Forum Topic

Sir Keir, enjoying the Spoils but delivering harsh handouts

The PM met the first hurdle of his tenure this week when seven rebels voted with the SNP amendment to his two-child benefit cap.The act of withdrawing the whip and keeping within budget limits portrayed a ruthless streak.But get this:Since leading the Labour party Sir Keir has received over £76k in gifts, over £16k in free clothing and wait for it, £2,400 in free spectacles, £12k in free tickets for football matches, a free season ticket to watch Arsenal home matches, a seat situated not six rows behind my good mate Eddie and worth north of £1800 per season.It is not just your cursed Tories who are disconnected from the realities of real life.

Denis Ian Fox ● 214d59 Comments

How does this affect some religious groups that have their own schools.

Janice Evans ● 206d

My comment referred to finances (that VAT on private schools  will clearly raise money not cost money) not on the quality of education. So, no I did not mean offering a meagre education. You may think that will be the consequence.  My experience is that many state schools offer a very good education despite generally bigger classes (not usually double mind)

David Turner ● 206d

Actually, there was a lot to be said for having one hard working parent and one home-maker who was there for the children when they came back from school. Sadly, what was once the norm is now the exception.

Richard Greenhough ● 206d

There's usually something to be said for having two hard working parents who set a good example in the home as well.Sadly,those days have gone for too many children.

Keith Iddon ● 206d

“ and if we didn't we were dealt with swiftly and proportionately and we had fewer distractions.”That’s right and you didn’t have half the class claiming mental health issues if they are reprimanded! Hence the government is now driven to have professional mental health psychologists in every secondary school at a cost of £millions to the taxpayer. And the Lib Dem’s wanted to squander even more money by having them in primary schools too!

Steve Taylor ● 206d

When I was at primary school,there were 43 other children in the class and afaik we could all read,write and do our sums to the extent that you may expect from a pre-teenager.But I suppose in those days we knew how to listen and obey,and if we didn't we were dealt with swiftly and proportionately and we had fewer distractions.I wouldn't swap what I had for what there is now.

Keith Iddon ● 207d

“ there is capacity to absorb those that do switch from private to state.”That’s assuming you are comfortable with the extremely high numbers of pupils per class in state schools. On average double the number you have in private schools. So by ‘absorbing’ you really mean offering a meagre education.

Steve Taylor ● 207d

If anyone is interested in an informed view of how Rachel Reeves might raise £20bn this is worth readinghttps://taxpolicy.org.uk/2024/08/01/rachel-reeves-raise-22bn-of-tax/

David Turner ● 207d

It’s extremely unlikely that the exodus from private schools to state schools will be so great that it will end up costing more than the VAT raises. Private school fees have increased by 50% in real terms since 2010 with no noticeable impact on numbers attending .  With population changes meaning fewer school age children now is a good time to add VAT (if that’s what you want to do) as there is capacity to absorb those that do switch from private to state.

David Turner ● 207d

You a right there Steve.

Janice Evans ● 207d

Not to mention the scrapping of care costs.What was that before the election even thou it was not in the manifesto."We will not ditch the cap on social care". "Mr Streeting was asked today whether he could make a firm commitment to bringing in the cap in October 2025".He told BBC Radio Four: “That’s the plan, as things stand.” Fast forward about 5 weeks and bosh,cap gone. This is not only the sign of the start,its the start of meltdown. And that includes the streets given the last 14 days. This goverment needs to get a grip,understand what and why and fast. Where is venessa,holiday ?

Julian Pavey ● 207d

So they’re happy to screw 10 million pensioners but still manage to find £2.5 BILLION to fund foreign aid. Somehow they think that doling out billions to corrupt money grabbing governments will stop hundreds of thousands of boat people from coming here. As if the boat people will see a penny of that money

Steve Taylor ● 207d

Messrs Phillipson, Reeves, Rayner and Mr Flipflop have, ever since the global financial collapse, followed by the global pandemic, and followed by Putin's war against Ukraine been scrupulous in their criticism of the Tory party.They are now finding out rather speedily that life at the sharp end is not so easy.Thank you Richard for enabling me to quit advertising my middle Christian name, not that I dislike it.

Denis I. Fox ● 207d

“ likely to mean more children needing places at state schools at the public expense. “Precisely!  And we haven’t got enough teachers or schools to cater for them so it will be bigger classes with more underqualified / overpaid agency staff who aren’t dedicated. In years to come we will be ‘excusing’ the uneducated kids leaving school by saying ‘oh dear, another product of a Labour education’ !

Steve Taylor ● 207d

By the same token, Labour's spiteful levying of VAT on private school fees is likely to mean more children needing places at state schools at the public expense. That black hole looks to be getting bigger....

Richard Greenhough ● 208d

Whilst it is true that there are many pensioners who will not mind this cut as they are not struggling financially,there are also many who are just slightly well enough off to not qualify for benefits.It is these people who will suffer,especially as energy pries are set to rise.This might encourage those pensioners who are currently entitled to benefits but who are not claiming them,to go ahead and apply.There are an estimated 2 million+ of these pensioners,so the governement may end up paying out a lot more than it wil save with this if they do.

Keith Iddon ● 208d

“It has been Tory Govt policy over a number of years to not change tax thresholds. “This has nothing to do with Reeves cancelling the Winter Fuel Allowance for  10 million people despite the fact that energy prices will increase from October!  But, as you for some reason bring up the issue of tax thresholds, you are 100% wrong to assert that the Tory Govt wasn’t going to change tax thresholds. Jeremy Hunt made it perfectly clear in his last budget speech that the threshold  would be increased for all pensioners in line with the Triple Lock.  The Threshold would be increased as Triple Lock Plus. This was again confirmed in the Tory Manifesto. So, not only is Reeves screwing 10 million pensioners with tax thresholds, she is screwing them even more by cancelling the Winter Fuel Allowance which many of them rely on to help them over Christmas.  It’s pure evil to punish the elderly and needy in such a way. Pure evil. How does she sleep at night! And Starmer is so weak and wet he lets her get away with it. Unbelievable but predictable for such a cowardly turncoat.

Steve Taylor ● 208d

It has been Tory Govt policy over a number of years to not change tax thresholds.  This produces an inflationary increase in taxation year on year by stealth.  It is therefore entirely disingenuous of Jeremy Hunt to suggest that this is some new Labour policy.  If Jeremy Hunt was still Chancellor he would NOT mention it in line with previous years and since there needs to be no specific announcement of this annual increase in taxes because it simply rolls on people are not told that their taxes are going up each year.The Tories have claimed that they are the party of low taxation but there has been an increase of taxation annually by stealth.  Taxation last year has been said to be at the highest level since the Second World War.Yes, the £300 Winter Fuel Allowance could be claimed by those of pensionable age who were still working and wasn't means tested.The trouble as always is when people's situation is borderline.

Philippa Bond ● 208d

Poor old pensioners will suffer the wrath of Labour as Reeves stabs them in the back by cancelling Winter Fuel payments. Martin Lewis furious as energy prices set to rise again.

Steve Taylor ● 208d

“Not sure what you are driving at Steve, but yes, they hadn’t had any children together.“Keep up!  It’s about single mums needing benefits to feed their children ‘foisted upon them’ by scumbag fathers.

Steve Taylor ● 211d

Steve, he did marry again and apparently was the same to that poor lady.

Janice Evans ● 211d

Steve my sister had two children,her husband was a builder and not onbenefits or in any way hard up, however with him being violent she did not want him to have access to them, so yes she was on benefits until she found suitable job that could accommodate her children at the same time, it all worked out o.k but thankfully she had that support when she needed it, I think if you have contributed all your life you should get that financial support if and when you need it.

Janice Evans ● 211d

And certainly used to be too often followed by far - a longawaytorun!It's a great shame that Sure Start was discontinued in England.  It has been expanded in Wales where there is a lot of poverty.  Also the reduction in investment in public health including pregnancy prevention and a reminder that those with wealth now may not always be able to maintain that standard of life. Would not go amiss.

Philippa Bond ● 211d

Not sure what you are driving at Steve, but yes, they hadn’t had any children together.

Andrew Jones ● 211d

“ I had a friend who was beaten up by her boyfriend on numerous occasions, and the few times I’d met her boyfriend before they set up home together, there was nothing that made me think he was anything other than a decent person.”But presumably she didn’t have 3,4 or 5 kids with him on the presumption that the taxpayer wound pay for them.

Steve Taylor ● 211d

“ some men can be very charming and cunning until they are married.”Yes but presumably the woman doesn’t still have 3, 4 or 5 kids with him on the presumption that the taxpayer will support her!!??

Steve Taylor ● 211d

Brian, I had a friend who was beaten up by her boyfriend on numerous occasions, and the few times I’d met her boyfriend before they set up home together, there was nothing that made me think he was anything other than a decent person.The case ended up in the Old Bailey and he was convicted and jailed.Having made her life with him just walking away wasn’t a viable option.Fortunately she’s got over this and is now settled with someone who loves her.

Andrew Jones ● 211d

Brian, some men can be very charming and cunning until they are married.

Janice Evans ● 211d

So why did she marry a violent person? Who's fault was it?

Brian Coyle ● 212d

Kapt Von Trapp had to fire Maria when they  brought in the 2 Child Benefits cap in Austria because he couldn’t afford to pay the Nunnery for her services.

Steve Taylor ● 213d

Soh I gathered!

Robert Fish ● 213d

I was just reminded of Julie Andrews.....

Richard Greenhough ● 213d

Very droll, Richard, but perhaps a little unnecessary - Keith was already aware of his slip without need of correction. In any case, you've got the wrong 'sow' - a female pig is not a homophone of 'sew'.

Robert Fish ● 213d

“ Feckless fathers who abandon their children are often living on benefits themselves.”And those benefits can be channelled to the children if need be. It just takes a bit of effort. But if mothers think they can just get benefits from the taxpayer no matter how many kids they have, it is just far less hassle.

Steve Taylor ● 213d

I would think each case is very different, my nieces partner dies of throatcancer, so all sorts of situations women are single.  My husband died fairly young but as I had always worked it was not so difficult for me.

Janice Evans ● 213d

Steve, my sister was married but to a violent person, often not the women'sfault.

Janice Evans ● 213d

"Childcare can be £250 a week, often more."Indeed - that's why people have to think very carefully before having kids if they can't afford them. And women need to think very carefully about jumping into bed with hapless loser men who are quite obviously going to do a runner. It's just basic common sense and the taxpayer shouldn't have to pay for irresponsible mothers or fathers. Keep the cap so that it hits home! More surprises today as to how much the country is in debt - much more than originally thought.

Steve Taylor ● 213d

"That's if the fathers are working.."Precisely. Feckless fathers who abandon their children are often living on benefits themselves.

Richard Greenhough ● 213d

Sew, a needle pulling threadSow, a female pig who has had at least one litter of piglets

Richard Greenhough ● 213d

My eldest sister was in that situation so took a job close by in a children'shome as cook (which involved extra training on how to prepare meals economically) and was allowed to take the children who joined in on eventsprovided by the home, they really enjoyed it.

Janice Evans ● 213d

Childcare can be £250 a week, often more.

Janice Evans ● 213d

That's if the fathers are working and then gives them access to the childrenwhen mothers don't trust them with the children, very complicated.

Janice Evans ● 213d

Single mothers can always claim child support from absent fathers and have direct deductions made from the fathers income if the father does not willingly support his children financially. “ Of all families with dependent children, families with one child made up 44% (3.6 million) in 2022. Families with two children made up 41% (3.4 million), and families with three or more children made up 15% (1.2 million).As of 2022, there were over 2.94 million single parent families in the United Kingdom, with the majority being lone-mother families, accounting for 84% of the total.”

Steve Taylor ● 213d

“Child care is usually the problem for single mums to return to work.“Of course it is. That’s why they need to think very, very carefully before having more children if they can’t afford them. Child care is also a problem for women with partners who want to return to work.

Steve Taylor ● 213d

Child care is usually the problem for single mums to return to work.

Janice Evans ● 213d

Exactly, Susan, as Martin Lewis and others have pointed out. It's very misleading to say parents don't get taxpayer money for having more than two children - they do.

Claire Moran ● 213d

Sew?..sow...

Keith Iddon ● 213d

With apologies for deviation, all these money problems could be addressed if the inflexible 'fiscal rules' were abandoned. Unless the government borrows to fund both capital and current expenditure, we'll never manage to restore the damage done to all public services by the last administration, and won't achieve the growth that Labour seek. As Andy Haldane, former Chief Economist of the BoE observed in an FT article recently: “By constraining investment and stunting growth, these are self-defeating -  they need to be replaced with rules that prioritise growth and seek to maximise national net worth, not minimise gross debt.”Sadly, Rachel Reeves seems to be too timid to challenge the post-Thatcherite fiscal orthodoxy. What is needed is boldness, not further retrenchment.

Robert Fish ● 213d

Single mothers always seem get the sticky end of the stick.I wonder what ratio of them have deliberately had 3 or 4 children in order to get more benefits, against what ratio have been duped by men who have just wanted to sew their oats and then run away from the prospect of taking any responsibility.Men only from the waist down I call them.

Keith Iddon ● 213d

Neither do I.

Keith Iddon ● 213d

“ or we import a lot of labour, the government will have a problem funding the state pension through NICs.” Osborne brought in  the 2 child cap in 2017 so families or single mums have had plenty of time to consider having more children. The idea  was/is to get mums back to work asap rather than opting to have more kids. Getting more mums back to work takes some pressure off funding state pensions and importing labour and naturally it also helps to grow the economy. Parents who have elected, since 2017, to have more kids knowing that they can’t afford to feed them or clothe them or heat their homes are just irresponsible. There is also the problem of having to accommodate people in social housing with larger homes when they have more children. We have all heard the stories of those who want larger accommodation to boast about having more children just to fulfil their desire to get larger houses. Labour has promised to get Britain back to work and get residents of Britain into British jobs so let’s hope Starmer sticks to his guns and doesn’t bow to pressure from  the rebels or the SNP and the Lib Dem’s who think there is a secret money tree. Tax payers should not be asked to fund irresponsible parents who chose to have more children knowing the consequences.

Steve Taylor ● 213d

I don't see any connection between Starmer maintaining discipline in his party and accepting some gifts which he will have reported, as required.

Susan Kelly ● 213d

There is no cap on the number of children eligible for Child Benefit.The two-child cap refers to the child element on Universal Credit. You would think Rosie Duffield would have done her homework a bit better.

Susan Kelly ● 213d

All very well, but don't forget the financial stresses created by a population with an ever-larger proportion of retired people. Unless the birth rate rises, or we import a lot of labour, the government will have a problem funding the state pension through NICs.

Robert Fish ● 213d

If you can't afford more than two children without further top ups from taxpayers,don't have another.A third child will not live in poverty if you don't conceive it.

Keith Iddon ● 213d

I am glad that for the moment at least I as a taxpayer do not have to subsidise those who have more than two children

Paul Fisher ● 214d

Interesting piece by Rosie Duffield, Labour MP for Canterbury, in last week's Sunday Times (page 11, "Child Benefit cap is straight out of The Handmaid's Tale"). "The Labour Party needs to recognise that this is an issue of social cleansing, an anti-feminist and unequal piece of legislation..."Perhaps they should also recognise that England is one of the most densely populated countries in Europe, and that the world cannot carry on with its present rate of population growth. I have every sympathy for poverty-stricken children, but at the same time subsidising parents to have more than two children does seem to show a reckless disregard for the planet's future.

Richard Greenhough ● 214d

The child benefit cap is not that disliked by the majority of the public, I think people do feel ambivalent, on the one hand it seems that children who come after the first two in a family can miss out. On the other, knowing full well you won't qualify and having more children is a choice that people make. As for the 'rebels' what planet are they from? This government has been in for three weeks tomorrow, they have one hell of a job on and need time to see just what they have inherited, so why those seven pillocks couldn't just give it time I will never know. As for Corbyn and his 'rebel alliance' - what does he think this is bloody Star Wars or something?

Vanessa Smith ● 214d

Well done to Sir Keir for suspending the rebels. I wonder how long it will be though before he bows to pressure and removes the two child cap. He is renowned for changing his mind.

Steve Taylor ● 214d