Latest news with #InstituteforFiscalStudies
South Wales Guardian
a day ago
- Business
- South Wales Guardian
How to cut your childcare bill as nursery fees top £1,000
Data from UK Debt Expert reveals families are now spending more than ever on childcare - with London parents paying as much as £1,431.96 a month. For lower-income households, a single day of childcare can cost over seven hours of work, meaning many are essentially paying to work. Even in less expensive areas like the North East, parents are still looking at around £945.50 per month for childcare. For information see the link below 📷 For information on how to book Kids Clubs & Wraparound Care please use this link - The financial reality is pushing many parents, particularly mothers, to their limits – and for single parents, the situation is even more extreme. When other living expenses are factored in, the financial picture becomes even more daunting. For a family of four: Add to this the average monthly mortgage repayments, which range from £1,565 in Manchester to £2,227 in Bristol for a semi-detached house, and it's clear why many couples are delaying or deciding against having children. While both parents feel the financial strain, it's women who often bear the brunt of the career impact. Women are more likely to take extended time off work or reduce their hours to care for children, leading to what's often referred to as the "motherhood penalty" in their career progression and earning potential. If you pay for childcare, whether just for the summer or all year round, watch this quick video briefing on the help that's available. Huge numbers are missing out. Courtesy of ITV The Martin Lewis Money Show, watch the full summer special back at In fact, research from the Institute for Fiscal Studies shows that by the time a woman's first child turns 12, her hourly wage is typically 33% lower than that of a man. Maxine McCreadie, a personal finance expert at UK Debt Expert, says: "The data paints an even more worrying picture for single parents, who are often facing the brunt of the financial burden. "Unlike co-parents, single parents don't have the luxury of splitting costs, meaning they are often forced to take on the full financial load for housing, childcare, and everyday living expenses. With 9 out of 10 single parents being women, it's no wonder more women are deciding not to have children, and it's essential that more support is provided, particularly as these families are more vulnerable to falling into debt." Further data from UK Debt Expert highlighted that for parents earning £16,000 per year, a single day of childcare requires over seven hours of work, compared to just 3.3 hours for someone earning the national average of £2,397 a month. This stark disparity highlights the heavier burden on lower-income parents, who must juggle childcare expenses with other essential costs, often leaving little time or money for social activities. Read Martin Lewis's open letter to the new Chancellor to fix unfair systems... on Child Benefit, Carer's Allowance, LISA fines, Tax-Free Childcare and morehttps:// Maxine explains: "The high cost of childcare not only limits a parent's financial flexibility but also their ability to maintain a social life. For lower-income families, the pressure to prioritise work and childcare leaves little room for social engagement, which can lead to feelings of isolation, especially for single parents or those in lower-paid jobs." This comes as Bridget Phillipson has called on Brits to consider having more children and have them sooner, warning of the 'worrying repercussions' posed by a decline in birth rates. The Education Secretary told the Daily Telegraph falling birth rates were not only a concerning trend but one which 'tells a story, heartbreakingly, about the dashed dreams of many families'. Official data from the Office for National Statistics shows fertility rates in England and Wales dropped to 1.44 children per woman in 2023, the lowest level since records began in 1938. Ms Phillipson said people were scared off having children due to the high costs, and wanted 'more young people to have children, if they so choose'. 'A generation of young people have been thinking twice about starting a family, worried not only about rising mortgage and rent repayments, wary not only of the price of fuel and food but also put off by a childcare system simultaneously lacking in places and ruinously expensive,' she said. Ms Phillipson's comments come months after she told the Daily Mail young women had been given added 'freedom' to have more children by expanded government-funded childcare. For information see the link below 📷 For information on how to book Kids Clubs & Wraparound Care please use this link - Since May, working parents of children who turn nine months old before September 1 have been able to apply to access up to 30 hours of free childcare per week, until their child is old enough to start school. 'They will be able to make choices about the career that's right for them, the hours that they want, but also [have] the freedom to think about family size and how many children they want to have, with support from the Government around childcare hours,' she said in May. Recommended reading: The expansion of funded childcare began being rolled out in England in April last year for working parents of two-year-olds. Working parents of children older than nine months are currently able to access 15 hours of funded childcare a week, before the full rollout of 30 hours a week to all eligible families in September. The Labour Government announced that up to 4,000 childcare places are set to be rolled out at new or expanded school-based nurseries in England from September.
Metro
a day ago
- Business
- Metro
'UK taxpayers will pay price' - How people are reacting to the Welfare Bill vote
Yesterday evening saw one of the most dramatic and confusing votes since Labour returned to power almost exactly a year ago. A welfare bill was passed, much to the relief of government ministers. But it wasn't the same welfare bill that MPs thought they would be voting on at the start of the debate just hours earlier. Instead, while that debate was taking place, it was announced that a huge chunk of the legislation concerning the Personal Independence Payment (Pip) disability benefit would be scrapped wholesale. Measures to change the assessment criteria for the benefit were dropped, with the government saying any alterations would instead come following a review from disability minister Sir Stephen Timms due in autumn next year. That meant the proposed legislation, titled the Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill, would no longer affect the Personal Independence Payment. Metro readers have had plenty to say about the bizarre passage of the bill and the impact it could have. Craig Munro breaks down Westminster chaos into easy to follow insight, walking you through what the latest policies mean to you. Sent every Wednesday. Sign up here. Reader Karen Louise Meakin wrote on our Facebook page: 'It's not even a bill at this point – it's a b.' It was a drastic U-turn to cap off a fortnight of high-profile U-turns from Prime Minister Keir Starmer, but it saved the government from a backbench rebellion and a potential humiliating defeat. What it hasn't saved, though, is money. Chancellor Rachel Reeves was banking on Pip savings to help balance the budget, but they're no longer coming. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video Reacting to the news on Facebook, Metro reader Kevin Ward wrote: 'So it's going to save £0.00 and Reeves will now have to find £5billion, that means higher taxes coming.' Marian Ringer Crossan argued: 'We do know there are thousands of people, including many young people who are dodging going to work on the basis of mental health, claiming benefits in my opinion fraudulently. 'We know this is true but it has yet to be evidenced properly. Due to Starmer's stupidity the whole bill is now caput! So UK taxpayers are the ones, yet again, to pay the price for our Government's ineptitude and incompetence!' Independent economic thinktank the Institute for Fiscal Studies agreed that tax rises 'look increasingly likely' as a result of the backtrack. Incoming IFS Director Helen Miller said: 'This will doubtless intensify the speculation over the summer about which taxes may rise and by how much.' Many others were troubled about the potential impact of the bill if it passes through the rest of its parliamentary stages. While the Pip measures have been massively watered down, the changes to Universal Credit (UC) – including almost halving the health element for new claimants – were kept. Charities covering disabilities, mental health, and poverty all expressed concerns over the current version of the bill after yesterday's vote. Charlotte Gill of the MS Society said: 'While we're relieved that the government are dropping some of their most catastrophic plans for Pip, and committing to a review before any changes go ahead, we still believe this bill risks causing harm to disabled people. 'Pushing through cuts to those on Universal Credit who are unable to work is unfair and cruel.' Reader Helen Solorz Bamford was sceptical the welfare changes would achieve one of the stated aims of encouraging those on benefits into work. More Trending She wrote on the Metro Facebook page: 'I totally get the 'helping disabled people into work', as there are many who would love to work, except there is no workplace suitable, employers often don't have the ability to offer changes to/in the workplace, needed for a disabled person.' However, not everyone was unhappy over the plans. Ricky John said on our Facebook page: 'The Labour party have actually done something right for a change, too many people in this country want something for nothing.' Get in touch with our news team by emailing us at webnews@ For more stories like this, check our news page. MORE: The stress caused by welfare reform flip-flopping left me feeling sick MORE: Failing water firms forced to pay ten times as much compensation MORE: Major parental leave review launched with current system 'not working'
Spectator
a day ago
- Business
- Spectator
Watch: McFadden refuses to rule out tax rises after welfare U-turn
Uh oh. After Sir Keir Starmer's embarrassing U-turn on his government's welfare bill last night – where changes to Personal Insurance Payments were pushed back until after disability minister Stephen Timms's review on it all next year – cabinet minister Pat McFadden has been out on the airwaves this morning defending his leader. But when the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster appeared on BBC Breakfast, Mr S noted that he didn't quite manage to reassure viewers that there would be no tax rises in the autumn as a result of this £5bn volte face… When quizzed on whether economists at the Institute for Fiscal Studies were correct in thinking that tax rises are on the horizon, McFadden remarked: Well, this was one moving part of the budgetary picture. It does have a financial consequence yesterday. I'm not going to speculate on where the budget lands because there are so many other different moving parts, and it wouldn't make sense for me to do that. The Beeb tried again: 'Can you rule out tax rises?' McFadden, once again, obfuscated: Look, I'm not going to speculate on the budget. We will keep to the tax promises that we made in our manifesto when we fought the election last year. But it doesn't make sense for me to speculate on something where, as I say, there are so many moving parts of which this is only one element. Clear as mud, eh? And Steerpike isn't sure that Brits will believe Labour figures who insist the party of government will keep their word. As YouGov polling revealed on Tuesday, the number one reason voters are deserting Starmer's army is, er, broken promises! Watch the clip here:
Mint
a day ago
- Business
- Mint
U-turns wipe out UK welfare savings and strain budget, analysts warn
Government forced to scale back cuts to pass welfare reform bill Budget watchdog likely to downgrade growth projections Finance minister Reeves has tiny buffer to stay within fiscal rules Analysts predict government will have to raise taxes MANCHESTER, England, - Prime Minister Keir Starmer's U-turns to pass welfare reforms mean the plans will no longer save taxpayers any money and have shredded the margin Britain relies on to meet its fiscal rules, analysts said on Wednesday. Starmer won a vote in parliament on his welfare plans on Tuesday, but only after his Labour Party lawmakers forced him to scale back cuts, underlining the prime minister's waning authority. In particular, the government backed down on its plan to make it harder to claim the Personal Independence Payment, a benefit for people with health conditions. Starmer had hoped his welfare reforms would save 5.5 billion pounds in the current parliamentary term, which should end in 2029. "Without reform to Personal Independence Payment, the watered-down bill is not expected to deliver any savings over the next four years," said Helen Miller, the incoming director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies think-tank. The reforms will create "huge" disparities between the treatment of existing and future claimants with health conditions and disabilities, the IFS added. The watering down of the government's welfare bill further strains finance minister Rachel Reeves' budget plans, which hinge on a tiny buffer against the government's self-imposed fiscal rules - equivalent to less than 1% of annual spending. Reeves must also fund a partial reversal of cuts to winter fuel payments made to pensioners, as well as rising commitments to defence spending. On Tuesday, the Office for Budget Responsibility said its past economic growth forecasts had been too optimistic, meaning it is likely to downgrade its projections for this year's budget - another headache for Reeves. "The welfare concessions last night blow a hole in Rachel Reeves' fiscal rules. Combined with U-turns on fuel payments, her 9.9 billion pounds of headroom has almost gone," said Rob Wood, chief UK economist at consultancy Pantheon Macroeconomics. "With the OBR signalling that it's likely to downgrade long-term growth forecasts in the autumn, Reeves will have to raise taxes markedly again." While Britain's government has borrowed slightly less than the OBR predicted during the first two months of the 2025/26 financial year, economists say budget plans could yet be knocked off course by a fractious global economy and conflicts abroad. The British government bond market has become increasingly volatile in recent years, reflecting unease among investors over Britain's mix of slow economic growth, high debt interest costs and persistent inflation. This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
ITV News
a day ago
- Business
- ITV News
Welfare U-turn leaves chancellor with financial blackhole that could lead to further humiliation
Economics Editor Joel Hills breaks down the financial repercussions of the government's welfare U-turn The welfare bill U-turn is politically embarrassing for the government, and it also leaves the chancellor with a significant financial problem. If you recall, the original plan was rushed out before the Spring Statement in March because Rachel Reeves was in danger of breaking the borrowing and debt rules she had just set, at the first time of asking. The government envisaged saving £4.5 billion a year by making it harder to qualify for Personal Independence Payments. And a further £2.7 billion by cutting future spending on incapacity benefit - the 'health' element of Universal Credit. The government also wanted to increase the generosity of universal credit for those out of work without health problems - benefit support for jobseekers in the UK is pretty mean by comparison with other wealthy European nations. This netted out at total savings of £5.5 billion by 2029/30. The PIP changes were tweaked and have now been shelved. The changes to the incapacity benefit have been watered down. The uplift to the standard allowance goes ahead as planned, so savings are now the sum total of zero. As things stand, the changes are likely to cost the government money. 'After [yesterday's] climbdown, the government is effectively returning to the drawing board,' says Helen Miller of the Institute for Fiscal Studies. 'The Timms Review may lead to savings, although Sir Stephen Timms, minister of state for social security and disability, has said that the review is not intended to save money. And this review is not due to report until autumn 2026.' Let us be clear, there has been a HUGE increase in the number of people claiming disability and incapacity benefits in the last five years. We don't really know why. It's definitely not Long Covid. It's probably not entirely down to the cost of living crisis, although higher inflation will have been painful for anyone on benefits. We do know this hasn't happened in other countries. It's perfectly normal for a government to be concerned about a surge in claims and to seek to reform the system, but goodness, this has been a fiasco. Back in March, according to the OBR, the chancellor had £10 billion of headroom against her self-imposed fiscal rules. £5.5 billion of that has gone. Another U-turn on winter fuel will cost the government another £1 billion. The outlook for economic growth (and therefore tax revenues) is weak. Borrowing is overshooting, and the government's borrowing costs are high. The news doesn't look good. As things stand, there's a good chance Rachel Reeves will have to increase taxes in the autumn, if she is still chancellor. Unless something changes, there's the prospect of further political humiliation ahead. From Westminster to Washington DC - our political experts are across all the latest key talking points. Listen to the latest episode below...
