Reply With QuoteTheresa May and her new 'caring' Tory Party.
Same old ..
It should backfire on them. As if the Tories need worry about that. They have no real opposition.
The plans have been long cast - heaven help us.
| + Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
The Tories announced this new policy two days ago for a change that will begin on April 1. They estimate it'll save a paltry £25m per year. What utter bastards they are.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politic...obless-9968096
The Department of Work and Pensions chose a non-sitting Friday in the Commons two days ago to confirm 18 - 21 year olds will lose their benefits in less than a month.
BYNIGEL NELSON
00:37, 5 MAR 2017
Ministers have slipped out plans to deny jobless young people housing benefit when MPs weren’t looking.
The Department of Work and Pensions chose a non-sitting Friday in the Commons two days ago to confirm 18 - 21 year olds will lose their benefits in less than a month.
That means they will either have to continue living with parents or find their own rent money.
But shadow Housing minister John Healey is furious the government published the legislation at a time when MPs could not object.
He said: “These shameful cuts in housing benefit will put young people on the streets.
“They’re old enough to marry, work, pay tax and fight for our country but are being denied the same right to basic help with housing costs as any other British adult.”
The measure was first floated by then Chancellor George Osborne two years ago to massive opposition.
It would save £25million in the first year rising to £40million a year by 2020.
But Theresa May was expected to abandon the plan when she became PM and fired Mr Osborne.
Now Mr Healey is calling on Chancellor Philip Hammond to scrap the cruel measure in Wednesday’s Budget.
Private landlords say they would not consider unemployed young people as tenants unless they had the benefit to fall back on.
And homeless charity Shelter predicts it would force thousands more youngsters onto the streets.
Councils are already struggling to cope with 60,000 homeless households with 100,000 children stuck in temporary hostels.
Mr Healey added: “Ministers should hang their heads in shame. They will find next to no one who thinks this should go ahead.”
Theresa May and her new 'caring' Tory Party.
Same old ..
It should backfire on them. As if the Tories need worry about that. They have no real opposition.
The plans have been long cast - heaven help us.
Weren't they going to do this before? I'm sure I moaned about it some time ago, I don't know what the hell they expect people with no families to do? Very low indeed.
Yes, George Osbourne tried it and got knocked back.Originally Posted by Mrs Steve R
Obviously 'they' were determined to get it through, and have tried to do it on the sly.
And those with abusive parents who they need to get away from.
Last edited by Wales-Bales; 05-03-17 at 22:17.
I remember that, I even raised an eyebrow at the time.
Yeah that's right, I remember now, they always manage to get things through eventually.
Indeed, It's going to cause loads of problems.
^^
Reasonable? - in principle? - What about in real life?
As with any scheme which is supposedly about 'doing the right thing' (and not solely about clawing back money from the most vulnerable ...) it will be the fair implementation and practice of it which would be the real test.
What is actually in place regards this: "helping young people get the training, skills and experience they need to move into a job and build a career"
Really.. Jobs , careers .. great! - get in line kids
Best prove and illustrate that is genuinely happening - first - before looking to implement some measure on the back of it.
It is okay. If there is nothing in place and the kids end up without a job/career we can just call them lazy.
. you offered that statement as an illustration of why this policy is reasonable!
Sorry to have bothered you! I hope you manage to stay away for the day.
Just to be clear - in my post above, I suggested that it was the Gov't that need to illustrate the opportunities - not you.
Aye, have a good un'
Obvz anything the Tories ever do is to the detriment of the working man or women.......No questions asked.
Tories baddies, Labour the goodies.
You could have not opened it, then you could have not read the thread, then you could have not replied to the thread.
Who said that?
C'mon! - that's as ridiculous a statement as the attitudes it pretends to challenge.
Do you blindly nod at everything that the Tory party offer to you to nod at? - No, I'm sure that you don't! Because that would be equally idiotic.
If the Gov't of the day - whoever they be - implements a policy which takes away existing benefits, on the basis that a certain situation is in place, then they need to illustrate the situation is as they describe.
Regards the amount of full-time jobs and training opportunities leading to proper jobs, you know that currently that is simply not the situation. If they can make those genuine opportunities happen - brilliant good on them.
Should Labour form a government again then they won't reverse this policy in spite of their fake outrage presently. How do I know? Because I remember the 1979-1997 Thatcher/Major years when they pretended they were against privatisation, dismantling of trade union rights, sales of social housing stock, etc, but kept them all between 1997-2010.
Some other benefit changes begin April 1st. Single unemployed parents in receipt of Universal Credit will have to seek work when their youngest child is three (from aged five), and disabled ESA claimants in the WRAG group's weekly payment will drop from £102 per week to £73 per week.
I vaguely recall a furore a few years back when they were set to reduce some Tax Credits. Such was the backlash this government pledged to not make more welfare cuts before the 2020 election. It appears they were fibbing.
Good cop/bad cop, until people accept that they are both the same thing nothing will ever change.
It sounds a lot like :-
“This government is delivering on its commitment to ensure the chronically sick and disabled in the benefit system go to work just as fit and healthy people do, or otherwise they will face the risk of becoming destitute.
“We know that personal circumstances will differ so we have worked closely with Atos/Capita/Maximus to develop a fair and robust set of exemptions to protect the most vulnerable chronically sick and disabled people.”
Perhaps it's aimed at one parent young girls . And potentially getting parents to work harder in being responsible for there children , motivating them to seek employment/ further education, prelong living in thier parental homes , rather than allowing a drift into housing , paid for via benefits, in an already challenged housing market.
^^
Grotesque.
Considering the national living wage (or the new minimum wage to be more accurate) comes for those over the age of 25, this seems to be a further cut made targeting the young. Stats also show women are bearing the brunt of 80% of austerity.
Tax credits being cut may put more emphasis on employers to pay decent wages but better wages should have been followed by tax credit cuts rather than the other way round. Likewise, HB cuts may encourage the young and their families to rely less on the state but it should have followed an effective move to increase affordable housing stock and greater control over private landlords rent demands and in general for irresponsible landlords.
Posting Permissions
