Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To think more outrage is needed over Tory threat to child benefit?

537 replies

flower68 · 08/04/2015 19:49

According to papers today Tory planned welfare cuts can't be achieved without further cuts to child benefit. George Osborne has refused to rule it out apparently. Such a cut would be massively controversial, hurt lower income families and is potentially politically toxic for the Tories. So why is no-one pushing them for a straight answer?

OP posts:
fabyork3 · 09/04/2015 13:30

Agree some of the replies on this thread are disgusting. The tories took away chb from high earners in an arbitary way. As other have said this now gives them an excuse to attack the low paid and out of work families. As of course high earners won't fight because it doesn't affect them. We are incidently a single income couple with 3dc who lost it but that is ok. We can afford to lose it.
if however, anything were to happen to dh or we split up I would need it to get back on my feet.
They are really showing their true colours now attacking poorly paid and out of work families.

bereal7 · 09/04/2015 13:46

Okay we are going round in circles. I can't say anymore on it than what I have.

I think raising it could mean some companies can't offer as many jobs perhaps. I really don't know what the best solution is but I just feel strongly about people needing an incentive to work. Not these 16 hour jobs that should be for students (uunless you want and can afford to only work 16 hrs ofcourse. I mean working 16 hrs and claiming benefits)

AnYway, I don't know - just my opinion. Life isn't fair. I wish I was born rich but I wasnt - I accept that and try to make the best of the hand I've been dealt, without taking from others more fortunate than me.

lottieandmias · 09/04/2015 13:54

So it's ok to let the poor and disadvantaged suffer as long as people who can well afford to pay more tax get to keep everything for their selfish selves. Shocking attitude.

holls2000 · 09/04/2015 13:56

I read that it wasn't bundled in with universal credits and was possibly going to be capped at 2 children.

bereal7 · 09/04/2015 13:57

lottie Erm I believe they already pay more than people on lower income.

SuggestmeaUsername · 09/04/2015 14:03

So it's ok to let the poor and disadvantaged suffer as long as people who can well afford to pay more tax get to keep everything for their selfish selves. Shocking attitude.

I doubt that is what people on here are saying

thecatfromjapan · 09/04/2015 14:04

Enough with all this 'high earners don't care!'
I agree that divide and rule was the point of taking cb from high earners (that plus using bit as window dressing to hide who was bearing the main burden of cuts).
But we lost cb and our family is very angry - for everyone!
I'm disgusted and desperately hoping people will see sense and vote the conservatives out.

Superexcited · 09/04/2015 14:06

holls they are currently looking at (according to reports) bundling child benefit in with universal credits, same with carers allowance so that anybody not entitled to UC won't be able to get CB or carers allowance either.

sakura · 09/04/2015 14:11

WHy don't people get that without children there would be no customers, clients or citizens.

The government knows this and that's why it funds children through benefits, even [gasp] those dreaded single mothers or mothers with children from multiple fathers.

For all the guff about "hardworking folk's taxpayers", they know: no children = no society

Those hardworking folk will nobody to care for them in old age, nobody to sell their shit to, nobody to vote for them... because children are the CENTRE of all that is important. The CENTRE.

So the government will continue to pay for children, albeit begrudgingly, because they know what the alternative means.

sakura · 09/04/2015 14:13

LMAO at the poor folks paying tax to fund the CENTRE OF SOCIETY AND ALL THAT IS IMPORTANT i.e children

Military = not important
Construction industry = not important
Business development = not important
Children = important

lottieandmias · 09/04/2015 14:19

My point certainly is not that high earners don't care - some really do. But it's the Tories that blatantly don't. Although I do know some parents at my child's school who are millionaires. Apparently they can't cope with the thought of anything other than a Tory government - otherwise they might not get their tax breaks and they will move abroad. Poor them(!)

In any case it's the Tories I dislike, not high earners.

rollonthesummer · 09/04/2015 14:45

Disclaimer: I am not voting Tory and have little time for their policies. I've just looked at this properly (not on a phone)

www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32208744

and GO says that although they haven't ruled it out, that...

If we wanted to put child benefit into the Universal Credit, we would have done it when we set up Universal Credit," he told reporters.

"We've made it clear and we've said that we need to find £12bn in welfare savings", she said, adding that such a wrapping was "not our policy... and there are other ways in which we can find those savings".

Is that all just boswallax then?

SuggestmeaUsername · 09/04/2015 14:53

I don't think people, as tax payers, have a problem funding families down on their luck and needing help because of job loss or some other crisis in their lives.

I think they do have a problem with having to pay for families who have never contributed to society or the economy in any way and just keep reproducing regardless of their total dependence on the benefits system.

Superexcited · 09/04/2015 14:58

Well where is the £12bn coming from because they haven't said and they didnt exactly deny that carers allowance might be rolled into Universal credit and I havent heard an outright promise that CB won't be rolled into universal credit.
Why didn't they include carers allowance in universal credit when UC was set up? After the general election they can roll whatever benefits they choose into UC if they get back into power and nobody will be able to stop them.

BaronessEllaSaturday · 09/04/2015 15:10

I think they do have a problem with having to pay for families who have never contributed to society or the economy in any way and just keep reproducing regardless of their total dependence on the benefits system.

This is where the difference between perception and reality comes in, there is only a very very small number of people who fall into this category.

SuggestmeaUsername · 09/04/2015 15:36

This is where the difference between perception and reality comes in, there is only a very very small number of people who fall into this category.

am sure it is.

I guess the ideal is to somehow find a magic formula for a fair and balanced system of taxation and benefits. Individuals and organizations generating income and wealth pay their fair share of tax. Benefits should help people according to need but designed in a way that it doesnt make people better off not working. There needs to be a correct balance.

The Victorians created workhouses with their appaulling conditions to deter people from being dependent on state support. This was a terrible extreme. However today's system of benefits is towards the other end where it has created a poverty trap where some people find themselves better off out of work or working limited hours.

is there a decent solution to all this?

Emmaswan · 09/04/2015 15:45

is there a decent solution to all this?

I think a CB cap for three children for those yet to be born, benefits cap at £23K and UC will go quite a long way towards a solution.

rollonthesummer · 09/04/2015 15:54

Emmaswan: Did you find any links to support this statement you made yesterday?

any proposal to cap CB is NOT retrospective. It would only apply to thos eas yet unborn

BaronessEllaSaturday · 09/04/2015 15:55

I think some of the cuts that were brought in have added to the problems and only keep people in the poverty trap. When you consider someone who has a pay increase due to extra hours or a better job, say they get an extra 5k a year they will pay an extra 1k in tax over the year and £600 in NI (approx) but they will also lose £2,050 in tax credits and however much they would also lose in housing benefit and council tax relief. If it's extra hours their childcare costs could increase too, easy to see why it is not in someones interest to improve their position maybe a lower rate of reduction enabling people to keep more of a wage increase would help.

Theoretician · 09/04/2015 16:08

if you have children, would you seriously want them to be taken away from their main carer and pushed on to a parent who doesn't want them? Would you want a child to be in that position?

It was a bit of a tongue-in-cheek proposal. The idea was that the children wouldn't usually switch main carer, as the higher earner would always gladly pay for someone they could offload responsibility to, and who better to pay than the previous main carer.

Actually it was a subtle dig at some people on both sides, as there are some main carers who (when complaining about maintenance) come across as quite entitled about their role, and would be quite startled and outraged if it were pointed out that actually their particular ex could take the children, freeing them up fully for the world of work and EOW contact.

JamesBlonde1 · 09/04/2015 16:53

I know the limitations with legal aid. That's why I mentioned a free half hour to get some idea as to how to proceed with a Schedule 1 application so the poster could try and do it herself. She is well educated and many people are now having to issue their own court proceedings, so not impossible.

Oldsu · 09/04/2015 17:42

Plonkysaurus what benefits I don't get any benefits so at the moment no-one is paying any thing for me and won't until year 2021 when I get my pension and as I understand the new rules my pension entitlement will be based on contributions made up to April 2016 which means that I will be paying 5 years of NIC (based on my current salary and NIC that will be 20k) without a single extra penny on my pension.

Where did I say I begrudge the young I was replying to a post that stated that if children don't get CB then those children should refuse to pay for older peoples pensions, that's the attitude I don't like

fabyork3 · 09/04/2015 18:37

Child support does not affect benefits though. So even if ex pays benefit bill won't change.

BaronessEllaSaturday · 09/04/2015 18:45

Child support does not affect benefits though. So even if ex pays benefit bill won't change

Only because it is too unreliable at the moment, if they managed to get something in place that meant the pwc could rely on it then they would be able to take it into account again.

letseatgrandma · 09/04/2015 18:59

Well, I for one wanted to cry when I read this.

We earn just above any cut offs for Universal Credit. DH works full time and I work part time-we have three children, and losing £190 a month is going to be absolutely disasterous for us; things are difficult at the moment. DH has been made redundant twice in the last three years, so we have no savings.

How is the economy going to recover and grow when people won't have any money left to spend?

Swipe left for the next trending thread