£12bn Welfare Cuts - Speculation and Information

[olgaga]

I've been reading the recent threads about this on here with interest. I came across this article by Robert Joyce of the Institute for Fiscal Studies.

Do have a read. We won't know the full extent of what is planned until 8 July when we hear the new Budget, but we do know that Tax Credits and Housing Benefit are in the firing line, along with an expected reduction in the Universal Credit Cap of £26,000 to £23,000.

I haven't posted this to provoke an argument, more to try to provide some authoritative information for those seeking possible answers, and to express my sadness at what I fear will be the impact.

Here are some of the highlights of the article, in my words:

Yes there will be an extension of free childcare, to enable you to work longer hours in your min wage job to make up for SOME of the shortfall caused by the withdrawal or abolition of WTC, whuch currently costs £30bn.

That's if you can find a childcare provider, and succeed in obtaining additional working hours.

No doubt they will also raise the tax threshold - but that will benefit higher earners just as much as the lowest paid.

Child benefit may be cut more quickly by lowering the cash terms threshold, so the number of families who reach the threshold will increase more quickly.

Or they might cut the amount for the first child, or for the number of subsequent children.

Or it may be abolished altogether and be included as an element of means tested CTC.

Cuts to housing benefit seem inevitable, as this makes up £26bn of the welfare budget - and not just for 18-21yo. This may be achieved by cuts to the LHA, or introducing a percentage co-payment (say 10-20% of rent) for tenants in both social and private rented housing. Worth bearing in mind if that might necessitate a move to a cheaper area, and possible loss of employment.

Disability and incapacity benefits, carer's and attendance allowances, at £37bn, are also likely to be affected. Whether by taxing, means testing, or simple abolition.

I think the Tories' position on welfare in the run up to the 2010 election was misleading. Certainly here, on thread after thread in the run up to 2010, people were declaring that the problem of the welfare bill needed to be tackled, but believed the Tories would only tackle so-called "career claimants".

It seems to me that all that "hardworking families" "strivers v skivers" stuff was designed to divide and rule. I don't blame people for believing it, but the Tories have always been the Party of low taxation, small state and individual responsibility - and that's not about to change.

Anyway, that's just my view. I'm sure there are still plenty of people who think lower taxation and a smaller welfare state will be beneficial to the economy.

But it's clear that a lot of people, and many, many children, will suffer when these benefit lifelines are taken away.

LurkingHusband - I don't think anyone's being protected from this one, sadly. It's not here yet, but it is coming.

The health and social care bill for our population is the most enormous demographic issue, and most people haven't grasped the magnitude of it, and the colossal costs that are involved. Those who are actively involved in planning for the future are working on the assumption that it won't be funded out of the tax bill. Councils are actually planning for a private solution now in terms of land allocations for private elderly care facilities. The idea seems to be to entice people out of their homes with aspirational housing solutions - and (though this is still implicit in much of the planning rather than something people are daring to voice) to cut the levels of help for those living outside of those communities so that they are pushed into these developments.

Don't get me wrong - I am completely in agreement with you that we currently have a huge issue of intergenerational equity, and that pensioners are currently very much winners. I agree with you about the bedroom tax.

I think it wouldn't be quite so bad if it was accompanied by some initiative by the Govt towards achieving a living wage. But there's no sign of it.

On the disability benefits issue, it is shocking. Indeed disability rights campaigners link Government propaganda with the rise in disability hate crime.

i should point out too, that our current generation of middle class older people will STILL be the winners in those eventualities - they'll still have lovely housing for older people. God help the poor elderly, though. And God help the rest of us when we get older and there isn't the private finance available because it's all gone into the hands of big private companies who provide this care, increasing the level of inequality in society etc etc etc etc

Stop press.

Government finds £38.5 billion unexpectedly

www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-33270586

The government says it will delay or cut back a number of modernisation projects planned for Network Rail.
Transport Secretary Patrick McLoughlin says rising costs and missed targets make the £38.5bn plan untenable.

(contd)

shovetheholly

Councils are actually planning for a private solution now in terms of land allocations for private elderly care facilities. The idea seems to be to entice people out of their homes with aspirational housing solutions - and (though this is still implicit in much of the planning rather than something people are daring to voice)

One thing I did notice, touring new builds last year, was a creeping concept of "lifetime living". The aim being that once people buy a house, they never need to move again. This meant things like no tight corners (our current bugbear with a wheelchair). Level access. Space for stairlifts or external lifts where needed.

On the disability benefits issue, it is shocking. Indeed disability rights campaigners link Government propaganda with the rise in disability hate crime.

I never apologise for posting this, as I suspect few people know about it. I won't translate it - it's more powerful when you work it out yourself.

What about those who can't extend their working hours to cover the WTC loss because there are no extra hours to work?!

What about those who can't extend their working hours to cover the WTC loss because there are no extra hours to work?!

And that's the governments problem how ? (Not what I think. But what they do ...)

Lurking Yep DH would happily work more hours but they only get extra in December. I know many others in the same position.

And that's the governments problem how ?

I guess it will become a government problem when people lose in work benefits and they can't support themselves any longer. The in work benefits will just turn into out of work benefits when people are forced to quit their jobs in order to put food on the table and extra strain is placed on councils when some people will be made homeless

The government could of course implement a forced living wage rather than a minimum wage. Although I can't see this happening

AnyoneForTennis

There's no scaremongering or guesswork involved. The Government's plan is to cut £12bn from the unprotected elements of the welfare budget. That's a fact, it is well documented, and the cuts have been described as "unprecedented".

If anything it is the Government which is guilty of scaremongering, by specifying the amount they intend to cut and refusing to say which of the unprotected parts of the budget will be cut.

There are certain elements which will be more likely to bear the brunt of the cuts due to their size. The Institute of Fiscal Studies is a respected organisation. I have reproduced their thoughts on the budgets most likely to be the target of the cuts.

This is a democracy, not a dictatorship. Some people might want to express their concern about the Conservatives' refusal to state where the cuts would come from prior to the May election. They might have real reason to fear the anticipated impact of the cuts on themselves and their families.

If so I hope they will write to their MP before the Budget on 8 July!

And that's the governments problem how ?

I guess it will become a government problem when people lose in work benefits and they can't support themselves any longer.

I repeat my question. How is that the governments problem ? Can you cite anything from the past 5 years that demonstrates anything to show they care ?

If peoples strategy for coping with the future is some sort of religious belief in "oh they would never do that", I suggest a quick trip to planet here-and-now.

This is a democracy, not a dictatorship.

Actually, it's a monarchy.

yesyes,i know all that....but you,with this post,are STILL speculating over which 'cuts' will take place

there have been threads this month from posters who have read these speculative threads,such as this one,and are worried sick! nothing has been confirmed yet,at all!

morage The Gov wants your family to care for you while telling the same families to move for work. Thick bastards.

ow taxation, small state and individual responsibility

Amen to this.

or even a corporatocracy :(

shovetheholly

www.watfordobserver.co.uk/news/12961852.Elderly_tenants_of_Watford_housing_association__in_tears__at_development_project_that_will_force_them_out_their_homes/

Anyone

There is nothing wrong with informed speculation. That is exactly why I posted the link to the IFS article, which clarifies exactly what parts of the budget are likely to bear the brunt of the cuts and why.

Frankly, given what we know for a fact about the planned cuts and the welfare budget, anyone who thinks they might be affected by this has every right to feel worried.

And every right to examine the best information available.

Actually, it's a monarchy

Actually it's a Constitutional Monarchy!

Helena - and so it begins .

I know this is self-indulgent and soapboxy of me, but whatever happened to a society in which we all recognise that we have a duty, an obligation that goes beyond anything legal or written, to care for all those around us?

shovetheholly One poor woman in her 90s had a stroke due to the stress of moving.

Its ridiculous uprooting ppl of that age who are possibly ill as well. Moving is one of the most stressful things FFS!

...whatever happened to a society in which we all recognise that we have a duty, an obligation that goes beyond anything legal or written, to care for all those around us?

I think it was rebranded in 2010. It's now The Big Society. Any ideas for a logo? I'm thinking Oliver Twist...

I also think child maintainence payments should becounted as income. Most of the lone parents I know receive substantial amounts in child maintainence each month and then substantial tax credit top ups too. If the parents can support the child financially then why should the state being doing this.

oh yeah,child maintenance really covers the costs of bringing up a child doesn't it!

if an absent parent doesn't want to pay then they wont. theres ways round any 'orders' made. but yeah,let the child suffer eh?