to work longer hours in your min wage job to make up for SOME of the shortfall caused by the withdrawal or abolition of WTC, whuch currently costs £30bn.

That's if you can find a childcare provider, and succeed in obtaining additional working hours.

No doubt they will also raise the tax threshold - but that will benefit higher earners just as much as the lowest paid.

Child benefit may be cut more quickly by lowering the cash terms threshold, so the number of families who reach the threshold will increase more quickly.

Or they might cut the amount for the first child, or for the number of subsequent children.

Or it may be abolished altogether and be included as an element of means tested CTC.

Cuts to housing benefit seem inevitable, as this makes up £26bn of the welfare budget - and not just for 18-21yo. This may be achieved by cuts to the LHA, or introducing a percentage co-payment (say 10-20% of rent) for tenants in both social and private rented housing. Worth bearing in mind if that might necessitate a move to a cheaper area, and possible loss of employment.

Disability and incapacity benefits, carer's and attendance allowances, at £37bn, are also likely to be affected. Whether by taxing, means testing, or simple abolition.

I think the Tories' position on welfare in the run up to the 2010 election was misleading. Certainly here, on thread after thread in the run up to 2010, people were declaring that the problem of the welfare bill needed to be tackled, but believed the Tories would only tackle so-called "career claimants".

It seems to me that all that "hardworking families" "strivers v skivers" stuff was designed to divide and rule. I don't blame people for believing it, but the Tories have always been the Party of low taxation, small state and individual responsibility - and that's not about to change.

Anyway, that's just my view. I'm sure there are still plenty of people who think lower taxation and a smaller welfare state will be beneficial to the economy.

But it's clear that a lot of people, and many, many children, will suffer when these benefit lifelines are taken away.

LotusLight Thu 25-Jun-15 11:20:00

We certainly need clear information. I take the opposite view - and like the people of this nation who voted in the Tories (and would also have done under proportional representation - they have massive support) we support these policies and see them with great happiness, not sadness. However objective consideration of their impact and non emotive threads are a good idea.

It is clear that many many families will hugely benefit from the changes.

olgaga Thu 25-Jun-15 11:27:03

Thank you for taking this in the spirit it was intended! I'm sure we could have some interesting discussions on vote share etc ... another time maybe grin

Goshthatsspicy Thu 25-Jun-15 11:32:56

lotus what type of family?

sliceofsoup Thu 25-Jun-15 11:34:28

I would like to know if the benefit cap means benefits of £23k or household income including wages and benefits of £23k. Although I see in that article it says those in receipt of WTC are exempt. But WTC may be abolished. hmm

ghostyslovesheep Thu 25-Jun-15 11:40:36

Lotus how will many families benefit?

Take me - lone parent 3 kids - working PT restricted hours (due to being public sector) - £17,000 income - relying on TC to pay my childcare bill

how will I benefit?

atthebeach Thu 25-Jun-15 11:43:49

Clear information is absolutely needed to enable people to plan accordingly.

Goshthatsspicy Thu 25-Jun-15 11:54:18

I honestly don't know how people are supposed to "plan" for something like this though?

bereal7 Thu 25-Jun-15 11:58:36

low taxation, small state and individual responsibility I truly believe in this - particularly personal responsibility. Maybe with reductions to benefits people will be more inspired to work. I appreciate that won't be everyone, but many

InexperiencedDisneyMum Thu 25-Jun-15 12:02:24

I think it's time fathers were made to pay for their children. The state cannot afford to keep single parents. Mothers should be forced to give the fathers details and the money should be taken from their wages or benefits at source. Excepting cases of rape or where the father has died.

Massivetonsil Thu 25-Jun-15 12:06:58

As a disabled working parent im siding with the tories on this.

If you can do it yourself then do so and if you can't then the state will support you. Too many people claim 'because they can' rather than there being a genuine need to claim. I know people claiming PIP at low rate on very high salaries and use it for beer money. Not what it's designed for!

olgaga Thu 25-Jun-15 12:08:15

I think it's time fathers were made to pay for their children

Yes, odd isn't it, that fathers seem all but exempt from "personal responsibility". I really can't understand, in this day and age, why so many men still manage to avoid financial responsibility for their children.

Massivetonsil Thu 25-Jun-15 12:09:51

Since single parents were able to discount csa payments from income it's got silly. Where father's basically pay the equivalent of a salary to the mum she can still not work and claim full income support. Or at least it was that way when I claimed. Again. Ridiculous situation.

LurkingHusband Thu 25-Jun-15 12:14:28

low taxation, small state and individual responsibility

Never going to happen. If it was, it would have by now.

In response to the OP, the real secret is understanding why we have to have these cuts. I imagine there are probably a few idiots naive idealists who would imagine they would be logical, and objective.

I strongly believe these are not economic cuts - intended to save money. They are ideological cuts. Designed to enforce a (Tory) moral code.

So in the firing line, in rough descending order of importance:

1) Disabled (because they are no use to society at all)
2) Poor people who can't/wont work (see above)
3) Uneducated people (see above)
4) Single mothers (just a Tory shibboleth, really)
5) Poor immigrants
6) Non homeowners

And if you can pass laws which make any of the groups disproportionately criminal, so much the better.

It's like the bedroom tax. Plenty of evidence it has cost money. Which is no problem - anyone who thought it was about saving money is displaying a level of naivete rarely seen outside 1970s porn ("you mean I have to take off all my clothes for the time machine to work ?"

Massivetonsil Thu 25-Jun-15 12:16:58

Can we nip the fallacy that because you're disabled you can't work in the bud please?

This attitude of 'ah the poor helpless disabled people' winds me up

Signlake Thu 25-Jun-15 12:21:00

Massive I'm sure it depends on the disability and how badly affected the individual is. Lots of disabled people are able to work but lots aren't

LurkingHusband Thu 25-Jun-15 12:21:15

Can we nip the fallacy that because you're disabled you can't work in the bud please?

IDS is on this as we speak, don't worry.

zazzie Thu 25-Jun-15 12:22:29

Some disabled people cannot work. That needs emphasising because there are some people that seem to think everyone can work/everyone has choices etc

LurkingHusband Thu 25-Jun-15 12:25:11

Of, and for the hard of thinking, I wasn't supporting what I posted. I was merely suggesting how the government think.

If you want to know what MrsLH feels (26 years with Multiple Sclerosis, now entering secondary progressive), it's this:

If you are disabled, and can work, then you're not disabled. Up the chimney with you.
If you are disabled and can't work, then, quite frankly, you are a nuisance, and best kept out of sight.

Sums up IDS/ATOS/ESA nicely.

Uhplistrailer Thu 25-Jun-15 12:26:55

Just wanted to point out that childcare providers will also be struggling.

They already struggle with the 15 hours at the moment (the only get, on average, £3.50 per hour from the government and aren't allowed to charge top up feed) and early years providers are very worried about the 30 hours.

LuisSuarezTeeth Thu 25-Jun-15 12:30:23

It is clear that many many families will hugely benefit from the changes.

How exactly?

olgaga Thu 25-Jun-15 12:33:00

Just wanted to point out that childcare providers will also be struggling

True. I have friends who are childminders and they already feel they are subsidising the 15 hour a week policy. A few are thinking about giving it up entirely, some (those without their own pre school children) are hoping to find work for the larger nursery chains.

Many of the smaller nurseries expect to go out of business when the 30 hour requirement is introduced.

Either way, the pressure on the sector will be immense, and choice of setting will be further limited.

coffeeisnectar Thu 25-Jun-15 12:33:36

It depends on the disability. Some people's pain levels are so high that the amount of drugs they take mean they literally cannot stay awake or concentrate. Others have fluctuating disabilities meaning they could work four hours one day and be unable to get out of bed the next. Others can hold down a part time or full time job.

My disability is progressive, I'm in pain all the time and I take a high dosage of drugs that leave me sleepy, uncoordinated and at times confused and forgetful. I get frustrated with my body, it's inability to function properly. I am lying on my bed right now on a rest day. I have littered a bit but my plans for today have been cancelled ...the alternative is being stuck in bed for a week out of my face on drugs for the pain and crying a lot. So today I'm frustrated at my lack of inactivity and looking at the towering ironing pile. Which I can't tackle.

If my benefits are cut I'll find a way to cope. Probably by eating less. It's the only thing left to cut and feeding my kids is priority so I will go without.

fanjoforthemammaries7850 Thu 25-Jun-15 12:36:06

People who cannot work due to disability. .who do exist..are just sitting targets here..who cannot "take personal responsibility" for becoming better off through work.

fanjoforthemammaries7850 Thu 25-Jun-15 12:37:15

Coffeeisnectar if your benefits are cut that will be criminalmy unfair IMO.

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, watch threads, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now »

Already registered? Log in with: