T here will be general approval of the sentences passed yesterday in Nottingham on Mick Philpott and his wife Mairead for the manslaughter of their six children in a deliberately started house fire. However, attempts led by the Daily Mail to link their crime to Britain's welfare services and child allowances should be immediately resisted -- the more so since the Chancellor of the Exchequer, George Osborne, was unwise enough yesterday to ask why are we subsidising lifestyles like those of Philpott and his wife.
The Times has suggested that the government should look again at the idea that child benefit should be capped or limited to the first two children and argued that there should be no assumed right to have a large family funded by the State. How long will it be before we hear calls for the adoption of China's one child family policy?
Philpott was not on trial for abusing what the Daily Mail calls welfare UK but for a disastrously mismanaged plot to discredit another of his wives. In her summing up the judge, Mrs Justice Thirlwall, made no reference to any connection between Philpott's and his wife's crime and the welfare benefits they received. Those commenting on this case would do well to follow the judge's example. In particular Mr Osborne should think carefully about the rather sinister implications of his reference to subsidising lifestyles.
No comments
To be able to write a comment, you have to be registered and logged in
Currently there are no comments.