To wonder what the govt has planned to punish those NOT on benefits?

[Glitterknickaz]

News link

This is not the first time cutting benefits has been suggested as a punishment. How are the government proposing to punish parents who don't tackle truancy efficiently that aren't on benefits exactly? Just like the assertion that the rioters should lose benefits, yes because they were ALL on benefits weren't they?

Once again the government fuels the totally untrue daily mail esque belief that all of society's ills lie at the feet of benefits claimants. Apparently they are the root of all evil, eh?

Not one of the policies publicised has said what would happen to those who do not claim benefits.

Money designed for basic sustenance should not be removed imo. At the end of the day it is the children that will suffer from these measures.

Exactly what I thought, op.

SHows a lack of any intelligence, this one.

sorry about that
Meditrina I really didn't agree with the CB measure, for eg it puts women that are subjected to financial abuse in a terrible situation and removes possibly the only money they've had for themselves...

Every government trots this one out every few years, "Parents of truanters/ young offenders/rioters will get their benefits cut" - Labour announced this loads of times. Whether it actually happens to any real people is another matter.

It's just a soundbite.

Similarly the "rioters will lose their council houses" soundbite. So the rioters lose their council house, so they present to the local authority as homeless, and the local authority have to house them in temporary accommodation. Money saved = 0

The government feel that round about now it would be appropriate if it appeared to be taking a hard line on truants and rioters. The easiest way to create the impression of taking a hard line is to release a story like this.

I do agree with you, Glitterknickaz.

I suspect that the issue is that fines and imprisonment can only be imposed by a court; and these cases requires proper evidence to go before a magistrates. The court will expect to see that some kind of effort was made by the school and the Local Authority to get the parents to get child into school before any sanction is applied.

What I think Cameron might be up to with benefit-claiming families is perhaps pondering, in his madness, a new piece of legislation or guidance that lowers the burden of proof but only for these families. A simple percentage unauthorised absence trigger from the school would be sent as an alert to the DWP (anyone feeling sick yet?) and money automatically docked.

Don't worry, it'll never work. The thought of schools actually doing this is absurd.

Isn't it?

I have family in south Africa and have seen first hand parents with disabled children on the streets begging for food for them, who wants to live in a society where we don't protect the most vulnerable

I keep pets.
One of my children is now verbal whereas before he wasn't - all through having pets. Not heard of pets as therapy?

OpinionatedMum children learn best when their parents aren't feckless scroungers

Those "with money"? You make out that all claimants are on the poverty line, and while many might "struggle" (although with money for food, education and health care I don't see how) there are plenty of claimants who do have "money" and make a living from it.

So now tax payers are responsible for you owning a pet? Not exactly providing a roof over your head or food in your stomach which is all benefits should cover initially.

If you earn over £40K a year, then should you be in receipt of Child Benefit at ALL? Surely you don't NEED it!

Unlike lowly non-earners such as myself, who, when forced onto State Benefits - through no fault of our own - had every penny we gained in any increase in Child Benefit deducted from Income Support,or any other benefit we might be scraping by on.

Try raising children on the bare minimum the State allows either single parents or those families who are forced to exist on the Job Seeker's Allowance......
When one's husband is out of work, having been made redundant, can't find a job, becomes depressed and despondant - while you're expected to find the money to pay for compulsory school uniform, on a one-off payment of £60 - from the State - when the full cost of that uniform is over £120 - THEN you can complain.
But,I suspect, most of you won't ever face that nightmare......

Nope. The disability living allowance, which incidentally is for matters relating to their disability, covers the cost of the pets which have markedly improved their development and therefore enhanced their chances in the future.
The Income Support, the Carers Allowance, isn't even enough to keep a roof over our heads, hence why we then need Housing Benefit.

'No you didn't choose to have SN children. However, the government don't have to support you. It isn't their responsibility
'

right well they took NI and tax off me for many eyars, DH stills pays tax (I pay NI but below threshold) so on the basis of having paid in I do think they have a moral responsibility to help with Sn provision for the boys, yes.

'Those "with money"? You make out that all claimants are on the poverty line, and while many might "struggle" (although with money for food, education and health care I don't see how) there are plenty of claimants who do have "money" and make a living from it.

yes well I can;t imagine you would see it; I OTOH actually worked in with these famillies and saw plenty of poverty thanks all the same.

So you are fully supported by the government...in terms of housing, erm animal allowance, free education ,free health care, some sort of carers' allowance, DLA (which I think means you're entitled to either free public transport or a car?)...and you're complaining about the govt because....?

I could provide for my children just fine thanks maypole, right up until they began to have significant developmental abnormality and were then diagnosed with multiple complex disabilities.

Then working became impossible, because there are three of them.

'Again it always seems to be the tax payer who should think about the feckless people children its time they thought about their children
'

WE DO PAY TAX AS A FAMILY and I still think it's crap. I wouldn;t have an issue with a bigger emphasis on fines for all but not one rule for one another for the other.

we pay less because dh was made redundant AFTER the boys were born is all.

LadyOfTheManor swap you
you have the disabled child, I have the non disabled one, you can ahve the perks

Peachy, shock me...what classes a poverty? Emergency housing? Not owning a television set? Not owning a vehicle? Free vaccinations? Free prescriptions? Free school lunches? Free education? Free eye tests? Money every week to ensure children get food? Help/support with rent? What counts as poverty?

The OP made a salient point about the application of a different level of sanction to one group of people as opposed to another group of people.

Her source of income doesn't affect the validity of her point.

2shoes, they're not perks, they're a means to survive and they are put in place where plenty of other countries don't bother with them.

I don't understand the constant moaning about being supported...people ought to be thankful there is a system in place to support anyone should they ever fall short through disability or redundancy etc.

CA is £55 pw

Now I am not arghuing for a raise atm, clearly country cannot afford it.

It's supposed to be replacement for wages and somehow I think with a good degree and almost an MA I could earn just a leetle bit more if I could get childcare.
Heck, could I get childcare (SSD said no, ds1 too aggressive) I could earn far moe on minimum wage!
And the CA is taxable, it gets cut off Tax Credits etc so it's not a benefit in Governmental definition terms, it's an allowance: it's not actually worth £55 pw to us.

OP, they're going to abolish the 50% tax rate. That'll show those blimmin bankers, so it will.

They're not applying a different level of sanction.

They're adding an additional collection method to the existing fines system

Those not in receipt of CB will continue to be fined.