The Summer Budget

Good point Jane. My DS and DD and their spouses are all in 'good' jobs but having been losing out for years in terms of both pay and conditions, child allowance, etc.. And it's across the spectrum of both public and private employers.

Students especially have been hit hard.

I don't think I am worried so much about who is better off and who isn't, Jane10, although if you can't afford to eat, etc., it will not help the country in the long run. There is no God given rule that says we will all continue to get better off even when the country is in debt. I am more concerned that the recent government and this one are not very good a detail and unintended consequences are always more difficult to sort out.

Maybe the government did want there to be a cliff edge at 25 so that businesses would endlessly recycle under 25s and bring down the unemployment figures in that area. I just get the impression that nobody actually looked at the issues that arise.

In previous budgets we've always been left worse off. Nobody was interested in middleclass bleating so most of us just put up with it but perhaps remembered come election time. I just wanted to point out that there are a lot of people like me who are better off for the very first time since a budget. Sad maybe but true nevertheless.

I don't usually believe anything David Cameron says, until it actually comes to pass.
It seems, tho, that he only promised there would be pilots of 30 hours free childcare, in some areas, from Sept 2015. So I guess no-one would be counting on getting that till they see official notification.

So are we not supposed to believe anything Cameron says in parliament until it's been confirmed by members of his government, Ana?
I'd prefer that, anyway. In fact I very rarely believe anything he says.

Saying it did not quite fit in with his chancellor's plans is a slight understatement, particularly if you are a parent who had planned to get a job around the 30 hours a week free childcare. The government is saving itself quite a lot of money by changing the date by a year.
They are also telling single mothers with three year olds that once they have their children in childcare they will have to look for work, otherwise they will not be able to claim universal credit. Now the details have changed that single mother will have to earn a lot more to cover the childcare costs of 15 hours over the next year. They already have 15 hours free.

I've already said (twice) why I don't see why it should have made a difference, Gracesgran.

But the truth is that DC said one thing and GO another "Ana* which has actually come through as a delay in something previously promised. The discussion is surely whether it will make a difference or not. Jen obviously feels it does and gave her opinion why. It is perfectly open to you to explain why you don't think it does. It would be interesting to know how you would put this in a thread without you defining it as "nit-picking." How does calling someone else's comment nit-picking add to the discussion? It's just getting personal.

Durhamjen was referring to a comment made by David Cameron before the budget, Gracesgran.

I think that complaining that it didn't quite fit with what George Osborne said in his budget speech is nit-picking and I stand by what I said.

I don't think it's nit-picking Ana. It's a mare's nest of a budget and it will go on being unravelled.

I don't think it is particularly an anti-Tory campaign either Jane10; if was a Conservative budget after all. Any party which came out with such a budget would have it pulled apart and I imagine papers of all colours will continue to do so over the weekend. You really can't stand up saying the equivalent of "look how clever we are we are going to change the direction of politics" which is what they would have us believe and not expect people to critique it. I am quite sure you would do so if a party presented a budget which had little in it you saw as worthwhile and lots to cause concern. I am glad for you if you feel you don't have any concerned over this one but, to be honest, personal criticism tends to reflect a paucity of argument and always seems unnecessary to me.

Jane like wise

Nit-picking. As I said, any organisation with an ounce of sense would not have been making unalterable plans before the budget.

The petty points you're making really aren't adding anything useful to the discussion which others are attempting to have, durhamjen.

Friday, Jane. I'm allowed time off, not locked in the schoolroom until he comes back on Monday.

In fact I was going to say something similar about other posters. Some of them must be on gransnet all day.

The strange thing is that I do not look for links for Gransnet. I read a lot of interesting websites, and then think some people on Gransnet might be interested in that. So then I look on Gransnet.

Ana, why would anyone in childcare wait for a budget announcement to alter something that Cameron had said in parliament the month before?

" 4. Hundreds of thousands of parents will have to wait another year for 30 hours a week free child care

George Osborne was explicit in his Summer Budget speech: “To make sure work pays for parents, I can confirm that, from September 2017 all working parents of 3 and 4 year olds will receive free childcare of up to 30 hours a week. Once again, a promise made: a promise delivered.”

But is it? Under the plans the amount of free childcare will double from 15 to 30 hours for 38 weeks a year - a total of 1,140 hours of childcare a year.

Up to 600,000 families will eventually benefit from the move, worth around £2,500 a year on top of the £2,500 they can already save from existing free childcare offers.

But the scheme was planned to start from September 2016. Now the start date is actually September 2017. But Mr Osborne did not quite say that. "

Durhamjen don't you have your hands full enough with the homeschooling without mounting a one man anti Tory campaign? You must be about cross eyed looking for more links to post.

Do you really think that's likely? I'm sure most sensible organisations would have waited for the budget announcements.

Wouldn't you think they could have agreed on it beforehand? Why did Osborne change it? There must be lots of families who have been thinking it was this September. They might have even made arrangements for it, and are now having to change them.
The childcare organisers, etc., must be a bit worried now, too, having heard one thing last month and something else this month.

Presumably we believe the person ultimately in charge of the budget.

On 1st June, Cameron announced that there would be 30 hours free childcare starting from this September.
In the budget, Osborne said it would start September 2017.

Who do we believe?
This is from the Telegraph, by the way.

It'll never catch on. Unfortunately...

Yes sorry anya we waited and saved up until we could afford for me to be off work for a bit then waited a while to see if we could afford another. Ridiculous I know!

DJ - you say
If you already have two children, and have a child after you are raped, are you going to admit to it?If you do not, you get no child benefit even though you might need the money.

this is not talking about child benefit but child tax credit

Forgot the

Jane what's this radical idea about only having the children you can afford?

Yes, Anno I do. They are actually the party voted into power by our flawed voting system, because most of the population of the UK didn't get off their sofas to vote for change when there was the option.

It might not have been the best option, but it was a step in the right direction.

This country has the government it deserves. Perhaps if Labour voters turned out to exercise their franchise in the same numbers as the ruddy Tory voters things might change.

I think thjere might be a lot more to it than that. What if the victim is a lifelong Pro-Life supporter?

"dilemma solved" (!!!)

Shite me!