MSE News: Government shrugs off Lords benefits defeat

shedboy94

LookingForNipsy wrote: »

1. Everyone gets a "pay rise" with each child whether employed or unemployed via child benefit. I agree in the case of unemployed we shouldn't encourage large families and capping benefits should help but children shouldn't suffer poverty because of stupid parents either - they didn't choose to be born any more than you choose to support them.

2. 10+ years?? I wouldn't believe it either but long term unemployed generally refers to 2+ years and I can believe that, obviously out of the roughly 400,000 who fit in this category some must just be lazy but given it got to this number during the recession some of it has got to be down to a lack of jobs.

3. Fraud estimates from the DWP for 2010/11 are 0.8% (http://statistics.dwp.gov.uk/asd/asd2/fem/fem_oct09_sep10.pdf) - even if they've underestimated by 10 times that amount then thats 8% which still indicates that few people deliberately defraud the system. Obviously its impossible to estimate the amount of people who aren't defrauding the system but aren't looking for work as hard as they could or having more children thoughtlessly so the best we can do is make sure the system provides more incentives for work and planning, that's why I favour reform - but based on EVIDENCE.

4. Recent government report estimated the number of immigrants receiving benefits and they constituted a smaller proportion of the immigrant population than UK claimants did of the UK population - therefore less likely to claim. 17% of UK vs 7% immigrant (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16643677)

5. Apparently eh? Well, as someone pointed out earlier most asylum seekers are excluded from the benefit system and aren't allowed to work either for quite a while so I'm even MORE suspicious of this particular anecdote.

You seem reasonable, I just suggest you supplement your personal experience with wider evidence for a more rounded understanding. You can be sceptical of the numbers but shouldn't outright dismiss them in favour of your personal experience.

I'm not having a go, but I will respond

1. I may get an additional £13.40 CB, however a benefit claimant will get an additional £13.40 per child and an additional £50pw CTC. The problem with child poverty is an impossible one......how do we ensure the money given to the parents is being used for the benefit of the child....we can't - perhaps vouchers is an answer, but there would be difficulties with this also.

2. I agree there is a lack of jobs, but there are jobs out there....there are just too many people happy to claim benefits as they are living a comfortable life doing so, or they are not prepared to take a menial job.

3. I don't work for DWP, but estimates of Tax Credit error and fraud alone are over £2 BILLION a year - probably more. The reason for this - a poorly designed system devised by Labour on a "pay now, maybe check later" basis, and lack of staff able to check for fraud. The Tory solution......cuts in civil service meaning even less staff to investigate fraud.

4. Maybe the figures are true, but 30% of my day is spent dealing with claims from non-UK nationals, and 90% of organised fraud is by non-uk nationals.

5. Once someone comes in as an asylum seeker and is granted leave to remain, they can claim whatever benefits they want. I spoke to a Somalian woman yesterday who came to the UK approx 2 years ago.....she is now receiving over £400pw in CTC, and paying no taxes - why is this a benefit to the UK economy, surely it is a drain? If someone wants to come and work fine, but they should not be allowed to claim benefits.

What also doesn't help is the current system allows non UK nationals to claim for benefits for children not even living here - the money is from UK taxpayers and if it is indeed being sent abroad to the children, it is then being spent in another country, which again benefits our economy in no way shape or form.

One of the biggest causes of fraud is undeclared partners - there are literally hundreds of thousands of single claimants out there......still popping out children......and strangely the children always have the same surname......"another child Miss Smith....and your child is called Jones, the same as your other 2 children"

MissMoneypenny

LookingForNipsy wrote: »

4. Recent government report estimated the number of immigrants receiving benefits and they constituted a smaller proportion of the immigrant population than UK claimants did of the UK population - therefore less likely to claim. 17% of UK vs 7% immigrant (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16643677)

You have read that incorrectly; not "the immigrant population" but "foreign born". There are no records of how many people claiming welfare payments are "the immigrant poplulation".

From your link:- It seems the government are looking to see how many foreign nationals have stated they came to the UK to study, work or visit, but end up staying in the UK and claim out of work welfare payments. Their sample showed that 6.4% of of working age, non -working, welfare claimants, are foreign born.


"The government has published its first ever estimates for the proportion of foreign-born people who are claiming working-age benefits in the UK."

"Before the coalition government came to power the nationality of benefit claimants was not recorded.

The government has now tried to link records on benefits, border control and tax for those who came to work, study or visit.

LookingForNipsy

MissMoneypenny wrote: »

You have read that incorrectly; not "the immigrant population" but "foreign born". There are no records of how many people claiming welfare payments are "the immigrant poplulation".

From your link:- It seems the government are looking to see how many foreign nationals have stated they came to the UK to study, work or visit, but end up staying in the UK and claim out of work welfare payments. Their sample showed that 6.4% of of working age, non -working, welfare claimants, are foreign born.


"The government has published its first ever estimates for the proportion of foreign-born people who are claiming working-age benefits in the UK."

"Before the coalition government came to power the nationality of benefit claimants was not recorded.

The government has now tried to link records on benefits, border control and tax for those who came to work, study or visit.

Forgive my ignorance but what's the difference? Are children born here also classed as immigrants?

MissMoneypenny

LookingForNipsy wrote: »

Forgive my ignorance but what's the difference?

Between foreign born and born in the UK? Is that a serious question? Just in case it is, those born outside England, Scoland, Wales and Northern Ireland, are "foreign born".

Interestingly, some of those born in the UK and therefore not "foreign born" will still not be British. Unlike the USA, where any child born in the USA gets US citizenship, the UK stopped that claim, 30 years ago.

LookingForNipsy wrote: »

Are children born here also classed as immigrants?

Officially, that would depend on the immigration status of their parents, when they are born. I suppose also officially, that is also why we have to tick those "ethnic origin" boxes on some forms (although not on welfare claims it seems from reading your linked report).

tifo

MissMoneypenny wrote: »

that is also why we have to tick those "ethnic origin" boxes on some forms

it's always voluntary and meant to be for stats.

LookingForNipsy

shedboy94 wrote: »

I'm not having a go, but I will respond

1. I may get an additional £13.40 CB, however a benefit claimant will get an additional £13.40 per child and an additional £50pw CTC. The problem with child poverty is an impossible one......how do we ensure the money given to the parents is being used for the benefit of the child....we can't - perhaps vouchers is an answer, but there would be difficulties with this also.

2. I agree there is a lack of jobs, but there are jobs out there....there are just too many people happy to claim benefits as they are living a comfortable life doing so, or they are not prepared to take a menial job.

3. I don't work for DWP, but estimates of Tax Credit error and fraud alone are over £2 BILLION a year - probably more. The reason for this - a poorly designed system devised by Labour on a "pay now, maybe check later" basis, and lack of staff able to check for fraud. The Tory solution......cuts in civil service meaning even less staff to investigate fraud.

4. Maybe the figures are true, but 30% of my day is spent dealing with claims from non-UK nationals, and 90% of organised fraud is by non-uk nationals.

5. Once someone comes in as an asylum seeker and is granted leave to remain, they can claim whatever benefits they want. I spoke to a Somalian woman yesterday who came to the UK approx 2 years ago.....she is now receiving over £400pw in CTC, and paying no taxes - why is this a benefit to the UK economy, surely it is a drain? If someone wants to come and work fine, but they should not be allowed to claim benefits.

What also doesn't help is the current system allows non UK nationals to claim for benefits for children not even living here - the money is from UK taxpayers and if it is indeed being sent abroad to the children, it is then being spent in another country, which again benefits our economy in no way shape or form.

One of the biggest causes of fraud is undeclared partners - there are literally hundreds of thousands of single claimants out there......still popping out children......and strangely the children always have the same surname......"another child Miss Smith....and your child is called Jones, the same as your other 2 children"

I don't think you're having a go, I'm pleased you're engaging with my points although we don't want to get into mammoth back and forth posts so I'll try to keep it brief.

1. CTC is still paid to employed people, up to quite a high income too I believe (40k?). Whether employed or unemployed it seems children pay well. The best cure for child poverty is secure, living wage employment and when that is absent we generally do have to trust parents receiving benefits to look after their children - anything else would be a literal nanny state.

2. On the whole, people want to work. You only have to look at the applicants per post for most jobs to see that. Its not simply a matter of people being too lazy or uppity to work - there just aren't enough jobs! Even if all the lazy/uppity people took any job that came their way a lot of people would still be unemployed so its not enough to say stop being so lazy and stuck up - there need to be more jobs!

3. Agreed, the system needs improvement and simplification. A well thought out Universal Credit System plus a Cap might prove to be very beneficial but the devil will be in the details.

4. Where is this 90% from? Even if its true, nationwide, non-UK nationals tend to be less likely to claim - it might be high in your area though but even the 30% you state isn't the "vast majority" and 2 years is hardly "straight away" either which is what your first post claimed.

5. Again, where is proof of claiming for children abroad - I don't disbelieve you but I'd like to see the details surrounding that. Also, asylum seekers and refugees don't come here to work (although we should certainly encourage them too when appropriate), they come to escape unimaginably awful conditions.

Fraud exists, I'm not denying that but this popular habit of obsessing over generous benefits, tarring those claiming anything with the same brush and treating all claimants as second class, child popping, work shy scroungers is damaging, innaccurate and distracts from other more important issues. People are furious at what they perceive to be high benefits but silent over the fact that full time work on the NMW leaves many in poverty - where is the anger at that??? It certainly makes me :mad:

So much for brief:p

LookingForNipsy

MissMoneypenny wrote: »

Between foreign born and born in the UK? Is that a serious question? Just in case it is, those born outside England, Scoland, Wales and Northern Ireland, are "foreign born".

Between foreign born population and the immigrant population - you said I used the latter when the study was in regards to the former but I'm unaware of the difference.

MissMoneypenny

tifo wrote: »

Don't claimant's have to be British before they can claim some benefits?

No.

EEA immigrants and their partners and their partner's parents and siblings (even if they are all non EU) have instant access to all UK welfare payments. They can also have home fees for university and access to the Student Loans, if they have lived in the EEA area for the 3 years prior to the course start date (this EEA rules was brought for the UK and Irish universities).

Any non- EU who has asked for discretionary leave to remain (mainly thorugh Human Rights) or has indefinate Leave to Remain (or Enter) has full access to welfare benefits too, even if they aren't British.

Refuges have full access to all benefits.

Those who have worked in countries who have reciprical agreement with the UK, get some benefits as soon as they arrive on a visa (although, not on a visitor visa).

Don't confuse public funds with benefits. Some benefits are not classed as public funds. Plus non-EU foreign nationals have 'no recourse to public funds' stamped in their passports, can claim most benefits as soon as they arrive for themselves and their non-EU children, if they claim through a partner who has been granted Indefinate Leave to Remain or has British citizenship.

Those that don't have a partner with ILR or British citizenship are on 'trust' not to claim, however, it seems that HMRC is not as good at checking as councils and the DWP are and some claim child tax credits and child benefit when they aren't entitled to.

tifo wrote: »

There are some asylum or refugee related benefits but I don't think they get £26k.

Asylum seekers get support from the welfare state in the form of housing, cash, NHS and free education and training. Once they are granted refugee status or have discretionary leave to remain, they have full access to all benefits.

tifo wrote: »

The majority of claimants will be British (whether born here or not) and native to the UK.

From that link, it seems there are no records on the ethnic origin of welfare claimants.

Immigrants can claim British citizenship when they have been in the country for a set amount of time. This time is set by the type of visa they have and whether they they used the UK immigration rules to get into the UK, the EEA rules or the EU Human Rights Laws.

I assume that article was written as the government are setting major new immigration rules at the same time as these welfare reform laws and have already closed some visa routes to the UK for non-EUs.

JillyJolly_2

I'd take the government surveys with a pinch of salt, they are often manipulated and not accurate. This is the government we are talking about here who often lie to us and avoid the tax bills for their own personal spendings..

jemini

trynsave wrote: »

I can't believe that they are even planning on giving them as much as they are! Is no-one listening? The proposed cap will be equivalent to a £35k salary for goodness sake. Don't try to convince me that you can't feed and clothe children on that.

The Govt deems everyone earning £40k to be on a high wage and takes 40% tax on earnings above it and is planning on removing child benefit to those above the threshold figure. Surely if working families are seen to be earning a high wage at £40k (before petrol costs, school dinners, prescriptions etc etc), then surely getting £35k for doing nothing is massive.

Yes I accept that some families may have to move to cheaper areas - tough! Working families have to. Many London commuters have to pay huge train fares every day because they can't afford to live in the city.

Some children whose families are living on benefits might have to do without the latest phone, game and their parents without ciggies, booze and the bingo - again tough!

Harsh - yes : Unfair - no.

I have to search out yellow-stickered food, tell my kids we can't afford stuff they want and be careful when the heating gets put on despite my husband and I both working to support the family. Do we get any 'help'? No way. Can we ask for a pay rise? No. Do we have to get on with it? Yes.

I might sound bitter. I am. Not that we have to penny-pinch, but that others seem to think it their right to be given (out of money we have taken from us), more than we earn.

I am sure that there are those of you who think my views are out of order, but times are a-changing, and about time too! The Welfare State is a wonderful concept but it is also antiquated and un-workable in its present format. Deal with less money or go get a job. And no, I don't believe many are trying hard enough. People who don't have English as a first language can manage it.

Rant over. Bring on the lefties!

Well said. My thoughts exactly. I am on a low wage but was refused housing benefit on a technicality, therefore i pay full rent which takes over a third of my monthly money, yet i survive,even though it's a struggle.

There are those who would say these cuts will take food from children's mouths. I doubt this very much, although it might take a few cigarettes from their parents mouths