In thinking the Coalition government have got it in for families?

[citytovillage]

The government have said they want Britain to be the "most family-friendly country in Europe". So why since getting into power have they launched an all-out attack on the services and support for families by cutting them or proposing to cut them?
First it was child tax credits, then child benefit, sports in schools, bookstart and now Sure Start centres. Where will this end? My local county council are proposing to axe around a third of the sure start centres, so what are families with young children going to do. By removing the child benefit for some families and proposing means-testing access to Children's centres, where will families get the money to pay for these? It wasn't young children who got this country into the mess they claim it is in.

ffs why cant I cut and paste. im pasting and then for some weird reason what is being pasted is the post above.

anyway I was trying to comment on mama and state that although I do very much disagree with the cuts etc I dont belive there are less manual jobs I do belive that some people chose not to do certain jobs. If I had to I would do just about anything, but unfortunatly that does not pay and those people who are lifestyle benifit claimants where targated then the deficit else where would lessen.

also just to add the sure start and book start cuts will take away from all families from every class, how many SAHM relly on social interaction and support wether from benifits, working or middle class families.

I also believe that the single non dependant population do have greater oppertunities etc to self support and we are in a society which does and should support the more vulnerable.

Your first sentence made me laugh, hahaha, what a joke. Then I realised you wrote "the government have said.." and actually thats true, the govenment are saying lots of nice things, and 'Dave' Cam said lots of nice things before the election too.

But we have to realise this govenment will say any nice thing, even if it makes no sense when you compare it with their actions or their policies or laws and how they vote in parliament. Such as "our policies will help the economy to recover" when what they are actually doing is sacking huge numbers of people, stopping funding to huge numbers of companies and government bodies, but making sure the bankers can still have huge bonuses (by not actually doing anything even though it would be in their power). Economists predicted that this would create high risk of sinking back into recession, and that is exactly what is happening.

The only way a tory government will help you is if you are a millionaire/rich/pensioner and/or make a 5 figure donation to the tory party.

Students will definitely be affected when they have families, because the loan only gets written off at 55. (so thats 10% coming off their earnings when they are trying to raise DC) and if they dont get a grad level job, they will be penalised twice over.

Some people are such sheep, spouting the can't afford it line, Jesus there are a million expenses that could be cut before dla and child benefit.

I would buy the lazy benefit scroungers line if only there were enough jobs for all those dole scummers to fill. Even in times of prosperity full employment would not be possible.

Family friendly my fucking arse, wish I had enough money to leave this class ridden, intolerant island, or move to the middle of nowhere.

I am not middle class, have no aspirations to be middle class. It's not my fucking fault house prices are ridiculous, the minimum wage will not sustain an average family without the aid of tax credits etc.

At least Labour pretended to care whilst they shafted us, the Tories have us chained to the bedstead and the lube at the ready.

do you know what Velouria I could put it better myself.

Citytovillage The cuts will be decided by your local council - while the gov decide how much of their funding will be cut, it is the council that decides what to do with the smaller amount of money.

So write to your local councillor and MP. Also, if you use your library, look out there because many councils are choosing to close them.

But that's what's so wrong Tom, in so many cases it doesn't pay to work. The only way to make it pay to work is to raise minimum wage and lower benefit help to those that are capable of working.

Sure start and book start weren't around when mine were little, we managed fine. Having sure start provide so many activities prevents Mums from setting up little classes the way they used to and takes money away from small businesses. It is not the job of the taxpayer to provide somewhere for Mums to do baby massage or whatever. As long as they provide baby clinics and antenatal classes, new Mums cannot complain that they have been given no opportunity to find support. They are capable of arranging coffee mornings or whatever at eachothers houses. I really don't see why sure start is so neccesary unless we think it's a good thing to remove all responsibility from parents.

if you use your library, look out there because many councils are choosing to close them.

and this is where they are saying adults with LD will be able to access intergrated services when thier day service and respite service is closed. ha fucking ha, no its not they will be left issolate at home with either elderly parents or in isolated accomodation where they will inevitably be abused, killed, murdered or just fade away with lack of help and support.

and where are they getting thier inspitation , canada? where at tge time of recession in the 90's I visited and seen the collosel homelessness with the most vulnerable on the streets. people who have downsyndrome and muliple disabilitie sleeping rough on the streets, my god I hate to imagine what type of exploitation they where required to endure to thier fellow friends on the street to help take care of thier personal needs. that is the personalisation agenda for you.

if you use your library, look out there because many councils are choosing to close them.
that is what I agree with curlymama that is not targeting the vulnerable.

sure start do not just provide massage or what ever, as I stated earlier they do monitor and work in paqrtnership with ss with at risk families, I think its far more finacial viable for a play assistant or support worker to keep these families out of crisis rather than in 6 months 1 year 2 year down the line have make care orders where families are then entering into the care system at the LA and tax payers expences of a S/W and expence of a court order

But that's what's so wrong Tom, in so many cases it doesn't pay to work. The only way to make it pay to work is to raise minimum wage and lower benefit help to those that are capable of working

sorry should have cut and paste this. not sure why I keep getting past messages when I try, sorry!!!

Pascoe and his cronies are all that is wrong with this country ..that is all

We all have our ideas of whats wrong with this country usualsuspect.

Roll on the cuts :)

Fuck you ccpccp

and pasco what about the people who can afford to have children and find themselfs in need.

Is it not better to provide respite to keep these families together and cost down than force them to seek residential placement against thier better judgement that will cost more

ccpccp roll on the day you need help!!!!!

ccpccp

"Roll on the cuts"

What do you mean by that?

If it was cheaper to live in this country, I mean house prices, food, fuel, then most folk who work wouldnt need to claim TC's as their wage would be adequate for them to support themselves.

It would also make employment more attractive as folk would be able to clearly see that their earnings would give them decent standard of living compared to benefits therefore making a saving there too.

I'm hopeless at politics though, so I'm hoping that one of you more academic types could figure out how this could be achieved.

Hi 5 usual was finding this a bit of a battle on my own....think you have just won the argument for us all.

sb6699 I dont think you need any accademics put your argument acorss any better. tis far better to say as you find.

If they raised the minimum wage to £20 an hour, everything else would go up and the benefits would have to go up too due to inflation otherwise people will starve, although actually it's starting to happen already and people will starve.
The cost of living never seems to go down.

The cost of living goes up and up ..have my wages gone up? have they fuck

Letter today fron eon ...fuel prices up

Wage slip ..have you gone up? nope

mama they can roucoup unlawfull expenses, cut bonuses to the elite and bankers, target tax evassion. then the minimal wage could possibly be increased and benifit claimants reduced.

Piscoe Pascoe at what income level do you think people need to hit before they should be allowed to procreate? Will this be before the student loan deductions or after?

Aww come on usualsuspect, I dont mean it personally.

Pascoe is right that the taxpayer shouldnt be raising kids the parents could never afford, when they are struggling in their 30s to have their own.

"think you have just won the argument for us all." - tomhardyismydh

Ha ha yeah. You tell yourself that.

You know, being the most compassionate or perching on the easy moral high ground doesnt make you right believe it or not. Sometimes tough decisions are necessary.

The sooner you politically driven whiners realise that the better. Cuts are coming - be they Coalition cuts or Labour cuts.

Thank you tomhardy - I'm normally a bit too scared to enter these threads

Surely there must be a way for the government to artificially lower the cost of living if increasing inflation makes it rise.

Sorry if that sounds stupid, I warned you all I was clueless!