You are here: Home » News »

Labour to force vote on “mummy tax” today

January 21, 2013 11:10 am

Tags:

Share this Article

Labour will today table an amendment to the welfare up-rating bill to force a vote on the government’s real terms cut to maternity pay – which as been labelled the “mummy tax”. The move comes as party sources reveal that 150,000 women are expected to be hit by the £180 real terms cut in the 106 battleground seats Labour identified this month.

A Labour source told us:

“There are set to be 150,000 working mums in key seats who will lose out under these plans by 2015 thanks to the part-time Chancellor’s political games. On Monday we will seek to force a vote on the mummy tax so every Tory MP in a battleground seat has to back Labour’s amendment or vote to cut support for striving mums – and if they don’t do the right thing, we’ll make sure their constituents know about it.”

http://twitter.com/johnringer John Ringer

I sort of recoil at the emphasis on the working mums in “key seats”. As if the plight of a working mum in Bolsover or Tunbridge Wells is worth less to us than that of one in Basildon. I mean, I know what they’re trying to say, but I thought we were trying to be “one nation”!
- John Ruddy
  
  If there is 150,000 working Mums in the 106 key seats, surely that means there is over 750,000 in the other 550 odd seats?
  Thats a lot of people to piss off…
jaime taurosangastre candelas

Can anyone explain how this figure of £180 is generated? As the reduction in increase in SMP is 1.2% (from the expected 2.2% down to a 1% increase), and payable over 33 weeks, the £180 “cut” would imply that SMP is normally paid at a rate of £454 weekly. But it is not: it is £135.45 weekly. The reality would appear to be (135.45 x 1.022) – (135.45 x 1.010) = £1.63 weekly, x 33 weeks = £53.64.

Even looking at the 3 year period of the abatement from 2.2% to 1%, it would imply that for the £180 figure to be true, Labour are expecting on average each woman affected to be pregnant 3.35 times in 3 tax years, or a total of about 128 weeks. That is an awful lot of (lower case) labour, and the women should be getting a medal in addition to the SMP.
http://twitter.com/robertsjonathan Jonathan Roberts

Agree with John below. And aside from the labeling of it as a tax – which it is not –
does anyone know if we tried to stop the cut to paternity benefits? I
have been concerned for many years that everything to do with family is
labeled a women’s issue, and the ‘dad’ part of the family gets ignored.
In fact, the only time dads are ever referred to is in the context of
absentee dads – the countless good ones seem to get ignored in politics.

Latest

Comment
Why Labour is fighting for the legalisation of Humanist marriages today

By Glenys Thornton

Monday saw the first day of Committee on the Same Sex Marriage Bill, where it became clear after a three hour debate on how to distinguish Same Sex Marriage from so called “traditional” marriage that opposition to this bill has not gone away. Despite a huge defeat on Second Reading, opponents reheated and repeated their earlier speeches, in part because their arguments rely on belief and prejudice not evidence or fact. So we sat until 11pm debating conscience clauses, Registrars [...]
Read more →
Comment
Sometimes what is unsaid at PMQs is the most important thing of all…

By Mark Ferguson

Well that was a bad PMQs for Ed Miliband – the second in a row. Perhaps he hasn’t gotten back into his stride after such a long period without the weekly Wednesday joust, but whatever it is, Miliband isn’t hitting his marks at PMQs. Meanwhile Cameron – who has been jousting with world leaders this week – seemed far more o top of his game than we’ve been used to seeing him lately. Alas the problem for Miliband was that [...]
Read more →
Video
Cameron refuses to answer question on secret government plans to hike interest on student loans

Last week it was revealed that the government discussed secret plans to hike interest on pre-existing student loans, meaning that anyone with a student loan will be expected to pay far more than expected. Today, the Prime Minister was asked about this – he spoke for nearly a minute but wouldn’t answer the question. What does he have to hide? How much more does he expect graduates to pay?
Read more →
Comment
Who benefits? Delivering on energy and infrastructure

By John Woodcock

Across the industrial north, it is striking how old pit villages and industrial towns are proving far less willing to embrace renewable energy than the noisier, more polluting fossil fuels and industries which shaped their identity. Energy companies are getting a nasty shock after mistakenly believing that these communities would not bat an eyelid at a few wind turbines on the surrounding hills because they had been content to make huge slag heaps part of the landscape in decades past. [...]
Read more →
News
Put reckless bankers in jail – Media roundup: June 19th, 2013

Subscribers to our morning email get the best of LabourList – including the Media and blog round up – every weekday morning. If you were a subscriber you would have already received this (and much more) in your inbox. You can sign up here. Put reckless bankers in jail Britain’s banking bosses should face jail if their decisions force fresh bailouts, the Parliamentary Commission on Banking Standards says today. The commission’s hotly anticipated report urges the Chancellor, George Osborne, to oversee the [...]
Read more →