Byrne offers ‘something for something’ — but what does it mean?

Heartless Curmudgeon

. . . Something for something . . . - nah, - never work, - Brits have been well trained to believe only in sumfin fer nuffin ... innit ..

Nickle

It won't happen.

With 7,000 bn of debts, the government needs all the cash it can lay its hands on.

When Labour presided over giving people (not in ICB), 170K a year of benefits tax free (in Westminster), and now complains that they are being ethnically cleansed from central London, they just don't get it.

1. People should be forced to save.
2. That money should come from NI not being taken from them in the first place.
3. If and only if that money runs out because of ill health, unemployment, living too long, do the rest of us help.

ie. Back to basics with the system Beveridge designed, rather than the Ponzi.

Andrew Tennant

The benefits system gives far too little to those who want a job and far too much to those that are indifferent or actively obstructive. As a Lib Dem I'd like to see contributions into the National Insurance system used as a cap on the amount that can be paid out - you only get back what you personally put in - reframe the whole thing as a sort of mandated hard times savings scheme.

Mudplugger

The problem comes when their floated 'something for something' policy runs up against their gerrymandering immigration policy, which was always predicated on the total opposite, 'everything for nothing'.

Rhoda Klapp

The benefit system does not make value judgments. If you have worked all your life, paid in, and taken nothing, the day you apply for a benefit you are treated the same as if you had been reliant on the state all your life, or had just arrived on these shores. That is how it is supposed to be. No value judgments, anyone in need is assessed on need alone, not history.

The question is, should it be that way?

Martin C

Bottom line is, the working classes must pay. You cannot tax the rich more, because they can just clear off to places where the taxman cannot reach. You cannot tax the poor because they have no money. (By working classes, btw, I mean people who work; I do *not* mean the benefitariat).
Scrapping middle class allowances and benefits will further skew the already badly skewed wealth redistribution away from those who work and toward those, on similar incomes, who do not.
At least it will end the concept of the universal welfare state, because the working classes will no longer receive any benefit.

Dennis Churchill

Mudplugger
January 3rd, 2012 11:58am
Yes but the law of unintended consequences may have been spotted.
You can have diversity or equality: not both.
People will not pay for others they have little in common with and Labour cannot win an election without the support of those on average rates of taxation.

Andy H

Why does anyone listen to these idiots?
If they had tried to set about this type of thing when they had the the chance, then I may take them seriously.

Now they are in opposition, they suddenly see sense and take in general terms about what they failed to achieve when they had the chance.

If the media had any self respect, then these people would be ignored as the opportunist fools that will say anything to get into power.

Unfortunately, they have absolutely no idea what to do when they are in power as they have demonstrated.

It is time idiots like Liam Burne left politics to people that have a desire to change things for the better....

Dennis Churchill

Rhoda Klapp
January 3rd, 2012 12:11pm
The question can also be phrased as:”Can it be?”

Ian Walker

The human rights lawyers will be all over this before it gets anywhere.

They'll say you can't discriminate on the grounds of 'actually deserving it'

Yam Yam

The problem for Byrne is that the "something for nothing" crowd disproportionately vote Labour and provide the party with healthy majorities in Britain's inner city constituencies.

As such, turkeys aren't usually in the habit of wishing December 25th upon themselves.

Ostrich (occasionally)

I wouldn't trust ANYTHING this weasel, however (allegedly) intelligent, ever produced.

Sir Everard Digby

"Parliament could do with a few more MPs questioning their sanctity".....This is the problem -the political classes always wrap difficult issues in layers of sanctimonious rhetoric. Thereby making rational discussion and change for the better impossible. It is lazy politics,of which we have endured decades.

Hexhamgeezer

An early contender for the 'Aimless witterings and tired old shite' Award 2012

Heartless Curmudgeon

. . . Parliament could do with a few more MPs questioning their sanctity. . . .

Peter, a change to one word would complete the article nicely, thus :

. . . Parliament could do with a few more MPs questioning their sanity . . . .

PS: and on the theme of MPs, any news about any MPs and their driving peccadilloes ?

TrevorsDen

Labour gave up on the white working class and allowed immigrant cheap labour to take their jobs. Now we get these pathetic words from Bryan.

The something the govt should give is to deport the economic migrants and the something the unemployed should give is to take the jobs even if they are not particularly inspired to.

Neither will happen.

Heartless Curmudgeon

PPS: My apologies. So taken was I with the idea of MPs and their sanctity that I did not write my PS as I wished. It should have read

PS: and on the theme of MPs, any news about any sanctimonious MPs and their driving peccadilloes ?

Nicholas

Where does "something for something" fit with "the money's all gone"?

Tom Pride

Andrew Tennant
January 3rd, 2012 11:57am
“The benefits system gives far too little to those who want a job and far too much to those that are indifferent or actively obstructive.”

Frank Fields has pointed this out. Lose your job after working for thirty plus years and you then find out that your unemployment benefit from all the National Insurance you have paid is £70 odd a week. You find out that there is no further help because of your savings and that the £20k plus sums of means tested non-contributory benefits are paid to those who made claiming benefits a career option.

Long term our benefits system and levels are going to converge with those of China and India as that is where our relative economic strength is heading. Why not just save time and implement the cuts now.

Tarka the Rotter

This bald headed weasel thought it was funny to joke about the money being 'all gone.' Now we are expected to take him seriously? Pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeese!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Tarka the Rotter Spotter

and you never see Lyam Byrne and Lord Voldemart in the same room together...funny that...

Noa.

Something for something from the man who said his party had left nothing.

dorothy wilson

Labour are a bunch of cynical opportunists - and bl...y hyprocrits to boot. They spent 13 years cramming as many spongers onto as many benefits as possible to get their votes. Now they come up with this!

If they really have had a change of heart and now want to get to grips with the welfare disaster they should announce their support for the government's plans to cut housing benefit.

Cynic

‘…“something for something” means reward for those who are desperately trying to do the right thing, saving for the future and trying to build a stable, secure home. In other words, the complete opposite of the situation which Labour worked so hard to set up and entrench during its 13 years of misrule. Words are cheap, it's actions that count and we know what Labour did when it had the chance.

disenfranchised

liam byrne sneered contemptuously at every english voter not of the left, and he will never be forgiven for it.....

Woody

Liam Byrne is the bloody fool that left the note, so how anyone can take him seriously is beyond me. For years he watched Brown/Balls take this country to the brink and did nothing. They had thirteen years to get to grips with the porblem of welfare and didn't even start the process.

God help this country if this dishonest shower ever get back in power.

REPay

There is a lot of money in the system that does not go to the poor - undeserving or otherwise. Start to squeeze the public sector establishment's perks, bonuses, pensions (in proportion to the degree they do not fund them themselves) and six figure salaries. The cuts always hit the front line first...lets start at the top.

Magnolia

We must take this seriously because if it's a good idea then we should introduce it first.
Is he moving towards a specific state savings vehicle (NI? sic) which kicks in and pays out pro rata when needed because that would be an admission that previous responsibility and effort should be rewarded during hard times rather than the general moral hazard that we have at present.
What a good idea!
That might be very different to our policy of moving towards a universal pension for all regardless of how much one has paid in.
Depending on the presentation and sums involved, Labour's policy might look like fair insurance and our policy might end up looking like the equivalent of the workhouse.
Don't forget at this point in time our government might be sowing the seeds of policy failures in the future and we need to be far thinking and on the watch for long term strategic consequences.
Liam must be one of the cleverer ones because he did leave that note saying that there was no money left and that is correct!

Edward McLaughlin

Well I think that Mr Byrne should be thanked for brightening up a dismal midwinter day, with his very original humour:

"...reward for those who are desperately trying to do the right thing, saving for the future and trying to build a stable, secure home."

Coming from one who was part of the gang that put together the scheme to ruin the nation; this is extremely funny.

escapedRoger

A true Byrned offering.

AliC

This, from the tit who left a note in the HM Treasury saying 'there's no money left'.

Jog on, sir, Jog on.

AliC

We need something like Canada, where you have work insurance. If you pay in, and you lose your job, you get some 'benefits'. If you have not worked.... not alot.

If I lose my job after 25 years of work, I should get looked after by the 'benefits' system - I should not be forced to lose my home etc. The system should help those who are workers more than those who don't work/won't work.

And Mr Byrne can ruddy well Jog On again.