Afternoon:
10°c
Unease over tax break for married couples
Nicholas Cecil and Pippa Crerar30 Sep 2008
David Cameron is facing unrest among senior MPs over his pledge to give tax breaks to encourage marriage.
The Tory leader is being urged to widen the policy to give more financial help to unmarried parents.
Adopting a more inclusive approach would inevitably water down the impact of pro-marriage tax measures.
But senior MPs are concerned that if the Tory policy is too restrictive, Labour will be able to portray it as a "back to basics" attack on lone parents and unmarried couples.
Shadow chancellor George Osborne is understood to be the most senior Tory who has voiced worries on the issue.
However, several other shadow Cabinet ministers, including shadow Commons leader Theresa May, are also said to be wary that the fiscal support for marriage could leave their party vulnerable to accusations that they are abandoning needy families.
One senior Tory told the Standard that Mr Cameron appeared to be prepared to heed their warnings.
But they also fear the worsening economic conditions could restrict funds to reward marriage, and possibly other stable relationships, as the bedrock of society.
Shadow children's secretary Michael Gove has hinted at a compromise deal.
He recently warned against "jumping the gun" to the conclusion that party chiefs had their sights firmly on one of two measures proposed by Tory traditionalists - a transferable tax allowance which would benefit stay-at-home mothers or a simple tax allowance for married couples.
Instead, he suggested that the financial support could be more wide-ranging.
"If someone were to say to me that our policy were to lead to real disadvantage to any particular existing group, then we would have to look again," he said.
There is also a split between the more liberal MPs. Some support an increase in childcare to help more women to go back to work, while others favour a rise in child benefit which would make it easier for mothers to stay at home.
Mr Osborne has stressed that there is no disagreement over rewarding marriage through the tax system.
Reader views (9)
This increasingly Blair lookalike, like WonderOne, is not willing to interfere with the antics of cronies involved up to the ears in organised syndicates that caused present nationwide economic turmoil, but in emulation of the sociopath Bambi, is quite willing to pontificate (and misuse taxes to promote his personal idiosyncratic opinions) about how ordinary people live in an allegedly free society.
- Jack, London, 01/10/2008 10:15
Report abuse
To Roy and Tim,
I note that neither of you refute the facts I've presented. Of course marriage is a choice- the right one.
I'm not an apologist for China. The fact is my wife and I are considerably better off here in China. As a working married couple, we're not taxed punitively, directly or indirectly, as we were in Britain. If you look at the British government's figures, you'll see that the revenue raised from Income Tax equals the money paid out in Social Security benefits. For better or worse, there's no 'benefits culture' here in China (and China does have a social security system).
I urge Roy and Tim to come to China to see for themselves what life is like, and not to rely on their imagined dystopias.
- Tim, Shanghai, China, 30/09/2008 23:29
Report abuse
I welcome this proposal whether it be prescriptive or not. Our education system is so lousy today that our population need prescriptive pressures.
- David, East Grinstead, 30/09/2008 19:48
Report abuse
Whilst I applaud the Conservatives' return to traditional values, the policy is just another state hand-out (although, at least it's for doing the right thing).
What we need is less government, not more. Marriage is a choice, just as having children is a choice. Neither should be rewarded by the tax payer. I'm so tired of money being wasted unnecessarily, when there are many things that are crying out for it e.g. the state of our roads which are in dreadful disrepair despite huge revenues raised through vehicle excise duty and extortionate tax on petrol.
As a single person who has never claimed a penny from the state, it would be nice if all political parties recognised that regardless of whether you are married or not, it is your contribution to society that is important.
In response to my namesake in China, it is interesting that you continue to criticise your home country, lauding the benefits of China - which include an internet where expression of an individual's views is either forbidden or censored. Perhaps you'd like to consider that next time you wish to be so scathing of our country.
- Tim, Bracknell, Berkshire, 30/09/2008 16:53
Report abuse
the problem is being prescriptive about peoples personal life. If statistics showed that Church goers are move liklely to be employed, use the NHS less etc - would we provide tax breaks for that...Marriage is a personal choice, what are we suggesting to a wife being beaten up by her husband (or vice versa) stay in the marriage because that is what the Govt wants......?
- Martin_Clerkenwell, london, 30/09/2008 16:00
Report abuse
the problem is being prescriptive about peoples personal life. If statistics showed that Church goers are move liklely to be employed, use the NHS less etc - would we provide tax breaks for that...Marriage is a personal choice, what are we suggesting to a wife being beaten up by her husband (or vice versa) stay in the marriage because that is what the Govt wants......?
- Martin_Clerkenwell, london, 30/09/2008 16:00
Report abuse
Tim from Shanghai. You live in a country where people are forced to have only one child (and cases of forced late abortions are not uncommon among those who don't comply). Where the orphanages are full of abandoned girl babies. Oh, yes, they really respect the family over there!
- Lindsay, london, 30/09/2008 15:53
Report abuse
Hilarious that Tim in Shanghai denounces Labour as "neo-Socialist" (not that they are the slightest bit socialist) whilst he himself lives in a Communist country!
The self-delusion of ex-pats knows no end.
- Roy, England, 30/09/2008 14:40
Report abuse
My wife was repeatedly told by her factory workmates in Britain "Why did you get married? You'd be much better off remaining single." And she / we would have been- financially.
Whatever political party gets into power needs to recognise that absolute values apply- not relative ones. The only reason the Conservatives are timidly watering down tax breaks for married people is being afraid of 'upsetting people' and losing votes. They've probably belatedly realised that these days the majority of voters in many sectors of British society are unmarried.
Marriage DOES mean more than 'living together'. It means being unselfish and being committed to the person you marry- and your children. Marriage SHOULD be rewarded, as it lessens the financial burden on society as a whole. Married people are more likely to be in employment and not seeking benefits. Married people tend to be healthier and consequently make fewer demands on the Health Service. Their children generally succeed better, and behave better, at school, and are less likely to require support from Social Services.
The Conservatives should hold fast to their principles and not become a neo-Socialist party as 'New Labour' is, promoting spurious social values.
Oh, yes- my wife and I now live in China. We're a hell of a lot happier and much better off. Marriage is respected and promoted here. My only regret is not leaving Britain sooner.
- Tim, Shanghai, China, 30/09/2008 12:03
Report abuse
