Defence Secretary John Healey resigns and calls out Rachel Reeves

[Fillies4DeclanRice]

John Healey has become the latest government minister to resign, basically saying he cannot do the job of keeping the UK safe because Labour's economic model is in such a mess.

His resignation letter effectively says the government needs to spend far less on welfare benefits and net zero, and start taxing less and spending more on defence.

This is total chaos now.

Can’t provide figures or documents no to prove this, but have met many who say it’s been transformative , including family members- DH! .Teaches them a skill, gives them confidence ,motivatation, discipline camaraderie, chance to travel. Worth encouraging those with no aspirations. Won’t suit everyone,of course.

Unfortunately it takes some grasp on the science to figure this out.

Something that the vast majority of people in politics are sadly lacking.

There are many other options as I listed above.

Reverse the UC above inflation pay rise as pp said.

Make sure the big corps are paying their fair share - Starbucks, Google, Facebook etc

Ensure that No one is better off on benefits than they would be if working

No PIP for ADHD / not being able to leave the house due to anxiety / being massively overweight

Bring back the 2 child cap,

Tax on any benefits received over 12-13k (like every other tax payer when they earn over that amount),

Tax the full range of incomes more, like they do in Scand so it's not too top heavy and everyone pays (equality),

Stop the net zero bullshit. The UK could sink into the sea tomorrow and there would be only a negligible affect on GW. Stop bankrupting us for nothing (well for your own pockets), Ed Milliband and fat cat friends.

It's just the way they have broken it down. We all know those on unemployment benefits also claim housing benefit and family benefits. Those should be added together.

Yes a large chunk is spent on pensioners, but if you add together the amount spent on housing, disability, unemployment, social services, family benefits which affect people in one or more categories, it’s more,
https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governmentpublicsectorandtaxes/publicsectorfinance/articles/howisthewelfarebudgetspent/2016-03-16

Agreed - too many people who benefit from generous welfare payments to be popular. Popular among the dwindling numbers of taxpayers though !

@Allseeingallknowing pensioners also receive housing & disability benefits…

@Northermcharn by all means tinker with other benefits but you have you target pensioner spend if you want serious savings.

We have an ageing population, that costs

@Allseeingallknowing did you read your link?

“Welfare covers a number of benefits, and many people don’t realise that the largest amount is actually spent on pensions at £111 billion.”

You want to cut the welfare budget?

Fine.

Then let's tackle pensions and make the state pension means-tested, reinstate the 2 children benefit cap and have means-testing of the fuel allowance and child benefit.

Basically no more universal, non means-tested benefits..

The targets should not be sick and disabled people who already struggle to afford to live on their current measly benefits.

And we will always need to have unemployment benefits in place for people who are made redundant and need a bit of help while they search for their next job.

Meaning that if you want to see the welfare bill come down we need to stop demonising the disabled and the unemployed who are genuinely looking for work and look at the wider benefit bill too.

It's not tinkering. First do all of that. and see where we are. Frankly they think it's a good idea to spend EVEN more on benefits - hence JH has just resigned. Shockingly bad gvt.

Yes, they do , but the other groups add up to more than just pensions . Pensioners are always mentioned as if they hog the whole welfare budget, which they don’t, plus some getting benefits could be working but don’t, and some are defrauding the system. Pensioners can’t do anything about getting old!

Yes but the remainder added together add up to more!

@Allseeingallknowing the fact remains if you want to target welfare spending you have to target pensioners. It’s just logic.

So you want to remove every single benefit that doesn’t impact pensioners but keep pensioner benefits? That is not going to work 🙄

Bet you aren’t a pensioner, or if you are you’re a wealthy one!

Then let's tackle pensions and make the state pension means-tested, reinstate the 2 children benefit cap and have means-testing of the fuel allowance and child benefit. Basically no more universal, non means-tested benefits..

Agree but child benefit is already means tested, didn’t used to be of course.

Bet you’re a pensioner. 🙄

Same old same old, benefits should be cut but not for me…

No, prune the budget appropriately and fairly, and weed out the cheats.

I'm not a pensioner, a way off yet. But I respect older people, and pensioners usually don't have the option of getting a better paid job, doing training etc. They're old, they've done their time paying taxes. Leave them alone.

I meant, bet you aren’t a pensioner, or if you are, you’ll be a wealthy one and not just about managing.

👏👏👏🙏

Yes, and I get fed up up with some making out we’re the biggest drain on welfare when it’s clear where a lot of of the money goes

Starmer loves to boasts about bringing in breakfast clubs etc fine for those who really need them but surely most parents can provide cereal and toast?