To think they MUST extend furlough in line with other European Countries

[LaurieFairyCake]

Most of the centrist countries are doing 12-24 months.

If they don't do it here for those industries that are hugely affected then we're looking at MASS unemployment, repossessions, huge housing benefit claims...

@TheTurn0fTheScrew

Probably not a popular view, but I'd rather scrap furlough, and see out of work benefits paid at more humane amount. Technically, anyone who couldn't work during COVID could have claimed UC. Except it's not enough. But the government only seemed to care that it's not enough (and inflexible, and an administrative nightmare) when people like them were faced with claiming it.

Yes, exactly this.

I'd rather see something along the lines of Student Loans, where people can borrow a certain amount each year will they will have to pay back over a period of time based on their future incomes. Those that go on to get jobs paying more than average wage have to pay a percentage of their income over the average, and those who don't go on to earning more than average don't repay. If it's good enough for Uni students then it's good enough for those affected by covid. It's time those who benefited from furlough/support were the ones having to dip into their pockets in the future to pay some of it back.

@Badbadbunny

I'd rather see something along the lines of Student Loans, where people can borrow a certain amount each year will they will have to pay back over a period of time based on their future incomes. Those that go on to get jobs paying more than average wage have to pay a percentage of their income over the average, and those who don't go on to earning more than average don't repay. If it's good enough for Uni students then it's good enough for those affected by covid. It's time those who benefited from furlough/support were the ones having to dip into their pockets in the future to pay some of it back.

Thousands of students will never, ever pay their loans back. I'm one of them - I currently owe thousands more than I borrowed because all that's happened over the last ten years, is that the loan has accrued interest. The pittance I've paid back hasn't made a dent in the now 15k+ I owe the government (up from the 9k I borrowed).

The same will happen with any kind of COVID loan. It's not economically viable.

Thousands of students will never, ever pay their loans back. I'm one of them - I currently owe thousands more than I borrowed because all that's happened over the last ten years, is that the loan has accrued interest. The pittance I've paid back hasn't made a dent in the now 15k+ I owe the government (up from the 9k I borrowed). The same will happen with any kind of COVID loan. It's not economically viable.

Better to get something back from those who go on to earn more than average than get nothing back at all, or to increase taxes for everyone (even those who didn't benefit from the covid support).

Me and dh are in Arts and Entertainment, lost everything.
Took 30 years of hard work in just one hour, all gone.
There's not much hope of us getting our business back, it will never be the same again now.
I don't think the gov like live entertainment.

It’d be interesting to see the breakdown for COVID support, furlough was most likely lower earners as majority.

Yes it should be extended for sectors still unable to operate - the arts, live events, travel etc.

It's not that these are non-viable businesses being propped up by furlough. They are often usually highly profitable but are currently completely unable to operate. It will be better for the economy in the long run if they are ready to resume trading when possible rather than going under.

The entertainment etc sector will re emerge when it can. New businesses maybe included but people will flock to it when it gets to that point (vaccine, sick if it, treatment whatever)

Agree with all the posts saying extend for businesses unable to operate.

I don't want to see all the clubs theatres etc in the UK close down. It would be a huge loss and I suspect in many cases once they're gone they're gone. Often on prime land etc.

NiceGerbil yes and some of them absolutely iconic in terms of music history like the Cavern Club in Liverpool, King Tut's in Glasgow etc. I worry we won't ever get this part of our heritage back again.

@NiceGerbil

Agree with all the posts saying extend for businesses unable to operate.

I don't want to see all the clubs theatres etc in the UK close down. It would be a huge loss and I suspect in many cases once they're gone they're gone. Often on prime land etc.

The prime and iconic received funding not sure about those mentioned below

i am only allowed just over £70 a week for max of 6 months , then nothing , when some have never paid in and get it continually

You'll get it if you need it, @Notfeelinggreattoday, same as those who've never paid in. The rules are the same for everyone.

If you think the level at which "need" is set is too low, that's something to take up with the benefit-slashing government.

I hope those who have claimed frauds are dealt with.
I find it appalling that in a time of a major crisis people have claimed what they are not entitled to. Sadly, many will get away with it and continue.

I wonder if they will continue supporting self-employed people? One of my dc plays a woodwind instrument. My dc’s teacher has been able to claim self-employed Government funding But has continued to teach and charge (online) and admits they have not lost work.

@RhubarbJellyFizz

I hope those who have claimed frauds are dealt with. I find it appalling that in a time of a major crisis people have claimed what they are not entitled to. Sadly, many will get away with it and continue.

I wonder if they will continue supporting self-employed people? One of my dc plays a woodwind instrument. My dc’s teacher has been able to claim self-employed Government funding But has continued to teach and charge (online) and admits they have not lost work.

No there were just two SEISS grants and I doubt anymore will happen

@RhubarbJellyFizz

I hope those who have claimed frauds are dealt with. I find it appalling that in a time of a major crisis people have claimed what they are not entitled to. Sadly, many will get away with it and continue.

I wonder if they will continue supporting self-employed people? One of my dc plays a woodwind instrument. My dc’s teacher has been able to claim self-employed Government funding But has continued to teach and charge (online) and admits they have not lost work.

That's one of Rishi's many mistakes. Sole traders were eligible for the grant even if they weren't badly affected and could continue trading. Directors in their own limited companies weren't allowed to do anything at all. Just one of many anomalies. If it's extending, that kind of stupidity needs ironing out.

I read the other day that it is estimated that about 15% of furlough claims are fraudulent. Hopefully these last few months will have given the powers that be a good slice of time to tighten the rules and checks so that any extension will be for those companies actually prohibited from opening.

@SheepandCow

I'd prefer that we adopted the approach some other countries have taken. Universal basic income.

So many people lost their jobs or became too ill to work before Covid. Just like Covid related job loss, through no fault of their own. They too have bills and rents or mortgages to pay. We have a ridiculously unfair situation where people too unwell to work or made redundant before Covid are stuck struggling on £74 a week, whilst Covid related redundancy or sickness gets an extra £20. Both groups have the same expenses.

To think we could've saved so much money and so many jobs had we taken the NZ and Australia island approach. We could still do a belated version and be okish by December but I very much doubt we will. If only!

100% agree about the unfairness. I'm torn - on one hand I don't want people to lose their jobs/be made redundant etc. On the other as pp's have pointed out, continued furlong is just encouraging some unscrupulous companies to save money by limiting staff costs, and working those who have been brought back to the bone.

I just think the 80%/up to £2500 p/m was insanely high. I recognise that for some on high salaries it didn't touch it, but £2500 is more than the average wage! Surely that's a kick in the teeth for people like HCAs, shop workers etc., even some nurses, who worked so incredibly hard in dangerous situations to be paid less than people who (not through their own fault) spent most of the summer sunbathing (not judging - this is exactly what I would have done if I'd been furloughed)?

I work for the civil service so furlough wasn't offered, but pretty much my whole team said we would have jumped on it if it was because the 20% reduction would have been more than cancelled out by reduced taxes, NI, student loan repayments plus no commuting, childcare costs etc. So it does seem mad that a lot of people would be better off not working - I thought avoiding that was the whole point of benefit reform...

Think it needs to be industry specific. Husband is in weddings, between CMA guidelines and insurers (business and events) refusing to pay out so he is now expected to refund his clients fully whilst still not being able to do weddings (he’s got a specialist package for the smaller weddings going ahead but guidelines say if they have to vastly reduce numbers they can get their money back... great). He has a tax bill of £10k in January. He’s got a 4 hour temp contract at the supermarket. I’m not sure where the money is meant to come from? He could career change but he has a year of rebooking’s to stick to that could be started anytime. Rock and hard place!
Weddings and a lot of the creative industry are being strangled due to the guidelines being all over the place. The governments lack of decisions and consistency across events is strangling any chance of return.
Even if they delayed the tax bills for whose sole traders who can’t return would be something!

For everyone saying that we can't afford it, what's the alternative? If we can't afford this then we certainly can't afford the benefits bill and inevitable economic crash when furlough ends at the end of October. Either way the tax payer will end uppsying for it. I'd rather pay in order to keep businesses open, people staying in their homes and having some disposable income than paying UC. The knock on effect of mass redundancies at the end of October is inevitably more redundancies when there are fewer people able to spend on services.

It’s not just being unable to open, we’ve been open throughout but we’ve lost 80% of our business.

@EnglishGirlApproximately

For everyone saying that we can't afford it, what's the alternative? If we can't afford this then we certainly can't afford the benefits bill and inevitable economic crash when furlough ends at the end of October. Either way the tax payer will end uppsying for it. I'd rather pay in order to keep businesses open, people staying in their homes and having some disposable income than paying UC. The knock on effect of mass redundancies at the end of October is inevitably more redundancies when there are fewer people able to spend on services.

UC is cheaper.

@Lakielady yes we do need it and under normal circumstances i know i would be back in work by now or at least have temp work as prior to this i have never ever claimed for unemployment benefit and unique times with little to no jobs available it wouldn't hurt to extend if actively looking which i can easily prove
I have actually filled in a universal credit claim to see of we can get anything but sometimes you can just be on the borderline and not be entitled to anything but be worse off than someone who is allowed

Nope. Way too open to abuse and we cannot afford it.

I do feel terribly sorry for business owners in some of the worst hit sectors, but that is kind of the reality of being a business owner? You can generate bloody good money in the good times, relatively, but stand to lose it all if the worst happens.

Should definitely have ended when lockdown ended. There’s been far too much abuse of it to start with; 2 people I work with have had partners n furlough and their employer has definitely abused the system. They’ll be the tip of the iceberg.

@Lakielady there are people on benefits who have never paid in who are entitled to it
I have a friend whose son gets jsa and has never worked a day in his life at 21 despite having no medical need , lives at home but due to his age obviously qualifies for income based jsa and was recently going to move out of home and claim housing benefit until realised it wouldnt cover 100 percent of cost and only about 90 percent
So yes i feel peeved that I can only claim 6 months based on last 2 years wages , what about the last 20 years i have paid in