Why doesn’t the 2 child limit apply to civil servant benefits?!

[Shepherdswarning]

I’ve just realised that education allowances, inc incredibly expensive boarding and ‘continuity of education’ allowances are available to an unlimited number of offspring, if you are a diplomat (or similar).

How is this even remotely reasonable, when benefits are limited to 2 children for the rest of the population??

The costs of employing a person w family in these jobs is already vastly greater than employing a single person (more travel, bigger house) - why on earth should they also get hugely subsidised private boarding school education for 3 or 4 or 5 children???

This feels so much like one rule for us and another for them…

the state only needs a few people to be diplomats.

universal credit is available to the whole population oif they meet the criteria.

Oh do get lost. It applies to a tiny minority who couldn’t do their job otherwise.

Employment benefits (such as school fees) are not remotely equivalent to welfare benefits.

Go and sign up to the armed forces or become a diplomat and have to move your kids around the country or overseas every 6-24 months and then come back and tell me that it isn't in the best interests of those kids to have stability of education. It is a tiny number of families that this applies to.

Military salaries are shit, the housing is awful and the pension is being rapidly diminished. Keeping some sort of incentive to keep older and more experienced soldiers and officers (i.e. those old enough to have kids of boarding age) is needed.

If you want the best people to represent our country abroad, you pay them well and ensure that their families are taken care of. If you work for a company and are sent abroad, your school fees are paid. Why should we expect our ambassadors to settle for less than our company executives?

I suggest you go and get a job in the civil service yourself and work your way up to the top where you pay shit loads of tax, barely see your family and are expected to move continents at a moment's notice.

Or carry on receiving benefits and moaning it's not as much as you would like.

Your choice.

Surely that's just a standard employment benefit for an employee, as it would be in the private sector for many people who take up overseas assignments. I see no purpose in drawing parallels with the benefits system...they are completely different.

🙄

If you can’t tell the difference between a diplomat and someone on the benefit…

I despise the benefit bashing on MN but this is just daft, OP.

Well exactly - everyone knows that Diplomats eat Ferrero Rocher at the Ambassadors' reception, and those on benefits make do with a McFlurry ;)

Do you really not understand that it’s a workplace benefit? 🫣

I don’t think there’s a limit on how many children can access childcare benefits?

I’m astonished you all think this is ok!

Am I really the only person here who thinks that having 4 kids at school costing up to £90k a year, paid for by the taxpayer even when parents live in London just STINKS?

So you don't understand the difference between paid employment with the necessary benefits and someone on universal credit. Ok...

Would you rather that the children of someone in a job that involves moving around every few years had their education constantly disrupted? I mean, that's just going to mean that in the future those adults are more likely to be dependant on state support than if they are given a good start in life and become productive, tax paying citizens.

I guess the alternative is that you discriminate against married couples and those with school age children for certain jobs. But that sounds a little like a return to the 1950s and somewhat problematic

I am astonished that you think penalising children for their parents career choices is remotely acceptable, particularly when that career is, loosely at least, a public service one

these are jobs people start from a young age, long before they have children

I’m absolutely not saying don’t pay for 2 kids’ education (tho surely state boarding should be the standard, not Millfield!!) But for FIVE???

And as for ‘penalising children for their parents career choices’ - doesn’t the two child cap also punish children?

Clearly you have no idea what "employment" or "workplace benefit" actually means.

It's not a good look for you.

I think that's a fair comment actually op

This isn't the gotcha that you seem to think it is, people in work get better benefits and more money than those that don't, it really is that simple.

If people want more money to support their families because they are struggling then they should go out and earn it.

All of the money going towards the benefits bill, would be better spent on healthcare, education, social care and other public services rather than just propping up people unwilling to work and creating families beyond their means. Benefits are meant to be a safety net not a lifestyle choice.

Not educationally, no.

Do you really not understand the difference between an employee and their remuneration and a benefit claimant?

Oh I see...so what you are actually saying is that if you choose to join the diplomatic service as a career, or indeed any public sector job, you shouldn't have more than 2 children. And it's five now is it, not four😂? Okay.

I think that I'd rather career driven people had more than two children than those who are dependent on the state. I'm sorry, but that seems to be better for the country and for the taxpayer.

And just how many state boarding schools do you think there are? I can imagine that your next outrage would be that diplomats children take scarce places in a state boarding school that could have been filled by someone whose parents are on benefits and that its unfair...

Yet another thread where the clickbait title doesn't match the content.

You're not actually referring to all civil servants, are you OP? Just a small sub-section. Diplomats and who else - some of the armed forces?

Nailed it.

Since when have the armed forces been civil servants? Diplomats yes, (how many are there, a few hundred, of which maybe a couple of dozen have kids that board), but services - no.