to be shocked the BBC asked a searching question re benefits?

[inheritanceshiteagain]

This morning I think it was Gordon Brown saying people on benefits should get a rise in line with cost of living increase (9%ish), rather than in line with wage rises (5%ish).
The BBC presenter asked him if it was fair to people getting up at 6am to go to work to support their families, who would not get this higher amount?
GB pointed out that 40% of people on tax credits are working... but that leaves 60% of people fit to work who don't work?

Of course there are multiple factors, childcare, single parenthood, no jobs available in the area where they are needed and so on, but why is there such a crazy system that makes it financially better to work 16 hours a week? Why isn't there more affordable childcare available? If this fixable?

The clue is in the name of the benefit op.
'Universal'
It's not just for people who are fit for work. It is a 'universal' benefit.

Why don't you do some reading and educate yourself on it instead of posting a load of incorrect information?

We have someone in my team who dropped their days to 2 from 4 when returned from Mat leave as they’d get the same or almost the same working 2 days and topped up. You can’t blame them if they will be paid the same for less. Of course means less pension payments and more difficult to progress but for a few years when she’s in her early 20’s I guess that’s not an issue for her

I'm not saying people should or shouldn't get benefits increases in line with CoL, because I just don't know anything about benefits. Just a bit shocked the left leaning BBC would actually say that. FWIW I did get up at 6am for work, and I don't claim work related or housing benefits, just child. Just made me think what is a fair way to go on? People who are just about surviving and can't afford to have a second child and don't get any help... why don't they get help? I know families on all the benefits, 6 children, no adult working, and I also know single parents on benefts needing food banks and at breaking point. Also working people living hand to mouth, claiming nothing and others who work the same hours and are really well off. The whole thing seems so difficult to square the circle and make things fair.

Its not incorrect information. Its what was on the BBC news .. unless Gordon Brown also doesnt know the stats.??

I'm not sure how it works for new UC Claims for disabled people but it appears that ESA has been phased out, only existing for 'legacy' Claimants. Any Disability UC Premiums seem to only be for those with at least 2 years recent NI contributions - ergo only for those that have recently become incapacitated/disabled.

There is no other UC Additional Payment for disabled people but as they are classified as having a Limited Capacity For Work they are not expected to fulfill the many job searches, job applications, fruitless Job Coach appointments and Journal Reporting that able people need to do.

I know this because I handle my disabled son's UC Claim.

A lot of people still on Tax Credits are on vulnerable claims, i.e., claims where there is a disability element, as they're amongst the last tranche being migrated to Universal Credit (currently slated to happen by 2024).

So of the 60%, many of them will actually be disabled and/or carers.

And I heard the BBC interview with Gordon Brown and whilst I agree with the points he was making it is completely correct for an Interviewer to ask counter-view questions, otherwise the Interview would be completely unbalanced

Yes, it’s quite confusing because of the phase out. A couple of years ago I helped out at a charity helping people fill out various claims or appeals forms. I had to stop because it was unbelievable stressful, the number of incredibly vulnerable people put through the mill of the appeal system, left almost destitute was sound destroying. For what? the sake of ideology, this system costs significantly more than the old system before Blair & Cameron’s tinkering.

Don't forgot that of those on benefits who are fit to work at least a quarter of them will only be on benefits for up to 13 weeks, they are the stop gap between being laid off and getting a new job, which is exactly the safety net most people want to have I assume?

So lots get said about all these people on benefits sitting around doing nothing, but it often gets missed that its not the same people all the time, its a cycle of people who get laid off, go on job seekers or UC, get a new job, go off benefits.

Lets not pretend they are an issue (and there are lots of reasons why a vast number of the rest are not the issue the media would like you to think they are)

On UC tgere are two levels of disability recorded, linited capability for work means you don't need to look for work but get no disability premium. Someone who is more severely has limited capability for work or work related activity and they receive an extra premium or around £300 a month on their benefits.

It's ESA where you now need two years NI contributions to claim, without them you need to claim UC instead.