Against stopping Child Benefit

137 Signatures | Sign Now

Created October 4, 2010 by Andrea

Politics

As announced on 4th October 2010, the current Government plan to cut Child Benefit for 'high' earner families from 2013. This would mean that families where one partner earns more than 44k per annum will no longer be able to get Child Benefit. However if each partner were to earn under this, such as 43k each, they would still get Child Benefit although the overall household income would be 86k! Please sign this petition to show the government that this is not 'firm, but fair' but is in fact discriminating against single earning households where mothers (or fathers) want to stay at home to care for their children, and that a higher overall family income cap would be more fair.

There are currently 137 signatures for this petition:

  1. Lee Huggett Shadwell UNITED KINGDOM
  2. Pamela Saunders Birmingham UNITED KINGDOM

    Think about single parent families – where you spend alot of money on childcare and just the general cost of you living on your own with your child.

  3. Jacqueline Burn Gravesend UNITED STATES
  4. Gill Galea Leeds UNITED KINGDOM

    i believe a overall higher family income cap would be fairer.

  5. Michelle Rogers UNITED KINGDOM

    This is so unfair and affects so many hardworking families, why not cap it at 2 children, that would stop all these lazy layabouts having 12 kids and claiming every benefit going!!

  6. Geoff Hickman UNITED KINGDOM

    I don’t beleive anyone could argue this is fair.

  7. John Mansell UNITED KINGDOM

    If at least one partner is earning more than 44k a year, that is more than enough to support at least 2 children without any child benefit, most just want it to continue so they can treat their children to more holidays, sweets, toys, and other luxury items which they don’t actually need, i think child benefit for most isn’t a NEED but a LUXURY or way out of paying with your own money.

  8. Julie Browne UNITED KINGDOM

    As usual the harder you work to better your quality of life, the government are going just take it off you and hand it straight to the work shy…. you call this just?

  9. Kerrie Mckim UNITED KINGDOM

    Omg bout time !

  10. Jackie Bird UNITED KINGDOM

    The changes to who would be able to receive child benefit is detrimental to a good family life. It’s making stay at home mothers have to consider returning to work, and their partner doing a shorter week just to still be able to receive the benefit. I think mothers being at home with their children is key in bringing up well rounded, communicative and focused children – which in turn affects us all in society today.

  11. Terry Holkham UNITED KINGDOM

    Ridiculous unthought through proposal

  12. Jenny Holkham UNITED KINGDOM

    Ridiculous unthought through proposal

  13. Suzanne Ledgar UNITED KINGDOM

    Both myself and my husband work, I wish I could stay at home to look after my girls but I can’t afford it. We have 2 girls and can’t afford full childcare as it is. My mum has to look after the girls 3 days per week whilst we work. We don’t have an lavish lifestyle, we can’t afford holidays and we cut back on everything we can. This benefit pays for clothes my girls and their birthdays. I fall into the higher tax bracket but my husband earns less than half of my wage..our family will be affected by this cut if it goes ahead and I can’t believe people think all families in this bracket are ‘middle class’ and have stay at home parents…I WISH! Some familes on benefits I know already seem to have a better lifestyle to us and spend more time with their children. We’re independent and do an honest day’s work. Please don’t penalise our family for this and try and consider total household income

  14. paul barnsley UNITED KINGDOM

    The child benefit helps pay for classes in football, ballet , martial arts , swimming keeping the kids fit and healthy and occupied but also much needed spending on small business services. Take that spending out of the economy and watch unemployent go higher you idiots!

  15. Steve Weedall

    Affects 1.5M Families (according to a BBC report). We are one of them. Will 1.5M impact on the election – sounds like the minority to me so Osbourne doesn’t care. If 1.5 M ‘Families’ turn up at downing street on a serious week long disruptive protest it will get us the attention.Mad rule that we need to back fire! Thanks.

  16. Gillian Kerr UNITED KINGDOM

    Totally unfair!

  17. Sarah Adams UNITED KINGDOM

    Hi, This is such an unfair and polictically biased approach to penalise hardworking families. It is a lib dem policy that the conservatives have backed to keep them happy and I will not be voting for either party should this unfair policy come into force. I am a stay at home mum who would love to return to work but to put two children in childcare is extremely expensive and I would not be paid enough to cover the fees. Have the government consulted us stay at home mum’s? NO . I am very disappointed in our current co-government, most MP’s are millionaires who havnt a clue on how much things cost nor worry. What they cant get into their heads is it is the MIDDLE INCOME FAMILIES who will contributing the most financially to get this country out of the ecomonic mess we are in. – caused by government and bankers who are millionaires. They tell us to keep spending to keep the ecomony moving!! How? When all they are doing is finding ways to take money off us. We cant spend what we dont have. Yours, ex conservative voter

Page 7 of 7«1234567
Your Name*:
Your E-Mail:
Message*:

Add your Signature...

Sign with Facebook
Or enter your details below…