Labour has said it would support the government if it delayed plans to reduce tax credits, amid efforts to kill off the proposals entirely.
Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell said cuts should be put on hold to study the impact on those affected and at least three years of transitional help given.
Labour would "not make political capital" out of any U-turn, he said.
Education Secretary Nicky Morgan said Labour had no "credible alternative" and the "policy wasn't changing".
She told the BBC's Andrew Marr show that Chancellor George Osborne was in "listening mode", ahead of a series of key votes on the issue on the House of Lords on Monday, where the government does not have a majority and faces possible defeat.
But she said she was not aware of any discussions about watering down the changes and it was important that the "overall package" offered by the government, including a new living wage, more free childcare and a higher personal income tax allowance, was taken into account.

Click me

House Of Lords- get in!!!!

House of Lords has delayed the case - a good result in the short term but its going to be a catastrophe in the long term.

The House of Lords doesn't make sense, on principal I strongly disagree with it BUT I am one of its strongest supporters, it works as an excellent safety net as this case has shown.

The catatstrophe? Its either going have its powers clipped or be changed into a completely different creature, Cameron won't take this defeat sitting down and unfortunately he has the power to ensure it doesn't happen again.

Its not the first time the the Lords has impeded a Government and its been under threat before but many believe that this is the Government that wants sole control.

Ah!..... the gob on Osborne

I thought it was the 'amazing' plan of IDS who had introduced this change to the scheme. There is also some unification with EU in either Tax Credit, Universal Credit or both. Under the changes, EU Job Seekers will not be able to claim these benefits until they have worked here for three months.
The Universal Credit was thought to cost 2.5 billion to roll out, instead it's cost 12.5 billion. !!

Changes have to be made if we are to move on, but personally IDS makes me scream from within. How does anyone get to such a major position of importance and inflicting changes on so many peoples lives, without qualifying or passing a single exam at a higher level of education ???? His whole life is a lie and he should go back to Scotland.

The Tax Credit system was an appalling idea in the first place, but we have now been entrenched in this idea and we feel we deserve it. Companies should have been paying a decent wage instead of scooping up the profits and redistributing in the form of 'bonuses' to the highest earners at the expense of the 'tax payers' and making people 'stinking rich' as Mr Mandelson called it. He had no objections and neither did Blair or Brown. All I can understand is, that they took the tax to give it back to the most wealthy and businesses , under a different label.

Along the same lines now, as the Lords have put a hold on it. Could it have anything to do with the fact that most of those sitting in the House of Lords are on the Board of Directors or Company owners and that they could indirectly be looking after their own best interest, with regard to rising wages ?

Nothing has ever been as straight forward as it appears , and I'm a ferret at heart.

Here you are, in black and white;

http://www.wsj.com/articles/how-the-house-of-lords-mixes-politics-and-business-1415693056


For centuries, the upper chamber of the British Parliament was filled largely by the landed gentry. But in 1999, then-Prime Minister Tony Blair ’s government replaced most of the hereditary lords with business people, civic leaders and politicians appointed for life. .............

Mr. Blair said the shift would “end the feudal domination of one half of our legislature.” Opponents said he was turning the House of Lords into a den of patronage—a “House of Cronies” to be occupied by a lord of “Lobbygate” and lord of “Offshore Funds,” said then-Conservative Party leader William Hague.......

Much as Mr. Hague had predicted, many lords now have ties to organizations that engage in lobbying, including one lord who agreed to be a lobbyist for an offshore-fund haven. Sixty-eight others give advice on government affairs to companies, trade groups or other organizations, or work for companies that specialize in government relations, according to a Wall Street Journal analysis of financial disclosures as of early August.
One hundred and thirteen draw paychecks from financial-services firms. Twenty-six are paid by resource-extraction companies. Twenty work for foreign governments, in capacities that include advising officials on policy and consulting for government-controlled companies.

Some of those jobs materialized after they joined the House of Lords.

And it is nowhere near like rolled out yet, IDS keeps it very close to his chest how much it is rolled out to hide the fact that he has cherry-picked the easy parts.

Exactly the same as the House of Commons.

This has been sent to me.

When the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great, but when government takes all the reward away, no one will try or want to succeed.


An economics professor at a local college made a statement that he had never failed a single student before, but had recently failed an entire class. That class had insisted that socialism worked well since no one would be poor and no one would be rich, thus providing a great equalizer.

The professor then said, "OK, we will have an experiment in this class on the Socialist plan" ... All grades will be averaged and everyone will receive the same grade so no one will fail and no one will receive an A ... (substituting grades for dollars - something closer to home and more readily understood by all).

After the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy. As the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too so they likewise studied little.

The second test average was a D! No one was happy.

When the 3rd test rolled around, the average was an F.

As the tests proceeded, the scores never increased as bickering, blame and name-calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one was motivated to study for the benefit of anyone else.

To their great surprise, ALL FAILED and the professor told them that socialism would also ultimately fail because when the reward (and risk) is great, the effort to succeed is great, but when government takes all the reward away, no one will work really hard to succeed. F.




These are possibly the 5 best sentences you'll ever read and all applicable to this experiment:

1. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity.

2. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.

3. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.

4. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it!

5. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that is the beginning of the end of any nation.

One would hope that an Professor of Economics would have better knowledge of what socialism is - but of course this story was originated by a capitalist who are experts at spreading malicious rubbish everywhere for personal gain.

It's a Professor of Economics .

Watch the videos : CLick me

Cameron will not answer.. .

And its a "Professor of Economics" not an Economics Professor - the reversal is how I ended up with "an" instead of "a" doh.

I'll stick with Maths, its easier than English.

Yeh, watched it this afternoon. He continues to get stuck on repeat, and churn out the same answers, as have the rest of them when asked about the same subject.

Delay tactics, whilst the backroom boys come up with a plan that will be sneaked in under the blankets, so no one has to admit defeat. (Just my thoughts)

Pensioners will be the next target for them.

Hello granny, yes I fear you are right about the pensioners, said at a fringe meeting during the Cons party conference, we should take the free bus passes and heating allowances away along with the cost of living rise on pensions, by the time of the next election most of them will be dead or will have forgotten which party it was that took those benefits away!!! perhaps Gideon will consider those outlandish requests to rehash his budget plans, who knows?

I don't think it will relate to bus passes, heating allowance or TV licenses. If, as he says that the state pension will rise to £7000 by 2020, that would take it to £134 per week. That, I believe is over the threshold for any pension credits. Therefore all pensioners would for a start have to pay full council tax (or with just 25% off). It seems the Tax Credit system is what they are trying to reduce. In many ways I agree with that principle as the 'Tax Credit' bill is unsustainable if it continues to operate in the same manner, but at the same time, it's hoped the cost of living doesn't soar into the realms of insanity such as utilities, rents and food.

Then we have this newly introduced scheme, which I fail to understand completely and how the present pensioners fit in, if at all. Maybe our resident mathematician can explain for us?

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/...-new-state-pension-theyre-expecting.html

I've not looked at the figures but the system isn't really changing, just the names used and the amounts.

Those that contracted out the state pension scheme (using a company pension instead and reduced national insurance contributions) currently only get the basic state pension, they are not entitled to the additional state pension (the two together are sometimes referred to as the Full state pension).

The new scheme does the same - those that were contracted out won't get the full state pension.

To get the even the basic state pension you must have enough national insurance contributions, if you haven't the pension is reduced.

The additional state pension was called SERPS or State Second Pension depending on the era and was again dependent on how many years contribution you have made. I think the maximum amount this can be is about £167 a week.

Currently you need 30 years national insurance contributions and the basic state pension is about £115 a week

In summary if you have 30 years contributions you currently get a minimum of £115 a week, if you were not contracted out the overall maximum is £282 a week. There is also a means tested pension guarantee which gives pension credit to top you up to minimum of £151. So the new system makes the overall minimum £155 instead of £151 on the old system but both these amounts have an element of means-testing.