Politics

[Renton 21364]

So he must be over £16,400 which while not great, is certainly not low by a lot of peoples standards, particularly when adding on child benefits, tax credits etc.

 

Does he actually live in one of the three trials areas either?

 

Both of which are under discussion to be scrapped.

[Christmas Tree 4702]

Lol'ing at all the Labourites who moaned like fuck about Cameron screwing the North East over.

 

One of his first decisions is securing a 20 million grant for Nissan.

 

Do the hordes come on saying they were wrong and welcoming the decision, do they fuck.

 

A little non story about a 3 borough milk trial and they're up in arms....

 

No wonder the country fucked.

[Christmas Tree 4702]

So he must be over £16,400 which while not great, is certainly not low by a lot of peoples standards, particularly when adding on child benefits, tax credits etc.

 

Does he actually live in one of the three trials areas either?

 

Both of which are under discussion to be scrapped.

 

 

Link?

[Renton 21364]

So he must be over £16,400 which while not great, is certainly not low by a lot of peoples standards, particularly when adding on child benefits, tax credits etc.

 

Does he actually live in one of the three trials areas either?

 

Both of which are under discussion to be scrapped.

 

 

Link?

 

Radio 5 discussion this morning. Of course they're under discussion to be scrapped - everything is on the line and we know where this Party traditionally likes to hit - the vulnerable.

[Renton 21364]

Lol'ing at all the Labourites who moaned like fuck about Cameron screwing the North East over.

 

One of his first decisions is securing a 20 million grant for Nissan.

 

Do the hordes come on saying they were wrong and welcoming the decision, do they fuck.

 

A little non story about a 3 borough milk trial and they're up in arms....

 

No wonder the country fucked.

 

I did. Is it only 20 million though? Absolute chicken feed if so, worth spending for the PR alone after last week.

[Christmas Tree 4702]

So he must be over £16,400 which while not great, is certainly not low by a lot of peoples standards, particularly when adding on child benefits, tax credits etc.

 

Does he actually live in one of the three trials areas either?

 

Both of which are under discussion to be scrapped.

 

 

Link?

 

Radio 5 discussion this morning. Of course they're under discussion to be scrapped - everything is on the line and we know where this Party traditionally likes to hit - the vulnerable.

 

 

A bollox statement them really

[Renton 21364]

So he must be over £16,400 which while not great, is certainly not low by a lot of peoples standards, particularly when adding on child benefits, tax credits etc.

 

Does he actually live in one of the three trials areas either?

 

Both of which are under discussion to be scrapped.

 

 

Link?

 

Radio 5 discussion this morning. Of course they're under discussion to be scrapped - everything is on the line and we know where this Party traditionally likes to hit - the vulnerable.

 

 

A bollox statement them really

 

Not really, there's a good chance Child Benefit will go. Here's a link for you as an example, it will be a very tempting target for Osbourne.

[Guest alex]

Tories stopping free school dinners....

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/education/10273613.stm

 

They'll be after the milk next.

 

Absolutely the wrong thing to do. That money could hardly be better directed. Disgusting.

 

Anyone remember what school dinners were like under Thatcher?

 

 

Wummery at its best Gentlemen, well done

 

Not wummery at all. Certainly not on my part.

 

My brother is a low income, stay at home, single father of an under five year old without IS or JSA. This is going to cost him a bomb.

 

Does he not fit into this bit then?

 

Children whose parents are on income support or jobseekers' allowance will continue to be eligible for the free meals.

You really fucking tuck yourself in at times like. Thick as pigs' shit

 

 

Dont see how, care to explain?

Roffle

[manc-mag 1]

Easy one for the Tories like. The parents probably arent Conservative voters anyway and the kids don't vote at all.

 

Knocks you sick when you see them putting the boot into the vulnerable ab initio.

[Christmas Tree 4702]

So he must be over £16,400 which while not great, is certainly not low by a lot of peoples standards, particularly when adding on child benefits, tax credits etc.

 

Does he actually live in one of the three trials areas either?

 

Both of which are under discussion to be scrapped.

 

 

Link?

 

Radio 5 discussion this morning. Of course they're under discussion to be scrapped - everything is on the line and we know where this Party traditionally likes to hit - the vulnerable.

 

 

A bollox statement them really

 

Not really, there's a good chance Child Benefit will go. Here's a link for you as an example, it will be a very tempting target for Osbourne.

 

Fucking Hell man

[Renton 21364]

So he must be over £16,400 which while not great, is certainly not low by a lot of peoples standards, particularly when adding on child benefits, tax credits etc.

 

Does he actually live in one of the three trials areas either?

 

Both of which are under discussion to be scrapped.

 

 

Link?

 

Radio 5 discussion this morning. Of course they're under discussion to be scrapped - everything is on the line and we know where this Party traditionally likes to hit - the vulnerable.

 

 

A bollox statement them really

 

Not really, there's a good chance Child Benefit will go. Here's a link for you as an example, it will be a very tempting target for Osbourne.

 

Fucking Hell man

 

Eh? I told you they were discussing it on the radio as an option this morning. I gave you a link because that's what you asked for - just after a Google like you normally do. It does though have some interesting figures which are probably correct, please enlighten me if they're wrong.

 

Official statistics show that some 7.5 million families receive Child Benefit in respect of 13 million children at an annual cost to the Exchequer of over £7 billion a year and rising - annual increases are index linked.

 

It's a tempting option for a Conservative party, wouldn't you agree? Yes or no will do.

[Christmas Tree 4702]

So he must be over £16,400 which while not great, is certainly not low by a lot of peoples standards, particularly when adding on child benefits, tax credits etc.

 

Does he actually live in one of the three trials areas either?

 

Both of which are under discussion to be scrapped.

 

 

Link?

 

Radio 5 discussion this morning. Of course they're under discussion to be scrapped - everything is on the line and we know where this Party traditionally likes to hit - the vulnerable.

 

 

A bollox statement them really

 

Not really, there's a good chance Child Benefit will go. Here's a link for you as an example, it will be a very tempting target for Osbourne.

 

Fucking Hell man

 

Eh? I told you they were discussing it on the radio as an option this morning. I gave you a link because that's what you asked for - just after a Google like you normally do. It does though have some interesting figures which are probably correct, please enlighten me if they're wrong.

 

Official statistics show that some 7.5 million families receive Child Benefit in respect of 13 million children at an annual cost to the Exchequer of over £7 billion a year and rising - annual increases are index linked.

 

It's a tempting option for a Conservative party, wouldn't you agree? Yes or no will do.

 

no

 

you do know this is a prime minister who has moved back the time of cabinet meetings so he can take his kids to school.

[Guest alex]

DBR

[Renton 21364]

So he must be over £16,400 which while not great, is certainly not low by a lot of peoples standards, particularly when adding on child benefits, tax credits etc.

 

Does he actually live in one of the three trials areas either?

 

Both of which are under discussion to be scrapped.

 

 

Link?

 

Radio 5 discussion this morning. Of course they're under discussion to be scrapped - everything is on the line and we know where this Party traditionally likes to hit - the vulnerable.

 

 

A bollox statement them really

 

Not really, there's a good chance Child Benefit will go. Here's a link for you as an example, it will be a very tempting target for Osbourne.

 

Fucking Hell man

 

Eh? I told you they were discussing it on the radio as an option this morning. I gave you a link because that's what you asked for - just after a Google like you normally do. It does though have some interesting figures which are probably correct, please enlighten me if they're wrong.

 

Official statistics show that some 7.5 million families receive Child Benefit in respect of 13 million children at an annual cost to the Exchequer of over £7 billion a year and rising - annual increases are index linked.

 

It's a tempting option for a Conservative party, wouldn't you agree? Yes or no will do.

 

no

 

you do know this is a prime minister who has moved back the time of cabinet meetings so he can take his kids to school.

 

Who is also a multimillionaire.

 

No point speculating I guess, we'll just have to wait and see. One last thing though, they were saying as well on the radio this morning (sorry, no link) that social security will be heavily hit, which makes sense if Healthcare is ringfenced, so a move like this really wouldn't surprise me.

Edited June 9, 2010 by Renton

[Christmas Tree 4702]

So he must be over £16,400 which while not great, is certainly not low by a lot of peoples standards, particularly when adding on child benefits, tax credits etc.

 

Does he actually live in one of the three trials areas either?

 

Both of which are under discussion to be scrapped.

 

 

Link?

 

Radio 5 discussion this morning. Of course they're under discussion to be scrapped - everything is on the line and we know where this Party traditionally likes to hit - the vulnerable.

 

 

A bollox statement them really

 

Not really, there's a good chance Child Benefit will go. Here's a link for you as an example, it will be a very tempting target for Osbourne.

 

Fucking Hell man

 

Eh? I told you they were discussing it on the radio as an option this morning. I gave you a link because that's what you asked for - just after a Google like you normally do. It does though have some interesting figures which are probably correct, please enlighten me if they're wrong.

 

Official statistics show that some 7.5 million families receive Child Benefit in respect of 13 million children at an annual cost to the Exchequer of over £7 billion a year and rising - annual increases are index linked.

 

It's a tempting option for a Conservative party, wouldn't you agree? Yes or no will do.

 

no

 

you do know this is a prime minister who has moved back the time of cabinet meetings so he can take his kids to school.

 

Who is also a multimillionaire.

 

No point speculating I guess, we'll just have to wait and see. One last thing though, they were saying as well on the radio this morning (sorry, no link) that social security will be heavily hit, which makes sense if Healthcare is ringfenced, so a move like this really wouldn't surprise me.

 

So why did you

 

Infact you didn't even speculate, you typed it as fact.

 

The point about the school run is that this is a very family orientated man who I think will be a lot different to your old school Tory.

 

It's going to fun on here when the cuts start. Labour wouldn't this and that and nothing.

[Christmas Tree 4702]

DBR

 

[Happy Face 29]

So he must be over £16,400 which while not great, is certainly not low by a lot of peoples standards, particularly when adding on child benefits, tax credits etc.

 

Does he actually live in one of the three trials areas either?

 

 

Here it is in single sentences again....

 

Labour government announced it would change the system to give free school meals

to more people

on low incomes.

 

It would have affected families with a

household income below £16,190.

 

Children whose parents are on income support or jobseekers' allowance

will continue to be eligible for the free meals

.

 

The scheme, due to start this September, could have given free meals to

500,000 more families

 

So half a million families, just in those areas, that don't qualify for IS or JSA, but have incomes below £16,190 would have benefited from free school meals.

 

Where do you get the impression my brothers income must be higher than that?

 

No he's not in a trial area...but once a trial works out the scope increases.

 

Furthermore, it's not even about my brother is it. I just used him as an example of this being a bit more serious than wummery as you'd suggested. It affects real people in his financial situation.

Edited June 9, 2010 by Happy Face

[Renton 21364]

So why did you

 

Infact you didn't even speculate, you typed it as fact.

 

The point about the school run is that this is a very family orientated man who I think will be a lot different to your old school Tory.

 

It's going to fun on here when the cuts start. Labour wouldn't this and that and nothing.

 

Read again what I stated as fact. Not that CB will be scrapped, that it was reported as being an option. Pretty sure that the only thing that has been ringfenced is the 'front line' of the NHS and, suprisingly, some overseas aid projects, so it is being considered, isn't it? At the very least I would expect it to stop being index-linked and reduced in real terms.

 

If Cameron is family orientated, why is he scrapping this project without even considering its conclusion? Giving impoverished children nutritious food is surely one of the best things you could do to help them, and what's more, it directs the money to exactly where it's needed, so gives you 'bang for your buck'. No, that sounds exactly like a thing an 'old school tory' would do to me. What a ridiculous notion to think being 'family orientated' means he cares about the welfare of all children. Thatcher believed in family, she just had a rather large problem with society.

[Christmas Tree 4702]

So he must be over £16,400 which while not great, is certainly not low by a lot of peoples standards, particularly when adding on child benefits, tax credits etc.

 

Does he actually live in one of the three trials areas either?

 

 

Here it is in single sentences again....

 

Labour government announced it would change the system to give free school meals

to more people

on low incomes.

 

It would have affected families with a

household income below £16,190.

 

Children whose parents are on income support or jobseekers' allowance

will continue to be eligible for the free meals

.

 

The scheme, due to start this September, could have given free meals to

500,000 more families

 

So half a million families, just in those areas, that don't qualify for IS or JSA, but have incomes below £16,190 would have benefited from free school meals.

 

Where do you get the impression my brothers income must be higher than that?

 

No he's not in a trial area...but once a trial works out the scope increases.

 

Furthermore, it's not even about my brother is it. I just used him as an example of this being a bit more serious than wummery as you'd suggested. It affects real people in his financial situation.

 

 

You said it was going to cost your brother a bomb.

 

It was only a trial. He doesnt live in a trial area. Trials do not always get rolled out, thats why they are trials.

 

I have nothing against any schemes like this, WHEN the country can afford it.

 

There are thousands of very worthy ideas about helping the less well off, but if we havent got the money, we havent got the money.

 

As for slagging the Tories off for not EXTENDING this trial, its not their fault the country is so in debt and overspent.

 

Had Labour reduced the debt or not overspent so much in their 13 years then the new Government would be able to increase spending (as previous Tory governments) rather than have to cut expenditure.

 

Anyone who thinks Cameron wants to be in the position of HAVING to cut public spending is stupid, beyond belief.

[Christmas Tree 4702]

So why did you

 

Infact you didn't even speculate, you typed it as fact.

 

The point about the school run is that this is a very family orientated man who I think will be a lot different to your old school Tory.

 

It's going to fun on here when the cuts start. Labour wouldn't this and that and nothing.

 

Read again what I stated as fact. Not that CB will be scrapped, that it was reported as being an option.

 

"Both of which are under discussion to be scrapped".

 

Pretty sure that the only thing that has been ringfenced is the 'front line' of the NHS and, suprisingly, some overseas aid projects, so it is being considered, isn't it? At the very least I would expect it to stop being index-linked and reduced in real terms.

 

If Cameron is family orientated, why is he scrapping this project without even considering its conclusion?

 

He's not scrapping it

 

"Education Secretary Michael Gove has said the existing pilot schemes would continue, "so as to assess better the case for increasing eligibility in the future".

 

Did you actually read it or just jump on the headline?

 

Giving impoverished children nutritious food is surely one of the best things you could do to help them, and what's more, it directs the money to exactly where it's needed, so gives you 'bang for your buck'. No, that sounds exactly like a thing an 'old school tory' would do to me. What a ridiculous notion to think being 'family orientated' means he cares about the welfare of all children. Thatcher believed in family, she just had a rather large problem with society.

 

Honestly, lose the bias man Renton, its bending your view of the world.

[peasepud 59]

You said it was going to cost your brother a bomb.

 

It was only a trial. He doesnt live in a trial area. Trials do not always get rolled out, thats why they are trials.

 

I have nothing against any schemes like this, WHEN the country can afford it.

 

There are thousands of very worthy ideas about helping the less well off, but if we havent got the money, we havent got the money.

 

As for slagging the Tories off for not EXTENDING this trial, its not their fault the country is so in debt and overspent.

 

Had Labour reduced the debt or not overspent so much in their 13 years then the new Government would be able to increase spending (as previous Tory governments) rather than have to cut expenditure.

 

Anyone who thinks Cameron wants to be in the position of HAVING to cut public spending is stupid, beyond belief.

 

I would have thought that raising PAYE by a mere 0.1% would easily have covered this being extended, Id happily pay that extra tiny bit more to see this continue.

 

Handing out Child Benefit is one thing but that doesnt even help those kids most at risk, Id rather see them halve CB and give all school kids free breakfasts, milk and dinners. Ensure that every kid in the country gets a good start to the day, some additional calcium etc from the milk and a hot meal daily. That way you'll ensure that those most at risk ie the really poor or those with parents who would rather spend the CB on beer, tabs or drugs at least eat.

 

It would also help the school system in giving more reason for these kids to actually attend school.

[NJS 4373]

Anyone who thinks Cameron wants to be in the position of HAVING to cut public spending is stupid, beyond belief.

 

How does that fit with his big society ethos which seeks a reduced role for government?

 

Do you think he wants to spend the same money on less things (not exactly a bad idea) or perhaps he actually wants more scope in the future for tax cuts?

 

Not realising a Tory's entire purpose is lower tax for the rich is what's really beyond stupid.

[Renton 21364]

You said it was going to cost your brother a bomb.

 

It was only a trial. He doesnt live in a trial area. Trials do not always get rolled out, thats why they are trials.

 

I have nothing against any schemes like this, WHEN the country can afford it.

 

There are thousands of very worthy ideas about helping the less well off, but if we havent got the money, we havent got the money.

 

As for slagging the Tories off for not EXTENDING this trial, its not their fault the country is so in debt and overspent.

 

Had Labour reduced the debt or not overspent so much in their 13 years then the new Government would be able to increase spending (as previous Tory governments) rather than have to cut expenditure.

 

Anyone who thinks Cameron wants to be in the position of HAVING to cut public spending is stupid, beyond belief.

 

I would have thought that raising PAYE by a mere 0.1% would easily have covered this being extended, Id happily pay that extra tiny bit more to see this continue.

 

Handing out Child Benefit is one thing but that doesnt even help those kids most at risk, Id rather see them halve CB and give all school kids free breakfasts, milk and dinners. Ensure that every kid in the country gets a good start to the day, some additional calcium etc from the milk and a hot meal daily. That way you'll ensure that those most at risk ie the really poor or those with parents who would rather spend the CB on beer, tabs or drugs at least eat.

 

It would also help the school system in giving more reason for these kids to actually attend school.

 

Absolutely. If this isn't a good and targetted use of resources then I don't know what is.

[Christmas Tree 4702]

You said it was going to cost your brother a bomb.

 

It was only a trial. He doesnt live in a trial area. Trials do not always get rolled out, thats why they are trials.

 

I have nothing against any schemes like this, WHEN the country can afford it.

 

There are thousands of very worthy ideas about helping the less well off, but if we havent got the money, we havent got the money.

 

As for slagging the Tories off for not EXTENDING this trial, its not their fault the country is so in debt and overspent.

 

Had Labour reduced the debt or not overspent so much in their 13 years then the new Government would be able to increase spending (as previous Tory governments) rather than have to cut expenditure.

 

Anyone who thinks Cameron wants to be in the position of HAVING to cut public spending is stupid, beyond belief.

 

I would have thought that raising PAYE by a mere 0.1% would easily have covered this being extended, Id happily pay that extra tiny bit more to see this continue.

 

Handing out Child Benefit is one thing but that doesnt even help those kids most at risk, Id rather see them halve CB and give all school kids free breakfasts, milk and dinners. Ensure that every kid in the country gets a good start to the day, some additional calcium etc from the milk and a hot meal daily. That way you'll ensure that those most at risk ie the really poor or those with parents who would rather spend the CB on beer, tabs or drugs at least eat.

 

It would also help the school system in giving more reason for these kids to actually attend school.

 

 

Totally agree, can you not hack Camerons computer and set this as his wallpaper.

[Christmas Tree 4702]

Anyone who thinks Cameron wants to be in the position of HAVING to cut public spending is stupid, beyond belief.

 

How does that fit with his big society ethos which seeks a reduced role for government?

 

Do you think he wants to spend the same money on less things (not exactly a bad idea) or perhaps he actually wants more scope in the future for tax cuts?

 

Not realising a Tory's entire purpose is lower tax for the rich is what's really beyond stupid.

 

 

You missed my use of the word HAVING TO