Originally Posted by Taggy (Post 733605)

Is this yet another example of Government trying to stamp on people least able to put up a fight!! Totally disgraceful if this is allowed to go ahead!!
DLA and AA threat

Best Regards- Taggy

Originally Posted by jaysay (Post 733629)

Just wonder if Mancie has read this yet:rolleyes:

Originally Posted by garinda (Post 739521)

The social benefits system does need a major overhaul.

It should be there as a safety net for those genuinely in need. Not as a career option for the work shy, which for some it most definitely is.

A system that allows able bodied people to be financially better off for not working, is wrong, both for society and for them as individuals.

This country now pays out more in social benefits annually than it raises in Income Tax. That is wrong.

I firmly believe all social benefits should be means tested. I'm still amazed that we pay child benefit to children whose parents who are city bankers etc, and who probably have combined earnings in excess of £250,000., that should be stopped.

The benefits system should benefit those who genuinely are in need.

Originally Posted by Mancie (Post 739535)

What worries me is that the "major overhaul" you talk about will be done under a Tory Government. I don't agree when there's talk of means testing for basic benefits like JSA and child allowance, for the simple reason that these are paid directly to wives/individuals that may have a partner earning an income, but that income could be kept by the earner and non of it passed on to the wife/partner.
Taking into account the income of benefit applicants is already a requeirment in almost all of benefits paid, but it's another case of thin end of the wedge.

Originally Posted by garinda (Post 739536)

If in the situation of a parent witholding earnings, child benefit, paid to the other parent, isn't enough to feed, clothe, and put a roof over that child.

Witholding earnings that should be paid in child maintenance should be pursued through the legal system.

A non-means tested benefit for every child in the country is ludicrous. Stop paying it to high earners, and pass it on to those children it will make a real difference to.

Originally Posted by Mancie (Post 739539)

Of course child benefit is not enough to feed and clothe a child..but at least it's something a mother has control of... this was one of the first basic payments made when the whole structure of health and wefare reforms where introduced back in the 50's... basic and untouchable!

Originally Posted by garinda (Post 739540)

It's archaic, as well as patronising to say it's something mothers have control of. Like every child has a doting mum, and a dad who blows all his weekly wages in the boozer and at the bookies.

Some child benefit is paid to lone parents who happen to be male.

Should Prince Edward and his wife get child benefit?

No.

Should the money saved if it was means tested, go from the pin money tin of the wealthy, into the pockets of children from poorer backgrounds?

Yes.

Originally Posted by Mancie (Post 739544)

But you are suggesting that a basic payment that is made to everyone with children should be means tested..I say No..it's better to have a few that don't need it getting it ..rather than the people that do need it not getting it

Originally Posted by Mancie (Post 739551)

And who would be "targeting" these basic benefits?.. Whitehall civil servants that are given instructions to write proposals with a remit of cutting public money ?.. cuts cuts cuts...it's time to vote Tory if that's your outlook.