Baby bonds or child trust funds

Lord Soley

I was very saddened when the new government abandoned baby bonds – these were introduced to encourage a culture of saving and were avilable to all new born children. For reasons I shall never understand they were opposed by both the Conservatives and Liberals when they were in opposition so I think it is not about cuts generally or the current economic situation.

I know they are now talking of introducing an ISA savings approach but there is no certainty that this will be paid for children in care or children in low income families or with chaotic parenting – and they are the ones we need to reach.

The following exchange took place on the floor of the House yesterday:

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201011/ldhansrd/text/110228-0001.htm#11022823000355

7 comments for “Baby bonds or child trust funds

  1. Lord Blagger
    01/03/2011 at 11:10 am

    The problem is that you legacy for children isn’t baby bonds or saving.

    The legacy is debt, debt and more debt.

    300,000 pounds per household.

    That doesn’t include bailing out the 50% of people who have less than 5,000 in savings in their ‘retirement’ Cost per person on benefits in retirement has a present value of 350,000 pounds. That doesn’t include their medical care when they need a lot of it, and its expensive.

    So borrowing more money to give children money to save, when that just means they have more to pay off later is a joke.

    Show’s how clued up the Lords are on the basic Ponzi that the state is running, and the Lords are supporting.

  2. Carl.H
    01/03/2011 at 11:44 am

    My Lord, capitalism, commercialism, has become so adept at selling the dream, how this product will make you happy that the choice for the poorer of our society has become inevitable. Most would rather smile for a while than eat, pay bills in the future.

    The choice to most younger people is that of a caged bird, warm, fed and safe or free in the sun smiling for just a short while.

    Whilst the dream of owning a home and reasonable lifestyle are so far away a culture of saving, where it should be, will not exist.

    Bonds, grants, trusts, whatever will be spent eventually on the new iphone 4 or similar. Go look on the streets, poor kids with good phones or designer label clothes. Capitalism has sold them a dream of today and forget tomorrow.

    • ladytizzy
      01/03/2011 at 6:13 pm

      The dream is also sold by the Church to the poor in a particularly pernicious way – graves.

  3. MilesJSD
    milesjsd
    01/03/2011 at 11:55 pm

    The strategic solution is simple:

    replace Individual-Capitalism and its directively-dominant super-over-enrichment of a mere 1% of the population at the Top,

    by Cooperative-Capitalism and its integrated Individual-Human-Development of 100% of the population, throughout.

    2355.JSDM

  4. Twm O't Nant
    02/03/2011 at 8:37 am

    paid for children in care or children in low income families or with chaotic parenting – and they are the ones we need to reach.

    It certainly seemed to conflict with existing benefit arrangements, and come at a high cost
    in lost middle income taxation.

    • maude elwes
      02/03/2011 at 1:43 pm

      This was a misplaced ‘gift.’ It meant nothing fundamentally and only created more confusion. Well off parents didn’t need it and poor parents were compromised.

      It would have been better to set up the fund for the individual children directly, which was then theirs to accrue when the time was right.

  5. Lord Blagger
    02/03/2011 at 11:12 am

    It certainly seemed to conflict with existing benefit arrangements, and come at a high cost
    in lost middle income taxation.

    ===========

    There we go.

    The purpose of government is taxing the middle class.

    Nothing to do with providing a service.

Comments are closed.