General Election 2024: General UK Politics Discussion here

[ECCOnoob]

11 minutes ago, Axe said:

The issue is that many carers did not know their circumstances had changed or understood just a very small rise in income would take them over the threshold.  Also carers main priority will be looking after the family member or partner that needs care rather than keeping an eye on income thresholds.   There is a big difference to deliberately breaking the rules than making a honest mistake and because of that reason some leeway should be given to those who clearly did not intend to receive carers benefits that they were not entitled to.  

There is some leeway.  

They're not being prosecuted with benefit fraud. They are not being sent to jail. 

 

They're simply being asked to pay back what was overpaid to them. Perfectly fair.

 

At the end of the day rules are rules and it's all set out in writing whenever they sign up for these benefits or payments or allowances. If I get busted for accidently speeding at 33 mph it's still speeding.

[Baron99]

18 minutes ago, Axe said:

The issue is that many carers did not know their circumstances had changed or understood just a very small rise in income would take them over the threshold.  Also carers main priority will be looking after the family member or partner that needs care rather than keeping an eye on income thresholds.   There is a big difference to deliberately breaking the rules than making a honest mistake and because of that reason some leeway should be given to those who clearly did not intend to receive carers benefits that they were not entitled to.  

It's an old saying but ignorance of the law is no defence. 

 

I'm guessing if this was overpayments to asylum seekers, there would be a whole lot of SF posters complaining. 

 

At least I'm consistent in saying this is tax payers money that should be returned to the coffers.

[Axe]

29 minutes ago, PRESLEY said:

Why would you support the Labour party if Starmer was dishonest, OOPS!  You did and still support dishonest Johnson,  Labour don't want dishonest politicians and voters who support dishonesty.

I stated I would support the Labour government if they are democratically elected  because it is the correct thing to do.  I have no intention of voting for the Labour party at the general election.  The Labour party are that desperate to end their losing streak at general elections that they welcome anyone prepared to vote for them. 

[Axe]

21 minutes ago, ECCOnoob said:

There is some leeway.  

They're not being prosecuted with benefit fraud. They are not being sent to jail. 

 

They're simply being asked to pay back what was overpaid to them. Perfectly fair.

 

At the end of the day rules are rules and it's all set out in writing whenever they sign up for these benefits or payments or allowances. If I get busted for accidently speeding at 33 mph it's still speeding.

 

14 minutes ago, Baron99 said:

It's an old saying but ignorance of the law is no defence. 

 

I'm guessing if this was overpayments to asylum seekers, there would be a whole lot of SF posters complaining. 

 

At least I'm consistent in saying this is tax payers money that should be returned to the coffers.

Wow you two should be traffic wardens.

[Baron99]

1 minute ago, Axe said:

I stated I would support the Labour government if they are democratically elected  because it is the correct thing to do.  I have no intention of voting for the Labour party at the general election.  The Labour party are that desperate to end their losing streak at general elections that they welcome anyone prepared to vote for them. 

And that's it at the next GE, although it's not a God given but people will only be going to vote Labour, if they can be bothered to vote at all, (think back to the likes of of the Brexit & the last GE when the 'Clever people were all over social media discussing tactical voting but apparently forgot to ACTUALLY vote & have been moaning ever since), because Labour aren't the Conservatives. 

 

Sometime in 2029 the Conservatives will be back to sort the mess out. 

 

[peak4]

28 minutes ago, ECCOnoob said:

There is some leeway.  

They're not being prosecuted with benefit fraud. They are not being sent to jail. 

 

They're simply being asked to pay back what was overpaid to them. Perfectly fair.

 

At the end of the day rules are rules and it's all set out in writing whenever they sign up for these benefits or payments or allowances. If I get busted for accidently speeding at 33 mph it's still speeding.

Indeed it is, and as I'm sure you're aware, assuming you were in a 30mph area, then it would normally fall below the threshold for prosecution, which begins at 10% + 2mph (in most police areas)

[Baron99]

7 minutes ago, Axe said:

 

Wow you two should be traffic wardens.

I used to like you, 😔

[PRESLEY]

17 minutes ago, Axe said:

I stated I would support the Labour government if they are democratically elected  because it is the correct thing to do.  I have no intention of voting for the Labour party at the general election.  The Labour party are that desperate to end their losing streak at general elections that they welcome anyone prepared to vote for them. 

Its a numbers game not a vetting game.  

[Axe]

13 minutes ago, Baron99 said:

And that's it at the next GE, although it's not a God given but people will only be going to vote Labour, if they can be bothered to vote at all, (think back to the likes of of the Brexit & the last GE when the 'Clever people were all over social media discussing tactical voting but apparently forgot to ACTUALLY vote & have been moaning ever since), because Labour aren't the Conservatives. 

 

Sometime in 2029 the Conservatives will be back to sort the mess out. 

 

I still believe that it is not a foregone conclusion that Labour will even be the largest party in a hung parliament.  You make an excellent point that the Labour party will have a job to make sure the bone idle will get out of bed in time to vote for them. 

 

15 minutes ago, Baron99 said:

I used to like you, 😔

 

Only joking about the traffic warden comparison.  Appreciate the debate. 

[Axe]

8 minutes ago, PRESLEY said:

Its a numbers game not a vetting game.  

Yes of course it is a numbers game that is how democracy works.