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
News
Original poster

Cap on benefits to 26k- am I missing something?

684 replies

buggyRunner · 23/01/2012 07:21

As far as I can gather it's the normal benefits ie housing/ cb and wtc. This seems like a large sum. Is it accross the board or does it include disability related benefits? Are the figures misleading?

OP posts:
EdithWeston · 23/01/2012 07:25

It doesn't include disability benefits (a huge other issue).

But it will include gateway benefits (free prescriptions, school meals, other reductions), and needs to be grossed up to allow for tax/NI if anyone wants to compare it to a waged household.

IUseTooMuchKitchenRoll · 23/01/2012 08:04

Disability benefit claimants are exempt.

I think it's a really good idea, and should have happened long ago.

GypsyMoth · 23/01/2012 08:06

Did I hear cb will be exempt from the calculations too?

ssd · 23/01/2012 08:24

there is anpther thread running which asks this

please if anyone knows the answer post on the other thread too, my heads going round in circles with it all

Original poster
buggyRunner · 23/01/2012 08:28

Oh I'm glad that disability is exempt. Sounds so far common sense

OP posts:
CogitoErgoSometimes · 23/01/2012 09:37

IDS interview on R4 this morning seemed to indicate exemptions from capping are....

  • People on DLA
  • People on WTC.
  • People newly unemployed... sounded like he was going to put in a 'grace' period of about six months to allow someone to get back into work.

The ones most affected - which I suppose is the whole point - are the long-term unemployed.

SardineQueen · 23/01/2012 09:47

The reason that I personally dislike this cap is that it will mean that thousands of families will need to move from mainly the more central areas of london, out. This will mean a lot of upheaval for the families and real problems for the areas receiving this big influx, and a reduction in mixing of different types of people which many people believe is a good thing for society.

So you have
Many many children leaving their schools - what will happen to the schools who suddenly lose a load of pupils. There are no plans that I have heard of to beef up school places in places where these people might be going so not sure what is going to happen there
People who are working and on benefits may find their increased commute costs make it untenable to continue in their job
There will be a removal of lower income people from certain areas, resulting in an "out of sight and out of mind" sort of scenario. It is easier to clobber people who are poor if you don't have to look at them, if you don't know them or live near them. Personally I think that one of the great things about london is that it is so mixed. You have enclaves of rich and poor but they are pretty close to each other
How is moving people to areas which are cheaper going to improve their prospects if they are unemployed - cheap areas are often that way because there is less access to employment

Basically I think that there are likely to be some really quite negative side effects from this, and it will be quite difficult for all the children who have to leave school, friends, family. Also for people who are in an area where they grew up and have a support network of friends / neighbours if they have things like mental health problems or difficulties for other reasons.

It is not the fault of claimants that the cost of housing is so high in some parts of the country.

SardineQueen · 23/01/2012 09:58

There is a reasonably comprehensive article on the BBC today here which explains teh govts reasoning and why some don't like it.

I didn't realise that child benefit was going to be included, I must admit.

dalaran · 23/01/2012 10:02

"and a reduction in mixing of different types of people which many people believe is a good thing for society."

What a tragedy! Perhaps there are lots of working people who would like to be mixing with the Notting Hill set but could never afford to live anywhere near there. There are working people who commute hours to London every day.

"How is moving people to areas which are cheaper going to improve their prospects if they are unemployed - cheap areas are often that way because there is less access to employment"

If they moved to outer London (as I say, many people commute for hours) then surely they could still be applying for the same jobs that they could be as if they were living in expensive areas of London. After all, even if they get a job while living in inner London, the job is unlikely to pay for accommodation in the area.

CogitoErgoSometimes · 23/01/2012 10:09

"There will be a removal of lower income people from certain areas, resulting in an "out of sight and out of mind" sort of scenario"

The cap doesn't apply to people on WTC. So someone on a low income will stay in the same place. It's only the unemployed that will be asked to move out. And what difference, really, if you're unemployed in London, Lincoln or Liverpool?....

Hullygully · 23/01/2012 10:10

Available jobs, cogito?

Hullygully · 23/01/2012 10:11

Social networks?

Family support? - in case you know, you do get a job.

Hullygully · 23/01/2012 10:11

Children's schools.

SardineQueen · 23/01/2012 10:12

?

You don't see the benefit of having people all mixed up together? I have always thought that ghettoes breed real problems. Around here there are some areas that are "gated" and the people who live there seem to be quite different to the people in houses around the outside. I think that it certainly does breed a certain type of attitude, to be separated in that way. For both the rich and the poor.

Fares in london are very expensive. If you are working in a low paid role, then the cost of commuting may cancel out the cost of working. You forget that many people on benefits already have jobs - and some may well have to leave those jobs.

SardineQueen · 23/01/2012 10:14

"The cap doesn't apply to people on WTC. So someone on a low income will stay in the same place"

Oh that's good, have you got a link?

The schools thing is the real biggy for me. Moving all the children. And I haven't seen a plan for what is going to happen in the areas they move to.

Surely areas that are currently within the cap (eg enfield) will see a large increase in rental amounts, and the ones in town will fall? So will people have to shuttle backwards and forwards as supply and demand dictates and the rental prices fluctuate wildly?

CogitoErgoSometimes · 23/01/2012 10:16

If someone is long-term unemployed - which is the category being indicated rather than those temporarily out of work -they haven't found an available job in London. There are jobs available all over the country and the living costs and housing costs are much cheaper outside of London. Could be a fresh start for those people.

CogitoErgoSometimes · 23/01/2012 10:19

@SardineQueen... it was in the IDS interview this morning on R4 (there's probably a listen again facility) when he said that people 'doing the right thing' i.e employed and in receipt WTC, would not be subjected to the capping measures. I'm sure it's written down somewhere

SardineQueen · 23/01/2012 10:20

I imagine that quite a lot of the people unable to find work will be single parents with young children, who need something in school hours because they cannot earn enough to cover childcare outside school hours.

All of those children will be removed from their schools and put where? There is no space for them in outer london boroughs - all of the schools here are oversubscribed. What is going to happen to the schools that lose all these children? It is going to be thousands involved. Where do they go? What about all the related services like healthcare? I have not seen any plans to explain how this is going to work.

SardineQueen · 23/01/2012 10:20

cogito yes I just found it - it's in a box on that BBC piece I linked upthread.

CogitoErgoSometimes · 23/01/2012 10:22

List of exemptions Taken from the linked article

Exemptions for households in receipt of Working Tax Credit, Disability Living Allowance or its successor Personal Independence Payment, Constant Attendance Allowance and war widows and widowers.

SardineQueen · 23/01/2012 10:23

Also, interestingly, outer london isn't exactly a desolate wasteland. It is green, and lovely, and terribly posh in some areas, with much less of the more desperate problems experienced in inner london (gangs etc). Lots of people would give their right arm to live in greater london. How long before it is decided that these areas are also too good for these people?

SardineQueen · 23/01/2012 10:24

What they should do is increase social housing in town by sorting out some of the thousands of long term empty state owned properties around the place.

That would be much more sensible.

MrsHeffley · 23/01/2012 10:25

It's the equivalent to £35K!!!!!!

Those of us not on benefits have to manage on this sum or lower not sure why it's more difficult for those on benefits.Hmm

Long,long overdue and I can't believe anybody would argue against it.My opinion of Paddy Ashdown has plummeted.

CogitoErgoSometimes · 23/01/2012 10:28

"All of those children will be removed from their schools and put where?"

Also in the interview the number of 50,000 households was mentioned. Not said how many of those include children. They've been identified and will be contacted to work through some options according to IDS. I'm sure some will find it difficult but maybe others will leap at the chance to get away from London with all its problems and see it as an opportunity?

CogitoErgoSometimes · 23/01/2012 10:31

"too good for these people"

Not a question of 'too good' is it? I live not that far from lovely Harpenden. Can't afford a house there so it's off the radar... not because I'm 'not good enough' but because I don't have enough money. We all have to cut our cloth.