Campaigners warn Field over child benefit cuts

by Keith Richmond
Friday, June 18th, 2010

Child poverty campaigners have fired a warning shot across Frank Field’s bows after the former Minister for Welfare – now the Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition Government’s new “poverty tsar” – admitted examining the possibility of taxing child benefit and linking payments to the age of each child.

Mr Field, Labour MP for Birkenhead, but long loathed by left-wing activists for his right-wing views, surprised no one when he leapt at the opportunity offered by Tory Prime Minister David Cameron to become chairman of the Review of Poverty and Life Chances panel. Mr Field said it would be easier to tax – rather than means test – child benefit.

A spokesperson for End Child Poverty Action said: “This is not the way forward if we want to eradicate child poverty by 2020.” And a spokesperson for Barnardo’s said: “Any reform of child benefit would be a cause for concern if it is not founded on the fundamental principle of protecting the income of the poorest and most vulnerable in our society.

The only place you can read all of Tribune's articles as soon as they are published is in the magazine. To find out more about subscribing from as little as £19, click here.

About The Author

Keith Richmond is deputy editor of Tribune
  • Boudicca

    I hope Field is not prevented from ‘thinking the unthinkable’ this time. Universal child benefit is not sacrosanct. Why should wealthy parents receive a benefit paid by poorer taxpayers and why should the ‘Karen Matthews’ of the country be paid for producing baby after baby which they don’t want and can’t look after.

    Child benefit should be limited to the first two children (or more in the case of multiple pregnancies). It should be taxed.

  • Boudicca

    I hope Field is not prevented from ‘thinking the unthinkable’ this time. Universal child benefit is not sacrosanct. Why should wealthy parents receive a benefit paid by poorer taxpayers and why should the ‘Karen Matthews’ of the country be paid for producing baby after baby which they don’t want and can’t look after.

    Child benefit should be limited to the first two children (or more in the case of multiple pregnancies). It should be taxed.

  • James

    I completely agree with Boudicca, “wealthy” parents shouldn’t get a penny in child benefits, and it absolutely should be cut to a maximum of two children to try and curb the terrible culture of “more babies, more money” that far too many parents have in this country.

    Social housing is the same, more kids equals bigger houses, and it’s revolting, I know people like this with 5 kids, never worked, and low and behold the kids are horrible, and her 15 year old has actually just had a child herself and will soon be getting a house of her own, and have herself 5 children too.

    It’s vile, disgusting, revolting and not on, you can’t stop the payments to the “wealthier” parents untill you sort out the problem with the scroungers and scumbags, it sends the message that idleness, slobbery pays and that hard work, education, doesn’t.

  • James

    I completely agree with Boudicca, “wealthy” parents shouldn’t get a penny in child benefits, and it absolutely should be cut to a maximum of two children to try and curb the terrible culture of “more babies, more money” that far too many parents have in this country.

    Social housing is the same, more kids equals bigger houses, and it’s revolting, I know people like this with 5 kids, never worked, and low and behold the kids are horrible, and her 15 year old has actually just had a child herself and will soon be getting a house of her own, and have herself 5 children too.

    It’s vile, disgusting, revolting and not on, you can’t stop the payments to the “wealthier” parents untill you sort out the problem with the scroungers and scumbags, it sends the message that idleness, slobbery pays and that hard work, education, doesn’t.

  • Snowtintrough

    Could I ask Mr Field what he is conribuiting to the benefit cuts is he giving any of his wealth to help the national debt I very much think not once again pick on the vunerable in our society rich for the rich and hit the vunerable people who cannot defend themselves by the way our biggest out lay is immgration cut that and we would not have a problem but the new goverment are frightend to mention our biggest problem

  • Snowtintrough

    Could I ask Mr Field what he is conribuiting to the benefit cuts is he giving any of his wealth to help the national debt I very much think not once again pick on the vunerable in our society rich for the rich and hit the vunerable people who cannot defend themselves by the way our biggest out lay is immgration cut that and we would not have a problem but the new goverment are frightend to mention our biggest problem

  • Robert

    I bet he still thinks he is in new labour, because I cannot tell the difference.

  • Robert

    I bet he still thinks he is in new labour, because I cannot tell the difference.

  • Robert

    Then why pay it to the dam richest, the rich do not need the poor do, but of course New labour has to look after the middle England vote.

  • Robert

    Then why pay it to the dam richest, the rich do not need the poor do, but of course New labour has to look after the middle England vote.

  • Robert

    The sad fact is of course Mandy offered to help the Tories if they wanted him, I’m sure Purnell Hutton and many many others of the new labour gang would be willing to work with the Tories, perhaps because New labour was so Thatcherite the difference is not noticed. Frank Field come on if he is labour then sadly I’m a commie, mind you compared to new labour I suspect you would call me that, in fact labour once called me a militant.

  • Robert

    The sad fact is of course Mandy offered to help the Tories if they wanted him, I’m sure Purnell Hutton and many many others of the new labour gang would be willing to work with the Tories, perhaps because New labour was so Thatcherite the difference is not noticed. Frank Field come on if he is labour then sadly I’m a commie, mind you compared to new labour I suspect you would call me that, in fact labour once called me a militant.

  • Robert

    Then why did you keep him in labour, because the people would have voted for him as an independent which shows you how far away from the people new labour has gone. Frank Field has more labour in his little finger then Blair or brown had in their whole bodies.

    Go for it Frank and keep in mind workhouses and concentration camps mate, we need to clean up this country.

  • Robert

    Then why did you keep him in labour, because the people would have voted for him as an independent which shows you how far away from the people new labour has gone. Frank Field has more labour in his little finger then Blair or brown had in their whole bodies.

    Go for it Frank and keep in mind workhouses and concentration camps mate, we need to clean up this country.

  • Kennykart

    I think child benefit should be paid for the first two children only if people want more then that is their responsibility.. It is also unfair that single parents who have worked hard rather than sponge off the state earn £44,000 they lose their benefit but two parents each earning 30 to 40 thousand will keep theirs, this is grossly unfair

blog comments powered by Disqus