£250 per child.

[garinda]

£250 per child.

There has been a lot on the news today about the low uptake for the Government's scheme that gives every child born after a certain date £250 to invest.

Apparently only about a third of the parents of the children, who are entitled to it, have claimed it.

Is this a wise way to spend tax payers money? Has everybody who has had a child taken up their offer, or is it just some sort of sweetner for middle England? Do you have a child who was born before the qualifying date, and one after, is it fair?

What will the invested £250 be worth in eighteen years?

An aid to starting adult life, or enough money for the little darling to go out on a bender?

 

[Margaret Pilkington]

Re: £250 per child.

I'm not 100% sure Garinda, but I think that families have to put some of their own money into trust for their children too to claim the money....and anyone who has small children knows what a huge expense they are.....and often there is not the money in the family budget to put into a savings scheme.

I'm sure that the members with small children will put me straight if I have got it wrong.....but there must be some kind of drawback for so few parents having taken advantage of the scheme.

 

[Neil]

Re: £250 per child.

If you don't use the voucher to set up a trust before it expires the government set it up for you in one of their choosing. Maybe some people are just being lazy and letting it happen for them. So the £250 is not lost if the parents don't use the voucher.

 

[entwisi]

Re: £250 per child.

You don't need to add anythying to claim the £250 although Julie and I set up a monthly savings plan to top it up. Hopefully it will be a reasonable chunk of cash by then.

The reason so many haven't bothered is pure apathy. It amazes me to be honest that people care so little that they can't be bothered to sign a form(You get bout 3 or 4 choices in the bounty pack given to you at the hospital).

 

[Romps]

Re: £250 per child.

There are several ways to invest this voucher. If it is not claimed in the childs first year of life as Neil says the government set up the Stakeholder acount for the child and send the details to the parents, they can then change to another account if they are not satisified with the one opened for them. I think they get another amount when they are a little older and they are looking into a 3rd amount at 7 years of age.

http://www.childtrustfund.gov.uk/Homepage/fs/en

 

[garinda]

Re: £250 per child.

I don't know if it's a good idea or not, though I would feel odd having a child that qualified for the scheme, and one that didn't.

If I was a parent I think I'd much rather they keep their/our money and make sure that University education was affordable for all by the time the child was eighteen, and if they wanted it.

A lot of these children who qualify won't have the finances to get further education, as can be seen with this years intake now that there are higher than ever fees, also they will probably have to work until they are eighty to pay for the £250 they were granted as babies.

 

[SPUGGIE J]

Re: £250 per child.

I wonder if some were hoping it was acash payment that is automatic like the heating lump sum and allowences for the pensioners? Mind you it could be paperwork that scares them or even accepting govenment cash as its seen as a "benifit payment" as opposed to what its real purpose is which is for the future benifit of the child.

 

[lettie]

Re: £250 per child.

When this started there were plenty of people around who thought it was a cash payout. Their children would've seen none of it. Many of these people were young chavs and druggies who just wanted the money. It was a real pleasure telling them that they weren't going to see a penny of it and that it would go into trust for their child. One lass told me that she had only got pregnant to get the cash........Lovely world we live in innit...

 

[Acrylic-bob]

Re: £250 per child.

Those who can afford to save will save. Those who cannot afford to save will not save no matter what the government does. This is just another exercise in pandering to the concerns of the middle classes in a pathetically transparent attempt to hang on to their votes. It proves yet again just how out of touch with reality this government has become.

 

[shakermaker]

Re: £250 per child.

"This government"

I agree that the government are seriously out of touch. However; we are not going to get any better from any other party - all they care about is keeping/gaining votes with numerous scams like these; just take what advantage we can out of them and roll with it - there's no better solution or clear answer to this country's troubled parliament, nor will there ever be.

 

[Neil]

Re: £250 per child.

One lass told me that she had only got pregnant to get the cash........Lovely world we live in innit...

Romps was really upset when you told her that she could not have the money to but some new trainers

 

[garinda]

Re: £250 per child.

Romps was really upset when you told her that she could not have the money to but some new trainers

Try and explain trainers go on her feet. No amount of 'butting' will turn them into a hat!

 

[Neil]

Re: £250 per child.

It proves yet again just how out of touch with reality this government has become.

Not at all. If it was not for the vouucher I doubt we woulf have put any money aside each month for her. Now because of it we are doing, and for the boys as well. I wonder how many other people, like us, decided we might as well put a little into the fund each month while we were setting it up. Sounds like a good result to me.

 

[garinda]

Re: £250 per child.

Not at all. If it was not for the vouucher I doubt we woulf have put any money aside each month for her. Now because of it we are doing, and for the boys as well. I wonder how many other people, like us, decided we might as well put a little into the fund each month while we were setting it up. Sounds like a good result to me.

You are probably the type of voter Blair was targeting then.

So you are saying that if it wasn't for the scheme that Emily qualified for, it wouldn't have crossed your mind to save for the sons that didn't?

 

[Neil]

Re: £250 per child.

You are probably the type of voter Blair was targeting then.

It worked then.

So you are saying that if it wasn't for the scheme that Emily qualified for, it wouldn't have crossed your mind to save for the sons that didn't?

We had not until now. Maybe I am just a bad (read poor) parent

 

[garinda]

Re: £250 per child.

It worked then.

We had not until now. Maybe I am just a bad (read poor) parent

Of course you're not a bad parent, I've met the little angels, just interested to see what parents thought of the scheme, along with everyone else.

Lucky little Emily Garinda, a £250 Government investment plus all my worldly goods.

 

[Neil]

Re: £250 per child.

Of course you're not a bad parent, I've met the little angels, just interested to see what parents thought of the scheme, along with everyone else.

Lucky little Emily Garinda, a £250 Government investment plus all my worldly goods.

She could do with that potty of yours in a few months if thats ok

 

[garinda]

Re: £250 per child.

She could do with that potty of yours in a few months if thats ok

Mid Victorian oak commode, if you don't mind.

 

[WillowTheWhisp]

Re: £250 per child.

I think it's terribly unfair on families who have one or more child(ren) who didn't qualify and then one child who does. The onus is on them then to set up equal funds for the others and maybe they can't afford to, but the other children would feel left out if they don't. Even more so if there are "top ups" at different ages.

 

[garinda]

Re: £250 per child.

I think it's terribly unfair on families who have one or more child(ren) who didn't qualify and then one child who does. The onus is on them then to set up equal funds for the others and maybe they can't afford to, but the other children would feel left out if they don't. Even more so if there are "top ups" at different ages.

I quite agree Willow, that's why I wanted the view of someone like Romps and Neil who have two children that I don't think qualify, and one that does.

If you are going to have a scheme like this at all perhaps every child that is entitled to child benefit should be eligible. Although of course the shorter time the trust was in place, the less return for the older children.