Wednesday, 7 October 2009

Milk and cookies

As of November this year, Council Tax Benefit and Housing Benefit calculations will now no longer taken into account the Child Benefit which parents [read mothers] get automatically. It's not means tested so millionaires can have it and now it won't be used to reduce the amount of the two residence- based benefits above. More cash for part-time working families.

Especially bigger ones. See Harriet's story here.

Good for hard-working families, you might think, but with three or more children and a part-time job, 'mums' might not have to work too hard.

Also in the past year, The Housing ceased to take into account any child maintenance paid by former partners or ex-husbands when calculating these two benefits.
Which means again, less incentive for mothers to work full-time (especially if they have larger families).
Better to pack up the familial home and sell it at a loss in order to live off the ex's now-disregarded Child Support, a few hours' wages a week, Child Benefit and Child Credit and Working Tax Credits.

For the unambitious (and our schools and TV churn them out every year), it's better than mopping and drying, serving in shops or freezing in warehouses.

John Page over at Benefit Fraud has some
harsh plans for those who want more even than this tidy wedge, and as for Winston Smith?

Well, let's just say his attitude to the mothers makes me seem like a Powder Blue by comparison.
He rather more than takes the biscuit.


banned said...

Perhaps HMG Revenue & Customs might likewise agree to disregard my income from investments and saving ?

JuliaM said...

Not a chance!

James Higham said...

Not going to help them much if they're in a special house for preggos.

North Northwester said...

Whoa! There's a pattern forming here, and it looks like I'm the pinko for once!
I do wonder where John Page's fraudsters will get the income from to repay their theft, an I'd really, really like to keep sterilisation as a battlefield accident that befalls our enemies rather than a.. .um... tool of state policy.

I strongly think that taking the benefits away or dropping them is better as one thing I do know is that the underclass are really good at understanding the principles of benefits - if only to exploit them.
And the tougher they are treated for minor infractions, and the more they are hit with fines, the keener they are to avoid further hassle and repayments. Some are incorrigibly stupid, of course, and so you can let them starve or take the kids away and leave them on a pittance - the latter would be my choice.


Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner