I honestly don't know enough about it to say one way or another. The SNP brought it forward because they know it's awkward for Labour to vote against it I imagine.
Actually having now listened to the twitter clip I put up just before your post, I'm now a bit clearer on it. I misunderstood it, I thought it was child benefit they were talking about (so the terminology used is mis-leading), it's not, nothing to do with it, it's about Universal Credit and Tax Credits.
So in simple terms if you are on (The two child limit for benefits or credits) Ie Universal Credit, you will only get benefit for two kids and no more, with some exceptions, but in general terms, more than two kids, you will not get extra benefits. please log in to view this image
1. Child benefit pay you money every week for every child have. First child gives you a bit more 2. When the highest earner in your household earns 60k or more, then they claw back the child benefit in number 1 by taxing your income rather than you repaying it (you get less in your pay cheque). At 80k, you lose all of that and pay it all back 3. My understanding of this is that you get more benefits if you are not working/low income for your children that is bigger than the child benefit in point 1. However this additional child benefit is capped at 2 children. Anymore children you have is the amount in point 1, not the larger amount in this point (point 3). 4. There is also a cap of total benefits so actually, you may not even get the full child benefit entitlement if all your benefits exceeds this total.
Yeah that's it Bobby, although the teminology 'child benefit' confuses it all, because when that gets said, people think of it like the old child benefit book, which use to be available to every citizen with children whether working or not, regardless of income. What the vote is on is the cap on the Universal Credit payments, which have a child cap....also being called child benefit, which leads to the misunderstanding of what is being talked about.
I get it now, thanks brb. As far as I'm understanding, this was a Kings Speech debate, it was actually the SNP offering an alternative to the Labour manifesto proposal. So it's meant to be a traditional formality and the parties are meant to just vote for the manifesto they have been elected under. So these 7 MPs essentially just said the Labour manifesto is wrong and a SNP policy is better
I did read something online several days ago that said something about food vouchers being given as additional help, as a workaround to the problem. Which all sounds well and good but my concern is it will be subject to fraud, because that's how these well intentioned efforts generally end up. I expect Keir wants a costing first on various scenarios, who do we target, problem then solution.
Duggie will be pleased. Sir Kier doing more for immigration than tories have in 14 years https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cpe388jy2n3o
All that bollocks and incompetence from the stop the boats team and Sir Keir gets it sorted straight away
Thousands of migrants each year Tories managed 4 Labour managed 55 We are absolutely tied up in international laws
Do you know how many migrants came into Dover on boats last week? I'm guessing you don't... 1,500 https://www.itv.com/news/meridian/2...ed-in-uk-after-week-of-crossings-figures-show
Funnily enough I was wondering that when I wrote it, I'm guessing probably not. I was thinking after whether the food vouchers was something local councils were thinking of offering, rather than being a government thing. They would take it from the costof living budgets they receive from the state at local level, or whatever name it's called.
