To wonder if tory voters care about the 1 million.

[Jacobsmum1972]

I bet they don't give a flying monkeys for anyone coming under attack by the Tories. The poor, disabled and tennants.

I have felt close to tears all day because I know what a conservative majority means for so many in this country.

bursary am I correct in Thinking its 24 hours for a couple and 16 hours for single parents.

Nope. It's 16 hours a week for some people.

Same people who will not EVER take on an extra shift at work to help ease the burden for their workmates who aren't eligible for tax credits,

Lazy bastards.

Who is it 16 hours a week for?

YANBU but most do not care because they blame the poor for their own misfortune.

If it's for single parents then maybe they can't do extra shifts because they have to work around their children?

Do you know everything about these people's lives so that you're entitled to call them selfish bastards Lawyer?

I don't disagree that some people are lazier than others but I think it's unfair to judge someone when you can't know all the circumstances.

We need to get across the message of a good education, good career and familes when stable and able to support them.
But you need more than a message. You need case workers. You need schools with good resources and enough places. You need access to and funding for further or higher education. You need relationships advice and access to contraception. As a country we need to work to provide options not messages, and I'm sorry but I just don't see the Conservatives doing that. In fact I don't see them making any attempt to even pretend that they are going to help to provide options.

It's like the PP who suggested someone would be able to access a nursery place for their child when they turned 3 and therefore be able to work. Where I live we couldn't get a nursery place for our DC when they turned 3 because there are not enough Council places and quite rightly families that need extra support are given priority.

It wasn't a problem for us because we could afford to pay for a place but it's clear on this thread that some posters just have no idea of the reality for people living in deprived areas with poor schools, rubbish infrastructure, low literacy rates and low life expectancy. Yes, people can come from that kind of background and become successful (I did) but that was a mixture of luck; availability of bursaries; work and family support. The children I see round about me, don't have the same opportunities that I had. Their options have narrowed to become practically invisible and that makes me ashamed.

You would cut benefits to 5 children because their parent is long term sick?

You seem nice.

Oh and surely it must only apply for single parents who have children under 5?

from www.gov.uk/working-tax-credit/eligibility

Aged 25 to 59 At least 30 hours
Aged 60 or over At least 16 hours
Disabled At least 16 hours
Single with 1 or more children At least 16 hours
Couple with 1 or more children Usually, at least 24 hours between you (with 1 of you working at least 16 hours)

there needs to be proper help so people can work. im not 100% sure on how though...i can understand some people only working 16 hours if they work more they get less/no help...thats not going to pay the rent i dont call that selfish i call it making sure there is food on the table and rent is paid.

30 free hours of childcare for 3-4 year olds...why not for younger children/babys as well so that mums can go back to work.

better wages maybe? do away with zero hours contracts?

theres something very wrong if there is such a rise in people using food banks. until the last couple years i had thought food banks were only used by homeless people who are on the streets. has this ever happend under over govenments?

I stand corrected on the point of hours. But it appears that to work 16 hours and get support, you need to have compromising life factors.

Zero hour contracts are a disgrace.

I agree ghost spirit

It is getting like the US wrt food banks.

bursarymum why do the labour party use so many of them if they are so bad?

sorry zero hours contracts I mean.

bursary zero hours contracts are not a disgrace in most situations. The problem is that employers are abusing them. Making people feel if they don't take the hours offered they will not be given any the week after. I have staff who are zero hours contract, who want to be on them. It suits them and suits us, but if they couldn't or didn't want to do the hours I was offering one week I wouldn't punish them but taking other hours off them

I was also on a zero hours contract and loved it. I am also pretty sure Labours stone plinth wouldn't have meant squat and they would nit have changed it..since they use zero hour contracts

I've never said that I agree with everything Labour has done, certainly not.

Yes, I mean that in practice they don't work because they are abused.

I didn't vote Tory but the Labour party's NHS manifesto was utter unfeasible shite - they were going to recruit 8000 GPs and 20,000 nurses - from where?
They weren't suggesting we train more and putting in place a structure where the numbers would be sustainable. The likelihood is they would recruit from other countries who may themselves be struggling with healthcare and poach trained staff - not an ethical way forward.

Ghostspirit, there is plenty of help in place for people to work already. Tax credits help with childcare, vouchers can be got from employers and once children are at school that's thirty hours a week less childcare needed. Yet still so many don't work or just do enough hours to qualify for WTC.

Lawyer is right, whilst people can just do a few hours a week or choose to do none at all (24 hours between a couple is a joke) then people will vote to get rid of the system that allows it. Tax credits bred laziness.

What message does it send to children, that you can have nice things and not work as someone else will pay. Children need a decent strong work ethic, education and to aim high. Not simply repeat the benefit cycle. Breaking the cycle and pushing people into work who are able too is what's needed for society.

And if indeed all these people are starving and having to use foodbanks, why do we have an obesity epidemic?

I have no interest in being hateful to people because of who they voted for (there are after all a significant number who didn't even bother to exercise a vote) but the above comment is an example of unparalleled stupidity. Clearly if the one thing exists the other can't possibly, but wait ... oh!

I thought even labour backed down on the sero hour retorhic when it was looked into and found that it wasn't proven that there has been more uptake in this field and those that are working in them are generally happy with the situation.

Also to cut down in the abuse, didn't vince pass law to end exclusivity in these types of contracts?

Happy to be proved otherwise

*zero hour