Cap child tax credit after four children, says MP

[SardineQueen]

here

One of nadine's friends!

I'm not surprised to see this from a conservative MP, as ever I think this sort of thing is a terrible idea - children don't choose to be born and by restricting benefits in this way you are punishing the children for something you disapprove of the parents doing. And as I understand it the number of people with no work ever and loads of children is actually very low? So this sort of policy doesn't actually save much money at all. Can't remember where I saw that though.

I am sure there will be some who disagree. I thought that people who post here might be interested anyway.

What happens when you have step dc or one patent goes on to remarry and have more dc ?

The combinations could be intresting

I hope it's 4 per pair of parents not just the Mother. It might stop some of these sperm donors in their tracks if they thought they would have to support their children.

Actually I hope it's only 2 but that's not what's being mooted.

Scarletmummy

One week is tough but try it week after week it is soul destroying

Alosie

Think your find it be 4 per claim not per parent .

So which of my 4dc would you Like me to penalise For exhisting .

I had 2 dc split from their dad then met my xh had 2 more dc he had none and was working full time .

But for lots of reasons we divorced including the fact. Ds3 has Sn . Now that's left me as Sp for 4 on benefits !!ds1abd ds2 dad left the country so no matineance. .

Dd and ds3 dad quit his Jon went on to incapacity so I get £10 a fortnight in total that's it no contact no extra topping up

So maybe they should be the ones to suffer since they was born last or should I rotate which 2 weekly or fortnightly

Oh and I'm probably better of then huntycat

As due to ds3 Sn and by fact I had accident and ended up disabled we don't suffer so many looks or comments as were classed as the deserving poor

Poor is poor deserving or not why punish the dc ?

No one is suggesting taking anything away from any current children. Just a preventative measure for the future. Employees don't automatically get a pay rise when they produce another child, neither should claimants.

And how about the Fathers of these children paying for their upbringing rather than the state. That's a novel idea

Oh on that point I agree with you they should be paying

Ds1,ds2 dad well he went back to Italy so a no go

Dd and ds3 dad officially he is paying for them at rate set by CSa . This is about to be reduced as him and his g/f wife ( not sure if they married ) are expecting so be down to £5 a fornightly between 2 lol that's not even going to cover their packed lunches

He jacked his job went on incapacity as was signed of after a while with depression (note incapcity not DLA he got turned down for DLA ). But that's a whole separate story

Are some of you strawmen argusist actually reading this thread?

No one has suggested stopping money for children already in existence nor is anyone suggesting abortion or culling.

What we are supporting is a cap on four children. Which to me, seems still rather generous considering the only people most of us seem to know with four or more kids are the poor or the well off. If I had a quid for every one I know that would like more children but can't afford them . I'd be rich!

Harry

What about as I pointed out step families or when new partner has dc ? . Both occurring after a so called cap amnesty is brought in ?

How do you decide when to bring it in ? What happens if someone has just fallen pregnant so the child will be born but they will be over the cap ?

alouise i completely agree.why are so many absent parents able to not pay for their children.My exh has never paid a penny for his children and because i work the csa werent interested in helping to get any.Even if they were they wouldnt get any cos he only works "on the side" and claims benefits with his dp and their 2 nice shiney new chidren who dont answer back.How marvelous that he can just make some more babies and not pay for them or the ones he already has If i think about it too much i will combust!

humancatapult I don't understand. Those children already exist so money is already there.

If you have four between you and want more, that is absolutely your choice. But you won;t get any more money, yunno, just like those of us who work don't get any more money for any more children.

Is this really proving so difficult to understand?
The govt introduces a cap that takes effect one year hence for all new claims. A bit like the warning they gave all The Rich(ha!) about losing CB.

Yes they do but if step family's combine it is then classed as a new claim . So will they then apply the new rules as the ctc are paid to just one person in the family

Bit like Hb if you move or swap houses now you loose the right to a secure ling term tenancy does not matter if you had s secure tennacy before hand

Oh in my case I'm not wanting or planning any more tyvm

How about only getting family benefits for the first family - might stop the subsequent issues around maintenance.

Or how about not getting an increase at all when a new child arrives.Dh and i both work and we didnt get automatic pay rises when we had our latest baby,in fact we are living on less as ive taken the full year off and will be returning part time. You just make it stretch further.

Totally agree Ledkr.

But that is just inhuman! People should be allowed to have as many children as they want even especially if everyone else is funding them!

Are you saying only the rich should have children?

Most of those children, statistically, will never be taxpaying adults. They will follow their parents example.

And isn't calling someone a fascist against MN rules?

Report it then. You are basically staring that these people are worthless. You tell me what that makes you...?

Stating

Bollocks am I. I am saying that if you choose to have more than four children when you already know you will have no more funding, then you are making a choice.
If that makes me a fascist, so be it.