• Sarah Teather has condemned the benefits cap as 'immoral'
  • She accused the Government of seeking to 'gain popularity at the expense of children's lives'
  • Work and Pensions Secretary Iain Duncan Smith accused the Lib Dem of 'needless scaremongering'

By Steve Nolan

|


A former minister has today condemned Government plans to cap household benefits at 500-a-week as 'immoral'.

Former children's minister Sarah Teather accused ministers of seeking to 'gain popularity at the expense of children's lives' by pushing through a popular but ineffective measure.

She said: 'I think deliberately to stoke up envy and division between people in order to gain popularity at the expense of children's lives is immoral. It has no good intent.

Speaking out: Sarah Teather has hit out at plans by David Cameron and the Government to cap household benefits at 500-a-week

She added: 'There are all sorts of things you have to do when times are tight that have negative consequences but you do them for good purposes.

'But to do something for negative purposes that also has negative consequences - that is immoral.'

The Lib Dem had faced calls for her sacking after missing a crucial vote on the reforms in February despite having publicly questioned them.

She was eventually relieved of her government role in September's reshuffle.

Teather said that the cap is merely a political device to 'demonstrate whose side you're on' rather than a move that will save the Government much money.

She predicted a mass exodus of families from London who can no longer afford to live there because of the cap but who would struggle to find work in cheaper areas.

A spokesman for Work and Pensions Secretary Iain Duncan Smith accused Sarah Teather of hugely misinformed scaremongering

Dismissive: A spokesman for Work and Pensions Secretary Iain Duncan Smith accused Sarah Teather of hugely misinformed scaremongering

She told The Observer that child protection and education services might struggle to keep track of youngsters whose families are forced to leave London.

But a spokesman for Work and Pensions Secretary Iain Duncan Smith accused her of hugely misinformed scaremongering.

He said: 'The criticisms Sarah Teather is levelling against the Government's welfare reforms are hugely misinformed and therefore result in needless scaremongering.'

'It's not fair or right that benefits claimants receive higher incomes than hard-working families who are striving to get on in life.

'Our reforms bring fairness back to the system while ensuring we support the most vulnerable.'

Sarah Teather says that many families may be forced to leave London as they will be unable to afford to live there under the proposed benefit cap

Exodus: Sarah Teather says that many families may be forced to leave London as they will be unable to afford to live there under the proposed benefit cap

Business Secretary Vince Cable said his party colleague was right to warn of the risks of 'very serious social consequences' but defended the need for a cap.

It was required to prevent housing benefit 'escalating out of control' but had to be accompanied by an increase in the provision of affordable housing, he said.

'What is immoral, and I have read her article carefully, is demonising poor people.'

He told BBC1's Andrew Marr Show: 'We have got to cap the housing benefit element while at the same time increasing the supply of affordable housing.

'That is absolutely critical because without that you will have very serious social consequences which Sarah has quite rightly warned about.'

Defiant: Business secretary Vince Cable defended the cap on benefits despite the attack from his party colleague Sarah Teather

Defiant: Business secretary Vince Cable defended the cap on benefits despite the attack from his party colleague Sarah Teather

LABOUR WIDENS POLL LEAD OVER THE CONSERVATIVES

Labour has posted a 12-point opinion poll lead over the Tories - its widest margin of advantage in a ComRes survey for more than seven years.

The Opposition gained two points to 43 per cent on a month ago and the Conservatives dropped two to 31 per cent, in the poll conducted for the Independent on Sunday and Sunday Mirror.

It showed the Liberal Democrats static on 10% and Ukip down one on 8 per cent.

Two thirds of voters also backed a cut in British contributions to the EU as Prime Minister David Cameron prepares for a Brussels summit later this week to discuss the future budget.

Tory rebels joined forces with Labour last month to defeat the Government by pushing through a call for a real-terms cut. Mr Cameron is arguing for a real-terms freeze.

In the poll, 66 per cent said UK payments 'should be cut rather than frozen' with 12 per cent against and 22 per cent unsure.

A majority (58 per cent) also agreed that Britain should withdraw from the EU altogether 'if some EU powers cannot be restored to the UK', including a 53 per cent majority of Labour voters.

Even Liberal Democrat voters backed that stance by a margin of 39 per cent to 32 per cent.

Asked if the UK should 'leave the EU regardless', 43 per cent agreed - with more Tory and Labour supporters backing the policy than not.

While nearly a quarter (23 per cent) of Lib Dem voters agreed, a clear 57 per cent were opposed.

ComRes interviewed 2,024 British adults online between November 14-16.

The comments below have not been moderated.

Once again the name calling begins, you are a Scaremonger if you dare to speak against IDS brain child Think Tank. Tami Grey Thompson was also called a Scaremonger. I would trust Tami Grey before any of these Politicians,

If people who don't have a job (or even people who do for that matter!) cannot manage on 500 per week - then they need help. And if they live in London - MOVE!

What is immoral is that many families where both parents are in full time work don't even earn 500 total between them. How do you think those people feel about jobless people being rewarded with more money than them. It gives the jobless no incentive to find work.

Could Nick Clegg please come out and say this woman is talking nonsnse? Er Nick.....? Where are you......? No..... nothing to say? Getting an ex minister to say something rather you saying it yourslf so she gets all the flak? Thought so!

Help yes, to those that need it Gemma I agree But no benefit should exceed any work

You have no right to use other people's money. That is immoral.

What a thoroughly unlikeable woman she is, and so wrong on practically everything.

what a very good idea Chris like it a million green arrows to you

WHAT A LOAD OF BULL !!!!!!!!!!. I have worked full time from leaving school. I ended up being self employed and sometimes at busy times I have had 3 hours sleep a night, but every penny I earned was spent giving my kids the best I could, clothes, food, holidays, just like any other caring parent. I NEVER expected to be given handouts left right and centre. My house is now paid for BY MYSELF working hard to pay the mortgage. I now live off the basic pension, no savings, as like I said my hard earned money paid to bring my kids up in a decent way and paid my mortgage off. So could anyone please tell me please, ISN'T IT IMMORAL that after all these years of graft I find it hard to feed myself sometimes!!!!!!!!! Could someone give me a nice gift of a weekly sum of cash, without earning it, so I could afford even a holiday, or am I just inconsiderate and greedy !!!!!!!!!!!!! Why don't you ask your kids, seeing how much they owe you.

Last week I went with my team at work to do a volunteering day. We planted 1000s of daffodil bulbs in a park in the middle of a housing estate. The day before they'd had a team of people doing community service lifting the turf for us. Not only was it rewarding for us (and a welcome day out of the office) it was hugely beneficial to the community. Anyone able to work (and who say they're looking for work) should be doing a volunteering day, if not once a week, then once a month.

The views expressed in the contents above are those of our users and do not necessarily reflect the views of MailOnline.