Osbourne Announces Benefit Changes for manifesto
Discussion
Telegraph said:
BENEFITS FROZEN FOR TWO YEARS
Britain can't afford £100 billion of working age welfare payments a year, Osborne says. Benefits have risen ahead of earnings: not sustainable and not fair, he says. He announces benefits will be FROZEN for two years after the next election, saving £3 billion. Disabled and elderly excluded. It follows a reduction in the uprating of 1 per cent, that passed with relatively little complaint.
As briefed over the weekend, the benefits cap will be cut by £3k to £23k, and housing benefit removed for young people, with the money saved used for apprenticeships to "pull up young people". Osborne is carving out clear dividing lines with Labour.
It seems like a good start at the leastBritain can't afford £100 billion of working age welfare payments a year, Osborne says. Benefits have risen ahead of earnings: not sustainable and not fair, he says. He announces benefits will be FROZEN for two years after the next election, saving £3 billion. Disabled and elderly excluded. It follows a reduction in the uprating of 1 per cent, that passed with relatively little complaint.
As briefed over the weekend, the benefits cap will be cut by £3k to £23k, and housing benefit removed for young people, with the money saved used for apprenticeships to "pull up young people". Osborne is carving out clear dividing lines with Labour.
With a structural deficit estimated at £25 billion eliminating it without real term benefits cuts seems impossible.
Adrian W said:
Why didn't they do this four years ago? when implementing cuts and blaming labour for everything, populist polices for the stupid voters.
The fact they have been in coalition with the Lib Dems has restricted them in a number of areas. Just because a policy is popular does not make it stupid.
otolith said:
Yes, getting everyone to think their prosperity is at the largess of the state was the Labour strategy, but I'm not sure it fools everybody. Redistributive taxes combined with token benefits are not convincing.
Young people receiving housing benefit - Tory votes lost there?
Families receiving more than 23k in benefits - Tory votes lost there?
People who think a 23k benefit ceiling is a shocking social injustice - Tory votes lost there?
AgreedYoung people receiving housing benefit - Tory votes lost there?
Families receiving more than 23k in benefits - Tory votes lost there?
People who think a 23k benefit ceiling is a shocking social injustice - Tory votes lost there?
Potential Tory voters will be affected by the freeze in child benefit and on the "token" child tax credits those on decent incomes receive, but it will not be critical to household budgets and rises in the personal allowance will offset a part of it.
Most people's experience of benefits (those who pay for it all) is to turn up at a job centre and only have an entitlement for a glorified luncheon voucher as their partner works.
Hoofy said:
I'm in two minds. Interesting point made on LBC last night - it's not weighted by area. Someone could happily live on £23k up north but a similar family in South London could be in serious trouble.
The state should not be paying for people to live in the centre of one of the most expensive cities on earth.Without the benefits system wages for low skilled work in central London would have had to rise far more.
Hackney said:
I'm sick to death of this "we're all in this together" when the top x% caused and continue to cause the problems yet play no part in the solution..
Well except for the 1/3 of all income tax they pay of course (from the top 1% of tax payers).But no they are not paying their fair share so the obvious solution is to raise taxes until they all leave, that will show them
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff