BARONESS FLATHER: Polygamy, welfare benefits and an insidious silence By Baroness Flather Last updated at 1:08 PM on 16th September 2011 In this disturbing and brave exposé, a Pakistan-born baroness reveals how some of her countrymen have as many children as possible by several wives so as to milk our welfare system... Baroness Shreela Flather, Mayor of Windsor and Maidenhead, was the first Asian woman member of the House of Lords Behind the creation of the modern welfare state lay a noble ideal. The post-war generation of politicians and civil servants were motivated by the desire to protect the vulnerable, the sick and those in genuine poverty. Tragically, over recent decades, the system has become corrupted. It might have once been a safety net for those in real difficulties but, today, parts of the benefits structure have become a lucrative racket for claimants who lack any sense of social responsibility. Through its generosity, which now costs taxpayers more than £200  billion a year, Britain’s social security system incentivises idleness and fecklessness. And one of the most worrying aspects of this — and which is something that has been a taboo subject for far too long, because of sensitivities about the issue of race — is the way the system is exploited by some migrants from Pakistan and Bangladesh. As I said in Parliament this week, there is now a growing wealth of evidence that the generosity of the welfare state encourages some Muslims from these two regions — along with plenty of white families — to produce ever larger families in order to claim extra payments and publicly-subsidised housing. And it’s something the system seems to allow too easily. For example, a Pakistani man contracts a marriage in his native country, and then brings his wife to England to start a family. Because they have been married only under Islamic law, she isn’t legally registered by British authorities as his wife. Even so, they are able to claim child benefit for any children they have. But the state handouts do not end there, for under Islamic Sharia law, polygamy is permissible. So a man can return to Pakistan, take another bride and then, in a repetition of the process, bring her to England where they also have children together — obtaining yet more money from the state. Because such Islamic multiple-marriages are not recognised in Britain, the women are regarded by the welfare system as single mothers — and are therefore entitled to the full range of lone-parent payments. Eastern values fashion and cultures meet western on the high streets of the multicultural society of Birmingham As a result, several ‘families’, fathered by the same Pakistani man, can all claim benefits as they are provided for by the welfare state, which treats them as if they are not related. Figures are hard to obtain, but it’s thought there may be around 1,000 polygamous families living in the UK, costing taxpayers millions of pounds every year. A friend of mine, who investigated the issue for a BBC Panorama programme, told me of one street in a Yorkshire town where all the residents are Pakistani women with children living on social security. There is not one man living in the street. Where are the men? Perhaps with another family somewhere else. Who knows. It is certainly difficult to discuss, because this phenomenon of serial marriage and exploitation of the benefits system is taboo — with few people in Britain seeming to want to face the disturbing truth. Indeed, any mention of this issue is seen in politically-correct quarters as a much greater crime than the wanton abuse of the welfare system and of taxpayers’ money. There may be 1,000 polygamous families living in the UK My proof of this? Following my speech in the House of Lords this week, I have been subjected to a torrent of criticism, with some people accusing me of prejudice and others even condemning me for racism. Such accusations are absurd. I was born in the city of Lahore, which is now part of Pakistan, and I have devoted much of my public life to fighting discrimination. Yet in our politically-correct society, nothing smothers open debate more than the accusation of racism. We cannot continue like this. The misuse of welfare among some Pakistanis, Bangladeshis and others has to be challenged, for the practice seriously undermines the social contract upon which the British welfare system is based. When modern social security was first introduced after the war, the driving force behind its creation was the liberal-minded civil servant Sir William Beveridge, who said that the system was not meant to provide ‘something for nothing’. Benefits were to be given in return for contributions to society — through taxes, national insurance payments and work. But, over the years, the contributory principle has been destroyed. Its obliteration is particularly stark in this case, for many of the Pakistani and Bangladeshi claimants will often have paid nothing in British tax or national insurance. What’s more, the continuation of this unfairness is a recipe for friction between communities. The misuse of welfare among some Pakistanis, Bangladeshis and others has to be challenged, for the practice seriously undermines the social contract upon which the British welfare system is based Nor should we tolerate the acceptance of Sharia law in areas of this country (as some militants minorities have been calling for) since an extreme interpretation of the Islamic code treats women as second-class citizens, stripping them of their rights on practically everything from property to divorce, which they have under British law. Indeed, there is some evidence that the Department for Work and Pensions, which is responsible for running the welfare system, has turned a blind eye to the incidence of polygamy in Muslim communities. In 2007, the Ministry of Justice admitted it had no exact figure on the number of polygamous couples living in Britain, and my fellow peer Baroness Warsi more recently warned that the Government shies away from discussing the issue because of ‘cultural sensitivity’. Two years ago, ministers proposed a change to the law to tackle the issue — only to back down after being warned this could contravene human rights legislation. Furthermore, we are also allowing the culture of benefit dependency to have a very unhappy effect on our children. All studies show that they are best brought up in a household with a loving mother and father. The accusation of racism kills open debate But when they are cynically treated as nothing more than a means to welfare payouts — with their two parents living apart — they are denied that support. Not only are the children’s polygamous fathers often absent, but their mothers often struggle to cope with ever larger broods, unable to give their full attention to their individual sons and daughters. Furthermore, the culture of benefit dependency bred by this practice tends to trap children in poverty, for, through no fault of their own, these youngsters often grow up in jobless households without any masculine role models and are very likely to repeat this miserable pattern. It is time to break this cycle — and stop providing incentives to dependency. For a woman’s first two children, there should be the full raft of benefits, but, for the third child, the amount should be cut by a quarter and, for the fourth child, by half. After that, there should be no more benefits for any extra children. The same should apply to accommodation. It is wrong that families are encouraged to believe that they can keep moving to ever larger, taxpayer-funded homes simply by expanding the number of their children. After all, it’s not as if, in our advanced, industrialised society, there is a need for vast families, with children put to work to bring in vital wages. This might be the case in parts of Pakistan, India and Bangladesh, where there is no social service provision, no NHS, no pensions or care homes for elderly, and where children are needed to look after their elders. Before critics of what I propose start throwing around abuse, I must stress that this is not some kind of British version of the Chinese government’s brutal crackdown on family size, where parents are allowed to have just one child. I don’t care how many children any family has, but, beyond four, parents should be expected to meet their own costs. This is a matter of fairness between those who give and those who take. The current free-for-all, as we can now see from the country’s gargantuan fiscal deficit, is simply unsustainable. Places: Bangladesh, United Kingdom, India, Pakistan Organisations: House of Lords Comments (276) Newest Oldest Best rated Worst rated View all I don't care what race or ethnicity the lazy "single " mummies or daddies are but I know I now have to work an extra 6 years in my upcoming old age and ill health to pay for them and their --- ahem --- youngsters. Unfortunately for me, I have the 1950s/60s mindset of my youth when these generous benefits just weren't available and parents worked their backsides off to provide for their very small families - one or two kids - as no one where I lived could afford to have more. It;s not a race issue - it's a moral issue. Is it fair for hardworking taxpayers to pay more and more tax to support the idle and lazy who are milking a system that was originally set up to help the genuinely poor, disabled and disadvantaged ? - Jean, Blackburn, Lancs, 16/9/2011 16:35 Click to rate Rating 188 Report abuse Will not bother with comments anymore. Some are repeated 3 &4 times and others that r in no way offensive r not published. Forget it I'll read something else in future. - Lc, London, 16/9/2011 16:31 Click to rate Rating 48 Report abuse Good article, just as well it wasn't a white person writing that or she would have been accused of being racist, exactly what this article wasn't. It does not matter what colour or creed you are, just have the children you can afford and don't expect everyone else to support you, I'm all in favour of helping those who have fallen on to hard times, but those who knowingly exploit the system should be ashamed of themselves, I, my husband and both my daughters and their parteners work very hard and we do not expect our taxes to be frittered away on the work shy, we would rather the vunerable elderly are supported, at least most of them have contributed throughout their lifetimes and deserve help in the twilight of their lives!! have these feckless people ever heard of contraception???!!!! - Ann, Rochester Kent, 16/9/2011 16:03 Click to rate Rating 145 Report abuse People are saying polygamy is illegal in Britain, yes it is but technically those who marry abroad aren't committing polygamy in the UK as their marriage under Islam isn't recognised as legally binding...so in effect they become like the fathers who father children on several women...I think people need to understand that it is mothers who claim or are entitled to claim and recieve majority of the benefits of having children not fathers...I have never heard of or come across Bangladeshi's or Bengali's having mulitple 'marriages' in the UK if it does happen it's very rare, but it more widespread within the Pakistani community in Britain, so if this is mainly a Pakistani issue, why not focus on Pakistani's...I think Flather like many MP's are afraid to approach or talk about issues focusing on Pakistani's community and so have to throw others into the mix... - IAmNoWhere, SomewhereOverThere, 16/9/2011 16:01 Click to rate Rating 56 Report abuse A simple solution, pay into the system for 5yrs before you can get anything out, no matter who you are and where you come from. Also 1st two children qualify for family allowance(2nd child half the amount of 1st child), thereafter no more for further children, they are your responsibilty. - shanky, Liverpool, 16/9/2011 16:01 Click to rate Rating 160 Report abuse This issue has come into existent in the recent decade or so...the first few generations of migrants only had multiple children because quite frankly they didn't know any better as most where from rural areas in their native countries, however most of the children born in these large families are actually having fewer children themselves, growing in a large family isn't easy no space or privacy. The problem of new migrants and benefits issue is because of the whole raft of fnew inancial incentives given to people who breed which goes across the board of ethnicity/race/religion! The issue with polygymy, I think it unfair to state Bangladeshi's in this regard, they are generally less likely to marry multiple times even in Bangladesh so this is more of a Pakistani concern and increasingly so in the Yorkshire region but I suspect this falls into the cousin marriages issue..which has reduced amongst Bengali's and Indian's as a whole. If Flather knew all this why not bring it up earlier... - IAmNoWhere, SomewhereOverThere, 16/9/2011 15:51 Click to rate Rating 35 Report abuse The views expressed in the contents above are those of our users and do not necessarily reflect the views of MailOnline. Site Web Headlines Most Read 'I didn't mean it': How student stabbed her roommate,19, to death after weeks of dorm tension boiled over in iPod row Prosecution lawyer moonlighting as 'dominatrix at S&M events in skin-tight latex' is suspended The frantic phone calls and messages sent before millionaire's lover Rebecca Zahau was found hanging on mansion balcony 'No such thing as bad publicity': Dominique Strauss-Kahn's $14 million New York bolt hole up for sale At least 75 injured amid 'multiple fatalities' at Reno air show horror as 74-year-old pilot crashes World War II plane into crowd Manhunt for armed 'dangerous and suicidal' soldier on the loose in New York Has Google's CEO stopped using Google+? It's been a month since Larry Page used search engine's social network Outrage at German comedian's blackface Obama billboard 'It's not our son': Fresh agony for family of Robbie Romero as DNA tests show teenager is not missing child Lockdown at Tucson Air Force base ends after military police fail to find any sign of a gunman Is this German boy who lived in the woods for five years? Sexual encounter between JV football players and female student leads to forfeited match Looking at money makes your mouth water, new study shows Meet the 26-year-old Tea Party activist challenging John Boehner in GOP primary Terrifying moment teenage murder victim was grabbed by a stranger in convenience store - hours before her body was found in trunk of car Mom 'screened porn and gave alcohol to her teenage son and his friends before sexting' Miami fights back against invasion by (very slow) army of TEN INCH Giant African snails Did White House pressure Air Force general to favour firm backed by Democrat donor? Cheerleaders forced to wear shorts and t-shirts under 'too skimpy' uniforms U.S. sailor cleaning up Hawaiian beach finds message in a bottle... from Japan John 'Junior' Gotti to pin four more murders on his late crime-boss father Sweet revenge! Poll reveals Hilary Clinton is more popular than Obama Hero pet rabbit saves family from house fire ... then dies of smoke inhalation MORE HEADLINES MOST READ IN DETAIL Ads by Google: Moving to the CloudGet Best Practices with Gartner Research or call (877) 806-2599Go.SungardAS.com Teach English AbroadTESOL/TEFL courses across the US including job placement & guaranteewww.OxfordSeminars.com Teach English in JapanALT (Assistant Language Teacher) Jobs in Japanese Public Schoolsinteracnetwork.com Teach English AbroadGuaranteed Teaching Jobs Abroad After Just 2 Weeks TEFL Training!www.worldteflassociation.com Volunteer Teach EnglishChoose From 1-12 Week Programs Abroad & Make A Real Difference!www.CrossCulturalSolutions.org Teach English AbroadAmerican TESOL Certification Guaranteed Job Placementwww.AmericanTESOL.com Train to Teach EnglishThe ICAL TESL/TEFL Cert online Train & teach around the worldicalweb.com Get TESOL CertifiedTeach English, Travel The World And Get Paid To Do It.eslglobalonline.com Find this story at www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2037998/UK-immigration-Polygamy-welfare-benefits-insidious-silence.html Published by Associated Newspapers Ltd Part of the Daily Mail, The Mail on Sunday & Metro Media Group © Associated Newspapers Ltd