Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Are you now more likely to vote for REFORM (the party)

932 replies

Decisiondecisions · 18/02/2026 14:49

NC for this and apologies if Q already asked. My quick search yielded no result.

Reform plan to undo the reversal of 2 child cap benefit. Are you now likely (or more likely) to vote for them? There have been endless threads about the welfare bill.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
14
pointythings · 23/02/2026 13:17

Selenassunsetsangria · 23/02/2026 13:04

Lived in poverty and survived on a max £500 a month. No handouts from the government. It's awful but its my problem and not the tax payer.

This tax payer doesn't begrudge people in need the support that they get. This tax payer would rather not go back to the Victorian age.

scottishgirl69 · 23/02/2026 13:14

Selenassunsetsangria · 23/02/2026 13:04

Lived in poverty and survived on a max £500 a month. No handouts from the government. It's awful but its my problem and not the tax payer.

That's not feasible for some people not to claim UC because they need to claim it to get rent element and their rent or part of it paid

Also - I paid tax for decades. Put far more into the system than I ever took out - that's just explaining your "handout" comment

There's a difference between 500 pounds a month and 316 pounds a month which you think should be reduced further

CharlotteRunpling · 23/02/2026 13:13

pointythings · 23/02/2026 12:54

You do know that this government have deported more people since coming to power than any government since 2017?

And that immigration is substantially down? Oh, inconvenient facts...

Edited

People miss this. Going to be fun when all the immigrants are kicked out and the economy is still in the toilet.

Selenassunsetsangria · 23/02/2026 13:04

scottishgirl69 · 23/02/2026 12:46

Single people on benefits get just over 400 pounds. Under 25s get 316 pounds. I assume you've never run a home on 317 pounds a month or you wouldn't be suggesting cutting benefits even more. Cutting benefits doesn't give an incentive to work - it has the opposite effect. There are people in work who can't make ends meet. Maybe if people understood the stress of running a home on a pittance they wouldn't advocate for more benefit cuts.

As for forcing people to contribute to the community - work for free, there's a word for that - exploitation.

And neither should disabled people (like myself) have to go to my GP and get a fit note to prove to the dwp that I'm not fit to do certain tasks.

People in the all work group on UC already have to job search and evidence it or face a sanction and plenty of people on UC do volunteer

As for all these community jobs for everyone on UC - what are they - where do they come from?

Lived in poverty and survived on a max £500 a month. No handouts from the government. It's awful but its my problem and not the tax payer.

pointythings · 23/02/2026 12:54

Thechaseison71 · 23/02/2026 12:35

It costs money to keep people waiting for years to get assessed though Swings and roundabouts.

Even without reform the current or last give haven't done much to speed it up

You do know that this government have deported more people since coming to power than any government since 2017?

And that immigration is substantially down? Oh, inconvenient facts...

scottishgirl69 · 23/02/2026 12:46

Selenassunsetsangria · 22/02/2026 20:38

25% reduction for those who haven't worked. Full amount when you have worked for 10 years.

Once you have claimed for 6 months you need to contribute to your local community on a part time basis unless there is a medical reason (certificate) or other extenuating circumstance).
This isn't just good for society but it benefits the individual. Keeps them active thus improving their chance of finding employment. Gives them a purpose and a time to connect with others. ( I would hope this would be short term whilst they find their feet.

Is that acceptable? Would you make any changes to the current system?

Single people on benefits get just over 400 pounds. Under 25s get 316 pounds. I assume you've never run a home on 317 pounds a month or you wouldn't be suggesting cutting benefits even more. Cutting benefits doesn't give an incentive to work - it has the opposite effect. There are people in work who can't make ends meet. Maybe if people understood the stress of running a home on a pittance they wouldn't advocate for more benefit cuts.

As for forcing people to contribute to the community - work for free, there's a word for that - exploitation.

And neither should disabled people (like myself) have to go to my GP and get a fit note to prove to the dwp that I'm not fit to do certain tasks.

People in the all work group on UC already have to job search and evidence it or face a sanction and plenty of people on UC do volunteer

As for all these community jobs for everyone on UC - what are they - where do they come from?

Thechaseison71 · 23/02/2026 12:35

pointythings · 23/02/2026 12:32

I'm absolutely in favour of speeding up the process. It's best for everyone. But that will cost money, and Reform lovers will whinge about the cost to the taxpayer.

It costs money to keep people waiting for years to get assessed though Swings and roundabouts.

Even without reform the current or last give haven't done much to speed it up

TopPocketFind · 23/02/2026 12:35

Thechaseison71 · 23/02/2026 12:30

The problem with the process is it's so inefficient and takes far too long. Should be sped up. Those approved can get to work and those denied should be immediately removed

There is also a backlog of cases. Reform is not interested in improving the process though.

pointythings · 23/02/2026 12:32

Thechaseison71 · 23/02/2026 12:30

The problem with the process is it's so inefficient and takes far too long. Should be sped up. Those approved can get to work and those denied should be immediately removed

I'm absolutely in favour of speeding up the process. It's best for everyone. But that will cost money, and Reform lovers will whinge about the cost to the taxpayer.

MeinKraft · 23/02/2026 12:31

I’d rather shit in my hands and clap than vote for that shower of bastards.

Thechaseison71 · 23/02/2026 12:30

TopPocketFind · 23/02/2026 12:26

But not when in the process (with a few exceptions) and that is when people complain about them receiving free accommodation, food, healthcare and a small amount of spending money.

The problem with the process is it's so inefficient and takes far too long. Should be sped up. Those approved can get to work and those denied should be immediately removed

TopPocketFind · 23/02/2026 12:26

Thechaseison71 · 23/02/2026 12:21

I think they can once approved.

But not when in the process (with a few exceptions) and that is when people complain about them receiving free accommodation, food, healthcare and a small amount of spending money.

Thechaseison71 · 23/02/2026 12:21

pointythings · 23/02/2026 12:11

Most of them do go back. The problem is that safety can take a very long time to be restored.

Once they are granted asylum, that is effectively a work visa to stay. Personally I think we should allow asylum seekers to work - it would aid integration, keep them occupied and help the economy.

I think they can once approved.

pointythings · 23/02/2026 12:17

TopPocketFind · 23/02/2026 12:14

Non European people that is.

Exactly. Though I have no doubt that they will also come after those of us who have EU settled status, because they don't want to pay us our pensions.

TopPocketFind · 23/02/2026 12:14

pointythings · 23/02/2026 12:12

I'm sure the Reform supporters on here are salivating at the idea of deporting people who were granted IRL decades ago.

Non European people that is.

pointythings · 23/02/2026 12:12

TopPocketFind · 23/02/2026 11:53

Reform has announced a more extreme immigration plan than Trump.

Would you like to see ICE in the UK @Decisiondecisions ?

I'm sure the Reform supporters on here are salivating at the idea of deporting people who were granted IRL decades ago.

pointythings · 23/02/2026 12:11

Thechaseison71 · 23/02/2026 12:08

But surely they should go back to country of origin once the danger past OR apply for a work visa to stay.

Most of them do go back. The problem is that safety can take a very long time to be restored.

Once they are granted asylum, that is effectively a work visa to stay. Personally I think we should allow asylum seekers to work - it would aid integration, keep them occupied and help the economy.

Thechaseison71 · 23/02/2026 12:08

pointythings · 22/02/2026 16:08

You do know that the absolute vast majority of refugees stay in the nearest country over to their country of origin, because they want to go back when it's safe? You do know that those countries around the world's powderkegs take far, far more asylum seekers than any European nation, the UK included? Your 5 million is a strawman argument.

But surely they should go back to country of origin once the danger past OR apply for a work visa to stay.

TopPocketFind · 23/02/2026 11:53

Reform has announced a more extreme immigration plan than Trump.

Would you like to see ICE in the UK @Decisiondecisions ?

Mosman2020 · 22/02/2026 21:48

Selenassunsetsangria · 22/02/2026 20:38

25% reduction for those who haven't worked. Full amount when you have worked for 10 years.

Once you have claimed for 6 months you need to contribute to your local community on a part time basis unless there is a medical reason (certificate) or other extenuating circumstance).
This isn't just good for society but it benefits the individual. Keeps them active thus improving their chance of finding employment. Gives them a purpose and a time to connect with others. ( I would hope this would be short term whilst they find their feet.

Is that acceptable? Would you make any changes to the current system?

This literally makes me laugh out loud. I know of a reform candidate who hasn’t worked since he left university in an actual job. Over 5 years.

He doesn’t claim benefits. He just sponges off the woman that he lives with. She pays for everything the stupid mare.

persephonia · 22/02/2026 21:42

Clavinova · 22/02/2026 21:14

Did you read the policies?

Barely.

corporate speak they won't mention hiring quotas etc

Some had hiring targets although apparently not met, e.g.

Deloitte [UK] is committed to achieving 12% ethnic minority and 3% Black partners by 2025, plus targets across other grades to create the future pipeline of talent.

a target of 40% female partners (or senior leaders) by 2030

EY UK Target [not met] 40% female partners by July 2025, alongside a target of 20% from ethnic minority backgrounds (with 15% being Black).

Yeah that's the sort of thing I meant when I said you can have targets but you are limited in what you can do to meet them. So you can maybe do more recruiting fairs in areas with high ethnic minority populations, you can have a senior woman give talks about how great working for Deloitte is, you can make the working environment ”inclusive" and tell everyone you are doing it in the hope it encourages minorities to apply. But you can't say "we need 20% of the applicants we choose to be ethnic minority so privilege those applications". If 100% of the best qualified applicants are white men (unlikely in reality) you can't legally reject some in favor of a less qualified candidate. Likewise internal promotions.
That's the kind of "uneven playing field" people complain about but it's not actually legal here. Its a breach of the equality act and puts companies on the hook for big payouts. Which is why it's odd Reform/the right are discussing getting rid of the EA.

persephonia · 22/02/2026 21:29

It's all so terribly British.

persephonia · 22/02/2026 21:28

Clavinova · 22/02/2026 21:17

It's like Alan Partridge does Ghandi

That's probably hilarious as well. I still think he got the idea from Greta Thunberg. Publicity stunt for both.

Oh for sure I think it was a publicity/PR stunt for both. There is no way Thunberg thought they would be allowed to sail that boat to Gaza. She did it in the expectation they would be arrested. Thus drawing attention to the blockade/making Israel look bad. But she was successful - she was "arrested for trying to bring aid" and it got attention.
I dont know if Farage also wanted to be arrested or exactly what he hoped would happen. But "man goes to military base without completing any paperwork and is told politely he can't come in because he hasn't done the paperwork so flies home" isn't a PR win in the same way. If they'd handcuffed him and thrown him in Chagossian jail he'd have made a point but that was never going to happen.

Clavinova · 22/02/2026 21:17

persephonia · 22/02/2026 21:07

Except Thunberg was threatened and arrested (and quite brutally treated.) Which proved the point she was trying to make (whether you agree with it or not). Farage had nothing much really happen except being politely told he can't enter and did a lot of breathless over-dramatic tweeting on a beach in The Maldives and then flew home. Which makes him look like a self agrandising fool. It's like Alan Partridge does Ghandi.

It's like Alan Partridge does Ghandi

That's probably hilarious as well. I still think he got the idea from Greta Thunberg. Publicity stunt for both.

FrizzyFrizbee · 22/02/2026 21:17

I will probably be voting tactically next time, and just now I have no idea which party I will vote for, will have to decide nearer the time. Here’s the most recent summary of voting intention across opinion polls, but things can change, so who knows https://www.markpack.org.uk/155623/voting-intention-opinion-poll-scorecard/

Latest voting intention and leadership ratings opinion polls

See the latest national voting intention polls for the next UK general election, along with MRP projections party leadership ratings.

https://www.markpack.org.uk/155623/voting-intention-opinion-poll-scorecard/

Swipe left for the next trending thread