Should We Increase Child Benefit?
Ask a Question
The Daily Mirror is calling on Boris Johnson to hike child benefit by £5 a week to end the scourge of child poverty.
https://www.megaphone.org.uk/petitions/increase-the-child-benefit-immediately
And where's the money going to come from? Child poverty could be reduced by teaching parents how to manage. Any parent who smokes, drinks. gambles or buys take-aways should be ashamed of themselves if their children are in supposed poverty.
I grew up soon after the war and, those of us who did, actually know what poverty is. it isn't multiple car families with subscriptions to SKY etc.
Well said davidstockport as if working people don’t pay enough tax as it is and then they even struggle
Ann1984 Some of these moaners are going to be totally lost if they survive to old age and have to survive on a pension. (and there are some OAPs who cry poverty because they didn't learn how to budget, and sometimes "do without" when they were younger).
AgnesFaludi So all the rich people move to a country where they don't have to pay as much tax - so they don't pay any tax in this country. That's a briiliant idea! (and that's sarcasm)
Couldn't agree more with Davids original comment. When growing up a holiday was staying with an elderly Aunt, or if lucky camping the one time we had a car, when it broke it was back to Mum and Dad on a bike with me on Dads crossbar and my sister behind Mum. No smoking/drinking in our house and money was tight - Dad worked on a farm. But we were cared for and looked after and sacrifices were made for us, they had to be, my NEW bike (needed to get from farm to main village for 'big' school bus) cost £19 19/- Dad only earned £9 per week. I still have the bike 50 years later, can't bear to part with it or think about what THEY went without to pay for it.
davidstockport if they move country their job will be free....and we can take them
AgnesFaludi Most rich people who leave this country take their "jobs" with them, very few of the ultra rich have "jobs" that become available when they leave. Some such as Richard Branson leave but come back to this country "to take care of business" but don't overstay their welcome enough to have to pay tax here.
Those who do stay contribute to the economy, back in the days when your "bright idea" was actually used, those earning a lot, had to be paid even more, it was no use offering them a £10 a week pay rise - if they could only keep perhaps £1 of it.
To try to explain it's better for the taxman to get 50% of something than to get 0% of millions.
But try to explain to me (and others) why should people who have earned their money, often by hard work, be expected to pay for the sprogs of many whose biggest effort, used to be going to pick up their benefits, but now have it paid directly into their bank accounts. Child poverty is exaggerated. What they already get is more than ample to feed and clothe a child.
davidstockport 
exactly. A lot of people who say they cant afford to live just spend their money prioritizing the wrong thing, eye lashes and nails, sky, takeaway and nights out arent priority when youve got little mouths to feed. God i sound old and miserable 
davidstockport maybe because they have no other option....they have no chance to get out of poverty.
Let`s explain it to u.....if someone has benefits they can not work more than 16 hours. Also if they work full time in a job it will not pay as much as the benefits. So which one of them will want to work? They not supported to get back to normal life.
I think everyone should pay tax....
But just can not stop to think about it that the Queen did not pay tax....and I do not understand why the rich do not want to contribute.
Lots of the big companies pay no tax at all...so why anyone should pay tax first pay.
Not even mentioning that we double taxed...we pay tax after our pay and than we pay tax for each item we buy...
AgnesFaludi You are incorrect - this topic is supposedly about "Child Benefit" (it replaced family allowance in the late 1970s) and can be claimed by people who work more than 16 hours a week.
Also although The Queen didn't need to pay tax she has since 1993 paid it on her personal income (voluntarily - rates and VAT too). She cannot, even if she wished, claim child benefit for the same reason that I can't: we have no children under the age of sixteen.
I believe that if people can't afford to have children then they shouldn't have them in the first place. It isn't fair on all the taxpayers having to pay for other peoples' choices.
Having said that, I do realise that unfortunate circumstances can and do occur unexpectedly, such as being made redundant.
Your opinions often reflect my own. I don't believe that an extra fiver will do away with child poverty. That condition is a result of parental mismanagement and addiction. They would sooner spend money on the things mentioned by David than look after their children properly. It makes me sick and you all know by now the job I do. Just today saw a mother leave the contact centre without a second glance at her child, jumped into car with boyfriend, lit a cigarette and opened a can of lager. Obviously a couple of hours without was too much to bear. Like I want to give people like that an extra fiver.
But even redundancy (and I do sympathise) shouldn't be a reason to increase child benefit, if a parent can't manage to feed and clothe a child on the current child benefits, then they need to be taught how to.
I can personally feed and clothe myself for less than £20.70* a week - and millions of pensioners HAVE TO.
*First child then £13.70 each for the rest.
If they want to see what "poverty" is they should try some third world countries.
I would love to see all families eating well, in clean clothes and warm homes. Unfortunately some in poverty have just been caught up in dreadful life situations, loosing their jobs. Be kind people, please.
Yes I appreciate there are some parents more interested in having big screen TVs and the best mobile phones but there are a lot of families who need genuine support and help.
They already get sufficient help to avoid "child poverty" - the current child benefits are ample to feed and clothe a child. If a child is fed and clothed adequately then the word "poverty" shouldn't be used.
If they need genuine support it shouldn't be in the form of "child benefit" but from some other source.
It’s a simple answer to all this you think it should be increased then if to increase it should be vouchers where only food toiletries or clothing bought and voucher state excludes cigarettes alcohol and lottery but personally people get enough
I’m afraid I can’t agree with you. Some families are crippled by the rent or mortgage they have to pay leaving very little for food and other essentials.
If they are 'crippled' by a mortgage that in itself is their own fault, they took on that amount of debt, no doubt because they wanted a big new house. To feed and clothe the family downsize and reduce the mortgage. Some don't seem to understand 'you live within your means'. Money does not grow on trees and we (as of women over 60 in particular) have to work until 66 because there is no pension money.
lilyflower I’m in the same boat as you regarding the pension. I know of a young family struggling NOT in a big house where the husband was made redundant and found a lower paid job and they are struggling to keep their small two bed house. Of course family are helping but they wouldn’t get a council house. Council houses are in short supply these days.
Child benefit is not supposed to be for the rent or mortgage, it is already sufficient to cover any extra expenditure incurred by having child, I've already said this but help with other things should come from some other source if it is genuinely required. They shouldn't be asking for extra "child benefit" to cover other things. Any increase would mean that even those who get child benefit, who are not struggling, would get that increase too.
There are many people who don't have children who are struggling - why should they be denied any extra help because they don't have children?
davidstockport I don’t think we will ever agree. I’m obviously too caring and feel some folk slip the system while others claim everything and some fraudulently!
Pjran I am probably more caring than you - I don't want parents effectively misappropriating money that should be earmarked for their children or people who don't have children, if they are struggling, being denied the chance to misuse the money they'd have been given if they had children. The full system is crazy actually paying people to have children even if they don't need it. Although most of those who don't need it are paying for it through their taxes. So I suppose they're entitled to it
davidstockport Do you actually have any kids? Because by the sounds of your comments, you've never been there and done it.
Of course there are people who take the Michael and will sponge off the government for all their lives, but there are hard working people who have to work in gig employment who rely on child benefit.
Don't get me wrong, there has to be a limit. I mean you can't have 12 kids and expect to have benefits of all of them.
Pjran I WAS in that situation when my ex was made redundant. I didn't work - I was a mother, I'd had children, I would look after them. His benefit was £65/2wks because we had savings (ready for retirement). He went self-employed, I did the office work/looked after kids/helped him on site, we lived on savings and purchased 'saver' foods. He never made a lot just enough to live on but we got by, the kids never suffered and turned out to be good adults both with good jobs. (The lack of money was NOT the reason he became my ex). As I said previously, people need to learn to live within their means and kids of 2 do not need an iPhone or Tablet to watch cartoons. Play with the kids - it's free and much more fun.
TheChimp Yes they rely on child benefit but I'm getting a little tired of asking this; why when the current benefit should be sufficient to prevent "child poverty" should they get anymore? If the benefit was increased that increase would go to ALL parents not just those who are struggling.
Incidentally there is no limit on the number of children who can be claimed for. at the present time it's £20.70 a week for the first and £13.70 each for the rest.
davidstockport I believe that you can only claim for the first 2 children now. Please let me know if I'm making it up.
TheChimp Yes you're making it up "It’s paid every 4 weeks and there’s no limit to how many children you can claim for". From: https://www.gov.uk/child-benefit
davidstockport I might have to disagree with you on this one.
https://www.nidirect.gov.uk/articles/universal-credit-two-child-limit
TheChimp That, I believe, is for those on Universal Credit. This with the words "additional children" & "per child" says differently "There are two rates for Child Benefit. Prior to the changes due in April 2020, the weekly rate for the eldest or only child is £20.70. If the allowance is for any additional children, then the rate is £13.70 per child per week".
davidstockport We obviously have different opinions and different sources on this issue.
But my main question to you was whether have had children so that you can validate your comments
TheChimp I don't need to divulge personal information to validate my comments - I think I have done it quite adequately without doing so.
My source above quotes a date 2020, you can easily find the source if you search for it. Yours relates to Universal Credit (try reading it).
Child benefit IS NOT exclusive to those on Universal Credit. Nor would be the extra £5 some are asking to be added.
Even if Boris Johnson did raise child benefit by £5 it would be by borrowing more externally so would increase the national debt and mean only a delay in more suffering with the interest on top. The UK is in a bad financial situation unfortunately and becoming poorer and turning around the economy is many years off I'm sure.
As for child benefit in my opinion it should be for the first child only anyway, we need to stop using the world's resources so much and create more farm land and forests to grow our own food and create oxygen and remove more carbon from the atmosphere. We should be aiming for a population of 30 million on this island and gradually reducing the population by lowering the birth rate.
The people having child benefit and living in poverty are more than likely claiming child tax credit aswell so i highly doubt £5 extra a week is going to bring hundreds of thousands of people out of poverty. I mean poverty means they dont have the minimum standard and their human needs cant be met - that will not be cured with a fiver. We have some cracking deals on here but what can you really get for fiver these days
KirsteyJames I think some places you can get fish and chips for a fiver, although if they're cooked at home the full cost including gas (with mushy peas added as a BONUS) is much less than a pound. (I seem to have gone full circle now), if those who want the extra five pounds were to not pay for take-aways (and cook them themselves) the £20.70 they already get would be worth much more than £100. So they wouldn't need the extra fiver.
I am a single mother too 2 under 2 my husband died when my baby was 3 weeks old and we severely struggle I go days without eating myself so my 2 babies can, I have no luxuries or smoke, drink, takeaways like you are all talking about, my youngest has dairy and soya allergies so my shopping is so expensive as can't have any they kind of products in the house incase she comes in contact with them, I know even an extra £5 a week in this house would make a huge difference, I have always worked and now I am suffering badly with PND and anxiety and hopefully with the help I am getting will manage back too work soon too end this ***
staceycowan247 I really do feel for you and you've let me know how lucky I am (even though I have to put up with the wife 
).
If your PND is really bad and is stopping you from working, have you considered trying to claim PIP? If you were eligible, that would help you with your finances and you'd still be able to do some work (as long as it's not as a professional marathon runner).
All the best 
Unfortunately, this gov run this propaganda for very long and now some people are too convinced that people go on benefits by choice because they are junkies or easygoing.
If benefits were scrutinised properly and run properly then nobody should struggle but its not and just throwing more money at it won't solve nothing
TheChimp thank you for your comment but no I have never wanted too apply as then feel like I am labelled if that makes sense I will beat this in time and get my brain back too being healthy for my babies ***
AmazingPerson problem is, there are plenty choosing to be on benefits. Families near me where nobody has worked for 3 generations now and just abuse the system
staceycowan247 You have my sympathy but if the child benefit was raised generally then people who don't need extra income would get it too, that would actually deprive those in genuine need (the money has to come from somewhere) I don't believe one person who's commented doesn't think that some people should get extra help.
Join for free to get genuine deals, money saving advice and help from our friendly community
Chief Bargain Hunter
