Groups

    Husbands living in a "harem" with multiple wives have been cleared to claim state benefits for all their different partners.

    Husbands living in a "harem" with multiple wives have been cleared to claim state benefits for all their different partners.

    A Muslim man with four spouses - which is permitted under Islamic law - could receive £10,000 a year in income support alone.

    He could also be entitled to more generous housing and council tax benefit, to reflect the fact his household needs a bigger property.

    Ministers have decided that, even though bigamy is a crime in Britain, polygamous marriages can be recognised formally by the state - provided they took place overseas, in countries where they are legal.

    The outcome will chiefly benefit Muslim men with more than one wife.

    Ministers estimate that up to a thousand polygamous partnerships exist in Britain, although they admit there is no exact record.

    Potentially, the benefits bill for income support could reach £10m.

    Chris Grayling, the shadow work and pensions secretary, said that the decision was "completely unjustifiable".

    He added: "You are not allowed to have multiple marriages in the UK, so to have a situation where the benefits system is treating people in different ways is totally unacceptable and will serve to undermine confidence in the system.

    "This sets a precedent that will lead to more demands for the culture of other countries to be reflected in UK law and the benefits system."

    Mr Grayling also accused the Government of trying to keep the ruling quiet because the topic is so controversial.

    Corin Taylor, research director for the Taxpayers' Alliance, said: "British taxpayers are paying a record amount of tax so the Government has a duty to make sure that every penny is spent properly.

    "Polygamy is not something which British law allows and therefore British taxpayers should not have to pay for extra benefits for second or third wives.

    "If other countries sanction polygamy that is fine but the British taxpayer should not have to fund it."

    Four departments - the Treasury, the DWP, HM Revenue and Customs, and the Home Office - were involved in the review, which concluded that recognising multiple marriages conducted overseas was 'the best possible' option. In Britain, bigamy is punishable by up to seven years in prison.

    But, while a married man cannot obtain a spouse visa to bring a second wife into Britain, some multiple partners may be able to enter the country via other legal routes such as tourist visas, student visas or work permits.

    Officials have also identified a potential loophole by which a man can divorce his wife under British law while continuing to live with her as his spouse under Islamic law, and obtain a spouse visa for a foreign woman who he can legally marry.

    Immigration rules say entry clearance may not be withheld from a second wife where the husband has divorced his previous wife, and the divorce is thought to be one of convenience.

    This is so, even if the husband is still living with the previous wife and to issue the entry clearance would lead to the formation of a polygamous household.

    Muslim couples are only married in the eyes of the British state if they undergo a register office wedding as well as a Nikah, or religious ceremony.

    Muslim groups say it is quite common for men here to undergo more than one Nikah with different wives. This does not count as bigamy since only the first marriage is legally recognised.

    A DWP spokesman said: 'There are fewer than 1,000 polygamous marriages in the UK and only a small percentage of these are claiming social security benefit.

    "We recently reviewed the rules regarding benefit payments to customers in a polygamous marriage, which conclude that the rules in place since 1987 provide the necessary safeguards to ensure there is no financial advantage for claimants in a valid polygamous marriage."

    dailymail.co.uk/pag…t=5

    52 Comments

    Source please OP. Thanks

    :shock:

    hottoshop;1542491

    Source please OP. Thanks


    Must be true I read it in the paper:whistling:

    OMG :w00t:

    harlzter;1542508

    Must be true I read it in the paper:whistling:



    ;-)

    Gaunty was on about this on Talksport today.

    It's scandalous !!

    ..............................................

    jerry;1542533

    ..............................................





    Should explain that ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ = lost for words!

    Don't really see what the big deal is? If they were considered seperately they would be able to receive the benefits anyway, the figure is skewed to create a shock headline.

    Headline "Shock: Muslim bigamists to receive £10M in benefits"
    Reality "5000 (1000 x 1 husband + 4 wives) people could theoretically receive £10M in benefits (around £2000 each a year, the normal amount for IS) if they are all eligible for income support"

    AH ! The Daily Mail, that's ok then I thought it might be from a biased source...................................

    Watch out for the key words:
    COULD
    POSSIBLY
    POTENTIALLY
    MAY BE
    MAY NOT

    In fact I can see very few actual facts in that "article".

    Promotes racial hatred and should be deleted.

    Reported.

    hottoshop;1542556

    Promotes racial hatred and should be deleted.



    I agree :thumbsup:

    Original Poster

    jah128;1542572

    I agree :thumbsup:



    This isn't Nazi Germany matey. Stop trying to censor.

    It's not promoting anything, it is a news story as reported in a newspaper.

    The "Author" of that article seems to be on some sort of mission doesn't he ?

    dailymail.co.uk/pag…ate

    Banned

    I'm off down the nearest mosque to enrol Although just spotted on News 24 that Ed Balls is denouncing this as internet spam! Must be true then if a Labour minister is declaring it false Come on though chaps - hands up if you voted labour last election. couldnt find anyone down my local today who wanted to claim responsibility. Reminds me of the tory voters in '97. Conspicous by their abscence. Mind you, even the tories were never this bad at their worst.

    diabeticguy;1542579

    This isn't Nazi Germany matey.



    You're quite correct, its not Germany. Plenty of propaganda though.

    Original Poster

    jah128;1542546

    Don't really see what the big deal is? If they were considered … Don't really see what the big deal is? If they were considered seperately they would be able to receive the benefits anyway, the figure is skewed to create a shock headline. Headline "Shock: Muslim bigamists to receive £10M in benefits"Reality "5000 (1000 x 1 husband + 4 wives) people could theoretically receive £10M in benefits (around £2000 each a year, the normal amount for IS) if they are all eligible for income support"



    A good point.

    I posted this for discussion not because it represented my view.

    apart from being completely mad, any man that has more than one wife should be entiled to something! xtra cash to by ear-muffs....etc. A man with one wife & 3 girlfriends on the other hand sounds great! ;-)

    diabeticguy - thanks, generally speaking threads like this tend to throw up a lot of heat on here (almost inevitably being locked). I'm not trying to censor, but I personally just think these boards would be better of without them, but then its not my call and I'm all for reasonable discussion. It must be said though, if you post a thread with a title as such and then a direct copy (without an introduction or disclaimer etc) it certainly appears that it represents your view and closely reflects your opinions.

    lol @ kimboball

    They deserve all these benefits as compensation for their situation after all the more "wifes" you have the more in-laws you end up with!

    Admin

    jah128;1542650

    diabeticguy - thanks, generally speaking threads like this tend to throw … diabeticguy - thanks, generally speaking threads like this tend to throw up a lot of heat on here (almost inevitably being locked). I'm not trying to censor, but I personally just think these boards would be better of without them, but then its not my call and I'm all for reasonable discussion.



    Reasonable discussion is fine :thumbsup: but if this conversation gets heated we will lock it

    Banned

    oh err this may well sort all my problems, how many hubbys we allowed and where do i sign:-D

    jah128;1542650

    diabeticguy - thanks, generally speaking threads like this tend to throw … diabeticguy - thanks, generally speaking threads like this tend to throw up a lot of heat on here (almost inevitably being locked). I'm not trying to censor, but I personally just think these boards would be better of without them, but then its not my call and I'm all for reasonable discussion. It must be said though, if you post a thread with a title as such and then a direct copy (without an introduction or disclaimer etc) it certainly appears that it represents your view and closely reflects your opinions.lol @ kimboball




    Exactly.

    I was on the verge of posting, asking why you posted in the first place diabetic_guy, as Jah said your title was provocative yet you added no personal view to the article.

    It's all very well asking for discussion but it helps if the original article is fair and factual before posting.
    Just because some hack from the Daily Mail writes it doesn't make it Gospel does it.
    And did you read the record of his past articles I posted ?

    He could certainly be a canditate for the BNP couldn't he ?

    sassie;1542684

    oh err this may well sort all my problems, how many hubbys we allowed and … oh err this may well sort all my problems, how many hubbys we allowed and where do i sign:-D



    RNIB usually have local offices. :w00t::p

    hottoshop;1542583

    The "Author" of that article seems to be on some sort of mission doesn't … The "Author" of that article seems to be on some sort of mission doesn't he ?http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/dmsearch/overture.html?in_page_id=711&in_overture_ua=cat&in_start_number=0&in_restriction=byline&in_query=james%20slack&in_name=on&in_order_by=relevance+date



    and in ]The Telegraph

    hottoshop;1542698

    RNIB usually have local offices. :w00t::p



    :w00t: So cruel!

    Banned

    hottoshop;1542698

    RNIB usually have local offices. :w00t::p



    not nice :-(

    sassie;1542715

    not nice :-(



    What ? RNIB = Really Nice Internet Buddies

    What did you think I meant ?? :whistling:

    Banned

    hottoshop;1542730

    What ? RNIB = Really Nice Internet BuddiesWhat did you think I meant ?? … What ? RNIB = Really Nice Internet BuddiesWhat did you think I meant ?? :whistling:



    no good changing ya mind now, and i thought you where real nice too:whistling:

    Dig faster hottoshop, dig faster...

    jah128;1542739

    Dig faster hottoshop, dig faster...



    I hope (nay pray) she knows me a little better :oops::w00t:

    This was also reported on the BBC News website & the Daily Telegraph website - both sites also pointed out that according to Islamic teaching a man should only have more than one wife if he can afford to keep them, so in theory they won't be claiming anyway.

    Still, what a Government! "Bigamy is against the law, but we'll reward you for it".

    Joke time: what's the penalty for bigamy? Two mothers-in-law:whistling:

    taasda;1542707

    and in ]The Telegraph



    Doesn't get away from the fact that all the shock figures that are given in both articles, the ones that provoke the racial hatred, are all supposition and not fact.

    All too easy to hide behind freedom of speech etc

    I still don't think threads like this should be allowed unless the facts that are posted are 100% verifiable. My opinion though and not my site.

    Does he not deserve it for putting up with 4 nagging wives,ones bad enough:whistling:

    Surely this has nothing to do with " race "..a British born person can be a Muslim or any other religious persuasion.

    This is really about allowing religious preference regarding our laws, which I am personally against, equality and fairness to all is what this should be about.

    I can understand the anger.

    It brings up questions

    They will need a big place to stay, which would be paid for by benefits.

    They wont have as many bills(maybe) as if they shared a house they wouldnt have to pay seperate bills.

    And so on

    I think this is complete madness. Why not hand the country to the muslims, its what we are doing gradually. I have nothing against anyone elses religions and who they worship but what i do have something against is when religion enters into the government and changes are english heritage just to suit. Would i be able to move to a muslim country and build a church and workship there and then demand they change the rules of their country to suit me. NO.. so why the hell are we allowing this. I am not a racist but when things like this happen for a particular race and religion it does drive hate. :x

    hottoshop;1542556

    Promotes racial hatred



    Only in Fairy Tale Land! It might only be a possibility now, but like most things, it will become a reality.

    Banned

    Never thought I'd ever say this, but seriously considering voting BNP! No-one else gives a damn!

    csiman;1545013

    Never thought I'd ever say this, but seriously considering voting BNP! … Never thought I'd ever say this, but seriously considering voting BNP! No-one else gives a damn!



    DAMN there ya go mate!

    I believe its all a load of nonsense. "THEY" WILL NEED A PLACE TO STAY", "THEY", who are they? "I'm not racist but!!!". This is exactly the kind of response this article was aiming to produce.
    Please don't buy into all this Islam Phobia hype. I am a second generation British Muslim and would never dream of breaking the law of "MY" country. Please don't alienate me and other muslims by remarks made by other religious leaders. I have never asked for and don't require "MY" country to change its laws to accommodate my religion. All I pray for is a peaceful world for my children and the children of every inhabitant of the world.
    Post a comment
    Avatar
    @
      Text
      Top Discussions
      1. So Brexit isn't going how a lot of Brexiters thought it would2470
      2. Just heard this...2 ★★★★★★★★★★★★★★ congrats to all on 392k ★★★★★★★★★★★★★★7767383
      3. 5am gym crew20132
      4. U.S. bombers fly off North Korea's coast in show of force1319

      See more discussions