Forum menu
What psycho dramas and scandals from the government have I missed then?
I was referring more to the comment about everything being normal and us being able to get on with our lives without having to watch politics 😉
Anyway it was only a joke. No criticism of the govt on this one - apart from maybe a few operational things - they've been left a shitshow and have been very unlucky. Funny though that only a few weeks ago we were celebrating a new era of peace and stability under a 'boring' govt and now look where are. That quote from Harold Macmillan about events has never been more relevant!
Two-child benefit cap is cementing regional poverty, Starmer told
Regarded by experts as the UK’s biggest single driver of child poverty, affecting about 1.6 million children
Will the claim that the cap cementing "regional" poverty be enough to make Starmer/Reeves decide that it is too important for it to wait until March next year before scrapping it?
Or will 1.6 million children still have to wait almost a year after the defeat of a right-wing Tory government before Labour scraps the biggest single driver of child poverty?
More likely it will be announced in the budget in the autumn
the biggest single driver of child poverty?
Surely, the causes are either lack of work, inability to work, or working for poverty pay? All paired with rising costs of living? The benefits system is a fix of sorts for the real drivers of child poverty, and would work better if larger families were offered more help. But “driver”…?
Personally, I’d like to see the government think bigger, and increase child benefit for all children (perhaps keeping an improved version of the system where the highest earners don’t receive it for their kids). Much of this would then go to child care for many anyway.
Also, while the breakfasts at primary schools is a good start, more direct provision and care for children provided by the state is needed… to ensure all children benefit. While it’s true that when in or close to poverty most people will but their children first, those kids in families that don’t work that way need direct help… and providing that help for all means kids are less likely to be missed, or stigmatized. I think Khan is right about school meals.
https://freeschoolmealsforall.org.uk/london
But “driver”…?
That's what the Guardian reckons experts are claiming, biggest single driver in fact. Who am I to argue?
They should have said cause rather than driver but I'd rather be doing anything that goes towards fixing it and it very easy to do was done quickly that discussing what words were used to describe it.
I'd very much like to know where the middle ground gets its optimism from with the idea that Labour are going to to do all this great stuff.
Rachel Reeves has pretty much set the direction she wants to go in.
Reeves said growth first yeah? (Looking grim by the way.)
She's doing what she said she would.
So the idea they they will sort the cap at the budget - great - but where's that coming from?
You guys seem to know things Reeves' has not alluded to.
As for causes and drivers of poverty and inequality - well of course but this is an easy fix which they could have done from day one. Zero excuses.
Bare minimum stuff.
They should have said cause rather than driver but I’d rather be doing anything that goes towards fixing it and it very easy to do was done quickly that discussing what words were used to describe it.
Well exactly - while centrists were trying to be all analytical about what causes what and slipstream around poverty - clearly just reversing this would put state money back into the pockets of a group that needs money and would spend money. Also sends out the correct political signals.
I was told on here that poverty comes from all sorts of places and reasons - apart from the effects of this cap of course. Hmmm. Aged well.
It's about doing something and not dwelling on this ridiculous black-hole garbage.
https://twitter.com/JoMicheII/status/1819371881146781697?t=AprZ5cTwgpGZY8psoJ7QSg&s=19
Osborne described Reeves as a 'mini-me'.
Just to be clear this is NOT right-wing Tory politicians talking about a previous Labour government, although the rhetoric would be presumably identical :
But Reeves warned that she would “look closely at our welfare system, because if someone can work, they should work”.
She said that “welfare spending ballooned” under the last government, while “inactivity has risen sharply in recent years”.
She told MPs: “We will ensure that the welfare system is focused on supporting people into employment, and we will assess the unacceptable levels of fraud and error in our welfare system and take forward action to bring that down.”
Her comments mirrored those by work and pensions secretary Liz Kendall, who suggested last week that she wanted to increase pressure on disabled people to move off benefits and into work, while disregarding risks to their health, and that she wanted the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) to move from being “a department for welfare” to becoming “a genuine department for work”.
Presumably this is the change all those Starmer fans were looking forward to.
If you genuinely want to help people to work who cannot work you are going to need to force companies to give the hours and flexible arrangements to enable that. Anything else is just the same old tory shit.
Liz Kendall is reprehensible in her logic.
This sort of talk will come back to hurt Labour for sure.
I cannot for the life of me figure out - now they're elected they feel the need to operate like this.
1) it's failed Tory policy / economic ideas.
2) it's cruel.
3) it's not necessary.
What does concern me if a recession takes hold (and yes recessions are always being called.) but fiscal flows in a America have slowed (the difference between money going into the non-governmental sector and out ) in the USA and data is looking shaky - and the UK follows; will Labour spend or cut their way out?
Million and one scenarios but there is nothing good economically on the horizon that I can see.
Interest rate cuts will drive a bit of growth as the markets get excited but downturns follow big interest rate cycles too as there is less money by way of interest income to buy assets with.
The entire article posted just uses words like suggest, or appears, there is no factual information in there, just Linda Burnip saying the same thing she's said in each government.
Not sure how it would be cruel, or not necessary to do a review on something like this, i would hazard almost everyone on here knows someone on disability who lives an active life, it's making sure that whatever review occurs, does not put pressure on those who are valid cases, like the previous Atos nightmare.
The entire article posted just uses words like suggest, or appears, there is no factual information in there
No it doesn't just do that, read it again. It very clearly quotes extremely senior Labour government ministers, THAT is "factual information"
i would hazard almost everyone on here knows someone on disability who lives an active life
And maybe send those examples to the Daily Mail so that they can demonise the disabled? Workshy ****ers
Not sure how it would be cruel, or not necessary to do a review on something like this, i would hazard almost everyone on here knows someone on disability who lives an active life
You explain to us why it's necessary?
Are even beginning to suggest that the government can save money?
There is no different between this line of logic and the early days of Cameron's government.
I can't believe the defence some folk put up here. Is it beyond the average Labour supporter to know a regressive policy choice when they see one?
No good comes from this.
THAT is “factual information”
It's all the rehashed stuff about the £22 billion and so on, nothing definitive about disability benefits being changed.
And maybe send those examples to the Daily Mail so that they can demonise the disabled? Workshy ****ers
And that's the issue, you don't see any improvements to a system that could have savings that could be moved to benefit those most affected, the uncentered left will just bleat on about binning trident, taxing the rich until the squeak and so on.
And that’s the issue, you don’t see any improvements to a system that could have savings that could be moved to benefit those most affected, the uncentered left will just bleat on about binning trident, taxing the rich until the squeak and so on
Government doesn't save. Fact.
You are ascribing house-budgets to government spending.
If you believe that you tell me how it saves? Because I know of no savings account in the BoE/government interface.
So all that can be left is you are making nonsense regressive political choices to align oneself with conservative policy?
You are ascribing house-budgets to government spending.
No, they aren’t. They are saying spending less on A enables more spending on B without increases in C or D. All this balancing still goes on in government even with the MMT blinkers on. Choosing where to spend more/less doesn’t go away… these choices still need to be made, you can’t address every choice with “just fund everything, to whatever level is required”.
On the opinion piece at the top of the page… for me it all comes down to the difference between genuine help back into work, or just trying to use sanctions to force people into the wrong work. We need more of the former (has costs but also large potential benefits) and less of the later.
for me it all comes down to the difference between genuine help back into work, or just trying to use sanctions to force people into the wrong work.
So you still live in hope that Labour will spend more to help people back to work rather than cut benefits hoping that employers will magically employ people who are more challenging for them to employ (flexibility, accommodations etc,.) than other choices they may have?
for me it all comes down to the difference between genuine help back into work, or just trying to use sanctions to force people into the wrong work. We need more of the former (has costs but also large potential benefits) and less of the later.
This. As someone with a working disabled partner.
So you still live in hope that Labour will spend more to help people back to work rather than cut benefits hoping that employers will magically employ people who are more challenging for them to employ (flexibility, accommodations etc,.) than other choices they may have?
Must be hard living in such a state of constant distrust and pessimism
nothing definitive about disability benefits being changed.
This very much suggests a change. It is claiming that under the previous there were "unacceptable levels of fraud", although they define what an acceptable is.
“We will ensure that the welfare system is focused on supporting people into employment, and we will assess the unacceptable levels of fraud and error in our welfare system and take forward action to bring that down.”
The comment could have come straight out of a Tory politician's mouth. It will have the effect of marginalising, intimidating, and demonising, those who are claiming benefits.
Have you seen the film "I Daniel Blake" ? It focuses on how the Tory government did exactly that. Now it's the turn of a Labour government
"The comment could have come straight out of a Tory politician’s mouth. It will have the effect of marginalising, intimidating, and demonising, those who are claiming benefits."
So because the pepperoni pizza I ordered from Dominos* was shit, I'm not interested in trying the one from Pizza Hut because I refuse to believe they might get it right.
*other suppliers of disappointing pizza are available.
Must be hard living in such a state of constant distrust and pessimism
Nope, I have an incredibly easy life thanks. But that's the point, I don't see why a government with so much shit to sort out would even mention looking at disability benefits, typically those people who haven't had the best start in life/best events happen to them during life.
They seem to be playing at tory hard man to me but guess that is what anyone that voted for them wanted.
So because the pepperoni pizza I ordered from Dominos* was shit, I’m not interested in trying the one from Pizza Hut because I refuse to believe they might get it right.
It depends.
Are Pizza Hut selling the same shit?
Are Pizza Hut selling the same shit?
Have to give them a chance to find out.
I don't think you are listening to what they are telling you. A senior Labour politician is talking about unacceptable levels of benefit fraud, it is straight out of the "How to be a Right-wing Arsehole" manuel.
Only this time instead of it coming very predictably from an incoming Tory government it is coming much less predictably from an incoming Labour government.
They are suggesting that the previous Tory government was too soft on benefit fraud.
That sort of rhetoric is hateful and contributes to the growing hostility which on benefits and with disabilities face.
What is there to wait for before condemning it?
fraud and error
Being overpaid, and then having that overpayment clawed back, has put a lot of people into difficulty. As often caused by administrative cock up as by people over stating their claims.
I don’t think you are listening to what they are telling you. A senior Labour politician is talking about unacceptable levels of benefit fraud, it is straight out of the “How to be a Right-wing Arsehole” manuel.
I can't see where she mentioned benefits fraud, just if people could work, they should be in work, is this another senior labour politician you're on about?
if people could work, they should be in work,
Pretty radical concept.
The problem with this rather terrible argument - is that we are moving the problems of the economy created by successive governments on to the shoulders of people that don't deserve it
And it's clear the Centrists have moved from 'Labour will move left when in power' to accepting every bullshit economic myth that Labour have taken from the Tories.
You wouldn't tolerate this if it came out of a Tory MP's mouth so why Labour?
Astonishing hypocrisy.
This is not change. This is continuation.
(But then we kind of knew it didn't we?)
he problem with this rather terrible argument – is that we are moving the problems of the economy created by successive governments on to the shoulders of people that don’t deserve it
So people who don't work, but could work don't deserve to be treated like this?
You wouldn’t tolerate this if it came out of a Tory MP’s mouth so why Labour?
Why not, i think the entire planet has changed over the last 4 years, we're less chained to desks and more mobile as a workforce, surely this is a huge benefit to a lot of those who couldn't previously work in jobs due to pressures on work timings and locations, as stated earlier, i wouldn't like to see another Atos style attack on the disability benefits, but this one just sounds like common sense.
I can’t see where she mentioned benefits fraud
I know that I probably shouldn't engage but I am fascinated in knowing what you think she meant by "and we will assess the unacceptable levels of fraud and error in our welfare system" ?
So "fraud in our welfare system" isn't benefits fraud?
You wouldn’t tolerate this if it came out of a Tory MP’s mouth so why Labour?
As someone who works in tackling fraud for the government, guess what?
Though what I would do is make sure I checked the exact words and the full context of what was said, and then wait until the actual policy is delivered before passing judgement, rather than going for a kneejerk instant opinion.
Much the same way I check and double check the facts when trying to work out whether the case I'm working is fraud, or error, and whether a penalty is justified.
So people who don’t work, but could work don’t deserve to be treated like this?
benefit fraud is an avsolute pittance compared to the amount that is avoided by complicated tax accounting, but messing with tax issues is far harder than shouting “benefit fraud”, and benief fraud is a very catch tagline for the papers.
tax the ****ers with masses of assets and offshore money
Why not do both, within the abilities of the UK, or is it ok to commit fraud if it's just benefits fraud?
Why not, i think the entire planet has changed over the last 4 years, we’re less chained to desks and more mobile as a workforce, surely this is a huge benefit to a lot of those who couldn’t previously work in jobs due to pressures on work timings and locations, as stated earlier, i wouldn’t like to see another Atos style attack on the disability benefits, but this one just sounds like common sense.
Full throated tory messaging there...
Why not do both, within the abilities of the UK, or is it ok to commit fraud if it’s just benefits fraud?
Because one is rich people doing anything they can to keep the money they don't really need and the other is poor people who can hardly afford to live trying to get an extra few quid.
Both are wrong but where your focus your efforts is very telling.
Why not do both, within the abilities of the UK, or is it ok to commit fraud if it’s just benefits fraud?
Benefit fraud is being dealt with pretty effectively, even draconianly. Tax evasion isn't, so it is a rather strange attempt to deflect from from the lax treatment of tax offenders to say "yeah but look benefits fraud"
Full throated tory messaging there…
So if people can find work that they can do instead of claiming benefits, that would be a tory style idea, and trying to cut down fraud either side is not good, as it should only be aimed at the 'rich' tax evaders, with that type of attitude i'm thankful i'm a fanatical centrist!
The intention to go after wealthy tax evaders and/or avoidance is to claw back the fact they have too much money and take too many resources. There is a real world reason there.
The problem with the benefits cheat argument is apart from it being an old fashioned Tory special is it puts a disproportionate amount of attention on a much maligned group of people. The class the Daily Mail hates.
If any of this is to make savings then it's bogus.
For me it would be easier to say governments - especially the sort that Labour ought to be is to create progressive redistribution from years of inequality.
This would be far better than punishing benefit cheats.
That can only really be done with fiscal policy and not when your ridiculous central bank is pushing policy designed to harm people without capital.
So how about we address the real problems instead of Labour running scared from what is entirely in their remit?
They can organise the economy if they want to and they've absolutely no need to use second-hand Tory mechanisms.
I've no idea how anyone can rage at the Tory landscape disaster era and then simultaneously support Labour's version of it.
It's incredible.
As you are well aware, no one is arguing to "allow" benefit fraud, just that it is currently already being dealt with, often in a way that punishes the poor and vulnerable for cock up in the system. Which is very different to the soft touch pretence of a fight against tax evasion, and that it is a frankly pathetic excuse to keep shouting "benefit fraud" to excuse tax evasion.
i’m thankful i’m a fanatical centrist!
LOL
Why on earth is the failure that is Jonathan Ashworth being given so much airtime?
The man's a noisy class A tool and riding a wave of publicity for nothing. His lack of self-awareness is staggering.
He was up for sending people back during the election. He and Ed Balls make for the most cringe ex-Labour gobshites currently on telly.
How on earth do people manage to wangle the system to claim fraudulent benefits? The number of checks is unreal (and rightly so). DLA you literally have a 30 odd page form to fill out and need proof to support the claim from healthcare professionals.
Universal credit too, the range of checks is wide spreading with follow up appointments to keep the entitlement. Having recently been through this whole process (DLA,UC and carers allowance) for the first time for my wife you wonder how many people are actually fraudulently claiming DLA at least. It is not made anywhere near as easy as presented in the press.
After 14 years of tory rule theres little to nobody left who could be identified as a 'benefit scrounger' The tories hate and i mean hate social security. In their tenure they have implemented policy after policy taking people off benefits.
Exactly. What are the types of fraud, who is getting away with it and how. And how much money is being lost to it.