£250 per child. - Page 2

garinda · 17-01-2006, 17:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neil

It worked then.

We had not until now. Maybe I am just a bad (read poor) parent

Of course you're not a bad parent, I've met the little angels, just interested to see what parents thought of the scheme, along with everyone else.

Lucky little Emily Garinda, a £250 Government investment plus all my worldly goods.

Neil · 17-01-2006, 18:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by garinda

Of course you're not a bad parent, I've met the little angels, just interested to see what parents thought of the scheme, along with everyone else.

Lucky little Emily Garinda, a £250 Government investment plus all my worldly goods.

She could do with that potty of yours in a few months if thats ok

garinda · 17-01-2006, 18:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neil

She could do with that potty of yours in a few months if thats ok

Mid Victorian oak commode, if you don't mind.

WillowTheWhisp · 17-01-2006, 18:18

I think it's terribly unfair on families who have one or more child(ren) who didn't qualify and then one child who does. The onus is on them then to set up equal funds for the others and maybe they can't afford to, but the other children would feel left out if they don't. Even more so if there are "top ups" at different ages.

garinda · 17-01-2006, 18:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by WillowTheWhisp

I think it's terribly unfair on families who have one or more child(ren) who didn't qualify and then one child who does. The onus is on them then to set up equal funds for the others and maybe they can't afford to, but the other children would feel left out if they don't. Even more so if there are "top ups" at different ages.

I quite agree Willow, that's why I wanted the view of someone like Romps and Neil who have two children that I don't think qualify, and one that does.

If you are going to have a scheme like this at all perhaps every child that is entitled to child benefit should be eligible. Although of course the shorter time the trust was in place, the less return for the older children.

WillowTheWhisp · 17-01-2006, 18:28

But bearing in mind inflation and all that it would probably even out.

Neil · 17-01-2006, 18:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by WillowTheWhisp

I think it's terribly unfair on families who have one or more child(ren) who didn't qualify and then one child who does.

You have to start somewhere.

SPUGGIE J · 17-01-2006, 18:59

What I dont get is why are they trying to bribe the electorate to be thats still in nappies in some cases

Do they think they will still be in govenment when it comes to cashing in the favour

garinda · 17-01-2006, 19:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by SPUGGIE J

What I dont get is why are they trying to bribe the electorate to be thats still in nappies in some cases

Do they think they will still be in govenment when it comes to cashing in the favour

It's the middle England voters they are sweetening with the scheme, not the children. They are probably the ones who have taken up the investment.

Sadly those kids who'll probably need it will have the parents who'll think it's all too much hassle.

Margaret Pilkington · 17-01-2006, 19:49

See, Rindy...i knew there would be folk on here who would know the answer.
I don't know where I got my ideas from......!

Neil · 17-01-2006, 20:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington

I don't know where I got my ideas from......!

Probably from some one on here

Margaret Pilkington · 17-01-2006, 21:03

No Neil.......I maybe read something when the scheme was first mooted......you know how the government sets its stall out and then changes its mind about things. I'm sure I read it somewhere too - but to be honest because I don't have any kidlidids.......and I am unlikely to have any more now......I maybe didn't pay enough attention to the article.

Romps · 17-01-2006, 21:50

I can understand the point of it being unfair if we have one child that qualifies and another that does not. But like Neil says you have to start somewhere. Luckily our boys have bank accounts so they are not starting from scratch. I am glad of the voucher for Emily it has finally made me set up a proper savings plan for all of my children albeit a little late. So Thanks for the kick up the arse Mr Blair. If I was not in a position to do the same for my children that didn't qualify....yes I would feel terribly guilty, and I sympathise with the many parents who find themselves there.

garinda · 18-01-2006, 00:21

Romps I'm not saying it is unfair. It's been interesting for me finding more about it and how it's used. Cheers my dear.

chav1 · 18-01-2006, 13:05

i think the £250 per child is a pathetic attempt at bribing peoples votes and yet another waste of money

considering the state of the dental service wouldnt this money be better spent ensuring that children have their teeth when 16 rather than a few quid in the bank

parents get enough help from the government with tax credits and other benefits already

not having a go at parents i am one myself but to me this £250 could be spent in many better ways than trying to buy votes

ime pretty sure we got a letter asking us to set up a bank account for our child but i havnt got a clue if the ex ever set up an account or not