Under 25s will not be able to claim benefits if the Tories win in 2015

""Anyone under 25 would not be able to claim housing or unemployment benefits under an all-Conservative government, the Prime Minister suggested. The young should be forced to “earn or learn”, he said."

At the heart of Mr Cameron’s speech was the suggestion that young people would no longer be eligible for welfare.

“Today it is still possible to leave school, sign on, find a flat, start claiming housing benefit and opt for a life on benefits. It’s time for bold action here,” he said. “We should ask, as we write our next manifesto, if that option should really exist at all.”

Instead, young people should have a “clear, positive choice” to go to school or college, do an apprenticeship or get a job.

“But just choose the dole? We’ve got to offer them something better than that,” he said.

Denying young people welfare is not “callous”, Mr Cameron said. “Think about it: with your children, would you dream of just leaving them to their own devices, not getting a job, not training, nothing? No – you’d nag and push and guide and do anything to get them on their way… and so must we.”

I agree that we need to stop people from leaving school and living on benefits their whole lives when they are capable of working, but I don't think this is the way to go about it. Surely it should be quite simple to see who is abusing the system that way? Just focus on the people who have never been employed and still offer JSA etc. to young people who need it. There simply aren't enough jobs for young people at the moment and we need better support for jobseekers, as from what I have heard, jobcentres are awful and often don't help at all.

IMO, there needs to be more focus on apprentiships and similar vocational training schemes rather than university for young people, and getting them into jobs that way.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/david-cameron/10350854/Under-25s-would-not-be-able-to-claim-benefits-under-all-Conservative-government-David-Cameron-says.html#disqus_thread



Personally, I think there are a hell of a lot of 'hard cases', and I doubt it would see the light of day in anything other than a heavily revised form. But perhaps it's time to do something about that abysmal voter turnout rate for the under 25s.

What do you think of this policy? Do you support it?

Best idea yet, should curb under 25 child rates, encourage further education / training and essentially force those to alzy to get a job.

Personally i think it is brilliant, I'd guessimate around 20-5% or under 25's have a child in the area by me with no means of supporting them other than the state, its a self perpetuating cycle whereby they can't retrain for work as they need to look after the child! If the option of ifnancial aid for the child (benfits, house, etc) wasn't in place ....

Best idea yet, should curb under 25 child rates, encourage further education / training and essentially force those to alzy to get a job.

Personally i think it is brilliant, I'd guessimate around 20-5% or under 25's have a child in the area by me with no means of supporting them other than the state, its a self perpetuating cycle whereby they can't retrain for work as they need to look after the child! If the option of ifnancial aid for the child (benfits, house, etc) wasn't in place ....

It's also somewhat unfair if you're 23, have worked full time paying tax since you were 16 and get made redundant only to be told you can shove off for a couple of years until you've been so good as to reach your mid 20s.

How many of those kids do you reckon were plannned?

Best idea yet, should curb under 25 child rates, encourage further education / training and essentially force those to alzy to get a job.

Personally i think it is brilliant, I'd guessimate around 20-5% or under 25's have a child in the area by me with no means of supporting them other than the state, its a self perpetuating cycle whereby they can't retrain for work as they need to look after the child! If the option of ifnancial aid for the child (benfits, house, etc) wasn't in place ....

But surely plenty (probably most) of those people didn't choose to have the child, it was unexpected. Hence they didn't take benefits into account when they conceived. If my assumption is correct, then all this will do is cause more children to be living in incredibly poor conditions, perpetuating inequalities.

Then maybe the rate of people having children young would drop, but how about those who already have them? Collateral damage?

As i have already mentioned, you chose to keep the child do you not?

No, it'd be a staged introduction like the new pension age rise, certain cut off points etc.

No, it'd be a staged introduction like the new pension age rise, certain cut off points etc.

As someone mentioned above, the circumstances and fine details would need to be considered. Essentially if youve paid in for; in your example 16-23 (7 years) you should be entitled to 7 years benefits.

Well if you are adult enough to make a life changing decision to keep a child you need to be adult enough to understand and support the financial implications of keeping that child.

Under 21? Sure. But what happens in those four years between leaving uni and 25, where there ARE no jobs to get? Where are people supposed to live - I certainly won't be able to live with my parents. I couldn't do it now at 19, and I won't be able to do it at 25 with my partner and a six-year-old.

Getting a job? Fine, when they create more jobs, and show me one that means I can afford to rent privately, or reduce the council waiting list, I'll get a job and live independently of benefits.

I would never opt for a life on benefits; my family were forced into that life and it's not what I want for myself or my family, but when the job system is so dire because of increasing the retirement age, and allowing anyone who wants to come into the country, how can they then expect everyone of school, college or uni leaving age to waltz straight into a job? And how can they expect parents, who are being made redundant every day, being forced to move into smaller homes when their children move to university, to be able to support an adult son/daughter, and their potential family, when there's no money and no spare room to do it with?

This systematic punishment of young people purely for the sake of being young is why I will vote for the Conservative's biggest opponent during the election, just to make sure this ridiculous idea doesn't become reality.