« The Pope in America – Main – Peckham library »

David Cameron vowed he would stop the government pushing through the abolition of the 10p rate of tax, and:

would fight in Parliament for compensation for those affected by the "disgraceful" move.

Remember, the most affected are those on low wages.

On the very same day, Cameron's party welcomed a report from Policy Exchange which has suggested the overhaul of early-years care, so that there is a flat rate of £55 parental care allowance for all parents, replacing tax credits targeted at those that need them most.

As the Guardian points out, though, this move would have a big impact on those at the lower end of the socioeconomic scale:

[There] are those who would lose from the scheme - starting with working lone parents. They are currently entitled to as much as £240 towards weekly childcare bills. If support was capped at £55, many would find that they could no longer afford to work. How exactly that would fit with tough Conservative talk on welfare-to-work is, to say the least, unclear. Then there is the effect on those children whose cash-strapped parents would respond to the withdrawal of subsidy by plumping for cheap, low-quality care. That effect would be all the more dramatic if, as the report suggests, funds were released to extend the scheme by scrapping free nursery places. Authoritative research at the Institute for Education has established that a year of pre-schooling can increase the subsequent educational performance of poorer children by as much as a £10,000 boost in family income. The new allowance would provide a fraction of that - especially when the report's small print makes plain that more of the cash would go to the richest 10% than any other income bracket.

I.e. exactly those David Cameron claims he's trying to help by fighting the 10p tax rate issue are exactly those he will take money away from if his party implemented these childcare funding changes. What he gives with one hand, he takes with the other, and all should be aware of this Conservative duplicity.

Tags — Politics