Osbourne who appears to be firing the bullets, has said no one on benefits can be better off than someone who is working for the average wage. As a soundbite on the news I'm sure many would be nodding along, however life is a bit more complex. Housing benefit at present may allow poorer members of society to live in some of the more prosperous parts of the country. As far as I can the changes that Osborne is proposing will ghettoise those on benefits and affluent areas of the South will become poor free zones.
Meanwhile the decision to cut child benefit for those on higher levels of income tax has caused a stir in areas of the Tory Press. They see it as an attack on middle class mothers who stay at home. A family with one parent at work earning £45K no benefit, the house next door with two working parents 2x £40K they receive benefit. Now I think child benefit needs a review, it needs weighting and to needs to taper , however the most interesting comment came from Rupert Reed, who argues that this attack on universal benefits is part of a strategy to detach the middle class from the welfare state. The Tories want to devalue the welfare state and by restricting it to those on middle incomes or lower is the first step on this road.
I've been thinking that once high earners feel they are not part of it, why shouldn't they ask for tax rebates for services that they don't use, why pay for the NHS when you have private health care or state education when you send your kids to private schools. I sense that the child benefit issue still has legs, and I sense by the end of October other universal benefits will come under attack by the Con Dem government.
No comments:
Post a Comment