Benefit Cap: Ministers Set For Lords Showdown With Bishops And Crossbenchers

Ids

PA/The Huffington Post UK   First Posted: 23/01/2012 06:43 Updated: 23/01/2012 14:00

Ministers are braced for a bruising clash with the House of Lords over work and pensions Secretary Iain Duncan Smith's flagship benefit reforms.

A combination of Church of England bishops and rebel Liberal Democrats are threatening to derail a planned £500-a-week cap on benefit payments when peers vote on the measure on Monday.

Former Lib Dem leader Lord Ashdown became the most high profile figure so far to speak out against the plans, denouncing them as "completely unacceptable" in their current form.

He said that as president of the United Nations' children's agency, Unicef, he was not prepared to support them in the vote on amendments to the Welfare Reform Bill.

Despite the divisions in his own ranks, however, Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg has said he is fully signed up to the changes.

Clegg suggested there was some scope for softening the impact of the changes through "transitional arrangements" around the introduction of the cap.

However, he flatly rejected an amendment tabled by the Bishop of Ripon and Leeds, the Rt Rev John Packer, which would exclude child benefit payments from the £500-a-week limit.

Ministers appear determined to ride out the opposition, believing there is strong public support for their plans to curb the benefits dependency culture and "make work pay".

Prime Minister David Cameron said the changes are are "a basic issue of fairness."

"Should people really be able to earn more than £26,000 just through benefits alone?

"I don't believe they should. And I think the overwhelming majority of people in the country would back that view." .

Speaking in Leeds Mr Cameron said the £35,000 equivalent wage was a "good, healthy salary".

Employment Minister Chris Grayling last night acknowledged some families would be forced to find new accommodation as a result of the changes, but strongly defended the measure.

"There certainly will be people who have to move house as a result of this, who have to move to a part of town they can afford to live in, but surely that is right," he told BBC Radio 5 Live's Pienaar's Politics.

However, the vote poses a dilemma for Labour who have to decide whether they want to try to inflict a damaging defeat on the Government, even if it means taking the blame for blocking a measure popular with much of the public.

Party officials were staying tight-lipped last night on whether they would back the bishop's amendment, saying they would be concentrating on their own compromise amendment designed to protect families facing losing their homes.

"Labour won't be voting against the benefits cap because we support the principles and the responsibility to take a job if you can work," a spokesman said.

"But we will be seeking to amend the Bill, to bring a compromise between the bishops and the Government because we don't think council taxpayers should be hit with a massive bill for homelessness."

However, Grayling said Labour now needed to decide where it stood on the issue.

"Does it want to deliver the kind of change to the welfare state that all the evidence says the public overwhelmingly want or is it going to line up on the other side and try and chip away at reforms that are essential?" he said.

On Sunday Iain Duncan Smith hit out at bishops trying to block his welfare reforms, accusing them of ignoring the concerns of ordinary people.


In an interview with The Sunday Times, he acknowledged that his plans to limit the total payments any household can receive could face defeat in the House of Lords on Monday. (£)

He urged the bishops, who are leading the opposition in the upper chamber, to rethink their objections, insisting they were not doing the poor any favours.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST UK POLITICS

Ministers are braced for a bruising clash with the House of Lords over work and pensions Secretary Iain Duncan Smith's flagship benefit reforms. A combination of Church of England bishops and rebel...
Ministers are braced for a bruising clash with the House of Lords over work and pensions Secretary Iain Duncan Smith's flagship benefit reforms. A combination of Church of England bishops and rebel...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 23
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
03:49 PM on 01/25/2012
The Goverment should introduce a law that only allows people to claim benefits once they have contributed a certain amount in taxes & national insurances payments. This would then stop people from other countries abusing our already over burdened NHS & Benefits system.
08:19 PM on 01/24/2012
oh and I will add to my comment that we earn £2 a year over the child tax credit limit that is what we earn before weve paid tax which in our house is over a £1000 tax a month. I wont tell you how much we pay on petrol each month going to and from work and dont anyone dare tell me to use the train check out those prices too.
08:01 PM on 01/24/2012
my husband and I both work I have four children from a previous relationship their father is now conveniently on benefits so I get a whopping £5 a week CSA which if you take the fact that my eldest son pays more in tax from his wages you could say he is in fact paying for his siblings CSA.My husband has two children we pay £100 a week CSA for - quite rightly.Their mother however is on benefit so gets that all her rent council tax income support and child tax credit. We however get no tax credit because we earn £2 a year over the cap we get no council tax or rent help,no free school meals help with glasses or prescriptions dental treatment etc, sit down and ask yourself why my husband has to pay for my children that are not his when their father does not. CSA allow us £105 a week for my children yet if I was on my own and claiming benefits I would get £154 a week tax credit for my children do the sums and answer my 15 year olds question why do you go to work ???? sad reflection. There is no way my neighbours who sit around all day whilst their multiple children are at school should be better off claiming benefits than anyone who works. What is wrong with this lazy country
02:53 PM on 01/24/2012
What would the goverment do if we all stopped work and went on benefits. If you get more than working everyone who can should claim it and see what they do then. As for the bishops etc who interfere into these matters get them out of there post and let them work for a living. Its about time the goverment listened to the people who put them there.
07:12 PM on 01/23/2012
I bet theres not one poster here earns 20 grand a year and this is the main reason for posting, you all swallowed the lies of this man and his crew, its a fallacy. Most definitely someone on benefits living in high rent areas of south east England will receive amounts such as this when taking account of every benefit, housing and council tax and some will get a lot more, but its not cash in hand, the claimant gets whats allotted for the family to survive on, theres few frills on the dole, the majority of the money goes directly into the landlords pocket, IDS's chums. This is more about freeing up housing in central London for those who cant afford to buy in town but think nothing of paying £500 a week rent. Lets hope this social exclusion policy works and the low paid decide not to travel into town for work, I can just see Camoron, IDS, Millibland and co loading up their gaz guzzlers with household trash for transportation to the dump. Without the low paid and jobseekers who want to work London will grind to a halt, and I for one cant wait. Benefits presently are dismal, we've one child and claim the massive amount of £130 a week, for everything apart from rent and council tax, try living on this, its no life.
02:12 PM on 01/23/2012
No one should be better off on benefits than those who are working and paying through their taxes to fund those benefits. Unless genuinely disabled, there is no reason why people should not work to support themselves and their families. The UK has a soft touch benefits system that both those born here and also immigrants take adavantage of - the system needs urgent reform.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Daviejohn
All the world's a stage,
01:32 PM on 01/23/2012
I have worked all of my life and my pension does not amount to £26k why should people who have contributed absolutely nothing to the treasury or supporting themselves get this amount,just because they breed like rabbits and know how to work the system. Parasites.
01:20 PM on 01/23/2012
The benefit system has become a way of life for many people in this country. Many know that they will never be able to earn the equivalent in wages so they say why bother working when I can earn more watching daytime TV. As a result immigrants come in to work for wages higher than they will ever get back home. While we have this cycle in place where the unemployed are rewarded for doing nothing, more and more will say who are the mugs, the workers or those on benefits. I work with the public and often see young girls get pregnant simply because they know the government gives them a flat, more than 1 child of different sexes a house. Its not the government giving them a house, its the tax payer, the worker. They never work so now live on benefits. Their kids grow up and see this and believe its ok, this cycle has to be broken. Even recently public sector pay has been capped at a max of 1% a year, BUT BENEFITS WILL GO UP 4% how on earth can that be right.I believe £26000 in benefits is way too high and still is more than most people will ever be able to earn, They say this is an average wage but most average workers will be over the moon to earn this amount.
01:15 PM on 01/23/2012
£26,000 is MORE than enough for ANY household on a State Handout. Is there ANY other country in the WORLD that gives out ANYWHERE NEAR THIS amount (usually without question and far too easily obtainable)?? NO WONDER almost half the population of the World are clambering to get into the U.K. Most of the people on benefit are newcomers to this country and have never even paid a penny into the system, yet they seem to be able to get almost double out to that which any U.K. Citizen can. People getting this sort of huge amount of benefit are not even going to THINK seriously about work, let alone go out and DO any. Benefit is not for LUXURY living. It is a means to an end (or SHOULD be) to merely exist in times of hardship. Asylum seekers or ANY PERSON who has lived in this country for less than 10 years shold also be automatically DISQUALIFIED from receiving benefit of any kind. Maybe this would encourage them to go back where they belong!!!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
Mickey Mouse 1
There are no lies or deceit on a chess board.
11:26 AM on 01/23/2012
This bill is going to affect Labour's core voters. When they left office, more people than ever were dependent on the state, and the incoming coalition government discovered that it dosen't pay to work.
01:08 PM on 01/23/2012
and since this govt came in even more people have become unemployed. If it doesn't pay to work blame the bosses whose wages and bonuses have increased more than ever whilst their workers are on minimum wage.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
Mickey Mouse 1
There are no lies or deceit on a chess board.
09:08 PM on 01/23/2012
The people who have been made redundant since this government came into power is as a consequence of the last lot running up the biggest government debt in history.
10:41 AM on 01/23/2012
well i couldnt agree more and cap it...............why should hard working people pay for HUGE families that are on the dole......................first child yes but anything after that you are on your own............................instead of filling it get out and fill it with a job......................have some respect for yourselves................
09:45 AM on 01/23/2012
The £26k cap is equivalent of someone working getting about £33K before tax, why should a family churning out kids to increase their benefits get more? An Asian peer recently said some families have more children to enable them to get larger houses,why reward them.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
SATCHMAN99
09:01 AM on 01/23/2012
I would agree if you can't live on £26k a year then some thing is wrong some where. People in the area where I live survive on much less even with the help of tax credits.Wake up UK..You should not earn more money from benefits than working for a living no matter how many kids you have.
09:14 AM on 01/23/2012
Tell that to the immigrants who claim as much as possible when they have not paid into the scheme. Natural Brits can't get any help!!
12:04 PM on 01/23/2012
Really, please explain the £125 billion that is spent by the goverment on benefits then...Immigrants account for a small percentage of this figure the rest is spent on our own, many of whom are deserving but many milk the system for all its worth. About time people like you stopped blaming immigrants for this countries woes and look a bit closer to home. These caps are not being implemented with immigrants in mind as they come here to work, asylum seekers and immigrants are 2 different groups. Asylum seekers get benefits because they have nothing, immigrants have to work to get benefits like the rest of us. Milking the system is not an idea dreamed up by asylum seekers but one that they have copied from our workshy loafers....
01:10 PM on 01/23/2012
it is not about kids it is about high rents. If only rich people could have kids would your kids have been born, would you?
08:49 AM on 01/23/2012
When a family receive benefits over £26,000 you can bet your bottom dollar that it's the landlord who's getting the bulk of it. They know they can charge high rents because the government are paying for it. It may even be a relative who owns the property in some cases. I do not agree with such high payments, but more social housing is required, and benefits SHOULD be taxed. I earn about £12,000 and I'm taxed. If you can't live on £26,000 there's something wrong with you! Or maybe we should just send immigrants back to the first country they came through on their way to seek assylum/benefits. Get tough. If you're over 50 most people know what it's like to be a bit hungry, a little cold, and share a bedroom, not have the latest fashions. Why are we giving away so much hard earned cash?
09:23 AM on 01/23/2012
Yes I agree the benefits are too high. If people who earn much les can make ends meet why is the benifit system payig more.
Those on benefits should be give specifc vouchers so it is not spent on booze and cigarettes. Also if you have more than 2 children then they should not receive any more child benefit for the other children. This will stop people having large families.
My Cameron did not think things through when he said he was going to cut child benefits for one income over £44k. Surely it should have been total household income. Under his proposal it will mean you can earn as much as £87999 and get child benefit. How stupid can soemone be.
01:11 PM on 01/23/2012
why stop at vouchers why not make the unemployed and disabled wear something, a yellow star maybe?
01:13 PM on 01/23/2012
that was sarcasm before you mail and sun readers think it is a good idea.
10:45 AM on 01/23/2012
i wish i could earn £26,000 before tax never mind after tax it looks as though the baby making industry is more lucrative than me getting up every morning at 6am and going to work and not returning home again until 6pm time to think again