Pensions Triple Lock and Benefits in Spotlight as Sunak Delays Fiscal Plan

THE GUARDIAN: No 10 not committing to keeping triple lock or inflation-linked benefits rise in 17 November statement

Rishi Sunak and Jeremy Hunt at the start of the first cabinet meeting of Sunak’s premiership on Wednesday. Photograph: Stefan Rousseau/AFP/Getty Images
Ministers are to re-examine the pensions triple lock and increasing benefits in line with inflation over the next fortnight, according to No 10, after Rishi Sunak delayed the announcement of the government’s fiscal plans from 31 October to 17 November.

The Treasury has said the new date will now be a full autumn statement, with Sunak telling his cabinet that time needed to be made to do things in the proper way.

The chancellor, Jeremy Hunt, said he had agreed the change of date with Sunak and that the statement would set out in detail plans to reduce debt and a medium-term plan to grow the economy.

Sunak said it was “important to reach the right decisions and there is time for those decisions to be confirmed with cabinet”.

But in exchanges after prime minister’s questions, Sunak’s spokesperson made no commitment to the triple lock on raising pensions, a Conservative manifesto pledge, or to uprating benefits in line with inflation, which Sunak committed to doing as chancellor.

Truss had previously committed to the triple lock – a guarantee that the state pension will rise every year by whichever is highest of inflation, earnings growth or 2.5% – after doubts were raised by Hunt about whether an inflation-linked rise would be possible. “That is something that is going to be wrapped up into the fiscal statement, we wouldn’t comment ahead of any fiscal statements or budgets,” she said. » | Jessica Elgot Deputy political editor | Wednesday, October 26, 2022

If we cannot afford the Triple Lock, then we certainly cannot afford to maintain a royal family with all the expense that the maintenance of a royal family entails. – © Mark Alexander

Related here.

Rishi Sunak Refuses to Commit to Inflation-proofing Benefits

MARK ALEXANDER: If this country cannot afford to raise benefits for the poor in line with inflation, especially in these highly inflationary times, then one must conclude that this country cannot afford the luxury and extravagance of a monarchy. This is a logical and necessary conclusion. The people must come first, not the extravagance of monarchy.

Rishi Sunak had better be very careful what he decides. These are very difficult times for so many people. It cannot be taken for granted that the people will plump for monarchy over being able to feed their children and keep themselves and their families warm over winter.

I should like to remind Mr. Sunak that this is exactly how, historically, monarchies have been overthrown. Think 1789! The French Revolution!

When people cannot feed their children, and when people cannot keep themselves and their families warm during winter, anything can happen. Be very, very careful, Mr. Sunak!

Mark Alexander
All Rights Reserved

Liz Truss on Verge of Major U-turn on Real-terms Benefits Cut

THE GUARDIAN: Exclusive: Tory MPs warn PM she would lose vote on increasing benefits only in line with earnings rather than inflation

Liz Truss is teetering on the edge of performing another big U-turn as Tory MPs warned she would lose a vote on delivering a real-terms cut to benefits while new research showed the move could push an extra 450,000 people into poverty.

Despite desperate pleas for party unity from senior ministers after weeks of bitter infighting, the row over welfare threatened to overshadow the prime minister’s attempt to reassert her authority when the Commons returns from recess on Tuesday.

Fresh threats of moves to oust Truss if she digs in were also being discussed by MPs over the weekend, while senior Tories, including former chancellor George Osborne, warned the Conservatives ran the risk of a wipeout at the next election for embarking on a “political experiment”. » | Patrick Butler, Social policy editor | Sunday, October 9, 2022

Liz Truss Refuses to Rule Out Real-terms Benefits Cuts

THE GUARDIAN: PM facing fresh battle with MPs as she declines to commit to raising benefits in line with inflation

Liz Truss said ministers were ‘going to have to make decisions about how we bring down debt as a proportion of GDP in the medium term’. Photograph: Hannah McKay/Reuters
Liz Truss has refused to commit to raising benefits in line with inflation, amid a fresh battle with MPs over cuts to spending including concern from among her cabinet.

The prime minister said pensions would rise in line with inflation, having committed to the pensions “triple lock” during the leadership campaign. But she said people on welfare benefits were in a “different situation” and said they were more able to look for more work.

“When people are on a fixed income, when they are pensioners, it is quite hard to adjust. I think it’s a different situation for people who are in the position to be able to work,” she told LBC. “What I want to do is make sure that we are helping more people into work.” » | Jessica Elgot, Deputy political editor | Tuesday, October 4, 2022

Please remind me: Did the Devil ever have a daughter? If he did, this must be she! God is replete with compassion; the Devil, by contrast, has none. Just like Lizzie! She has absolutely no compassion for the less fortunate and worries about the pennies they might be costing the country; by contrast, she is generosity itself when it comes to the superrich and doesn't give a damn that many are not paying any taxes at all and are hiding their great fortunes from the taxman by stashing the dosh away offshore. – © Mark Alexander

Failure to Raise Benefits Would Be ‘Hostile and Harmful’, Truss Is Warned

THE GUARDIAN: PM reneging on Conservative promise to increase benefits in line with inflation ‘morally indefensible’, say experts

Liz Truss will deliver the biggest permanent real-terms cut to the basic rate of benefits ever made if she fails to raise them in line with inflation, one of the UK’s leading poverty charities has said.

The Joseph Rowntree Foundation (JRF) urged the government not to renege on its promise, made earlier this year, to raise universal credit and other working age benefits in line with inflation. It said such a move would be a “harmful act of historic proportions” – and deliver a devastating blow to millions of families on low incomes.

The JRF’s intervention follows widespread outrage at suggestions that the Treasury will seek to strip billions of pounds from the welfare budget to help repair shattered government finances after its disastrous mini-budget last week, which announced generous tax breaks for the rich but caused a near financial crisis. » | Patrick Butler Social policy editor| Friday, September 30, 2022

If this heartless woman reneges on Tory promises, she will be nothing less than evil. Very many struggling families rely on those benefits just to survive. This is an outrage. – © Mark Alexander

Early Liz Truss Comments on Scrapping Benefits Stoke Fears of Further Cuts

THE GUARDIAN: Proposals from 1995 condemning ‘recycling’ of taxpayers’ money add to concerns for universal credit increase

The chancellor, Kwasi Kwarteng, right, arriving in Darlington on Thursday, said it was ‘premature’ to say if benefits would rise in line with inflation. Photograph: Owen Humphreys/PA
Liz Truss has previously suggested universal benefits such as the state pension should be scrapped because of the “huge expense” to taxpayers of “recycling” their money through the system – prompting fears she could go further still with her plans to cut back the benefits bill.

The proposal, included in her motion to the Liberal Democrat Youth conference in spring 1995, highlighted the “enormous – and rising – cost of pensions and child benefit”, calling for a “search for realistic alternatives to universal benefits”.

Truss, who left the party the next year to join the Conservatives, had added that it was not “socially desirable to pay out universal benefits in the current fashion”, given the “huge expense to the taxpayers of recycling money through the tax system”. » | Pippa Crerar, Political editor | Friday, September 30, 2022

State pensions are NOT a “benefit”! Benefits are handouts from the government. State pensions have to be paid for, by law, by the eventual recipient.

Madame Truss is going the right way about getting people onto the streets! I see before me a ‘winter of discontent’. In order to avoid this happening, I suggest that Madame Truss be unceremoniously kicked out of Number 10. I also suggest that her sidekick, the practitioner of voodoo economics, also be kicked out of Number 11. BEFORE they do any more damage to this country and its economy. The Tories should be kicked out of office forthwith, as well. They have been in office for far too long. As a result, they are stale and bereft of any good ideas.

I suggest that Madame Truss be recycled: recycled into the dustbin of history! – © Mark Alexander

Qatada, the Happiest Man in England: Brother Tells of Hate-preacher's Delight at Being Handed a More Expensive Taxpayer-funded Home

THE MAIL ON SUNDAY: Terror suspect's new home has more bedrooms, a bigger garden and more fittings / His family are said to be 'delighted' at the move / The 51-year-old had requested a move from previous home worth £400,000

Abu Qatada has been upgraded to a larger taxpayer-funded home since his release from jail last month, the Mail can reveal.

The terror suspect has told relatives in his native Jordan that he is the ‘happiest man in England’ after he was rehoused to the more expensive property.

His wife and five children are also said to be ‘delighted’ with the move, because their new home has more bedrooms, a bigger garden and more modern fittings.

Qatada, who was once described by a judge as ‘Osama Bin Laden’s right-hand man in Europe’, asked to switch houses a week after being freed from Long Lartin jail in February.

The hate preacher had initially moved into a £400,000 home in Wembley, North London – organised by the local authority – where his family were said to be paying £1,900 a month rent which they funded through benefits.

But the 51-year-old requested a move after complaints from the property’s owner, who was furious to discover he had unwittingly allowed the cleric to become his tenant.

Qatada’s brother, Ibrahim Othman, said: ‘He told us they have now given him a very nice new place, bigger than the first house he went to after the British let him go.

‘He is really enjoying his new home and so are his family. The inside is very modern and has been done up more nicely, it has more bedrooms and a larger garden.

‘It is better for the family. They are all very happy in the larger house.

‘My brother cannot work so the British government fund his family to live there. The new house is costing more but he does not have to pay it because there is no way he can earn money.’ Read on and comment » | Tom Kelly | Sunday, March 25, 2012

Now That’s Really Dumb, George!
THE TELEGRAPH: Middle class parents who take time out from work to look after their children will lose out on thousands of pounds of Government handouts under a reform of child benefit announced by George Osborne.

In a move designed to save a billion pounds a year, the Chancellor annouced that higher-rate taxpayers will no longer be eligible for the benefits.

However the way the system is calculated threatens to put families with just one breadwinner at a disadvantage relative to households where both parents work.

This is because families with a combined income of £87,000 where both parents earn just under the higher-rate tax threshold of £44,000 are still entitled to the benefit while those with just one breadwinner earning £45,000 are not.

If the withdrawal of the benefit is not tapered, it could also mean that parents earning just below the threshold could be penalised if they get a pay rise.

The system relies on higher rate taxpayers declaring whether anyone in their household is claiming the benefit which can then be deducted from their earnings.

Mr Osborne defended the plan by pointing out that the costs of conducting a means test on every family would eat up much of the savings from cutting the benefit payouts. He claimed that the average income for households with one higher rate taxpayer is £75,000.

Speaking in an interview on ITV's Daybreak this morning he described the move as "a tough but fair decision."

He added: "It's just not fair to ask someone who's on £15 or £20,000 a year to be paying for the child benefit of someone who's on £50,000 or even more."

"At any other time, I wouldn't do this. But Labour left us with a heck of a mess." Stay-at-home parents to lose out in child benefit reform >>> James Kirkup, Political Correspondent | Monday, October 04, 2010

BENEDICT BROGAN: Child Benefit: What's fair about taxing stay-at-home mums? >>> | Monday, October 04, 2010

Poor Must Accept Benefit Cuts: Clegg on Collision Course with Own Party by Backing Welfare Axe
MAIL ONLINE: Nick Clegg has waded into the row over welfare reform by warning that benefits should not be there 'to compensate the poor for their predicament'.

On the eve of the Liberal Democrat conference, the Deputy Prime Minister backed the Coalition's programme of welfare cuts and dramatically shifted his party's policy on the subject.

He said the billions spent on welfare should be used as an 'engine of mobility', instead of just leaving people 'stuck on benefits, year in, year out'.

His comments are likely to infuriate his party's left-wingers, who have publicly accused the Coalition of targeting the vulnerable and Mr Clegg of breaking promises to ensure all cuts were 'fair'.

The issue is likely to prove a flashpoint with the LibDem Left when activists gather in Liverpool from Saturday for the first time since joining the Tories in government.

But Mr Clegg made clear he considered welfare reforms to be essential. In a newspaper article, he said: 'A fair society is not one in which money is simply transferred by the central State from one group to another.

'Welfare needs to become an engine of mobility, changing people's lives for the better, rather than a giant cheque written by the State to compensate the poor for their predicament.

'Instead of turning the system from a 'safety net' into a 'trampoline', as Labour promised, people have been stuck on benefits, year in, year out.' Read on and comment >>> Jason Groves | Thursday, September 16, 2010

Bounty Hunters to Cut Benefit Fraud by £1bn
THE TELEGRAPH: Private agencies are to be paid by the Government to reduce benefit fraud by £1billion, David Cameron is to announce.



Finance experts will identify welfare cheats by trawling through their records, household bills and credit card applications.

The agencies will get a “bounty” payment for each fraudster they identify under government plans to cut the £5.2billion annual fraud bill.

By having access to the Government’s database of incapacity and housing benefit claimants, the companies believe they can shave at least £1billion from the welfare bill, earning as much as £50million.

The Prime Minister will say today that the level of fraud is “absolutely outrageous” and an “uncompromising” strategy is needed.

Mr Cameron will also call on members of the public to report suspected cheats and promise tougher punishments for offenders. >>> Holly Watt, Rosa Prince and Robert Winnett | Tuesday, August 10, 2010

This is so 'old Tory'. Whilst I am not in favour of people cheating the system for benefits, I feel that Cameron should have the balls to target the fat cat bankers who are stealing far more from the system with their multi-million pound bonuses than the paltry sums of money that Jo Average is getting in the form of welfare. Why doesn't Cameron come up with something new and original like jailing bankers who milk the system, and thereby endanger capitalism's very existence? – © Mark | Comment also posted here

Bravo for Nico! Nicolas Sarkozy Backs a Ban on the Full Muslim Veil
TIMES ONLINE: Curbs on wearing the full Muslim veil come a step closer in France today with a report that will call for a ban on the dress in post offices, universities, hospitals and state-owned premises, as well as public transport.

Last night President Sarkozy was due to endorse the proposals, to be made by an all-party commission. Last week he called the niqab, the form of veil worn in France, “contrary to our values and to the ideals we have of women’s dignity”. Parliament is expected to act on the proposals in the spring.

If they become law women with covered faces would be refused public services such as transport, university classes and benefits. >>> Charles Bremner in Paris | Tuesday, January 26, 2010

I Don’t Have to Thank the British Taxpayer; My Benefits Belong to Allah!
The British taxpayer should withdraw all benefits paid to Mr Choudary. Then we’ll see how much Allah will pay him! The last time I checked, Allah didn’t deal in money or benefits! – © Mark

MAIL ONLINE: Hate preacher Anjem Choudary has claimed he is proud to receive £25,000 a year in benefits from the British taxpayer because the money 'belongs to Allah'.

The extremist cleric was speaking hours after Home Secretary Alan Johnson banned Choudary's Islam4UK group, making it a criminal offence to be a member.

British-born Choudary provoked outrage earlier this month when he announced that 500 members of his group were considering marching through the Wiltshire market town carrying empty coffins to mark Muslims 'mercilessly murdered' in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The 42-year-old cleric cancelled the protest on Sunday but yesterday showed no sign of curbing his fanatical rants, warning that the ban on his group would force young Muslims 'underground'.

Asked about receiving £25,000 in benefits, the trained lawyer said: 'I am not doing anything illegal. If we were living under the shariah there would be free food, clothing and shelter for all.

'Whether you are on benefits or not that does not mean you cannot propogate your ideas. I have always remained within the ambit of the law.

'The money belongs to Allah and if it is given you can take it. You don't lie and you don't cheat- that is what the prophet said.'

Choudary's bizarre defence of his benefits payments came just days after a group of Muslim extremists who screamed 'rapists' and 'murderers' at British soldiers escaped unpunished and claimed the state would pay their fines. My benefits belong to Allah: Hate preacher Choudary defends £25,000 a year payments from British taxpayers >>> Daily Mail Reporter | Wednesday, January 13, 2010

The Vile Rants of Anjem Choudary
Photo of Anjem Choudary courtesy of the News of the World
NEWS OF THE WORLD: A FANATICAL preacher of hate has been recorded urging impressionable young British Muslims to go to WAR against our troops.

Yet, sickeningly, crazed cleric Anjem Choudary and his wife rake in more than £25,000 a year in welfare BENEFITS—while he plots to destroy British society.

Now Choudary —who once called for the Pope to be executed and described the September 11 hijackers as "magnificent martyrs" — could face arrest under anti-terror laws for his evil ranting on the tape, which was passed to the News of the World.

After hearing his latest inflammatory remarks, terror experts asked: "What more does this man need to do before he is locked up?" Tape Reveals Vile Rants of Muslim Scrounger Who Preaches Evil >>> By Lewis Panther

Mark Alexander (Paperback)
Mark Alexander (Hardback)

UK Benefits Claims Treble in a Year!
DAILY EXPRESS: THE toll of Eastern Europeans claiming benefits has almost trebled in a year – costing the taxpayer more than £125million-a-year.

Around 112,000 migrants who came to Britain to work are now claiming state handouts – the equivalent of one in six of those who have headed here since the EU expanded.

The ever-increasing drain on public funds comes as the number of workers and their families heading from Poland and its neighbours continues to soar.

Critics warned that the pressure on handouts is only set to increase with more and more staying longer and growing older and less healthy.

The Home Office admitted some of the burden is because migrants are now forming families over here. In a separate blow, Ministers were accused of letting asylum run out of control as figures showed that the backlog of failed applicants is growing, not reducing. Ministers were also criticised for not having up-to-date figures on overall net migration.

Blair Gibbs, campaign director of the TaxPayers’ Alliance, said: “Migrants who come here should work and pay taxes, but mass immigration is having a direct financial cost on British taxpayers because there are not tight enough rules on claiming benefits.

“Taxpayers don’t want new migrants arriving here and being able to depend on benefits, instead of working.”

Sir Andrew Green, chairman of Migrationwatch UK, said: “The increase in benefit claims is a sign that real life is breaking through. Eastern Europeans will not forever be young, healthy and single and so the social costs can only increase.” Benefits Bill for EU Migrants Trebles (more) By Tom Whitehead

Mark Alexander