This comes from the Guardian this morning, but since it comes straight from a press release I cannot find on the web as yet I have no compunction in sharing it. In doing so I should add that a rarely have that much sympathy for the work of Frank Field MP. But he is now making clear just what is going on as a result of new government cuts:
The Labour MP Frank Field has this morning released figures from the House of Commons library on the impact of two measures in the budget. He asked the library (which doesn't just lend books - it's a research facility for MPs) to analyse the impact of the cut in the amount people are allowed to earn before they start losing tax credits, and the increased, 48% taper rate (the amount claimants lose for every extra pound they earn).
Here are the key findings, according to Field's press release.
The analysis shows that:
· 3.2 million strivers will lose an average of £1,350 next year.
· 754,900 families earning between £10,000 and £20,000 a year will lose up to £2,184 next year. Families earning £10,226 will be exactly £1,500 worse off.
· 51,600 families earning between £20,000 and £30,000 will be made worse off by up to £2,884 next year.
· 580,100 of Britain's poorest working families earning less than £6,420 a year face the prospect of being ‘taxed' for the first time. Those earning between £3,850 and £6,420 will lose 48p in tax credits for each pound they earn. This is a higher withdrawal of income than that imposed on the country's highest earners. Families earning £6,410 a year will be £1,200 worse off as a result.
Field said Labour should be standing up for these “strivers”.
Before, during, and after the general election campaign the Tories rightly gained plaudits for their commitment to protect and advance the interests of Britain's strivers. Yet in his first post-election budget the chancellor has decided to knock this group for six. He has torn up the contract they signed when they took it upon themselves to find a job. So here is Labour's opportunity to put itself once again on the side of Britain's army of strivers. First we must fight this double whammy of unfair cuts being forced upon them and, second, we need to push for improvements to the chancellor's living wage proposal so that low paid workers genuinely are better off.
I agree.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Frank Field was a Labour turncoat. Though I agree with what he says, why should I take him seriously? He knows damn well his contributions were hurting those most in need, yet he comments against it now?
Far too little too late, Frank!
Well I don’t. Those “strivers” are exactly the same people as those “scivers” as they move in and out of insecure poorly paid work. Frank Field was ever thus.
I reject that stupid false dichotomy in its entirety. Adopting means the case is already lost
I did wonder whether there was that duplicity
Frank Field has said he’s happy with the reduction in the benefit cap. I think your comment is spot on.
If has said that he is on his usual form
As I said, I usually disagree with him
I’d have more respect for Field if he’d bothered to vote last night. If that’s his idea of ‘fighting this double whammy of unfair cuts’ I don’t know what.
I have to say that I agree with you
How about this message for Frank to chew on…..
Wow, that’s “fantastic” that you have established that the Tories are out to further impoverish the poorest in the UK.
Are you going to find your “cojones” and do something about?
If you showed a fraction of the commitment that Simon Danzcuk has shown pursuing the “child abuse” issue that is haunting Westminster as much as the “Young Princes” haunt the Tower of London.
To start with, how about raising it as a question for Cameron at “Primeminister’s Question Time”?
Over to you Frank!
Indeed
Still not accepting comments on how popular the budget was?
See below for more details…
http://www.leftfutures.org/2015/07/the-worst-thing-about-osbornes-budget-isnt-the-cuts-its-their-popularity/
As you are well aware I do not accept persistent drivel
You provide it
Why you bother beats me
The rate of benefit withdrawal against earned income (the taper) in this country has been far too high/rapid for a very long time. There was a lot of research into in the early 1990’s if I recall and it was raised as an issue then under the social justice commission of John Smith where the paltry extra earnings allowed against benefits at the time were criticised. I believe the Commission recommended higher earnings accompanying benefit for longer and also criticised why savings were taken into account before allocating benefit.
Clearly being deaf to the consequences of this stupid methodology of punishing strivers for daring to get work and then dropping them like a stone when they do has now become ingrained in Government.
This is not a ‘nudge’. It’s more like a stab in the back.
can we excise that dreadful word ‘strivers’ from the discourse? It is a vile piece of neo-literal jargon, utterly dehumanising and decontextualising the lives of real people. The foul baggage this word bears sees humans as financialised units whose only value is the extent to which they permit themselves to be cathetered by the financial system.
Field is a disingenuous scoundrel and feeds in to the Tory narrative. Joe Halewood has it about right:
“Yet by then this is all too late and today we see the real spineless incompetent f***kwits in the Labour Party who are going to abstain and not vote against the welfare bill because they are more concerned with how they individual move up the greasy pole in the Labour Party than three quarters of a million children made homeless.”
Are you all contacting the Labour party personally to challenge their stance?
This is what I wrote to my MP:
Dear Chuka
Like so many people in the country (the 75% who did not vote for the current government) I am saddened by the unnecessary further damaging cuts
due to be enforced that will destroy the fabric of what we think of as Great Britain.
The people of Streatham voted for you because they believed you would offer them Labour values, and a different approach.
That is why you are called “the opposition”. However, many of the Shadow Cabinet don’t seem to grasp the fact that Labour lost
the last election because they were not offering an alternative to the current party, just a watered down version of the same approach.
The reason that 56 SNP MP’s were elected by Scotland (which used to support Labour) was because the candidates held the old Labour values
I have heard the youngest SNP MP give her maiden speech and she was awesome. Real vision, values and passion.
It is becoming apparent following recent debates that the vast majority of people (some who weren’t even Labour supporters) think that Jeremy Corbyn
is the best candidate for Leader of the Labour Party as he is the only one who will lead any form of opposition to a party that is running totally out of control
misusing their power to pass whatever they choose.
As has been pointed out by many people, that Jeremy is the only really authentic, honest, passionate & true Labour candidate. He stood up against the Welfare Bill
and if all Labour MP’s had stood shoulder to shoulder with SNPs and others the bill would have been blocked. Shame on you all!
Some of the Labour Party is trying to ridicule Jeremy Corbyn and imply he is a dinosaur. Age brings wisdom and the ability to communicate with all people
in all walks of life. The man has a true vision of what he would to do as a Shadow Leader & a Leader in Office.
You say that tax dodging is high on Labours agenda but I have never heard you consultant impartial experts.
Jeremy Corbyn has, and I quote from an tax expert Richard Murphy :
Min
Would be interested in the reply….
Richard
OK lets cut the ‘striver’ paradigm but also lets not sweat the small stuff so much eh?
What is more important is what is happening to elements of the Labour Party. They seem to have convinced themselves that Britain is just Toryland and that the only way to get into power is to become more Tory.
This is a staggering loss of faith in people by a so-called political movement.
Yet out there in the real world there ARE people who know that there is something fundmentally wrong with all of this and are crying out for leadership, for an alternative.
The confusion and vote chasing of Labour poses a real threat to this country but it also provides an opportunity to the Greens, SNP to really up the ante and start talking about their ideas as much as possible to fill the void created by Labour’s problems.
The problem at the moment is that only the Tories seem to be grasping this fact – more’s the pity.
Agreed -labour needs to realise that it HAS to be in the wilderness now and possibly for some years-steering the nutritive away from the neo-liberals will be like the turning of a huge oil tanker with the turning arc moving further away before it can effect the turn. As you say, the Labour party trying to be electable is a contradictio in absurdum.
I suspect if Corbyn got in , depite the savaging of the gutter press, the Tories would be secretly scared.
Brilliant comment Simon
Everyone seems to be argueing about the wrong thing. I don’t care if he is a “turn coat” – are the stats true Richard? The fact is this shambles of a “labour government” led by a Tory – Harriet Harman (ex Blairite) sided against the very people they are supposed to represent. There is only one labour new leader – Jeremy Corbyn. That is why he gets attacked by the press & all the “new labour tories” in his party.
A sad reflection of the state of British politics.
Who knows how far the neo-liberalists will push their agenda, or where it will end. It seems the depths of their greed know no bounds.