who cares about the family speech - anne fennell

8/9/2019 Who Cares About the Family Speech - Anne Fennell

1/21

Who CARES about the Family?

Speech: 27thJanuary 2015 ou!e o" Common!

#other! at ome #atter

Having a parent at home to take care of the familyis a choice most families feel they cant make.

The purpose of this booklet is to shed light on theeconomic conditions bearing down on families to

better understand the pressures they are underand the choices available to them.

We have seen an increasing rise in the numbers ofmothers returning to the workplace when theirchildren are very young. Not such a long time ago70 families had a mother at home! now only "#do and that $gure is falling fast. %rucially morestay at home mothers have gone back toemployment in the past two years than in theprevious &' years combined.

( am not saying that mothers should not go out towork or that mothers at home should be regardedas better but ( am )uestioning whether this is

really what all these mothers want and whetherthey have a choice in the matter.

(t would appear from a number of surveys thatmothers do not have a choice.

*y the governments own statistics released last+anuary "0&,! -7 of working mothers said they


2/21

would prefer to stay at home and look after theirchildren if they could aord it! while '7 said theywould like to work fewer hours and spend moretime looking after the children if they could aordit.

/ similar survey by the %entre for ocial +ustice

"0&& showed that ## mothers with very youngchildren said that the main reason for themreturning to work was $nancial pressure.

1nly 7 of those at home cited unaordablechildcare as the reason.

/ survey by *ritain Thinks also reported234amilies today are tired! stressed and underpressure. #0 believe in an ideal world one parentwould be able to stay at home.5 Britain Thinks2011

We put the statistics from Netmums 6reat Work8ebate survey 9"00:; into a pie chart to give animage of what mothers wanted. The debateinterviewed ,000 mothers of young children 97"children under -;. These were the $ndings.


3/21


4/21

1f those at home only 7 were there because theycouldnt aord childcare.

o nearly half of mothers with young childrenwould like to be at home raising their children

Nearly a half would like part time work

1nly a small percentage want to be working fulltime

Netmums concludes

3The holy grail of choice remains far beyond thereach of most mums in this country!5

?others believe 3choice has been virtuallyeradicated5 when it comes to deciding whether toreturn to work or stay home.

o what has changed to make it so di@cult todayfor a parent to be at home! particularly over thelast few years.

The way families are taAed is one of the mostimportant causes of this change. 1ne of the mostsigni$cant shifts in taA policy over '0 years hasbeen from treating the family as a household unit

with allowances for a dependent spouse andchildren! to taAing it as individuals disregardingwhether they have family responsibilities or not.34or many singleB income couples! 9where oneparent is the sole income provider; and the otherthe has the primary caring role! the taA burden hasmore than doubled.

1ur current taAation system favours the doubleincome family 9where both parents work; over the


5/21

6single income model. The 8ouble income familybene$ts from " personal allowances! they can earndouble the amount taA free and also can earn twiceas much as a household before becoming liable forthe higher ,0 taA rate.

The %oalition governments policies have furtherdisadvantaged the single income family 9(4;.(ncreasing the Cersonal TaA /llowance lifts thepoorest out of the taA net and encouragesemployment but without Transferable /llowancesor (ncome plitting! the (4 is furtherdisadvantaged. Demoving child bene$t from somefamilies will hit single income families the hardestwhile this /utumn a new T/E 4ree %hildcare/llowance will be made available to families whereboth parents work and working lone parents.Carents with an income up to F&'0k each will beentitled to a taA free sum of up to F"k per year! perchild! towards childcare by registered providers. (nshort everyone apart from parents at home arebeing helped.


6/21

This slide shows the eAtra taA paid yearly by the(4 compared with the 8(4 on the same householdincome! split e)ually between partners. o foreAample the 8(4 both partners may be on F&0keach. These $gures preBdate the new TaA 4ree%hildcare /llowance coming in /utumn "0&'!

These $gures take account of (ncome taA andNational (nsurance but not TaA credits or the new

%hildcare TaA /llowance.

ingle income families are getting poorer. / +D4report published last week states2

3ingle breadwinner families have seen a largeincrease in the risk of inade)uate income. (n "00#!-# of families with children where someone

works full time and their partner does not work


7/21

were struggling to get byG this $gure has risen to'&.5

/nother recent report notes2 The number of

children in relative poverty& where one parent isworking has grown fast since "00".3oleBearnerfamilies account for nearly a third 9-0; of all poorfamilies with children.5

The cause they report is because 3maleemployment has fallen and earnings among lowB to

midBskilled men have grown relatively weakly.5 Thesolution given for the family to avoid poverty is forthe mother to work as well. 3iven the uncertainprospects for future wage growth! womensemployment will continue to be vital for lifting

families out of poverty.5-

What the report does not do is to en)uire into the

causes that stop mens earnings grow. ( would liketo give you an illustration which may eAplain why.

Take a family with two children on the medianwage, about 26k. The father is an electrician andthe mother is at home looking after their two

young children. The family need a car and theywork out that he needs to bring in an extra k a

year !"# week$ to meet the %urchase, runningand maintenance costs.The father is able to do this by taking on extrahours. &owe'er they will disco'er that to earn kmore (gross) will make 'ery little im%ro'ement tothe family)s dis%osable income. &e would ha'e toearn an extra 12,"00 a year more to make knet*

This is because for e'ery extra %ound he earns theTreasury takes back +6% income tax accounts for


8/21

20%, national insurance 12% and reduction in-ni'ersal redit //%. This in economic terms isreferred to as the arginal ecti'e Tax 3ate, andit is +64.


9/21

o . =arning more gross makes little dierence tothe money the family can bring home.

(f the same family lived in the =ast ?idlands thegraph would look the same but start at &>k as thehousing allowance is smaller.

4our million families! nearly half of all families arecaught in this taA trap. TaA credits subsidiseincome and although the subsidy may be a

generous one its eect is to take away thepressure on employers to pay decent wages 9aswages are subsidiIed by the taApayer;! itundermines the fathers ability to provide for hisfamily and forces the mother 9or second earner;into the workplace if the family need to bring homeeAtra income.

This taA trap aects lone parents in the same way2working harder does not result in an increase ofincome.

No other country in the world has so high a taArate. "'yrs ago before independent taAation wasintroduced the taA rate was -,.


10/21

This graph shows the ?=TD for single incomefamilies at 7' of average wages for 1=%8countries "0&&! at about F":k gross wage in theJ. The J has by far the highest taA rate.

The = and 1=%8 taA rate are about -'.

Daising the minimum wage! new starting taA rates!or increasing taA free thresholds fail to tackle thereal problem. /s income increases with thesemeasures so niversal credit will decrease.4amilies will hardly be better o by any of thesemeasures until we tackle these high rates. Weneed to look at the family as a whole in our

taAation system.


11/21

Treating the family as a unit should be the $rstprinciple of taAation. Not doing so causesunfairness and anomalies. /nd the latest mostsigni$cant eAample of this is the removal of childbene$t for higher earners.

( )uote from the %onservative Carty Cress Deleasein "0&"5e ha'e always been clear that those with thebroadest shoulders should carry the greatestburden. ...7ome %eo%le the richest 1" %er cent ofhouseholds with children will lose out from

8anuary next year but ... it is 'ery di9cult to :ustifycontinuing to %ay for the hild Bene;t of the

wealthiest 1" %er cent of families in society.


12/21

=)uivalisation calculates 6household! not individualincome. (t calculates income after taA 9net;! notgross income. /nd it allows for the number ofdependents.


13/21

single income family is worst o of the dierentforms of family.

The eect of removing %hild *ene$t from thesefamilies will be to make them poorer than manyother families who earn less than them.


14/21

The single earner family on :0k is scarcely bettero than the family on the minimum wage andworse o than the family on F,'k.


15/21

Take a family with three children, li'ing in =ondon.The father is a &ead of >e%artment at a secondaryschool earning "0k salary. The mother cares fortheir children at home.&e has been oered %romotion as >e%uty &ead atanotherschool a bit further away. &e will ha'e extrares%onsibility, hiswill hours be longer, and he will ha'e to tra'elfurther but he willbe rewarded with an increase to his wage of anextra 10k. ?n

%ractice howe'er he will ;nd that he brings homeonly ,00 of that increase.@or e'ery extra 1earned he loses 6"% in tax, A?and loss of child bene;t. &e kee%s only a third ofthe extra 'alue he is adding for the school.7hould his wife return to work instead she can earnthe full 10k without %aying tax, and they kee%their child bene;t. They will be signi;cantly bettero.

o this is what is happening. The taAation systemis making it di@cult for the main provider to earnmore. What options do these families have but forthe mother to return to the workplace to $ll theincome gap.

/ll political parties are clamouring for 6aordablechildcare to help mothers back to work to plug thisincome gap! also citing the emancipation ofwomen from the home and their ful$lment in theworkplace.

(ndeed


16/21

race going on between the three main partiescoming forward with policies on childcare.5

*ut no political party is talking about the inKusticesthat force the mother away from the family in the$rst place. 1r the enslavement to a wage andtimetables set by work. 1r whether it meets theneeds of very young children. This factor is almostentirely absent from debate.

Nor is any party highlighting the fact that mothers

will be working very hard to bring home very littleincome because she too will be caught in the sametaA trap. (t will not be su@cient for her to earn onlyF-k gross to bring home the money needed topurchase the car 9in the eAample given earlier;.Her ?=TD will be :'. =ven if childcare was fullysubsidised she will have to earn at least F#.'k tobring home the F-k net. This is before travel costs.

(n an (4 brie$ng on the budget "0&, it said2

5e still lack a %ro%er rationale and e'idence basefor the more than + billion a year %ublic moneythat is now s%ent on childcare. Beware areas ofs%ending with uite such unanimous cross%artysu%%ort. ?t does not always lead to the best %olicy.


17/21

*ut the Treasury do not see this as a loss. Theycelebrate the fact that more mothers than everbefore are in the workplace. They have even set atarget for half a million more mothers to be inemployment by "0&:. This would 3would allow theJ to match the female employment rate inermany and the secondBhighest overallemployment rate in the 7 grouping of maKor

economic powers.5 (t would help the Treasury

meet the =uropen target employment rate of 7'

overall for women and men by "0"0. -

The "ndreason is that working mothers look goodon Treasury books. Working mothers! along withpaid nursery workers! and additional commutingeApenses! can be shown as an increase 8C. Thisis not a measurement of 6real growth. 8Cregisters an increase where something that was

previously not bought and sold 9such as care in thefamily for love; becomes a traded commodity9cared by agencies for money;! and is measured asgrowth. Transfering care from the unpaid to paid isnot an increase in output. /nd What 8C also cannot count is the )uality and continuity of care andthe emotional wellBbeing and the strength of thefamily unit.

Thirdly the Treasury can collect the taAcontributions! employers contributions from thisnew workforce. *ut given that the cost ofsupporting working mothers through subsidisedchildcare is estimated at F7billion we challenge the

Treasury to show the evidence it is better o by thecontribution made by those Kuggling work and care


18/21

responsibilities as a result of receiving childcaresupport and taA credits.

(t is credible that the overnment would save bymaking it possible for parents to choose to care fortheir children themselves. %an we not oer parentsthe choice to use an allowance to either carethemselves or spend it on third party childcareL

(nstead the Treasury promises more help withchildcare2 a new TaA 4ree childcare allowance forall working families with an income up to F&'0!000per parent. /nd they have promised to spend aneAtra F"million on creating '0!000 new childcareplaces. The stay at home parent is not regarded asdeserving enough for an allowance.

Nicky ?organ! the ?inister for Women says2 3Nowoman should have to choose between theircareer and their family.5 The irony is that thegovernment! in supporting double earning familieswith taA allowances and subsidised childcare whileat the same time disadavantaging single earnerfamilies is urging women to choose their careerabove their family.

o this is what is happening. The tate iseectively telling families how they should livetheir lives! and in the process they have demeanedthe role of mother at home.

Marious


19/21

=dwardian or sepia tinted while the Crime ?inisterand %hancellor have implied that parents who stayat home are not hard working and lack aspiration.

The %onservatives! in 8avid %amerons speech atthe /utumn conference have openly stated thatthey prefer and represent only families where themother is working.

3(f you work hard and do the right thing we sayyou should keep more of your own money to spend

as you choose.The %onservative party is the union for the motherwho works all the hours od sends to give herchildren the best start. These are the people werepresent...the people who want to makesomething of their lives. These are the people weare $ghting for.5

*ut this is obviously an unKust situation where themain breadwinner is unable to bring home eAtraincome by working harder. (t is not a virtue in thesecases that the mother is driven out to work whenfor some children the best start is a mother athome. ?any mothers do want to be at home. /ndchildren want their mothers to be around more.

/nd the community! elderly neighbours andrelatives! schools! churches all bene$t from theinput given by mothers who stay at home.

(t is not right for the tate to interfere in this wayand discriminate against certain types of families.(t denies aspiration. (t denies some mothers the

chance of ful$llment and the simple enKoyment ofbeing with their children and nurturing them. (t


20/21

denies children their mothers. (t denies families theright of following their own conscience to live theirlives according to what they believe is 6the rightthing to do! not what the tate dictates is the6right thing.

?oreover to imply that those parents who stay athome to raise their children are not aspirational orhard working undermines the very real sacri$cethat mothers or fathers make when they decide togive up a career! and make the economic sacri$ce

of living on one income. 4amilies are making huge$nancial sacri$ces to stay at home.

/ll political parties know that women are the mostdisenchanted group. ( have given you a fewreasons why.

Colitical parties would make a mistake to think thatstay at home mothers are Kust a small band of afew middle class women.

This is a much bigger issue aecting many moremothers. What we represent is the desire to beable to care for our own family members within thefamily set up! and this includes the old as well asthe young. We want real 6family friendly policiesthat value the role of care.

We can only begin to do this if we recogniIe thefamily as the fundamental unit for economicconsideration.

(ndividual earnings are not a good indicator of theprosperity of families.

4amilies need to be given the option of being taAed

Kointly.


21/21

TaAation and bene$ts should not be the cause thatseparates a mother from her children! or ahusband from his wife. (f a family would have beenviable before taA on a single income! taA shouldnot render it unviable.

?others at Home ?atter call on all parties to2O end the discrimination against %arents who stayat homeO recognise family res%onsibilities within thetaxation and bene;t system

O treat child bene;t in a way which is fair for allfamiliesO include the desire of %arents to care for their ownchildren in the debates on (aordable childcare)O change the di'isi'e language used whichdisregards stay at home %arents as (laCy) and(unas%irational)

The as%iration we re%resent is the as%iration ofcare. others at &ome atter cam%aign againstthe odds because we do not wish the ability tocare for our own family members to be deniedeither to this or to the next generation.

who cares about the family speech - anne fennell

Documents