Dave Only Has One Shaped Peg for Our Diverse Families

The Lib Dems are going to cut taxes for all working and middle class families not just the few. This comes as the Conservatives announce their marriage tax break.

The Tories are giving only £150 a year for couples who are married, the Lib Dems of course are promising £700 a year tax break to each individual who works and earns over £10,000 by raising the personal income tax allowance. Nick Clegg said:

"Modern families come in all shapes and sizes. One-size fits all policies like tax breaks for married couples are just not right for our times.

"Liberal Democrats will give all mothers and fathers the support and flexibility they need to spend time with their children.

"We will cut taxes for all working families on low and middle incomes, not just a select few.

"Following the birth of a child, we will allow parents to share leave between them.

"We will help fathers to share parenting, giving them the right to time off for antenatal appointments. And we will change the way tax credits are paid so you can rely on them and you don’t face the nightmare of having to pay back thousands of pounds when the government messes up your payments."

So as well as the tax breaks the Lib Dems are offering in our policies for families:

• flexible parental leave between the mother and father as they see fit
• free and universal childcare provision for children aged 18 months – five years for 20 hours per week, when resources allow
• fix the payments of tax credits for six months at a time so payments are stable and predictable for families
• set up an independent commission to agree a fair long-term solution to the problem of providing quality care to those who need it in their old age
• provide affordable homes for the 1.8m now on the housing waiting list by bringing the quarter of a million empty homes back into use by offering grant or loans to those willing to move in and renovate them for their own use
  

So while Dave wants to shoehorn us all into the same homogeneous family type the Liberal Democrats are dealing with the reality of the flexibility of the UK situation, giving real solutions that are fair to all, at whatever stage of live.

Why We Need Fairness is Two Easy Lessons

Two findings that make interesting reading today.

First up the pay gap between rich and poor is wider than it 40 years ago. Despite Labour saying they constantly doing something about poverty and helping people aspire, their tax regime of regressive tax increases seems to have had the opposite effect.

The other one I heard on the TV before leaving the house on the BBC was that family conflict not whether the parents were together or apart had more impact on a child's well being. Therefore the Conservative incentivisation, through a tax-break, to stay married may have repercussions on the child if conflict ensues.

Indeed their policy only would affect 14% of the poorest families where only one parent works full time, fail to help 230,000 children living in in poverty in one parent families who juggle work to care for them. Nor will it help 29,000 children living in in poverty where both parents work. In total four out of five adults of working age would fail to benefit from this tax scheme, as well as the above 46% of adults living in poverty are single.

Of course the Lib Dems have a message that is clear regarding both those issues. We want a see a fairer tax system. We will lift the tax allowance threshold to £10,000 lifting 4million out of tax altogether and giving £700 to those lowest paid. We'll balance it with taxes on those that can afford it and on how we pollute.

Ciao Momma I'm Moving Out

What were you doing at 18?

Me, I was starting the final year of my A'levels having a September birthday meant I was only just starting the first term when I turned 18. At nineteen I did move out to go to University but at 26 I found myself back home after finding a new job hard to get in London. Of course I was out the door again at 31 and have been over in Scotland ever since.

So therefore the Italian minister who wants all of Italy's "bamboccioni" momma's boys and girls to leave home at eighteen surely hasn't looked at all the consequences. What are the reasons that 38% of Italy's 18-34 year olds still live at home? Before we mock Britain we are at 34%.

The major concern is financial. Obviously it is cheaper to have all the household bills paid for by your mum or dad. Or course when I spent that time at home I as building a little nest egg, but was looking for places to move out to, never expected I would end up in Scotland where after a year of spending that nest egg on travelling to Scotland or London it was sadly diminished.

But can an eighteen year old afford to move out of home on their own? Not all of them can, so how is the Minister going to insure that instead of 18 years old cosying up to their mothers they are not cosying up to the next homeless person in their cardboard box.

Of course there does come a time when it is ridiculous what some mothers will do for their grown up sons or daughters at home, and expect nothing in return. When I moved back in with my parents I paid a nominal rent, I cooked, did my own ironing, cleaned my own room and helped around the place. I also topped up the car with petrol after use. All of my entertainment came out of my own pocket.

The minister is taking exception to some of those who stay a home not because they need too, but because their momma makes it too nice for them to actually want to move out. Having that first experience of not letting the turkey thaw out long enough, finding yourself in the middle of nowhere after missing the last connection or that washing machine breaking down with your important load in it (all Uni experiences of mine) is part of growing up. They can only be experienced when you move out, find your own place (sharing with strange people even) but they help you learn to stand on your own feet, muddle through and make decisions.

By all means make it easier for young people to be able to afford to move out, but it isn't something your can arbitrarily set a age determining factor on, we're all different.

What is Dave Throwing Out with Baby's Bath Water?

Rachel Sylvester in The Times today draws an interesting analogy out of the child rearing reading material of the political leaders. Considering all three have young families and have said something about families in the last week, there is some logic in her thinking.

But after pointing out that Gordon Brown can't decide which school of thought to follow "tough love" or "tender loving care" it leads to the interesting contrast between the other two main party leaders. Of course we all know what Nick Clegg's view are after the weekend interview in The Sunday Times, indeed all the 'broadsheet' papers have been running with the theme since.

Of course what Nick has objected to is the rigidity of the ideas of Gina Ford's approach. As Rachel Sylvester puts it "the age-old clash between liberalism and conservatism has been reinterpreted for the Mumsnet age". Indeed looking at some of Dave's policies you can see the Gina Ford "Ikea manual" approach.

• You will get married for the sake of the children
• We'll even give you a tax break
• At the age of 65 you will give us £8,000 to insure you get 'free' personal care
• We'll add to word 'Public' into the Department of Health so you remember we care, oh about you (changing the logos and letterheads will cut the deficit)
• At 65 we'll raise the personal allowance for (the 40% wealthiest) pensioners
• When you start saving we'll abolish the basic tax rate on savings, giving up to £5 p.a. who those earning less than £30,000
• When you die we'll help out with your inheritance tax, increasing the threshold to £1m, giving an extra £200,000 to the children of people like George and me.
  

Yeah Dave certainly sets out a lot of milestones to look forward to, if you are wealthy enough to benefit. As for family you'll benefit as long as you are married (he recently added civil partnered) , heaven forbid you get a tax hike upon being widowed, divorced, fleeing a violent husband or wife, of your partner undergoes gender reassignment (forcing a divorce even if you remain together). Of course if your partner is killed in the line of duty fighting our wars, we'll keep you're kids alright, but only they will benefit from no tuition fees.

There are all of these promises of tax breaks, while at the same time David is promising to cut the deficit quicker than anyone else. So what else gives. You may not know, if you are a naughty little person you may be put away on the naughty step (you single parent you), or locked away in the cupboard.

Of course following the regimented top to bottom approach of family, of tax breaks etc means that something other than baby is going to end up being thrown out with the bath water. Surely the Tories cannot keep up all their commitments and race to cut the deficit all at the same time.