Tory Family Tax is alarming Labour and LibDem

Posted 17 Jan 2010 by Walaa Idris

Even though David Cameron and his policy team have not yet finalised their Family Tax plans – a tax policy aimed at helping and encouraging married couples to stay together because studies have shown it is better for the over all well-being of children when both parents are together, and proved that on average married couples with children tend to fight harder to keep the family together. The two other parties seem to have a great deal to say about what’s included and not included in that policy!

Ed Balls – told the Politics Show today that the policy is going to disadvantage non married families? And make it difficult for single and loan parents to raise their families? But never told us which particular part of the policy he was referring to, and he can’t, because the policy is still in the making and the policy makers themselves can not give us specific details!!

On the Andrew Marr Show this morning Nick Clegg said Cameron was wrong because ‘the policy’ is like a bribe for families to stay married – hinting the policy will disadvantage unmarried, loan parents and people who are forced to raise their families apart, again he did not and could not specify which part of the policy!

Both parties are clearly very worried and concerned by what the Conservatives are promising to do for families. And they are right to be, it is a tough area and it needs a bold person to address it. Many studies and sociological research in recent years have proved that married couple raise stronger more balanced and over all better children, and argued that we need to encourage and support the family more. Family is important, it is the bedrock of every society, and it is celebrated and held in high esteem by all cultures. But in Britain today we are very confused by what it means and what we see, we are equally unsure of what to do and where to start.

During Labour’s thirteen years reign Britain social fabric has been torn. Labour has marginalised the family in its traditional form and replaced it with a culture of dependency teen pregnancy and a custom where a child is just a means to an end. Under the flag of liberalism equality and freedom of expression there is no social responsibility or personal accountability. That is what the Conservatives are trying to promote responsibility, accountability and a social conscious to free the future generation from dependency, moral confusion, and social irresponsibility.

All families need and should be supported but that support does not necessarily have to come at the expense of one over the other. It just means family laws as they are now make it more attractive for parents to stay apart thus disadvantaging the traditional family. All the Conservatives are aiming to do is correct that imbalance.

3 comment(s)

Eveleigh

Eveleigh
17 Jan, 19:46

Surely the purpose of the policy is to remove the current disadvantages, in the tax and benefit systems, that favour unmarried parents?

Even unmarried people know that the best place for child to grow up is in a family.

Stephen R Hillier

Stephen R Hillier
18 Jan, 17:55

Hi Walaa,
A well-written piece, as to be expected from you.

However, I am afraid this marriage nonsense is starting to get me really incensed. Partly because it is turning off so many voters because they think it ill-thought out and rather irrelevant considering all of the huge changes that will be needed, and partly because it is such a mistake.

Why are we going to bribe people to stay together when they are unhappy and unfulfilled? How many people have you spoken to who’ve said that they wished their parents had split up and had better lives. How many children already suffer in hostile domestic environments and learn bad habits from hearing their parents’ petty sniping at each other or muttering complaints about their partner when out of earshot?

A “family” is definitely the best environment to bring up a child – no doubt. But who says a “family” is determined by the institution of marriage? One of the reasons this debate is so wrong-footed is that a lot of it stems from religions, as usual.

We would be far better to root out the causes of disharmony in relationships and see whether, through education or other means, we can equip people better to create the right environment for children, not seek to chain them together in the pursuit of a rarely-found nirvana…

Walaa

Walaa
18 Jan, 19:46

Eveleigh & Stephen thank you both for commenting I feel good when I get comments- its like cooking if nobody tells you what they think you’ll never know if your cooking is any good ;-))

Stephen – I see where you are coming from, as Eveleigh said; we all know a two parent family is best for raising healthy and well balanced children.

As a single parent myself, I would have loved to raise my two girls with their father but it would have been hell on earth for all involved, hence we had a civilized divorce – where he has very limited involvement in their upbringing and all the fun time he wants with them (his choice) – my girls are healthy, balanced and I am sure will be a great asset to the community.

That is the point we have to be very careful addressing this issue, and you are correct Stephen – religion is playing a part in it. But if we can adjust the tax system so that married parents are not better off apart that will be a great achievement.
As for mending the rest – it is a tall order and no type of tax will remedy it. We need a whole new out look and a cultural shake up to even come close. The good news, we are not the only nation that suffers form social dysfunction, the bad news, our understanding of freedom of expression and personal liberty makes matters a little more difficult to untangle. But I am always hopeful for the future.

Commenting is closed for this article.