Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

So David Cameron (we are in it together) really wants to fuck up our children then!

660 replies

belleMarie · 23/06/2012 23:14

How can anyone be taken in by this muppet? whilst him, Sam (and her £1000 pound frocks) and kiddies eat good, sleep good, shit good - we're basically screwed?

His hate for the poor/have-not is staggering and apart from a a couple of grunts here and there, this man is unstoppable.

Cameron to axe housing benefits for feckless under 25s as he declares war on welfare culture
Prime Minister gives exclusive interview to the MAIL ON SUNDAY
Reveals housing benefit will be scrapped for under 25s, who'll be forced to live with their parents
Dole money will be stopped for those who refuse to find work
Mr Cameron shares his views on Euro2012, Jimmy Carr, and what really happened when he left his daughter in the pub

Radical new welfare cuts targeting feckless couples who have children and expect to live on state handouts will be proposed by David Cameron tomorrow.
His bold reforms could also lead to 380,000 people under 25 being stripped of housing benefits and forced to join the growing number of young adults who still live with their parents.
In a keynote speech likely to inflame tensions with his deputy Nick Clegg, the Prime Minister will call for a debate on the welfare state, focusing on reforms to ?working-age benefits?.

Among the ideas being considered by Mr Cameron are:
Scrapping most of the £1.8 billion in housing benefits paid to 380,000 under-25s, worth an average £90 a week, forcing them to support themselves or live with their parents.
Stopping the £70-a-week dole money for the unemployed who refuse to try hard to find work or produce a CV.
Forcing a hardcore of workshy claimants to do community work after two years on the dole ? or lose all their benefits.
Well-placed sources say Ministers are also taking a fresh look at plans to limit child benefit to a couple?s first three children, although Mr Cameron is not expected to address this issue directly tomorrow.
Speaking exclusively to The Mail on Sunday, Mr Cameron said: ?We are sending out strange signals on working, housing and fa8milies.?

He argued that some young people lived with their parents, worked hard, planned ahead and got nothing from the State, while others left home, made little effort to seek work and got a home paid for by the benefits system.

?A couple will say, ?We are engaged, we are both living with our parents, we are trying to save before we get married and have children and be good parents. But how does it make us feel, Mr Cameron, when we see someone who goes ahead, has the child, gets the council home, gets the help that isn?t available to us???
?One is trapped in a welfare system that discourages them from working, the other is doing the right thing and getting no help.?
Asked if he would take action against large families who were paid large sums in benefits, he replied:
?This is a difficult area but it is right to pose questions about it. At the moment the system encourages people not to work and have children, but we should help people to work AND have children.?
His plan to axe housing benefit for the under-25s will have exemptions for special cases, such as domestic violence, but he said: ?We are spending nearly £2 billion on housing benefit for under-25s ? a fortune. We need a bigger debate about welfare and what we expect of people. The system currently sends the signal you are better off not working, or working less.?
He also favours new curbs on the Jobseeker?s Allowance, demanding the unemployed do more to find work. He said: ?We aren?t even asking them, ?Have you got a CV ready to go?? ? A small minority of hardcore workshy, an estimated 5,000 to 10,000, could be forced to take part in community work if they fail or refuse to find work or training after two years.
The Prime Minister wants to show he is committed to radical policies, but his speech could exacerbate strains with Coalition partner Mr Clegg, whose Lib Dems oppose drastic welfare cuts.
It follows the row over plans to revive O-levels and will fuel rumours the Coalition could end long before the 2015 Election. ?As leader of a political party as well as running a Coalition it?s right sometimes to make a more broad-ranging speech,? said Mr Cameron.
A Government official said: ?Decent folk are fed up with the increasing abuse of the welfare system. Responsible people who work damned hard, often on low incomes, to support themselves, are sick and tired of seeing others do nothing and live off the state.
?Labour threw ever greater sums of money at the problem and made it worse. If we want to encourage responsibility we have be bold enough to tackle these issues. We suspect some of those who refuse point-blank to seek work are working on the black market and claiming fraudulently.?
But a Labour source said: ?It is easy for rich Tories with big houses to have grown-up children at home while they find their feet. It?s different if you live in a tiny council flat and your daughter is a single mum.? Ministers said curbs on housing benefit for the under-25s, had helped slash the welfare bill in Germany and Holland

OP posts:
ShellyBoobs · 24/06/2012 15:37

Labour went berserk with the welfare system; it was obvious it would have to be reined in at some point.

I don't know about 'purely ideaological', I think it's more the fact that they know there is huge support from voters for benefit caps.

gordyslovesheep · 24/06/2012 15:43

I work with 16-19 year olds (not for much longer mind as I am being made redundant) who are homeless and job seeking - it is incredibly difficult for them to access benefits without proving estrangement so there are the kids who CAN NOT 'go home' - no one wants to be in a hostel or sofa surfing - these are some of the most vulnerable people in society and they are our future - stop kicking them in the teeth :(

LineRunner · 24/06/2012 15:53

This intrigues me as a piece of policy rubbish. It's like John Redwood's loony tunes rhetoric in the early 1990s about making grandparents become financially responsible for their 'born out of wedlock' grandchildren. Remember that embarrassing disaster?

gordyslovesheep · 24/06/2012 15:57

John Redwood WAS an embarrassing disaster Grin

AThingInYourLife · 24/06/2012 16:03

"Are we actually out of money?"

That question is meaningless.

A national economy is nothing like a household.

Anyone who suggests it is is either
a. lying
b. stupid

LineRunner · 24/06/2012 16:08

I think it was satirical, AThing.

AThingInYourLife · 24/06/2012 16:11

Ah, OK, that makes a bit more sense LineRunner.

Sparks1 · 24/06/2012 16:13

I can see that with the Tories in, the benefits system as it has been structured in the last 10 - 15 years or so is over.

And thank fuck for that!

LineRunner · 24/06/2012 16:14

Imagine David Mitchell saying it, faux-indignantly. (OK, maybe not, he's probably a specialist taste...) Smile

corlan · 24/06/2012 16:39

Conservative ideology is that the state should stay out of people's lives as much as possible.

There's no doubt that the public sector cuts and reduction of benefits are ideologically driven - I don't think any honest Conservative would deny that.

JamNan · 24/06/2012 16:41

Workhouse and Marshalsea debtors' prison here we come!

I remember Thatcher's era. Homeless young and old people living in poverty on the streets. I saw them on my way to work in London and it was awful to see the degradation those people endured.

I think this vile and uncaring government is even worse because THEY DON'T GIVE A DAMN!

And don't forget that most of the Housing Benefit payments go into the pockets of the buy-to-let-landlords.

Sparks1 · 24/06/2012 16:44

*Workhouse and Marshalsea debtors' prison here we come!
I remember Thatcher's era. Homeless young and old people living in poverty on the streets. I saw them on my way to work in London and it was awful to see the degradation those people endured.

I think this vile and uncaring government is even worse because THEY DON'T GIVE A DAMN!*

Except this isn't a tory government. And it was a labour government that got us in the shit. Why oh why are some people so quick to forget both those facts...

LineRunner · 24/06/2012 16:47

Buy-to-let absent landlords have ruined my neighbourhood.

Empusa · 24/06/2012 16:53

"Except this isn't a tory government."

That's right, the Lib Dems hold so much sway..

NowThenWreck · 24/06/2012 16:55

Can't face reading the whole thread.
Got to page 5.
If someone hasn't taken down mumofmillie yet for her vile snideyness towards jellytotsandcolabottles, please allow me:

So what if a woman chooses to marry and have children at 19? According to the Mail etc we women are all "leaving it too late" and trying to "have it all"... Can't win, can we?
Maybe your vitriol should be reserved for the man who has abused and abandoned his wife and children and now won't support them financially.

Some facts:

The VAST MAJORITY of HB recipients are working. Many are working FULL TIME.
I realise this is not what the frothing right wingers want to believe, but it happens to be true.

The problem here is that rents are massively inflated, and unaffordable on the meagre salaries most of us get paid.

Many people of 25 and under have their own children. Also contrary to popular belief, having a child DOES NOT entitle you to a council house. If it did, I would be in clover, instead of paying nearly half my income to my landlord.

Sparks1 · 24/06/2012 16:56

That's right, the Lib Dems hold so much sway..

Well um, yes.

Without Lib Dem backing no government drafts would get through.

LineRunner · 24/06/2012 16:56

Cameron, Gove, Osborne, Hunt. Tories, I believe, at the heart of this idiotic government.

gordyslovesheep · 24/06/2012 16:59

bloody well said NowThenWreck

LineRunner · 24/06/2012 17:00

Sparks, that may be true but Cameron surely can't blame the Lib Dems for his own thinking on things?

Sparks1 · 24/06/2012 17:04

Sparks, that may be true but Cameron surely can't blame the Lib Dems for his own thinking on things?

As far as i'm aware he hasn't tried. I'm also led to believe these are proposals for their next manifesto as well so all those jumping off the deep end and wailing have rather jumped the gun a bit.

Personally i think the bigger picture counts more here. Housing in this country is a chronic problem, especially in the south east. Prices for both rent and purchase are disgraceful. That's the issue that should be addressed.

Empusa · 24/06/2012 17:07

I wonder how many Lib Dem policies, compared to Tory policies have actually happened? And also how many things that they have promised won't happen have actually happened?

LineRunner · 24/06/2012 17:09

Sparks, well then this is a Tory government planning to seek re-election on a purely Tory manifesto.

I hope the Lib Dems do bail out. They can't help The Deluded.

marriedinwhite · 24/06/2012 17:29

Have read the first and the last.

My children are teenagers. If between uni and work they are unemployed they have a home with us. There will never be a need for them to claim housing benefit. That should be the case for all young people but it isn't and there needs to be a safety net for those for whom it genuinely isn't the case. However I know a lady whose son's girlfriend told him she was on the pill and wasn't. The girlfriend got pregnant. The son and the girlfriend now 22 and 20 respectively (the baby is 2) are from loving homes. They are no longer together as partners but he baby is loved and both grandmothers play an active role. The girl, who has a loving family, now has a council flat because she and her family have played the system.

What happens is wrong. Very very wrong. The boy should take financial responsibility for the baby, the girl should not have got pg, the girl's family should take responsibility for their daughter and granchild. It is just terribly wrong that that this is the prevailing mindset and that I have to fund that mindset

Socknickingpixie · 24/06/2012 17:32

Would there be anyway to penilise the few people who do take the piss without doing so to genuine claiments? By taking the piss I'm not meaning anything to do with widescreen tv's or any thing at all like that.
The little rant I had some pages ago was directed at a person (who I do know the ins and outs of) who has never held a job for longer than a week hasn't even attempted to get a job in the last 3 years was offered several on a plate by friends of mine but wouldn't accept then as they required him to take a ten minute bus ride has no legit reason to not work or to not control himself in an employment suituation but he's 26.
If rents are sky hi then hb top up will be needed inless you have a job that means you earn enough to pay it.

If more people on hb are working than not then why penilise them given that after personal deductions are made you only have £25 disalowed it's not as tho your raking anything in.

And yo yo your not entitled to hb because you have no rent or mortgage costs so why should you be entitled to it

Sparks1 · 24/06/2012 17:45

Sparks, well then this is a Tory government planning to seek re-election on a purely Tory manifesto.

It's not a tory government though.

And of course their manifesto is tory. No political parties launch joint manifestos.