Government defeated in Lords on benefit cap amendment

The House of Lords has voted, by 252 to 237, in favour of an amendment excluding child benefit from the proposed benefit cap -

Here’s a link to BBC report -

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-16675314

and Guardian live coverage of Lords debate -

http://www.guardian.co.uk/global/blog/2012/jan/23/welfare-reform-bill-household-benefit-cap-lords-debate-live-discussion

Mr Duncan Smith said excluding child benefit would make the cap “pointless” - as it would raise the amount families could receive to an average of about £50,000 a year. - BBC report

Uh? How? If the benefit cap for a couple is £26,000, that means IDS is claiming that an extra £24,000 p/a would be paid to them through child benefit, which I make as being somewhere around £460 p/w, or the equivalent of having about 14 children by my calculations, in terms of the amounts of child benefit involved.

In what way is that an average? What am I missing?

This is the same IDS who, on the Today programme, brought up (unprompted, he was actually quite insistent) the issue of potential homelessness resulting from the cap:

the homelessness definition which is bandied around all the time by the bishops and others is in fact very misleading for the public. The public thinks that homelessness is about not having any accommodation, reasonable accommodation to go to. That’s not what the definition, the definition inside government and things like Shelter is that children have to share rooms. Now for most people who are working their children share rooms, they would find that a strange definition. Nobody, and I can guarantee this, you know nobody will be made homeless in the sense of the public’s view of it without a home to go to as a result of this. This is about fairness to the taxpayer and fairness to those who are trapped

I’ll have to remember that definiton the next time I assist someone with a homelessness application.

Somehow I doubt the government will mind being defeated that much. They have achieved the real aim of giving the public a highly misleading view of the benefits system.

Please sir!  Please sir!  I know the answer.
What now Jenkins minor?
I know the way to ensure that people on benefits don’t get more than the average wage.
Enlighten us boy.
Raise wages!
Are you insane?
Who said that?

“Government defeated….”

Hmmm.  Not quite correct.  It simply delays the inevitable - the goverment is making it crystal clear it will simply revive it in the Commons and get it through in any case.  As Labour support the cap (in broad terms), it is unlikely there will be a similar reverse in the Commons.

Hopping back to IDS comment on homelessness definition, Shelter has issued a rebuttal -

‘The Secretary of State said that, according to Shelter, a family where children share a bedroom would be defined as homeless. This is simply not true.

‘According to the Government’s original impact assessment published last February, the expected effects of this policy include households falling into rent arrears, resulting in some households having to move and others presenting as homeless to their local authority.

here’s a link -

http://england.shelter.org.uk/news/january_2012/shelter_responds_to_today_programme

Jan, in fairness to Odo, at least he was competent and his chameleonesque shape shifting had little to do with political convenience :).

Heavens to murgatroyd!  Are the Cardassians coming?

thing that riles me - what is the purpose of the House of Lords?  They vote against the Government proposals for Welfare Reform but immediately Ian Duncan Smith says that he will move to overturn the decisions of the Lords when the matter comes back before the Commons - so much for democracy.

My God, the likeness is frightening.

Listen here all you bleedin’ heart liberals and commie agitators. Do not underestimate the determination of a quiet man.  Being in government isn’t easy you know.  You try it and see how you like it!  Trying to please Tom, Dick and Harry (not to mention the other four dwarves) all at the same time is a fine balancing act I can tell you.  Its so easy standing outside the tent, spitting in, and complaining while you’re getting beaten up by the police.  Go into the tent, have a wander round.  Never mind the quality, feel the width.  Get in bed and have a cuddle with those who have to make the big decisions.  Feel their pain, dry their tears.  Where would you cut, yourselves?

You leave Ian Duncan Smith alone.  They’re both doing a b****y good job! (thanks to Paul Merton for that one)