Single Mothers May Face Benefit Cuts As Soon as Child Turns One

2 December 2008

If you're a single mom with young toddlers, you better get prepped up.  According to reports of a Government announcement to be made today, you could soon be forced to get back to work as soon as your youngest child turns 1, or face benefit cuts.

Ministers are desperate to change the "something for nothing" welfare culture in Britain.  With 8 million 'economically inactive' (i.e. unable to get work, or a CV photo so bad that it goes right into the 'reject' pile) people claiming weekly income support of up to £57.45, they believe that a large number of people are claiming benefits when they don't even need them.  As a result of this proposal, approximately 300,000 of 770,000 unemployed single mothers may be required to be spending their 9-5s looking for work or undertaking community service.

Professor Paul Gregg, the author of a Government-commissioned report, said that this move will tackle the growing trend of people seeking incapacity and job benefits. Only those with severe health conditions or disabilities will be excluded from the clause, as well as carers and lone parents with children under the age of one.  The idea is that almost everyone on benefits should be looking for a job, or face it being removed for up to 4 weeks if they repeatedly refuse to cooperate.

The report was 'strongly welcomed' by James Purnell, the Work and Pensions Secretary, adding "The approach that virtually everyone should be doing something in return for benefits is the right one".

[Daily Telegraph ]


  • bobthedog
    Looks like this only applies to the U.S. WHO in the UK says "mom"? Please, someone check these articles before posting!!!!
  • Vince V.
    there shall be no defense. Let's just blame my American education! I will plow on and write in your favorite way by prioritising to memorize the correct spelling, so that I can honor your request. Have a nice day!
  • Liam
    Ho! Ho! There will be no jobs for the single mothers by the time this legislation comes in. There will be record numbers of people out of work, this is just a way of saying "We don't have enough people in the UK working to pay all your benefits". If you really hate James Purnell then take a read of this blog:
  • Barbara
    They are STILL homing in on women, even though women do most of the work already in the world, and for the least amount of pay! Why don't they chase after out of work men instead? At least the single mums are already doing something useful - raising the next generation. There are plenty of men who are not working - get them into work first, before rounding up the mums! But they'd have to pay the men more, wouldn't they - they can bully the women by threatening to make them even poorer than they already are. Hmmm, we're onto them!
  • Barbara
    I don't need any persuading that James Purnell is a D head - I already know it.
  • Liam
    Here here! Barbara!
  • Mark
    First they target the disabled and now they are going after stay at home mothers. Going after the weak and vulnerable, who do they think they are the Tories?
  • George
    Barbara, you're having a laugh right? They've been pursuing men for decades. You don't get the chance as a man to say you don't fancy working and want time to bring up your newborn. You get 2 weeks as a man compared to the women who get paid montns to have time off and have a baby. IT'S NOT AN ILLNESS, IT'S A LIFESTYLE CHOICE. Imagine if I said I want to travel the world for 3 months and I DEMAND my employer PAID ME to do it. When the women decide they no longer want the man around the men pay a fortune for their children and then get denied the right to see them or bring them up. It's adisgrace. If I split with my partner, I will keep the kids, raise them and get HER to pay for them. Isn't that how it's done? Or does Equality only work in one direction? Of course it does. Take a look in your local job centre and see it's all men being forced to justify why they haven't taken the minimum wage dead end job, rarely women. Men are CURRENTLY threated with benefits being withdrawn if they don't do the jobs they are told they have to. About time lazy women and the other freeloaders were made to contribute to society for once. You telling me that these people are spending every hour between school times working hard on the household chores? Rubbish. Do some community support instead of sponging and giving NOTHING back. I see these "hard pressed single mothers" sitting daily in the pub drinking during the afternoon before picking up their kids and living on their £200 rent free, council tax free lifestyle. I KNOW this happens because I could loosely be called a "friend" of some of these people and have been in the pubs WITH them so it's not hearsay. Cue the Ad Hominem. P.S. My brother is a single parent so spare me the "picking on the vulnerable" bile. Those vulnerable should and WILL be protected and if they aren't I'll be the first there demanding answers. This is about making the freeloaders pay something back for once.
  • Mark
    Not about the mothers but about disabled (vulnerable). The system that was brought in on the 27th Oct of this year was announced as a way of supposedly helping the forgotten and getting those that are disabled off the poverty line (the majority are below it). The idea was to reduce the main benefit and give a 'bonus' to those that attend (compulsory) workshops and support groups. The sad fact is that no disabled person will be better off and those that are totally unable to work will end up £400 worse off a year.
  • simonb
    Bring back work houses. Was at a local cafe and there was a person with a big star wars toys in a big box (thought it was for his kid). Found out he didn't work and after he paid his bills and bought his food there was enough for him (since he was on benefits) to blow it on toys for his collection (there was nothing wrong with the guy from what i could see) . A woman bringing up kids has a reason for not going back to work but the people who p**s me right off are the one who are just plain lazy. work houses where there to feed you and cloth you but their day was filled with boring monotonous work (cleaning steps, moving stones repeatedly) to the point where they wanted to work in the outside world. The trouble is once on benefits people find it hard to push themselves to get off it. I know of a few people who are perfectly fit to work but choose not to (which me and you pay for in taxes) . Hopefully they should start cutting benefits (although not for the legitimate) to pay for the debt this country (or benefit people) have got us into. Oh and ban the minimum wage whilst their at it. In this climate employers cant afford to pay the minimum wage and the whole company goes down because they cant get the workforce cheap enough. (aside).
  • jane
    the problem with this legislation - is that it will not DISTINGUISH between loving single mothers looking after their baby at home - and the group of single mothers that exploit the 'system' to get housing, benefits, and do not really even 'bring up' their children in any recognisable way. so personally, i find myself both agreeing and disagreeing with the legislation. by the way 1 year old is not a toddler - its still a baby. i saw loads of babies (i.e. under 2) at my son's nursery. they would be 6 months old or even 3 months, and were there 40 hours a week. IMO they didn't really have a mother (though most of those mothers were married actually).
  • Abe B.
    Hi, great post. I'm a massive fan of your respective blog site. I have been trying to get a hold of you to view if possibly we will talk about some strategies about report by way of an e-mail chat. If you can, great. Or else, no worries.

What do you think?

Connect with Facebook, Twitter, or just enter your email to sign in and comment.

Your comment