Iain Duncan Smith Vows Welfare Reforms Will Not Punish Or Force Families Into Poverty

Ids Benefits Cap

First Posted: 23/01/2012 09:13 Updated: 23/01/2012 15:40

Iain Duncan Smith has insisted his welfare reform plans are not designed to "punish", as he vowed the proposed cap on benefits will not make children homeless or force families into poverty.

The work and pensions secretary, who is facing a threat from Lords to vote-down the government's proposed £26,000 per year benefit cap, gave a guarantee the reforms would not leave children on the street.

"The reality here is that £26,000 a year, there is absolutely no reason why any family should not be able to be found accommodation and no children should be in any respect plunged into poverty," he told BBC Radio 4's Today programme.

Impact assessments show the government expects 67,000 households - and 220,000 children - will be affected by the changes.

"We do not believe there will be an increase in child poverty," Duncan Smith said. "Our department does not believe that you can directly apportion poverty to this particular measure."

Prime Minister David Cameron said: "It's 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".

Quick Poll

Should benefits be capped at £26,000 a year?

VOTE

The prime minister's official spokesperson said on Monday the government would look at the implementation. "We will look at the impact of these changes and see if there is anything more we have to do on implementation.

"But we are sticking to the fundamental policy. We think it is fair to have a cap and we think that most people would think that a cap which equates to £35,000 gross income is quite a lot of money."

Responding to alliance of peers and Bishops, including former Liberal Democrat leader Lord Ashdown who are planning to derail the reform, Duncan Smith said the cap was not designed to "punish" and his critics were wrong.

"I simply make the point to them that the purpose of this is not to punish people but it is to give fairness to people who are paying tax, who are commuting large distances because they can only afford to live in the houses that they have chosen," he told Sky News.

"It is also about fairness to those who are on these benefits; it is not fair to trap somebody in an expensive house which they cannot afford then to go to work on the back of, because they would lose their housing benefit if they went to work - so they are disincentivised from going to work.

The cap, which would mean no family would be able to claim over £500 a week in benefits, was denounced as "completely unacceptable" by Lord Ashdown on Sunday.

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.

Shadow work and pensions secretary Liam Byrne has said Labour will support the bishop's amendment to exclude child benefit from the cap if the party's own amendment is defeated.

Employment minister Chris Grayling said some families would have to move house because of the changes: "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.

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.

Labour have said they will not vote against the bill "because we support the principles" but would seek to change it: "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," a party spokesperson said.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST UK POLITICS

Iain Duncan Smith has insisted his welfare reform plans are not designed to "punish", as he vowed the proposed cap on benefits will not make children homeless or force families into poverty. The wo...
Iain Duncan Smith has insisted his welfare reform plans are not designed to "punish", as he vowed the proposed cap on benefits will not make children homeless or force families into poverty. The wo...
Filed by Dina Rickman  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 96
  • 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
Page: 1 2 3  Next ›  Last »  (3 total)
02:22 PM on 02/03/2012
AND WHAT PLANET DOES THIS PRXCK LIVE ON !!!, here in WALES there are VERY FEW JOBS anyway & again few that pay MORE than the MINIMUM wage,yet rents for housing are above average outside the major cities & large towns,even social housing rent is high in comparison with income,I know many families in this area that were on benefits who have taken TWO part time jobs (20 hours a week each ) as these are about the only jobs available,but their income is so low they cannot manage due to the high prices for nearly everything you purchase,their income is only a few pounds more than benefit,but then working expenses have to be taken into account as the nearest towns are 11 & 13 miles away,so its just not viable to work & even if this pillock does cut benefit payments they still will not be any better off by working,the results will be the same family after family will be going bankrupt,which will in fact cost the country more as the council will then have to house these people either by housing benefit paid to private landlords (IF you can find one willing to take a benefit claimant as a tennant) & around here thats rare,or they are put into B&B which they do only for a limited time,it would be far better to chase & recover the billions of pounds owed by big business !!
11:20 AM on 01/26/2012
If David Cameron genuinely thinks that the £26.000 per year, or because it sounds like more, the £35.000 before tax, ` a good and healthy income` then he must think the ammount he personaly takes from the public purse, as income, before expenses , immoral.!
Ian Duncan smith , has been caught `bending the truth regarding the effe
photo
BeeJayCeee
I still loathe Thatcher
06:26 PM on 01/23/2012
Punishing the poor is the whole raison d'être of the Tories. Mr Duncan Smith is being disingenuous, at best.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mediumal57
Moderate Extremist
05:30 PM on 01/23/2012
It's not the headline grabbing cap figure that is of real importance here. TAll the Tories in their time-honoured fashion are attempting to do is the old softening up exercise. If the sum total of individuals is truly only about 67,000 one begins to wonder why they are bothering. Mean-spirited selfish little policy.

Nobody should be in any doubt that this so called reform is really just yet another attack upon the Welfare State. The Tories have never been comfortable about the entire concept of State welfare provision since its inception and have done all they could when they're in office and out of it to undermine it at every turn. Sadly the Labour Party once again is being led by the nose and meekly accepting this cap in principle.

Bloody fools.

By the time they get back into office they'll be inheriting just one more fait-acompli of the Right in their incessant "Social Enginnering" of gradually dismantling the Welfare State and the basic principles that underpin it. There won't be a single National Health Hospital worthy of the name by the time Labour have to once take charge and try, probably unsuccessfully, to make some practical difference to what the Tories will have left of it.

In many ways that unwillingness by the last "New" Labour Government in reversing the trends set in place by Thatcher is the real indictment of Blair and Co. Thatcheritres in Red Rosettes for the most part.

.
photo
Valksy
civis mundi sum
06:14 PM on 01/23/2012
Absolutely right. They are playing politics rather than serving the people, and relying on the Tory meme that anyone who REALLY wanted a job could just go out and get one. It's a lie. A plain lie.

And I don't approve of punishing children for the bad acts of their parents and they will be the ones who suffer. But then Tories like having a serf class at the bottom of the ladder and won't give a damn that the next generation is moving towards poverty and homelessness.

Our first move to assist the country should be to close the tax loopholes that let companies off hundreds of millions, if not billions. And withdraw from any and all of the unnecessary and pointless bloody wars we have squandered blood and money on.

We are generating a bigger class of people who have no future and nothing to lose. Very very dangerous for the nation.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
06:41 PM on 01/23/2012
You both make really good points. I personally agree with you both. But we are very much in the minority. We are a democracy, so if this is what people want then unfortunately that's what they'll get.
09:02 AM on 01/24/2012
Very true valksy.
We need more action and less spin,
from this government.
We cannot turn our back on this
up and coming younger generation.
or suffer, we will.
wes
07:55 PM on 01/23/2012
At least I am not on my own in describing the Labour Party since they elected the conservative Kinnock to lead them, non-socialist. The major problem with ALL politicians is that they have never struggled, grafted for a living but too many leave university and enter politics as a research assistant until they gain a safe seat.
04:33 PM on 01/23/2012
I'd love to know how much the average income of an MP is if you use the same method of calculation that they use for average incomes. That would mean taking every penny paid out to MP's in wages, allowances, freebies, air travel. travel expenses etc etc etc + + + ?? Then dividing it by 650 Mp's I bet that well over £26000 or £35000 before tax. I'd say it' more likely well into six figures.

However I'm glad that their sharing the pain with the likes of the wife and I. We who have a joint income of £14000 a yea,r that includes my wife's minimum wage job, and my £96 a week ESA. oh and before you shout scrounger. I worked for 45 years, was never unemployed. paid my tax and NI contributions, and am very unlikely ever to claim my old age pension.

My mistake was working all my life, buying my own modest two bed house, paying my way, never getting into debt. Oh and not being an Eastern European Immigrant.
04:52 PM on 01/23/2012
right there with you on that score, F & F'ed
04:22 PM on 01/23/2012
Duncan Smith. Another spent force in British politics. He should be put into care with William Hague!
04:21 PM on 01/23/2012
torys always target the poor and disabled, private landlords rent their houses and make a great profit in doing so, i agree paying some family £26000 is a bit much but the goverment should be putting a cap on how much landlords can charge , most are making large profits out of houses that are not fit for rent and try getting them to do repairs. when maggie thatcher said everyone should own their own home she new this ould happen.
nelthroppesq
Attorney in allentown,pa
04:35 PM on 01/23/2012
England has been in control of the socialist since 1945 and the solialist policies has been the root cause of the economic decline of England, the first free market country. Welfare has created a population of dependants who live on welfare benefits and are stuck in a system which stifles their drive and potential. Putting caps on whaqt landlords can charge is another attack on the free market and on property. Nothing stops government from ensuring that houses are fit to rent and in good repair, but whyswhould government tell a landlord what he can charge? It is the market which should decide.
04:59 PM on 01/23/2012
not when that market doesn't afford the people enough wages to cover the rents, theres many living in sub-standard properties in this country and neither landlords or government do anything about it, try getting a private landlord to repair even the basics and you get the concealed threat of, "theres many homeless people would be pleased to rent this house if you're not happy here"
04:14 PM on 01/23/2012
Iain Duncan Smith: "I Won't Punish The Poor" , But the old, sick, and unemployed. "I'm gonna have them, just you watch me.
04:00 PM on 01/23/2012
Yes we all want to see an end, too the abuse of the
benefit system, hard working taxpayers, having too
foot the bill for people who have no intention,s of
doing a days work in their lives.
At the same time we must look after the genuine cases.
The problem is, when 20 people are chasing the one job
this looks nothing more than a cost cutting exercise.
When the work is there, by all means carry through
these actions .
In our present economic condition no.
wes
04:04 PM on 01/23/2012
I like how all of your posts read like a poem.
06:25 PM on 01/23/2012
Well i do stay in Ayrshire,
Robert Burns country.
wes
03:55 PM on 01/23/2012
We are paying the price of immigration .Pensioners heating reduced ,benifits capped, unemployment sky high .What a stupid country we have become .
03:46 PM on 01/23/2012
It seems one major fault in all of this is private renting. It is nit true to say renting decreases mobility, but where the system has failed is allowing people to buy second third and upwards houses, then claiming tax relief on the mortgage interest.

There are three houses to the left of mine, all ex coal board properties. Thatcher instructed the NCB to dispose of al lit's holdings, result, these three houses, as their NCB pensioners died off, went to a housing association.
Being in a semi rural area the H Assoc decided they were too costly to maintain, so stuck 'em up for auction.

At auction they went for nearly fifteen times what the NCB sold them to the H Assoc for.

The new owner, did some small bit of works to them, after the H Assoc had spent next to nothing on them, they left the NCB fully refurbished at a cost of a few thousands each.
The rents on these as the new owner told me just about covers the mortgage interest on the loans he took out to buy them.
He charges nearly £400 per calendar month, each.

The whole of the housing sector stinks,

thanks to Thatcher for screwing it up.
04:21 PM on 01/23/2012
And thank you Tony Blair for not correcting it because his best friend Rupert Murdoch would never have forgiven him.
Labour failed in 13 years to sort out Housing, and that sums up our political parties in a nutshell.
05:06 PM on 01/23/2012
I couldn't agree more. The slush fund of some billions drawn down from the sale of State owned property, which as I understand it has never been accessed, despite the pleading for access by virtually all local authorities needing to replenish housing stock. I also understand it was to be left in escrow, earning no interest. another of the incomprehensible notion of the Thatcher government.

But with the needs to prop up the cash strapped banking sector, it would not surprise me to discover that fund is now depleted.
03:04 PM on 01/23/2012
It was perfect Stephen Tyler. I guess those that were expecting something else are the same people that didn’t know Paul McCartney was in another band before Wings.
02:56 PM on 01/23/2012
The welfare state is quite pointless. You work to eat that's it. I earn far less than 26k TAX FREE so why should i be forced to pay for a system that employs civil servants on better employment conditions than I get, pushing up taxes I pay, to give away my taxes to people I walk past every day. Do you have any idea how infuriating it is to walk to work and see them sitting in their garden drinking beer looking down on the obviously foolish me going to work 37 hours a week to bring home 14k BEFORE TAX!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Brokenduck
The Loyal Opposition.
02:14 PM on 01/23/2012
Be forewarned of the stories about "Welfare Queens" wandering around collecting cash from the government. Here in the United States, lies/stories like that were put out there when Reagan was trying to implement "Trickle Down Economics" back in the 80s. Yes, there are always examples of people gaming the system, but they are always few in number.
04:02 PM on 01/23/2012
They are few in number, but what you socialists dont seem to understand is that it is still WRONG.
05:07 PM on 01/23/2012
and you're a capitalist, on £14000 per year, IDS must love the likes of you voting for the party, another capitalist with a limited grasp of mathematics, the dumbing down of the population appears to have worked, in your case especially.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
08:56 PM on 01/23/2012
But they do exist. I hate to admit it but there are people who think it's fine to scam the system for all they can get. It's the people who genuinely need help that lose out as a result of this.
01:53 PM on 01/23/2012
Family Allowance was a benefit introduced in the UK in the aftermath of the two World Wars. There was a danger that Britain wouldn't have a birth rate sufficient to support industrial growth in the aftermath of war. Those wars are long over and we need to get back to reality. There should be a benefits system to help those that cannot help themselves and it should be capped at the minimum wage and not the average. Those with special needs should be able to get more if they need it. Having children is not a special need at least not in todays world. I am a pensioner and all I get from the state is my old age pension which I have paid towards. I get no other benefits and I have to manage so why can't others manage? Well done Iain Duncan Smith.
02:02 PM on 01/23/2012
I totally agree, Curney. I work my arse off for effectively half of what they are proposing to cap it at.