Labour suspends seven rebel MPs over two-child benefit cap

Mr Bump

Mr Bump

From under the bridge
Suspended / Banned
Messages
10,944
Name
Sophia aka Paul
Edit My Images
Yes
Good !

Hope Kier keeps up a solid we have campaigned on not "blowing" money we don't have lets keep it that way
he said the money isn't there so out you get !

www.bbc.co.uk

Labour suspends seven rebel MPs over two-child benefit cap

The government comfortably won the vote despite growing pressure from some of its own MPs to scrap the policy.
www.bbc.co.uk www.bbc.co.uk
 
One of the rebels, Zara Sultana, was on the Laura Kneunssberg prog on Sunday. Zara had quite a big spending list and I got the impression the economist sitting next to her was not that impressed
 
If you want to breed them you better be able to feed them, woman regularly in the news “I often go without to feed the kids” has 5 of the hungry buggers, guy at the weekend was moaning about this and said he should get help to look after his kids, this was whilst standing at the bar, priorities?
 
Mr Bump said:
Good !

Hope Kier keeps up a solid we have campaigned on not "blowing" money we don't have lets keep it that way
he said the money isn't there so out you get !

www.bbc.co.uk

Labour suspends seven rebel MPs over two-child benefit cap

The government comfortably won the vote despite growing pressure from some of its own MPs to scrap the policy.
www.bbc.co.uk www.bbc.co.uk
Click to expand...

Apart from on private and / or RAF jets I assume? Starmer, Lammy, Healey... Hundreds of thousands of £ already. Champaign socialism at its best.

Perhaps this should be in the hot topics section?
 
Motion brought by the SNP, always keen to give away tax payers money, baby boxes, laptops for school work, free school meals for all, except teachers, votes buying.
 
Here in Scotland it's called the rape clause, not everyone with more than two children chose that situation yet everyone is blanketed with the same rules.

During campaigning for the election various Labour candidates in Scotland promised they would vote to end the cap - not one of them did yesterday.
 
That I don’t have a problem with, but must be only a small percentage amongst claimants.
 
mj4456 said:
If you want to breed them you better be able to feed them, woman regularly in the news “I often go without to feed the kids” has 5 of the hungry buggers, guy at the weekend was moaning about this and said he should get help to look after his kids, this was whilst standing at the bar, priorities?
Click to expand...

I’m pretty left wing but agree with you there
 
LCPete said:
I’m pretty left wing but agree with you there
Click to expand...

Interesting on left wing. Until not too long ago I was a Labour supporter and so was my family going back generations but the Labour party has changed and thus so have its policies and I think what is "left" has shifted dramatically in recent times.

I'd say my views are left to very left on some things and yet also apparently "far right" by todays belief system labels on some others and interestingly mostly those others used to be mainstream and indeed "left" not too long ago.

We are living in strange times.
 
It took me a time to properly understand this issue. The best explanation I've seen is from Martin Lewis -


I'd like to see benefits for children to be limited to two. I'm not suggesting people who have more than two children lose benefit but anyone having a third child (and any subsequent children) after a time in the future, say a year/18 months from now, gets no benefit. There would be exceptions, eg unexpected multiple births, but in general benefit is for up to two children.

Dave
 
mj4456 said:
Motion brought by the SNP, always keen to give away tax payers money, baby boxes, laptops for school work, free school meals for all, except teachers, votes buying.
Click to expand...

yeah i noticed that as well, they are a bit t***tish
 
mj4456 said:
That I don’t have a problem with, but must be only a small percentage amongst claimants.
Click to expand...

its a few quid though

The Institute for Fiscal Studies think tank has estimated that removing the two-child benefit cap would eventually cost the government £3.4bn a year, roughly 3% of the total budget for working-age benefits. Figures show an estimated 1.6 million children were living in families affected by the policy.
 
The thing is, and I'll admit to having merely empirical anecdotal evidence for this opinion: whenever I see families with 3+ children, mostly they are:
- poor already/low income, suggesting either on Saturday nights drink affects their behaviour or domestic abuse (he forces himself on her or does not allow contraception)
- Catholic, very often immigrant East European families, working but not well paid
- Middle class high income where 4 is the minimum but also
- when they inevitably divorce, the mother does not always get more than a minimum from the CSA
- single mothers whose career plan is get pregnant to get a flat, have more kids to get bigger flat.

The current inherited policy did I think establish a threshold date for paying only for the first two.
Why should people be rewarded or compensated for their failure to plan a family when there is abundant support and advice available? I think the Labour leadership are right to stick to this, but it is a hard pill to swallow for the more left wing of the party.
 
This is an area that will always be difficult: should children suffer because of their parents bad choices vs whether we effectively encourage parents to make bad choices.

There's probably a very strong need for teaching children about lifestyle and hope too, but some would certainly see trying to encourage children to become responsible adults in the way *we* see that as being fundamentally wrong, just as some here see those with a faith and values trying to pass that on to their children as wrong. And then there's also this issue of whether one should depict the choices made by a childs' parents as being fundamentally wrong.
 
I am in total agreement with this policy. My wife & I only had one child, whenever we discussed having a second, we decided that we couldn't afford it, and we could at least support our one child properly. There is no reason, in this day & age, in this country, to have multiple children unless you. can support them properly yourself.
 
For me I support Labours simple stance of sticking to there guns
so many times parties have been voted in then changed their policies and
that does not get a lot of support from voters.

Kier said he would not change this rule so if you vote against it you will lose the whip
i hope to see a few more militant labour MPs get this happen to them
then the rest will slide into line
 
Last edited:
Whatever Labour's thoughts are re being able to afford this they will not cave-in to the demands of the left. I think you'll find they will quietly lift the cap in about 18 months or so because they've prioritised eradicating child poverty.
 
Last edited:
Once our second child had been born, we waited 6 months to ensure he was free of any illness etc. Then I had a vasectomy which seemed the right thing to do give the world population. We could have afforded more children but that does not make it right and, in any case, were more than pleased with the two we had. The pity is that they have moved away from their home town now and so large distances have to be travelled to see grandchildren.

Dave
 
JohnC6 said:
Whatever Labour's thoughts are re being able to afford this they will not cave-in to the demands of the left. I think you'll find they will quietly lift the cap in about 18 months or so because they've prioritised eradicating child poverty.
Click to expand...

i agree to be fair , but what labour seem to be doing is slowly easing themselves in so there are no ripples
and that is what we need the random trotsky mob want the coffers to be distributed to the poor.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top