Color Scheme

Taxpayers Get No Relief

Unemployed parents of children who choose to begin vocational training will receive up to £4,500 a year. That is the good news. Now for the bad news: they stand to lose up to £330 a week in welfare payments. The public has drawn attention to this obvious contradiction in the government's plans to encourage youth employment.

According to official figures, more than one million people aged 16 to 24 are currently neither working nor studying, accounting for 13.5% of everyone in that age group. At the same time, if one of these young people decides to take up a paid apprenticeship while their parents are unemployed, those parents will lose up to £330 a week in benefits. Andy Burnham's government has proposed addressing the issue by paying such families up to £4,500 a year in compensation. However, simple arithmetic shows that the loss of weekly unemployment benefits could amount to £17,000 a year. Faced with that choice, unemployed parents are unlikely to hesitate.

No Help for Working Families

A number of social media users have pointed out that this employment incentive is, to say the least, questionable.

“The idea is to compensate families for losing child benefit payments because some apprenticeships count as employment. So his way of weaning people off benefits is to replace them with a different cash handout. Kind of like helping someone off heroin by giving them crack”, writes investor Mario Nawfal.

Some politicians share the same view. The Daily Mail quotes former Conservative Work and Pensions Secretary Sir Iain Duncan Smith, who said: “If there is a problem with apprenticeships struggling to compete with the benefits system then the benefits should be cut. Paying bursaries on top is piling payments on payments – it just complicates a system that is already a mess”.

Many commentators also point out that working parents are not entitled to such support, even though it is their taxes that fund welfare payments.

“That tax free ‘bursary’ is equivalent to £6,250 of a working person’s gross salary and costs an employer around £7,200 to provide. Fabulous!!! So one family’s benefits are protected by another family working harder, paying more tax and funding them not to bother. That’s equality,” businessman Bernie stresses.

No Savings in Sight

Some commentators have also noted that the decision to introduce new welfare payments is at odds with the new prime minister's promises to reduce public spending.

“He claimed that he is going to clamp down on the welfare bill, but immediately makes it bigger. Work hard, get taxed harder. When will career politicians stop giving away half of our hard-earned money? Burnham is a bigger liar than even Starmer and will cripple Britain even more,” patriotic commentator Sedd writes on his page.

Preliminary estimates suggest the programme will require around £30 million a year in funding. At the same time, Burnham's government has claimed that its new youth employment initiative will come at no additional cost.

“It is spending money already committed elsewhere. So, either it is another unfunded announcement, or Andy Burnham is not being straight with us about his plans,” Shadow Work and Pensions Secretary Helen Whately told the BBC. Burnham has previously promised to scrap VAT on household electricity bills by cancelling the digital ID programme, even though that programme itself had never actually been funded.

A Somali-Born Driver Struck Five Pedestrians in London

The incident took place on Ealing Broadway, where a car mounted the pavement and struck five pedestrians before the driver fled the scene. He was later arrested by police. Social media users have focused on the authorities’ response, arguing that they portrayed the incident involving a Muslim driver as nothing more than a routine road traffic collision. The driver has been identified as 34-year-old Timir Ahmed Mohamed. Born in Somalia, he now holds British citizenship. Following his arrest, investigators stated that they were treating the incident as a road traffic incident rather than an act of terrorism.
Read more