Suella Braverman - comments on cutting welfare benefits.

[stayingpositiveifpossible]

I have just heard the interview where Suella bemoaned the alleged 'culture of dependency' - and the way in which she referred to 'people on benefits'.

It was pointed out that she failed to mention the vast numbers of people who are in paid work and claiming U.C because they can't manage.

I personally was appalled at her comments and feel they risk stereotyping a great many people. I feel the facts should be presented much more clearly. Can we have some transparence about the numbers of people who are in work and going to food banks, for example?

The worst scroungers are MPs who get everything paid on expenses from utility bills to food and waste tax payer money on vanity projects or by giving their useless mates public contracts.

Everyone is this leadership contest seems to try their hardest to be as right-wing and vile as possible.

Time for a general election...

She's playing to her audience. She knows this is what Tory voters, especially the new Brexit related ones, want to hear.

Same old, same old:

Rumour has it she may not have reached the required twenty supporters to stand as leader which would be disappointing. I am backing her as leader as I feel sure she is the quickest route to electoral defeat for the Tories at the next election.

You can’t “avoid” personal tax by “using a string of companies”. It’s not easy to avoid tax beyond approved schemes (such as pensions or isas which are limited). There are a lot of myths around alleged big companies or rich people avoiding or evading tax in the uk. HMRC focuses its enforcement on these people and legitimate tax avoidance for these sectors is very difficult.

ultimately of course we should all be paying the tax that is due but benefits fraudsters are not justified regardless. They are stealing from all of us.

It isn’t at all true that the “vast majority of families” are “reliant on some sort of benefit while working”.

Also what “legal loopholes” or “legal tax avoidance” are you talking about? Most legal tax avoidance has a clear purpose eg pensions encourage people to save for retirement. are you suggesting we abolish pensions?

Good. Lower benefits, raise minimum wage and save disability benefits for those that actually physically can’t work.

Lower benefits, raise minimum wage and save disability benefits for those that actually physically can’t work

Is that what she said or is that your wish list? I can't see anything about her conceding that she would have to increase minimum wage to reduce dependency on benefits?

Benefits are already at a fucking minimum. People are going to suffer this autumn/winter and for longer to come.

Many disabled people work and are only able to be so because of benefits. Most disabled people turned down by Conservative appointed assessors, have their benefits restored on appeal.

Some die before then. Some fall prey to loan sharks, pimps and traffickers to survive.😨

What Suella Braverman is proposing is destructive and practically impossible.

The notion that we have an able and ready workforce lounging around in luxury on the dole is a fucking lie!🤦‍♀️

How will labour improve things ? Do they actually have a plan ?

Labour are not in power so don't matter for another 2 years.. The winner of this election will be our Prime Minister.

There could be an early election. I’ve heard nothing from labour about a coherent plan for recovery.

There is not going to be an early election. The Tory party won't call it as they will lose seats.

This is Tory vs Tory to be voted on by Conservative party members. The Labour Party and the electorate are irrelevant @Darnley.

WHATABOUTERY at a whole new level

Why the fuck dont they go after the people in debt to CMS.

Lots of people women in the main depend on benefits as they can't afford the childcare to work. Why are the always looking at what they see is the easy option.

And struggle whilst the non resident parent owes all kinds to the child/children.

Not at all. It’s a genuine question. How are people to know who to vote for, whenever there is an election, if they don’t know what the policies are ?

NightmareSlashDelightful · Today 14:26
Off the top of my head the benefit fraud rate is about 3%.

If only the MP expenses fraud rate was that low.

They do not need to tell the school anything.

@Darnley, atm people don't know who the next leader of the Conservatives will be. Let alone if they survive long enough to take us into the next GE. You are not voting for anyone for a long time yet. Labour is a complete irrelevance in this contest because all those standing are Conservative.

The next Prime Minister is being selected. We don't know who they will be but they will be a Conservative and neither you, nor I have any say in the matter.

I’m aware of that, but the majority of posters seem to want the Tory’s out. I just want to know what are the policies of the Labour Party that they may vote for.

Labour won't produce an election manifesto until the next election. The timing depends on the amount of notice given.

Labout does make policy suggestions, but they may change as the actual government alters economic course and the social landscape shifts.

@Darnley, this is a discussion about the Conservative leadership contest. A contest consisting of Conservative MPs only. There is no place for "But Laaayyyyburrrr" here. Because Labour have nothing to do with the current Conservative leadership contest.

This is why they fucking merged all benefits in the first place - so they could tar everyone with the same brush and claim the 8 million households receiving UK are all dole receiving layabouts.

When anyway, what kind of life is that? All sorts of unfortunate circumstances lead to being unable to cope physically or mentally with work. And anyway, why are we constantly trying to justify immoral acts of a whole society with the immoral acts of a few individuals? Because leaving millions of people, many with dependants, vulnerable to poverty and suffering is far far worse than a few people receiving a pittance while not working.

And more to the point - millions of those households are working families. I have worked since I was 16, am going back to full time on a wage a hefty chunk above minimum wage and will still be entitled to extensive UC support because the cost of living is just that high.

The only reason they get away with saying this shit on live air is because enough people agree with them. That is the bit that is in our power to change.

This x100 but… isn’t that the Tory line since Cameron?

The other thing I will never understand is how it is the less fortunate who are going to be screwed by the Tories the ones that keep them in power…

oh wait, of course, is not the tories but the immigrants!
🤬

It isn’t at all true that the “vast majority of families” are “reliant on some sort of benefit while working”.
Also what “legal loopholes” or “legal tax avoidance” are you talking about? Most legal tax avoidance has a clear purpose eg pensions encourage people to save for retirement. are you suggesting we abolish pensions?

Of course it's true. The term "vast" may be off but the majority of families in the country receive some kind of benefit.

"The welfare state is a big part of British family life, with 20.3 million families receiving some kind of benefit (64% of all families)"

And of course many people receive child benefit which I don't even know if this is considering or not.

Don't play dumb and pretend that the billions of pounds lost in corporation tax avoidance isn't what the OP of that post is talking about, not your bloody pension fgs.