Boris Johnson- Prime Minister (Vol. 5)
Discussion
amusingduck said:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/governmen...
It sounds like if you receive UC, and your other non-benefit income after tax is <£616/mo, you qualify automatically for FSM? In the given example, if she nets less than that from her childminding, she should be eligible?
Obligatory 'I don't like child poverty, it's the govt's responsibility to fix etc'
That's interesting. It suggests the £16,190 upper FSM threshold doesn't apply to UC, which the last time I looked was still on the claim form regardless of benefit type.It sounds like if you receive UC, and your other non-benefit income after tax is <£616/mo, you qualify automatically for FSM? In the given example, if she nets less than that from her childminding, she should be eligible?
Obligatory 'I don't like child poverty, it's the govt's responsibility to fix etc'
I'm still trying to work out how she's getting £1500 a month in UC, though (it could be that much if it includes childcare costs, but that part would be money being claimed back that you've already paid out).
Tuna said:
I for one applaud IforB's work to take food to those who need it. Well done.
Here we have a good example of what we can achieve. Ifor would be the first to tell you he's a socially privileged individual, who has benefitted from our education system and a business environment that rewards serial entrepreneurs. This is a successful guy getting involved in their local community to make a positive difference. He's found a cause that matters to him and is clearly enjoying being involved.
I'm struggling to think of a more Conservative solution to a perennial problem - rather than waiting for consensus over what is clearly a contentious issue for some, he's taken personal responsibility and the benefit of his position to support his community.
I agree but his solution is apolitical it’s not a conservative solution or a labour one it’s just about helping where it’s needed.Here we have a good example of what we can achieve. Ifor would be the first to tell you he's a socially privileged individual, who has benefitted from our education system and a business environment that rewards serial entrepreneurs. This is a successful guy getting involved in their local community to make a positive difference. He's found a cause that matters to him and is clearly enjoying being involved.
I'm struggling to think of a more Conservative solution to a perennial problem - rather than waiting for consensus over what is clearly a contentious issue for some, he's taken personal responsibility and the benefit of his position to support his community.
I don’t think there’s a need to try and score political points out of someone helping people.
Helicopter123 said:
Do you have a problem with women generally, or just with single mothers?
I'm not sure of the significance of the '16 plate Renault Kadjar TBH.Edited by Helicopter123 on Sunday 25th October 11:28
Does Mike think this is a good car ? I think Mike needs his bumps feeling.
Or maybe Mike thinks this person "he knows" should go everywhere by skateboard.
I reckon this person is Mike's ex. The hatred is obvious. IMHO.
Red 4 said:
Helicopter123 said:
Do you have a problem with women generally, or just with single mothers?
I'm not sure of the significance of the '16 plate Renault Kadjar TBH.Edited by Helicopter123 on Sunday 25th October 11:28
Does Mike think this is a good car ? I think Mike needs his bumps feeling.
Or maybe Mike thinks this person "he knows" should go everywhere by skateboard.
I reckon this person is Mike's ex. The hatred is obvious. IMHO.
Tuna said:
I for one applaud IforB's work to take food to those who need it. Well done.
Here we have a good example of what we can achieve. Ifor would be the first to tell you he's a socially privileged individual, who has benefitted from our education system and a business environment that rewards serial entrepreneurs. This is a successful guy getting involved in their local community to make a positive difference. He's found a cause that matters to him and is clearly enjoying being involved.
I'm struggling to think of a more Conservative solution to a perennial problem - rather than waiting for consensus over what is clearly a contentious issue for some, he's taken personal responsibility and the benefit of his position to support his community.
I agree entirely and credit to IforB and anyone else who has got involved to help out.Here we have a good example of what we can achieve. Ifor would be the first to tell you he's a socially privileged individual, who has benefitted from our education system and a business environment that rewards serial entrepreneurs. This is a successful guy getting involved in their local community to make a positive difference. He's found a cause that matters to him and is clearly enjoying being involved.
I'm struggling to think of a more Conservative solution to a perennial problem - rather than waiting for consensus over what is clearly a contentious issue for some, he's taken personal responsibility and the benefit of his position to support his community.
Yet as I pointed out last night the Government when asked couldn't even bring themselves to pay credit to all those struggling businesses and individuals who had pledged to help out.
Conservative solutions maybe but they don't seem to draw much support from the current Government.
No.10 Keeps Refusing To Praise Businesses For Offering Free Meals To Children
Can someone tell me what's conservative about that because it beats the s
t out of me 
Red 4 said:
Crackie said:
Red 4 said:
In 2019 Boris Johnson said there were 400,000 fewer children living in poverty than in 2010.
This was a great big fat whopper of a lie. All of the stats, regardless of what metric you use to measure poverty, say otherwise.
One measure says there are actually 500,000 more children living in poverty.
When you have a PM who is prepared to lie through his teeth and pull figures out of his arse then you have a problem.
The Tories will continue to deny the scale of the problem and say what a wonderful job they are doing to tackle child poverty.
Disgusting.
No rhetoric from you, nope, none at all.This was a great big fat whopper of a lie. All of the stats, regardless of what metric you use to measure poverty, say otherwise.
One measure says there are actually 500,000 more children living in poverty.
When you have a PM who is prepared to lie through his teeth and pull figures out of his arse then you have a problem.
The Tories will continue to deny the scale of the problem and say what a wonderful job they are doing to tackle child poverty.
Disgusting.
You put great stall in facts and evidence Red 4, how about posting up the facts and the thread can discuss exactly what the scale of the problem is, how badly the government is doing, what has been done by the government, if anything.
That would be a reasonable approach for a renowned pragmatist such as yourself wouldn't it.
Go on then, chop chop.
If the government are going to deny how bad the problem of child poverty is then it is only logical to presume that they really don't want to address it.
Denying the truth doesn't change the facts.
Here endeth today's lesson, my love.
biggbn said:
amusingduck said:
sim72 said:
We are talking about Free School Meal provision here. Such a person's children would not be eligible for it.
£350 a week in UC (which seems a very large figure, but whatever) would bar you from FSM straight away, even without everything else.
Are you sure about that?£350 a week in UC (which seems a very large figure, but whatever) would bar you from FSM straight away, even without everything else.
gov said:
Firstly, a Universal Credit claimant will be checked for monthly net earned income
not exceeding £616.67 (a twelfth of an equivalent yearly income of £7,400) in their
most recent Universal Credit assessment period. If they meet this criterion, they
are eligible for free school meals and no further checks are necessary;
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/700139/Free_school_meals_guidance_Apr18.pdfnot exceeding £616.67 (a twelfth of an equivalent yearly income of £7,400) in their
most recent Universal Credit assessment period. If they meet this criterion, they
are eligible for free school meals and no further checks are necessary;
It sounds like if you receive UC, and your other non-benefit income after tax is <£616/mo, you qualify automatically for FSM? In the given example, if she nets less than that from her childminding, she should be eligible?
Obligatory 'I don't like child poverty, it's the govt's responsibility to fix etc'
FWIW the government say people on the £7400 of income at which point FSM provision stops would be on £18-24k total income.
Red 4 said:
In 2019 Boris Johnson said there were 400,000 fewer children living in poverty than in 2010.
This was a great big fat whopper of a lie. All of the stats, regardless of what metric you use to measure poverty, say otherwise.
One measure says there are actually 500,000 more children living in poverty.
When you have a PM who is prepared to lie through his teeth and pull figures out of his arse then you have a problem.
The Tories will continue to deny the scale of the problem and say what a wonderful job they are doing to tackle child poverty.
Disgusting.
Some stats from The Children’s Commissioner.This was a great big fat whopper of a lie. All of the stats, regardless of what metric you use to measure poverty, say otherwise.
One measure says there are actually 500,000 more children living in poverty.
When you have a PM who is prepared to lie through his teeth and pull figures out of his arse then you have a problem.
The Tories will continue to deny the scale of the problem and say what a wonderful job they are doing to tackle child poverty.
Disgusting.
https://www.childrenscommissioner.gov.uk/2020/06/2...
and this
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/governmen...
Page 16 specifically mentions the 4.2M figure from yesterday and that it's expected to rise to 5.2M.
Incidentally this is what the Children's Commissioner has to say on this as of this morning.
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: Conservative solutions maybe but they don't seem to draw much support from the current Government.
No.10 Keeps Refusing To Praise Businesses For Offering Free Meals To Children
Maybe that's because the business involved are somewhat antagonistic towards the government? Can you imagine Ifor standing next to Boris to shake his hand? No.10 Keeps Refusing To Praise Businesses For Offering Free Meals To Children
768 said:
I did think Brandon Lewis did reasonably well this morning. Probably why there wasn't any mention of it. 
I think Brandon Lewis did reasonably well this morning too.The articles I linked to are from when Boris Johnson's spokesman was asked three times on Friday.
Johnson can also use Twitter when it suits i.e. whinging about Rule Britannia at the Proms.
I'll happily give Lewis some credit for his words.
If Johnson had said them I'd give him credit too.
As it is he's said nothing on this and as the article shows has actually almost actively gone in the opposite direction.
What I do find interesting on this thread, especially from the Boris supporters, is that none of them appear to think that provision of (school) meals in school time is a bad thing.
But, to a person, they all think that providing them out of school time, in such extreme circumstances as we are encountering, is a bad thing.
Please note, this is not support of the welfare system as it stands. Like many things, it is well overdue for a long term look and assessment of its aims and its results. But we are in need of a few sticking plasters for very short term.
I am fairly sure that all of those objecting to any extra support, for children, have never been in a position where they have had to choose between food and something else, daily, let alone when income has been hit further.
They also appear to label the mother of Marcus Rashford as a bad parent, unless they don't believe what his time as a child was like. Looks like she managed to produce a skilled person, with compassion and thoughts for others as far as I can see. It is possible for children to get out of poor backgrounds, but not many make it. Why do we want to perpetuate the problem?
But, to a person, they all think that providing them out of school time, in such extreme circumstances as we are encountering, is a bad thing.
Please note, this is not support of the welfare system as it stands. Like many things, it is well overdue for a long term look and assessment of its aims and its results. But we are in need of a few sticking plasters for very short term.
I am fairly sure that all of those objecting to any extra support, for children, have never been in a position where they have had to choose between food and something else, daily, let alone when income has been hit further.
They also appear to label the mother of Marcus Rashford as a bad parent, unless they don't believe what his time as a child was like. Looks like she managed to produce a skilled person, with compassion and thoughts for others as far as I can see. It is possible for children to get out of poor backgrounds, but not many make it. Why do we want to perpetuate the problem?
BigMon said:
GrizzlyBear said:
RonaldMcDonaldAteMyCat said:
Fairly awful conversions about how parents of hungry children must be lazy and feckless is exactly the kind of harm that comes from the government's confused position. Same as that awful Devon MP suggesting businesses who have offered children free meals ought not receive government support.
Johnson needs to get a fking grip because the country is going to hell in a handcart whilst he potters about.
Glad to hear that someone else gets the point, even if the kids parents are fools who have kids for the benefits, THE KID IS STILL HUNGRY!!! and that is not the child's fault, they are a child and can't do anything about it. So unless the Government tell people they aren't allowed to breed unless they can pass a common sense test.Johnson needs to get a f
king grip because the country is going to hell in a handcart whilst he potters about.The state has to step up, I never had kids, but when I think about what my taxes are spent on, I hear all the allowances MPs get (obviously thought up by MPs for MPs), and then I hear that some poor child, who through no fault of their own is going hungry in a first world country! but some MPs don't want to fund it I think how corrupt the current system is.
It's right wing views like those of mike74 and others on here that I find pretty repellent to be honest. Almost no compassion and all about finger pointing at 'feckless wasters'.
I think there are issues with the benefits system and I certainly don't think there should be more cash just bandied around but there is definitely societal problems regarding food that I don't think existed when I was a child in the 80's (or if there were I wasn't aware of them as it was pre-internet obviously).
I don't think the reason there are so many food banks and issues with hunger is just down to people being feckless, popping out kids and spaffing money on TVs and tattoos but doubtless many on here think that is exactly the reason they exist.
However, I'd also contend that thanks to schemes such as food banks (as well as others) that kids without feckless/negligent parents shouldn't be going hungry. There is a huge amount of public, private and tertiary sector support available.
The issue then, is that do food vouchers or availability of free meals actually fix anything for those kids who have feckless or negligent parents - the ones that really need intervention and help? Do those parents actually get off their arses and take up the support for their kids?
I'm inclined to think it's unlikely. Wales did a scheme of school breakfasts - and noted that there was poor take up by those that should be assumed to be needing that extra boost.
So then, the question is "what should we do?".
I'm not inclined to suggest free Maccy Ds is not the answer either - especially when we consider the obesity rates by income decile...
Sway said:
I'm not inclined to suggest free Maccy Ds is not the answer either - especially when we consider the obesity rates by income decile...
McDonalds don’t think providing free ‘Maccy Ds’ is the answer either,that’s why they are funding £1m through Fareshare and not just giving out free burgers.768 said:
I did think Brandon Lewis did reasonably well this morning. Probably why there wasn't any mention of it.
Yes it was a good show from Lewis, and refreshing to see Marr allow any questions to be answered which is a change from previous shows.It's a shame the message Lewis gave in respect of the support already given to date and the support going forward for the topic being discussed isn't reaching a wider audience, although it would be lost on quite a few as it doesn't quite fit at the moment.
don'tbesilly said:
Yes it was a good show from Lewis, and refreshing to see Marr allow any questions to be answered which is a change from previous shows.
It's a shame the message Lewis gave in respect of the support already given to date and the support going forward for the topic being discussed isn't reaching a wider audience, although it would be lost on quite a few as it doesn't quite fit at the moment.
The Prime Minister could go on TV at any point and explain those details.It's a shame the message Lewis gave in respect of the support already given to date and the support going forward for the topic being discussed isn't reaching a wider audience, although it would be lost on quite a few as it doesn't quite fit at the moment.
He could go on Twitter and do the same.
As it is he couldn't even bring himself to acknowledge the fantastic work done by Rashford this week.
You've read the responses when journalists asked for comment from his official spokesman.
Why do you think the Prime Minister might find it so hard to support all that hard work from already struggling businesses?
rustednut said:
What I do find interesting on this thread, especially from the Boris supporters, is that none of them appear to think that provision of (school) meals in school time is a bad thing.
But, to a person, they all think that providing them out of school time, in such extreme circumstances as we are encountering, is a bad thing.
Not at all.But, to a person, they all think that providing them out of school time, in such extreme circumstances as we are encountering, is a bad thing.
I have said on the Rashford thread that the government should consider ways to expand access to FSM to those children who require it in the holidays. This scheme isn't a proposal to provide FSM to children in holidays it is a proposal to give their parents a voucher to spend in supermarkets.
I'd really like to be able to say I'm surprised by this.
Boris Johnson condemned for ‘appalling’ Tory alliance with neo-Nazi and anti-Muslim parties across Europe
But right now I'm not.
Boris Johnson condemned for ‘appalling’ Tory alliance with neo-Nazi and anti-Muslim parties across Europe
But right now I'm not.
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: I'd really like to be able to say I'm surprised by this.
Boris Johnson condemned for ‘appalling’ Tory alliance with neo-Nazi and anti-Muslim parties across Europe
But right now I'm not.
Its going on a long way away and nobody will understand it...!!! Its ok though, he's not a details guy. Boris Johnson condemned for ‘appalling’ Tory alliance with neo-Nazi and anti-Muslim parties across Europe
But right now I'm not.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff