When the going gets tough...
Tough. Radical. The end of the something for nothing era.
Those are the words that ministers want to be associated with today's proposals for a shake-up of the welfare state.
Hold on a second though, let's focus on what exactly is the "something" ministers now expect of almost everyone claiming benefits. It is not - contrary to some expectations - going out to work or doing compulsory community work.
The central proposition in today's White Paper is that all those who once were simply on benefit will be expected to agree to the goal of entering the world of work. All those, that is, except those classified as severely disabled or parents of babies under one. The system will accept that "the goal" may take many years to reach or may never be reached at all. During that time the benefit claimant will stay on full benefits and will not be forced into community work providing they stick to a plan they agree with an adviser.
The plan may involve receiving counselling for a problem such as drug abuse or being heavily indebted. It may involve training. It will include help with job search such as advice on how to draw up a CV, money for a new suit or the cost of the ticket needed to get to an interview.
Only if someone who was on incapacity benefit doesn't follow the plan they helped to draw up will they face sanctions. At first, they'll be given a warning (a kind of benefits yellow card). If that doesn't work those on ESA (the new name for those on IB deemed fit to prepare for work) will be fined £12 for a first offence, £24 for a second and then forced into compulsory work such as digging an old person's garden. There will, in other words, be no red card which throws people out of the benefits system altogether nor any American-style time limits for claiming benefits.
Now, I am not saying that today's measures don't represent a major change. They do. Millions of people who were told there was no expectation they should even look for a job will be told that they can and should get one if at all possible. Millions of lone parents who did not expect to have to look for work until their children left home will now be expected to do that. (One of the architects of the reforms, David Freud, writes interestingly about them in today's Times.)
What I am saying is that recent headlines have all been about stick when most of what's in today's proposals is about carrot. How tough they turn out to be will depend on the actions of those administering the system on the ground. What's more, in the short term at least, we will all spend more trying to get people back into work not less.
What makes the proposals really significant is that they represent a consensus between the Labour and Tory leaderships and are, therefore, certain to be implemented in some form. They are not scheduled to come into operation until autumn 2010 - that's after an election and after, we all hope, the recession is over.
PS. Sorry to go on at such length but a man-sized fly may just have distracted you if you were watching last night's Ten O'Clock News. Thanks to those who've said I was incredibly calm. In truth, I had no idea he was there at all. If I had I would have swatted him.
I'm 
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~23~RS~)
CommentsSign in
You need to sign in to contribute to this page. If you're new to BBC Blogs, creating your membership is quick and easy.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Nick, can you ask our unelected PM to call an election
Brown out!
Complain about this comment
This is chasing a headline, and as with all the statements put out by the Government since Mandy returned, it has no substance.
Complain about this comment
This heavy handed approach will backfire and make this incumbent government redundant. It is time to run the head count reduction program for the DWP, CSA and Councils to save tax payers money.
Complain about this comment
Half baked measures, they will not force the determined work shy benefit recipient to change his ways. ( amend a CV will be enough to keep him on full benefits, really tough measures )
This is typical Labour, they grab the news headlines, spin it to death and they forget about it!!
With his polls rating improving why is Moses Brown still scared of calling a general election( perhaps the real PM ,the dodgy Lord, does not think the time is right ). Perhaps his bottom is still sore from the smacking he took after last year's fiasco!!!
Complain about this comment
So hang on. Sounds like a stick but on reflection looks like a carrot. Announced in 2008 but no effect until 2010. Boils down to asking if a jobseeker has thought about doing a cv. Is it a bird is it a plane is it a Dodo no its a Labour election stunt.
Complain about this comment
Nick, repeat after me
National Insurance IS a tax
National Insurance IS a tax
National Insurance IS a tax
National Insurance IS a tax
National Insurance IS a tax
National Insurance IS a tax
National Insurance IS a tax
National Insurance IS a tax
National Insurance IS a tax
National Insurance IS a tax
your repeated assertions to the contrary make you sound like a government stooge. And that wouldn't be good, would it, given that you work for the (allegedly) impartial BBC?
Complain about this comment
Nick...
can you comment on the rumour that "the fly" was none other than David Cameron - jogging home from a House of Commons Fancy Dress party?
Complain about this comment
Nick,
for a start it is good to have you back. I hope our comments have not stung you into action. Two blogs in two days is very good.
Now for these 'reforms'. I have referred before to the demographic time bomb going off. An awful lot of people will soon be retiring and then they will be coming off either unemployment benefit or their disability payments. When you retire your main entitlement will be through the state pension scheme. They may be entitled to some form of means tested tax credits but they will have to declare all their income, or what exactly have they done with their money, given it away.
I just cannot see these proposals working. Look at what is happening in Greece. Young people will say you have given the banks billions for the bankers and their bonuses, and you want me to get a useless job, or digging old peoples gardens. This is bizarre.
There will be riots on the streets, this will never see the light of day, unless we are coerced by tales of young women living a life of luxury on our benefits. Interesting photo as well, the person seems to be wearinga prison uniform. Interesting choice!
Complain about this comment
Nick,
I wonder if this will cause some of labour's natural supporters to vote Lib Dem or someone else?
Also - I can't believe that we haven't had either 'sticks or incentives' to get people back into work for years already?!!
How many billions have Labour spent to pay people to watch Jeremy Kyle?
I enjoyed the Fly demonstrating behind you last night - not sure he got his message across though.
Complain about this comment
If the object is an offence on 'scroungers' why no mention of MPs' expenses?
Personally, I think this with many other recent 'initiatives' is simply a government seeking headlines to draw media attention away from the economy.
Complain about this comment
This will have an effect on IB claimant numbers, it's just that that effect may not be the one intended.
Many mentally ill IB claimants (approximately 1 million of those registered) could consider registering for Disability Living Allowance. Those who don't, might easily be bullied into agreeing a plan, and then be in hospital when it comes time to implement the plan: what then?
What does Frank Field think of all this?
And -- to be political -- does this help the Government remain in power next year? Whilst it has the support of the tories, disaffected labour supporters on IB will presumably have always been more tempted to vote Liberal; and up here in the North West, they are the alternative party anyway. I'm not sure I see the electoral advantage of this reform.
Complain about this comment
Thanks, Nick. Interesting blog.
Forgive me for being a little cynical, but I've heard this before every election from Labour.
Which is interesting: the government seem to want to be ready for May. Full impact of downturn not yet felt, point to green shots, etc.
No doubt the final decision will rest on how the first quarter plays out in the polls, but right now, it's still got to look a good bet for Labour. Probably better than waiting . . .
Finally: I think we all have to salute the sheer brilliance of the Labour PR machine. Big speech by Cameron on a critical issue yesterday completely overshadowed by the evening news slots. Perfect timing - even it's a re-announced policy!! You don't have to like it, but you have to admire it! No wonder the Tories struggle to get their message heard . . . whether that is good for the country may be another matter of course . . .
Complain about this comment
Nick can you explain why we all have to work, in particular, why we should send our children to be looked after by someone else, so we can do a pointless job, the example you give of digging an old persons garden is laughable.
Anyone would think the State do not want a close family bond, or secure, loved offspring, the future adults.
Of course our additional taxes will help buy guns and similar plus pay for spaceships to Mars etc.
cheers
Complain about this comment
This is a sensible and well balanced measure that should have been implemented years ago by this or the previous Tory government. I hope Labour MPs will support it.
Complain about this comment
So many people claim to know someone who is a benefit cheat, but, whilst there are undoubtedly such people, they are realtively few in number and the loss to the state is small. Recent figures show that the chances of a benefit fraudster being caught are much higher than professionals, (the legal profession was an example). The losses from high earning tax evaders are considerably higher than benefit fraud, but there is little sign of the same sort of vicious condemnation that benefit fraudsters get being directed their way.
I wonder how many of those who attack people on benefits are quite happy to cheat the same taxpayer by paying cash in hand for work-but that's different isn't it?
If anyone thinks that "the nasty party" has gone away, just read HYS!
Gordon Thompson (employed)
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
RE john cook @ # 10
As a Labour supporter I'm not at all put off by this measure. I think many other Labour supporters who are hard working and pay their taxes will be pleased that the government is trying to get others into work.
Complain about this comment
"It may involve training" Really? My partner who has been unemployed and at home with our children for the last 3 years has repeatedly asked his local job centre for help to get on a training course for computer networking. To be told that the only computing course the DWP is allowed to send him on is European Computer Driving License - which will just about qualify you to turn a computer on and use Microsoft Word.
He has a natural talent with computers and in fact can probably do any computing job put in front of him. However, very few companies will employ someone without a formal qualification, which we can't afford to get. How is the government going to "help him to find work"? By forcing him into a minimum wage job that means that we have to pay for childcare - which will cost pretty much what he earns in a month!
If you ask me, this is the government just trying to follow even more Friedmanite economic policies. Our government is so enamoured of the US model of government, they fail to see the societal collapse that has happened over there. Do they not realise that increased street crime and violence are a direct result of reduced access to public services? The divide between rich and poor in the US is almost as great as in any third world country. They just hide it better - by not talking about it.
Complain about this comment
It all sounds very good, but I suspect the vulnerable will suffer whilst the hardcore will continue filing their boots at the taxpayers expense.
Complain about this comment
I have a non-operable heart condition which requires large doses of medicine to keep in control.By the time the meds 'kick in' I'm probably good for about 4 to 6 hours in a day.I'm on disability and incapacity benefit,after 26 years in work,does that make me a scrounger?Don't tar everyone with the same brush folks.I've tried going back to work,both times I ended up with long spells in hospital.I've also been told now I'm a Health+Safety risk where work is concerned and can't get insurance.
My previous jobs were physically demanding as well as 'stressful',I was a Road Patrol for a motoring organisation for 18 years,(not Yellow van one),a police officer for 7years. I also did voluntary work, working with kids and youth in Scouting and under privilidged kids. I took them on hiking and climbing holidays in Wales, another hobby I can no longer do. I'd climbed, prior to the heart giving out, 186 out of the 286 Munroes for one,(thats peaks over 3000ft!)
I'm all in favour of welfare reform so long as its done compassionately and not used as a means of headline grabbing by what is now, a govt. with little or no credence.Also, please, please,please, STOP tarring everyone on benefits with the same brush. I had to be pushed into claiming help,I had no idea what help was available and suffered for it. While working over the 26 years, I paid vast sums in tax and NI,I didn't mind, if I was earning good money that was fine, now I need help, through no fault of mine, I don't expect to be treated like a leper.
Complain about this comment
I'm all for pressurising the idle minority back into work so long as it doesn't mean taking food away from their kids and the disabled.
But can anyone explain why it's taken the Government over 11 years to decide do this, then to implement it in the middle of a recession, with unemployment forecast to rise by up to a million?
Complain about this comment
DEAR nICK
FIRST STOP IMMIGRATION ----GIVE PRIORITY TO HOUSING FOR BRITISH PEOPLE AND MAKE A DEFINATE DISTINGTION BETWEEN THOSE WHO HAVE WORKED ALL THEIR LIVES AND END UP LOOSING THEIR JOBS, -----AGAINST THOSE WHO HAVE SPENT THEIR LIVES SPONGING OFF THE STATE.
THOSE WHO DO NOT COMPREHEND THE FACT THAT WORK IS GOOD FOR YOU, PUT THEM IN THE ARMED FORCES, ITS ABOUT TIIME CONSCRIPTION CAME BACK.
Complain about this comment
Nick change the subject to the falling pound, the Euro, Black Wednesday!
Complain about this comment
Whilst this government tries to 'look tough' regarding the welfare state, the real problem is Labour's own scorched-earth policies.
'Waste Now, Tax Later' will cause huge damage to the economy and the very businesses that could be providing the jobs that are needed for the future.
This isn't a plan. It's an epitaph.
Complain about this comment
Ha, Nick. I saw the fly. Maybe it is a friend of Boris' dancing bear.....
Complain about this comment
So in other words, the government are doing what New Labour seem to do best: making everything fantastically complicated. I predict this will have 3 outcomes:
1. The system will become much more expensive to administer
2. Those who are genuinely in need of help will find the new procedures cumbersome and be less likely to get the help they need
3. Benefit cheats will find new loopholes and manage to exploit the system better than they are doing now.
Have I missed anything?
Complain about this comment
" I think many other Labour supporters who are hard working and pay their taxes "
Hahaha that's a good one made me laugh.
Public sector employees do NOT pay tax. Their income is paid out of taxpayers' money, so they cannot pay tax without double counting.
And the rest of Labour's vote don't work, so they don't pay tax either.
Complain about this comment
Nick, Grooming appears to be the current buzzword. Do you not think that this is what NuLabour have done over the last 11 years with regards to the benefit culture that has blossomed under them.
I also brought this topic into play in your previous thread. But those NuLabour numpties on here have no answer.
My take is:
There are very few people in NuLabour that I respect. One of those few exceptions is John McDonnell MP, he states the following:
Notwithstanding the first part, the later part really beggars belief, after 11 years, childcare which is either unaffordable or non-existent.
Could it be that NuLabour are trying to win back Middle England voters!
Complain about this comment
So net effect:
More public sector jobs for 'coucellors' to look after these 'return to work' plans. But nothing else changes.
Is that it?
Why don't they call them 'career advisors' put up school leaving age to 35yrs and be done with it - zero unemploymnet.
Waste of more tax-payer money...
What an absolute joke.
Complain about this comment
Nick
"Now, I am not saying that today's measures don't represent a major change. They do. Millions of people who were told there was no expectation they should even look for a job will be told that they can and should get one if at all possible"
This is not strictly true as most of those on benefits were already meant to do this.
It just isnt enforced. This is just bluff and bluster from the government. Its just words and nothing will change.
Can you imagine how many enforcement officers would be needed to make this a reality. The costs dont bear thinking about and certainly wont be covered by the pittance of the fine system.
Talking of bluff and bluster. Ed Millibands asertion that he will force the energy companies to reduce bills. another farce. They can already justify charging prepay meter customers more because of the infrastructure to administer the system. If they are forced to charge that group less the bills for everyone will rise tocover the costs. ITs all just hot air.
Tlak about do nothing government. This government dont exactly do nothing. They make a lot of noise and achieve nothing. That is worse than actually doing nothing.
Call an election
Complain about this comment
Free Cornwall. Ditto to that. Totally agree. However, Cornwall is a hell of a lot nicer than London where I live. There are only a few English people left here. The foreigners are in the councils and look after their own. God help you if it comes down there.
Complain about this comment
"So in other words, the government are doing what New Labour seem to do best: making everything fantastically complicated. I predict this will have 3 outcomes:
1. The system will become much more expensive to administer
2. Those who are genuinely in need of help will find the new procedures cumbersome and be less likely to get the help they need
3. Benefit cheats will find new loopholes and manage to exploit the system better than they are doing now."
Exactly! Especially as, after a few years, they'll hand it over to a private company to administer who'll naturally want to take a profit from it - telling us that they're "much more efficient" while all the time doing what the benefits system is supposedly doing - bleeding the taxpayer dry!
Why doesn't government instead crack down on all those businesses and businessmen who don't pay their taxes and exploit the loopholes they paid to have written into the tax laws?
Complain about this comment
So more of the old cat and mouse game, forcing, if you can, the willing-to-work into any old job on minimum wage and on the other side of the coin a similar but expensively more complex game with the unwilling; same game, different wording. Against the background of 3m unemployed (by the way!) the MWP will have its work cut out sorting the sheep from the goats (never did before), and then making any real headway at all.
So more political twaddle about social policy and all this to justify the zillions spent to restore profit to the banks' dodgy retail credit business. When it has done its job in the argy bargy for the next election we'll see it for the wishful thinking it is.
The Tories are beginning to find arguments they have a chance of winning, and it is no surprise.
Complain about this comment
I've commented long and often on business and welfare, and don't really want to repeat that again. The core message remains the same but economics realities and lessons from punishing everyone because of a few extremists are usefully taken on board.
My general view is that business innovation and a fair society are key goals, and those must fit together with helping people aspire and step out of their comfort zones. This makes developing positive consensus very important.
If this project is just another badly targeted stick or carrot, it will destroy innovation and willingness but if it develops the middle way it may have a chance. But, all stakeholders must have a positive reason to get on board. This is essential.
Complain about this comment
#21
I don't think anybody in their right mind would not support helping people who are genuinely unable to work: as I am sure is the case with you.
However, there are many people who can work but choose not to: does anyone really believe for example that a full 40+% of the working population in certain areas cannot work? I certainly don't.
Benefits and support should be there for those IN NEED, not those who can't be bothered.
And yes, if you can do something but can't get a job, I don't see anything wrong with putting something back into the community that's helping you by, for example, picking up litter, weeding town centre gardens, etc. for part of the time. I would be proud to put something back: it would actually give me a sense of self-worth that even though I couldn't find a job at that time, I was still able to contribute something to my community.
So: don't worry about being tarred with the same brush as those who can but don't. We are all (Labour and Tory) much more sensible than that.
Complain about this comment
My dad worked up to the age of 68.
He was a manual worker so could not pay into a pension scheme until late into his working life because schemes were not available.
As a consequence, he pushed as much money as he could afford into an AVC scheme late into his working life. (big mistake)
He is now £2.75 above the limit for claiming any benefit whatsoever.
He suffers with arthritis, spondolosis of the spine and is now 78.
He has been turned down for attendance allowance by the benefits agency although we do look after him.
However, in my street is a women who is approx 35, has full disability payments (her car is through the state) and she is as able bodied as myself and any other healthy person.
I've seen her playing tennis, taking a full active part in aerobics classes at the gym and riding a bike.
I've reported her to the fraud line 4 times but has anything been done....................NO.
I'm fed up of this socialist government rebuking the hard working person in this country for the sake of repulsive scroungers like this women.
Can Mr Cameron please start pushing Mr Brown so we can have a general election.
Can we also start and see some independant reporting and some hard interviewing of Labour ministers by BBC reporters please, I don't pay my tv licence for an LBC (Labour broadcasting corporation)
Complain about this comment
23
Or indeed send them all to Cornwall (if your tag is what it seems.) Now there's thought. DWP are you listening?
Complain about this comment
I think we need to get away from a set of values which defines the deserving poor and the undeserving poor. This is pre-Victorian but still seems to underpin public attitudes to welfare.
These proposals from the government are fair enough as far as they go. A hand-up rather than a hand-out is the best method to deal with poverty.
I am delighted to learn that at long last the system will accept that working is its own benefit. Too often good people have been signed off work for often treatable medical conditions causing them to go into a long and slow decline.
Perhaps the tax system can also be modified to allow the lower paid to keep more of their income. This would be a further incentive to work.
My concern is to how proactive the system will be. Will it really deal with the hardened drug addict? Will it really extend a supporting hand to the long term unemployed? I have my reservations but I will take the positive view.
I do have concerns as to forcing single parents out into work whilst the child is still young. We need to set a broader standard of childcare within the family throughout the country. Too often mothers are forced out into the workplace whilst their children are too young. I also feel that children start school too early as well. In my view society pays a longer term price for this behaviour: some children can handle it, others cannot.
Complain about this comment
Really enjoyed your piece to camera last night.
There are no flies on you Nick, ho ho.
As children, we pretty soon learn, if our parents are sensible people, that pocket-money has to be earnt.
So if seems more than strange that a vast chunk of the adult population are simply 'given' money by the taxpayer, via the State.
Now that Government money is 'tight', it is tentatively being withdrawn, or at least, being made harder to obtain 'for free'.
There is always a cost and somebody always has to pay.
And usually, that payer is the biggest mug of all time - you and me - the English PAYE taxpayer.
Complain about this comment
#12 Frank Field given faint praise for some aspects, but been quite critical of others
He said that emphasis should be placed on young people who have never worked, and that eventually there should be no benefit for them unless they work for it.
Complain about this comment
We used to say 'Carrot and stick' but this government has introduced the concept of 'carrot and carrot'!! Ok lets be generous: 'carrot and feather'!! This move is purely an exaggerated soundbite designed to strike a chord with middle class voters who currently feel, with much justification, very hard done by. Like all soundbites it carries no substance. The simple truth remains that Labour (old, new, borrowed or blue, sorry red) will not act to the detriment of its core vote and will continue to soak the hated middle classes. No chance of this comment getting past the thought police!
Complain about this comment
Interesting white paper. Thanks for the summary.
Wouldn't it be a little more productive trying to address the needs of people like me, who actually want to get back into work (and are not claiming benefits, because we don't qualify and therefore have no contact with the DWP), but are still experiencing problems because of the many prejudices in the world of employment, i.e. too old, too bald, too male, too white, not gay, doesn't like Russell Brand, supports Southampton FC not Portsmouth, left the previous job because dissatisfied with exploitative employer so not likely to get a glowing reference, 4 A levels and 10 O levels, never had a parking ticket let alone any other criminal offence but doesn't have exactly the right NVQ in wiping old peoples bottoms etc, etc... ad infinitum ?
There really are all sorts of artificial or regulatory obstacles out there, that stop ordinary decent people getting back into work...
Complain about this comment
# 31 Pot_Kettle
"Can you imagine how many enforcement officers would be needed to make this a reality"
This government does seem to support the use of enforcement officers for the really important things - such as making sure a Lollipop Man removes the tinsel from his Lollipop for Health and Safety reasons.
Unfortunately, the track record is not quite so good when it comes to things like the welfare of battered children.
Complain about this comment
What does it say about a PM that needs the Tories to push through these reforms.? Brown should be totally embarrassed that he does not have the support of large parts of his party on this issue. However, they should be going much further and changing the whole of the benefit system so that only those that really need it receive anything. Child benefit should be the first benefit to be cut or at least limited to, say, the first two children.
If Brown wants to get even "braver" then how about ending 'the 'gold plated' pensions given to MP's and public sector workers. It is an utter disgrace that this scheme is still in existence but no political party is willing to tackle it. Surely this would save even more money for the UK than the welfare changes currently being discussed.
Complain about this comment
UK-SILENT-MAJORITY @ 37
You fathers story is a lesson to most working people.
For most working people, if they cannot currently accumulate a pension pot of at least 180,000 thousand pounds, then it is not worth saving anything at all.
This is because, as your father found out, the State 'benefits' are withdrawn once a certain size of pension pot has been saved.
Inadvertently, the State has created a moral hazard here, i.e. you are not punished for not saving for your old age.
Complain about this comment
The trouble comes when you start beating the donkey with the carrot and feeding it the stick...and I'm far from reassured that this isn't what's happening here.
Complain about this comment
So, the primary effect of these new rules will be to 'employ' a new layer of Civil 'Service' mouse-nudgers who will send out Sternly Worded Letters, while yet another new cadre fills in the 27B/6s for the dole scroungers to ensure that not one of them loses a single penny of unearned income?
This is good news for us taxpayers how, exactly?
Complain about this comment
@39
"Perhaps the tax system can also be modified to allow the lower paid to keep more of their income. This would be a further incentive to work."
Theres a good idea how about a 10% tax band, lets call it a starter rate
Complain about this comment
Yes, this is a key problem. People of "high status" get big rewards and little scrutiny, while those of "low status" get nothing and go through hoops. This is an artifact of ego and stepping away from those extremes is a good idea. Again, this this another argument for developing the middle-way.
Sorry, but this is just more of the same low status reinforcing view from someone who says "if I was in that position". Yeah, it's fine to tell other people they have to take a third rate job to subsidise the living standards of everyone else until it happens to them.
People say they want better but the class and isolationist attitude of the British gets in the way. People don't want their status or wealth threatened so contain or control the problem by pushing it onto someone else. It would be better redirected in a more achievement and market development orientated direction instead of projecting failure onto someone else.
Complain about this comment
More NuLabour economic thinking here:
Criticism over NuLabour credit card.
Last quote says it all.
Complain about this comment
Hmm.... so it's a classic Labour SPIN then.
Big announcement suggesting ONE thing....... but the detail actually painting a completely DIFFERENT picture.
When is Labour ever going to do what they say (or imply) they will?
Complain about this comment
It really ought not to be about any carrot. Carrots are far less efficient than sticks.
But, really, it's all incentives, for both the claimants and the workers in the area.
But will we really crack it with this carrot method? It will remain too easy to just sign off someone with a "bad back" - after all, telling someone that you're cutting off their main income is hard for the people in the sector.
There should be more of a "need benefits? Prove it" attitude. And take down those stupid public sector pensions. They can have theirs taxed and squandered (or untaxed and boosted) by the government of the day like the rest of us, then maybe they'd be more "prudent" with their votes.
Complain about this comment
Imagine how this feels if you are long term sick. You are being told that your own doctor isn't to be trusted but the nice man down at the Work and Pensions Department knows what's good for you. Work isn't actually a medicine and it can't make you better so you are unfortunately still ill. But he decides how to help you and what he requires you to do. He's some sort of super life coach.
If you read the disability and mental health sites you will see a lot of very frightened people who don't trust the staff at the benefits office to make these decisions about their illnesses and lives. If you get ill will you trust your own doctor or the staff at the benefits office to run your life. Doctors train for many years and take a Hippocratic Oath. They are trained and employed by the NHS. Why are they being replaced as judge and jury here by an army of who exactly?
Complain about this comment
NuLabour would never risk alienating one of their core voting blocks so as long as they remain in power the rest of us will continue to work to support the chav underclass. Businesses needed workers, so economic migrants filled the gap whilst the proles kept on taking the social.
Same with their other core voting group, people in public sector jobs. That's why they've increased the workforce by almost a million people in ten years, and let them have their final salary pensions whilst being punitive towards private pensions. They could save billions by trimming the fat but they'd rather just keep on borrowing.
Most people on benefits would much rather be earning a decent wage. There are far too many who see it is a lifestyle choice.
Complain about this comment
Nick,
You forgot to ask what number plan this radical welfare reform was, I think this is now somewhere about 27 or 30.
The only radical way to make people work is to stop handing out cash willy nilly.
My radical welfare plan would be to reduce payments year on year until year 3 when you do not get anything.
I think the Americans have something like this.
ps
I have just been told this is radical welfare reform plan number 57.
Complain about this comment
Wow! The big news is that 'Big Ben' has disappeared from behind Nick in his picture.
Complain about this comment
Re53
"Carrots are far less efficient than sticks."
Oh no does this mean that Sticks need a quango too?
Carrots you have competition for that yacht that you were after
Complain about this comment
My view is that the real problem is people's perspective. Regulations and attitudes are just an excuse. They're afraid of success so push other people into a corner. It's less of a can do approach and more of a politic around the water cooler approach.
Waaah. We can't build a gigabit internet.
Waaah. We can't build a movie industry.
Waaah. We can't build a Microsoft.
Waaah. Waaah. Waaah.
One word: mediocrity.
America isn't afraid to go for it and the Japanese don't have hang-ups about cleaning toilets. The British can learn a lot from America and Japan. If Britian is to get over itself and stop being such a whiny and nasty little country, it has to drop this nonsense and focus on doing better.
Now, folks could go on some MBA or communication course, or practice martial arts for a lifetime, and get nowhere. But, something as simple as, say, taking up a hobby can teach the lessons of success, socialising, and developing opportunites that Britain needs to get off its ass.
I bought a camera the other month and have spent some time dicking with it and reading up on technique. But, it's not going to take photos by itself. Yeah, it's only a little thing but it's one way I can revise and polish my own skills and attitudes so I improve. And that's better than getting complacent or sneery.
WAKEY WAKEY. THIS MEANS YOU.
Complain about this comment
Nick,
it would appear that Zanulabour are led by a nose picking Aspidistra who saved the world. You can't make it up.
I loved your comment about 'hubris'. It is so sad that this country is led by Gordon Brown. At least Mugabe won an election, which is more than can be said for the despot known as Gordon Brown. I would have thought that today when he announced the death of another soldier in Iraq that he could have made reference to our final retreat.
It is time for him to go, give us an election, in the spring will do.
Complain about this comment
Interesting article in the Times:
Pound sinks to record low as euro nears parity
Words like Gold Reserve, Duff Gordon, Sold Off and Euro spring to mind!
Complain about this comment
@59 CEH
you say "If Britian is to get over itself and stop being such a whiny and nasty little country, it has to drop this nonsense and focus on doing better.
"
then end with
"WAKEY WAKEY. THIS MEANS YOU."
Talk about pot_kettle
To quote python " you whining hypocritical toady with your colour TV and your tony Jacklyn golf clubs"
Complain about this comment
What seems to have been missed is that this is all hot air at the moment. None of this will see the light of day until 2010, so the spongers have got at least another 18 months to get as much out of the system as they can.
Meanwhile......what's going on behind the doors of No10?
Another diversion, methinks.
Complain about this comment
Children under 1? I still can't understand why it is better to put the kids into care then look after them yourself? Of course, working part time is a given when they go off to school but that is aged 4 not 1...
Personally, don't care about the benefits or lack of (its ok I never expected anything for my 500 a month paye contributions anyway :oP), when I am in a position to start a family (not yet, only just started my career) in a couple of years, I'll be getting priorities right and giving up for a few years!
Agree with the rest in principle though!
Complain about this comment
I see that the meglomaniac admitted in PMQ's that he is deluded by openly stating that he saved the world
Complain about this comment
CEH @ 59
President-Elect Obama has a decent outlook.
I particularly like the idea of speeding up the next generation Internet (IPv6 for the techies).
In my opinion, this will bring about a colossal amount of innovation and business in the USA.
But sadly, we live in the land-of-nod, so I am not hopeful that initiatives such as 'next generation internet' will receive much Government support here, despite it now being as crucial to us now as our traditional utility supplies.
Our politicians may be rather lacking regarding the 'vision thang' or do they need time to 'shape their public'?
Complain about this comment
@64
"Children under 1? I still can't understand why it is better to put the kids into care then look after them yourself?"
Its known as government make work.
you look after your mates kid and she looks after yours and you pay each other
Complain about this comment
Can we have more articles on Superman saving the world please?
Complain about this comment
Government Ministers
If any of you think trying to survive on
POVERTY RATIONS IS FUN YOU NEED TO
GET A LIFE.
SO A MILLION PLUS ARE GOING TO BE
MICROMANAGED INTO GETTING NON
EXISTANT JOBS????????????????????
WHATEVER!
Complain about this comment
I know there may not be enough jobs, there never are, but the same people should not be spending their whole lives living off the state for nothing - either contribute or learn skills to get into a job eventually, if you never contribute how are you a citizen who deserves government protection?
I've never understood the rationale behind allowing a single parent to not work til their child is 16, mine went back to work when i was 8 weeks old, and kids with two parents often have both toiling - I would maybe support it til school age, as child care will inevitably come up, but it's just a free ride - I used to work shiftwork with a load of single mothers who worked odd hours to provide
politically, I'm not liking that labour are stealing tory policies (granted they've done it for years) - it's just currently scaring me as the government is basically becoming eternally labour, who take ideas from the opposition parties to shut up those who aren't the party faithful in the run up to an election
Complain about this comment
"Lord Mandelson has been accused of bully-boy tactics after it was claimed his lawyers sent a threatening letter to those against the HBOS merger.
"
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/7769285.stm
How buried was this little gem. Well done the BBC on actually reporting it even ithough it never made the politics or business headlines
Complain about this comment
These measures I agree with. But how does my wife access them? She is not 'in work'. But since I earn slightly too much to qualify for working families tax credit and since Im working too many hours for her to claim any benefit, we're not in the system at all except for child tax credit which anyone earning up to £55 gets, and child benefit which everyone with children gets. She did not have a career before having our son (now nearly 2, so not eligible for any free childcare) so had no job to go back to. She could only now get an entry level job. In order to do such a job and make any 'profit' at all after childcare she would have to go from no work at all to five days full time - meaning our son would need to suddenly adjust to only seeing us first thing in the morning and last thing at night 5 days a week. I know huge numbers of children have to deal with that, but its not what I want for my son, I don't beleive its good for him. We therefore struggle on with my 23K a year (below the national average of £25K according to official figures) because we fall exactly in the middle and dont' really qualify for anything. Therefore my wife's national insurance contributions are not being made - reducing her pension entitlement. We are basically holding on until my son is three so that he can qualify for the free 12 hours a week he'll get.
These measures are aimed at people who have been getting handouts for years - justifiably in many cases I know - but what about us? How do we get some help getting my wife back to a job that's actually going to allow her to work a sensible number of hours and still actually see some additional money for it? We're being penalised for managing without help on the one hand, and then on the otherbeing told we're not fulfilling our obligations to society because my wife dares to stay at home and look after our child? I thought the government wanted to strengthen the family unit? How is forcing families to spend all their time apart addressing that?
And also - where are all these jobs going to come from? Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't there a recession on?
Complain about this comment
Not bad, Nick. Now you have NuLabours spin merchants providing you with copy.
Nick Robinson and this BBC Blog are now officially the media mouthpiece for Gordon Brown. As such, I despair for the future of free and fair elections, when the largest, most important, and most influential mass-media element in the country discards it's remit of political independence in such a shameful manner.
For gods sake, get some chutzpah, get some independence, and get some balance!
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
@ 64
helengelic, working part time isn't a given - seeing as you have millions of mothers all in the same boat at the same time, and jobs that fit in with school hours simply do not exist in such numbers......
Complain about this comment
As a taxpayer fed up to the back teeth of seeing my money wasted by this governemnt I would like to see awhole lot more stick.
Compulsory contraceptive injections for anyone on benefits would get my vote. Anyone who cant afford to support themselves has no right to expect us to pay for them to have children.
I would love for myself or my wife to be able to stay at home with our son in his formative years, but thats only an option for scroungers who've never worked a day in their lives.
Complain about this comment
Chrisleopard @#18
Of course hard working Labour supporters will support it as there is not that many of them. The problem being for Labour MP@s most of their supporters are mainly working class and the immigrant community most of which are on benefits. So it would be suicidal for them to back a measure that is going to make their constituents work for a living.
I would have no compulsion in not paying unemployment benefit after 16 weeks without the claimant working 32 hours per week in the community and if there is a disability involved, work based on their abilities and for those who say they can't I say If a Para Olympian can, you can it is not what you can not do but what you can do. All to often we hear from the Disabilities community we don't want to be discriminated against well I won't, go out and get a job. Yes there still need to be some form of benefits to the less able bodied as their cost are higher than most.
Freedom of speech mods
Complain about this comment
So Gordon saved the world did he? Looking around he didnt do a great job.
FreeCornwall (it was bloody expensive last time I went) Conscription won't work, the forces don't want it as it gives you a bunch of unmotivated surly youths with guns.
Great idea.
Plus it costs a fortune, but if you're willing for your taxes to increase, then by all means crack on, you have to pay them, you have to clothe and accomodate them and you have to equip them.
I dont know whether you've noticed, but we're having difficulty equiping our current troops.
Still I suppose its one way of getting mine fields cleared cheaply
Complain about this comment
# 63 shellingout
you say: "so the spongers have got at least another 18 months to get as much out of the system as they can".
There are certainly some who play the system, but most people on benefit are not spongers.
The real challenge for government is to support the businesses that provide the real jobs. As has been said elsewhere, the economy is currently based on people taking in each others laundry.
Brown's policies of waste, borrow and tax will strangle the very businesses we need to provide long term employment for the future.
Brown's policies will only act as a weedkiller to the green shoots of recovery.
Complain about this comment
post 69
Sorry,
NON EXISTENT JOBS!
Complain about this comment
SAVING THE WORLD???
Just heard THAT WOMAN Patricia Hewitt
HOW TOTALLY PATRONISING AND ARROGANT
WHY DO THESE PEOPLE THINK THEY HAVE
THE RIGHT TO CLING TO POWER
AND BANKRUPT US ALL??
Complain about this comment
Post 76
Selective breeding? NOW theres a THOUGHT
Complain about this comment
#76 Idespiselabour
Yep - I have to agree with this.
We scrimped and scraped when our boys were little because we didn't want to farm them out to childminders - we couldn't have afforded to in any case. We didn't qualify for any financial help either, even though one of us was at home bringing the children up. Our eldest son is now 26 and, if anything, things have deteriorated.
Peple can claim benefit without ever having worked a day in their lives. How can that happen? Look at Karen Matthews. She now has her "first job" in prison. People can enter this country and claim benefits for their children who live abroad. I have also heard that people of certain religions can also claim for more then one wife. It's scandalous. No wonder people are getting angry.
Complain about this comment
"If that doesn't work those on ESA (the new name for those on IB deemed fit to prepare for work) will be fined £12 for a first offence, £24 for a second and then forced into compulsory work such as digging an old person's garden."
Is that deliberately to try and catch someone out? Presumably if you're on incapacity benefit, manual labour could prove a bit tricky?
Complain about this comment
Does that mean MPs will be forced to get a real job?
Complain about this comment
# 53 RichardManns
Vote Tory like you, is that what you mean?
Dream on boy!
Complain about this comment
dear Nick
*32,
YUP, TOO MANY foreigners in local councils and Yes they do discriminate, Howevr you can voice an opinion and Vote them out, OR JOIN THE MASONS.
Complain about this comment
I have just graduated this year from a top university and yet I cannot seem to get a job no matter how hard I try! There doesn't seem to be any temp work either.
I have to show to the job centre that I apply for at least 2 jobs per week already, otherwise I will not receive my jobseekers' allowance. I can't help but feel that there are harsher measures for other people in my position because the government has simply given up on those who make a career out of living on benefits. These shouldn't ordinarily be seen as harsh measures as I feel that I should prove I am actively seeking employment to receive my benefits.
The problem is that, being a graduate not on a Graduate Training Scheme, employers either require a minimum of 5 years' experience or a Diploma, meaning I would be overqualified and therefore not expected to stay in that job for any period of time.
Although I am applying for at least 2 jobs per week, they are starting to dry up, and I would hate to be in the situation where I am actually seeking employment, but not finding any and therefore not receiving jobseekers' allowance.
I would like to know what the Government would propose to do for the plethora of graduates in my position.
Complain about this comment
I had a longer comment but it ran on a bit. So, to acknowledge your point and give folks something to follow-up on their own time I'll recommend watching The Genius Club. It's only a B movie but has something to say folks might find worth reflecting on.
Complain about this comment
# 77 rockyhippo
Well, thats the working class, immigrants and the disabled consigned to perpetual poverty or qworse in your ideal world then.
May I say what a pleasure it is to have you as a fellow citizen - not!
Complain about this comment
We all know this is another red herring to appease the middle classes.
The programmes they are talking about to give each person a personal counsellor are both extravagant and will be far too expensive to fund.
They already know this because they've tried it already.
In 2010 we will still have a majority of those same people on benefits plus a million or so others from the fallout of the recession.
More Talk Talk But no action.
Complain about this comment
Nick Robinson's article is pure New Labour spin. He might just as well have had David Freud write it for him. When is the BBC going to get a backbone and start offering balanced and unbiased reporting that actually puts the facts out for people to weigh up?
The evidence used by Freud and his cohorts claiming that work is helpful to the sick and disabled is based on tiny studies that have little validity. It is a concept that has been promoted by big business in the US who want to make money out of a privatised UK welfare system. New Labour is following the US model where millions of people are thrown off benefits into further poverty with no health care. Do we really want to return to the days of the Victorian workhouse and children up chimney's? The UK already has one of the highest levels of child poverty in Europe.
There is evidence to show that the stress of being placed under pressure by the benefits system contributes to exacerbating the ill health of sick and disabled people. Nick Robinson must be naive to believe that these changes will not place sick and disabled people under further stress and pressure when they are trying to rebuild their lives.
The take up of back to work schemes already in place for sick and disabled people has been lacklustre to say the least because these schemes are tokenistic and run to make a profit rather than actually help people. New Labour are intent on privatising welfare services and this means that profit comes before the people they are meant to serve.
It is estimated that millions of people do not claim benefits that are rightfully theirs yet we are told that we live in a culture of scroungers. This is ironic considering that tax payers have had to bail out the super rich who have got us into what is shaping up to be the worst ever economic crisis.
So less of Nick Robinson promoting New Labour's new measures to scapegoat sick and disabled people and more of him and the BBC investigating how Brown is trying to place the burden of this economic crisis on the poor and sell off the welfare system to rapacious US capitalists who got us into this economic mess in the first place.
Complain about this comment
THIS WILL NEVER HAPPEN.
'government' (with a small 'g') has had 11 years to do something and has procrastinated endlessly.
This is another election sound-bite to appeal to 'hard-working families' and to be 'fair' and is 'the right thing to do'.
More (za)Nu Labour rhetoric and obfuscation.
They know that most of those on unemployment and incapacity benefits who should not be will vote Labour, so does anyone believe they will bite the hand that feeds them ?
Pull the other one.
Complain about this comment
I notice the K Matthews name come up
her situation is very sad and yes she must
and has taken blame.
But we must ask WHY did she do it,is our
society rotten?We have so many at the top
getting money for nothing,so is she any
WORSE than the ones at the TOP?
I JUST ASK THE QUESTION?????????????
Complain about this comment
Was that today's substance free eyecatching headline? Back to the drip drip one headline a day no doubt scheduled for the weeks ahead. Seemed to happen a lot when Blair wanted to "move on" from Iraq or to create an impression in the media of high energy government. A cynic would say Brown is now using the same tactic to move on from his low polls rating last summer. Hear the Ministers past and present take their turn to parrot the "do nothing party" line while being given a soft interview by the BBC on the headline of the day.
Complain about this comment
Was there something briefly in BBC News today about troops home from Iraq next year? Excellent news - when will the date be set for the long overdue Public Inquiry?
Complain about this comment
Why is it when we had 10 years of (credit growth) the government did nothing to get these people back to work and allowed foreigners in to do the jobs.
Now the jobless total is going to spiral out of control they decide they want to do something?
once again, spin, spin and more spn from a group (ministers) who if brains were made from leather, wouldn't have enough to saddle an ant.
why is it we allow ourselves to be ruled by such incompetant half wits?
Complain about this comment
A complete and utter waste of time and money, and an insult to the British people's intelligence.
Nothing more than that which we've been on the receiving end of for a decade: spin. It's the only thing "New" Labour ever knew about. However, the spin is about to unwind with a vengeance and it'll be taking off a few Labour heads as it does so; Brown's will be the first.
Bring on an election now.
Complain about this comment
88#
Laura:
What subject did you graduate in?
Complain about this comment
@82 alexander
No I'm not quite that radical! Not selective breeding, just social responsibility i.e. not popping kids out as a source of income.
Although thinking about it... If we started to breed for intelligence (and not have a lowest common denominator education system) maybe, just maybe, Labour would be consinged to the political dustbin where they belong!
Complain about this comment
# 92 Spectralis
Very interesting and constructive thread, much appreciated.
Complain about this comment
If people have to work for benefits then they will have to be payed the national minimum wage because they will be working.
current lone parent income support rate = 60.50
divide this by number of hours worked and that will give hourly rate.
So working 20 hours = £3.00 an hour.
So already the proposals are flawed legally due to the conflict with minimum wage laws.
Another thing wrong is forcing claimants to do 'community work' as this is treating them the same as offenders.
I would never have thought 20 years ago that I would see a 'labour' government bring in these changes to the welfare state.
I remember in my youth the depravation of the tory years in the eighties and the inner city and poll tax riots.
This labour government are no different from the thatcher government and these benefit changes will I think end up
provoking similar riots, cause people to break the law get arrested and this will obviously cost more in the long run
with prison sentences and legal aid costs.
People on benefits also have the right to be represented and supported by parliament and these measures will not help them.
If people want to work that is their choice, if they are lucky enough to find work.
DO NOT PENALISE PEOPLE ON BENEFIT MR PURNELL......!!
Darren Brooks
Shrewsbury
Complain about this comment
Free Cornwall, could you provide some basis for your statement that "work is good for you", additionally, you suggest a viable alternative for the work-shy is to join the military and learn to kill other humans.
great idea.
cheers
Complain about this comment
peteinamerica @ 85
MP's may bridle at your comment about getting a real job, but I doubt it because:
a) they have incredibly thick skins
b) many MP's do have actually have real jobs
As ex-MP Neil Hamilton kindly pointed out, that is the whole point of being an MP, it is a part-time 'job', there are no proscribed hours or amount of work that must be done.
Therefore, there is plenty of time for MP's to engage in extramural activities such as 'real' jobs.
As they say, you could'nt make it up.
Complain about this comment
#99
I graduated in French and Linguistics. It seems to be a bad time for any Arts graduates.
So now I have £18,000 of debt, with no way out! The Student Loans Company are thieves. In the summer the interest started out at £50 per month, but it's now gradually been going up to £65. This in only going to get worse. Even if i get a job with a salary of £15,000, I will only be paying back £15 per month. Not even close to the interest, never mind the actual loan.
A degree means nothing these days.
Complain about this comment
There are clearly many problems when it comes to creating the perfect benefits system. The bottom line is that however it is done, it is open to abuse by those that see taking benefits for nothing as a more attractive option than having to work for a living.
On the assumption that it is possible to define a set of rules preventing the seriously disabled, single mothers, etc. from falling through the net, and effectively enforcing those rules, there is no obvious case against a system that makes a presumption that claimants have to be willing to work, and demonstrate that willingness in some measurable way, in order to qualify for benefits.
For many of those funding the system, however (the taxpayers), even this is not enough to ensure that the "scroungers" do not continue to "sponge" off society, and the automatic assumption is that if someone is not working and claiming benefits, they are doing so out of choice. Clearly more needs to be done to reinforce that for most of those on welfare, this is not the case.
Fundamentally, this means making life on benefits "harder", not necessarily by reducing benefits but by making it even less attractive to depend on the state for support. In a time of recession, clearly this is difficult, but in fact, there will be possibly two milion or more new benefits claimants coming onto the unemployment register over the next year or so, many for the first time in their lives. Harsh as it may seem, we need to act now, not in 2010, to reinforce to these people that unemployment is not a long term option, and the best way to do so is to make life on the dole as uncomfortable as possible.
One workable scheme would be the use of vouchers or credits in place of cash. These would be redeemable at designated local shops (helping to support small business in favour of large supermarket chains during the recession) and would, by design, involve an element of stigma for the claimants. Not pleasant I accept, but we need to ensure that of the extra two million or more unemployed people arising out of the recession, all of them move back into work as quickly as possible, before they too become tied to a life on benefits.
Many will claim it is unfair to stigmatise those already suffering from losing their job, ostensibly through no fault of their own, and I agree it is harsh. But no less so than expecting the dwindling numbers of non-public sector employed taxpayers to accept even greater demands on the wealth they generate, and which is expected to fund the government's mushrooming spending obligations.
Complain about this comment
This won't work, it's just a publicity stunt. People don't want to work and it'll still be a softly softly approach.
Complain about this comment
Darren:
If people want to work its their choice?
Well, if they want to choose to starve or not, fine, they can have that choice. Whether like one of my brothers in law though, he can choose to live off the state even though theres nothing wrong with him, no that shouldnt be a choice.
luck in finding work... you have to go out there and get it and not give up til you do.
And yes, I remember the 80s, poll tax riots, winter of discontent and all that, I was there. Born in a council house, went to an inner city comprehensive... didnt hold me back though, nor a lot of my schoolmates.
You get out of life what you put in. If you put nothing in, life doesnt owe you anything.
This doesnt go far enough. Bin the entire welfare state I say. We managed to get by without it for centuries.
Complain about this comment
Dear Nick
103*,
I see your not of this planet, when did you last visit , problem
, New spaceman, er ET, ----SOME PEOPLE LIVE IN THE REAL WORLD LIFE AND DEATH EXIST, SIDE BY SIDE ,i learnt that whilst serving 22 yeras in the Armed Forces, and never being out of work for 50years, If you have no where to go, the Forces are an excellant Employer.
Complain about this comment
105#
I can empathise. At least your degree seems to be more useful on face value than my sister's Fine Arts one.
Given your linguistics skills, it may be that you're going to have to consider working abroad??
Complain about this comment
88 Laura
I'm in exactly the same boat, just graduated with a good degree - i even signed on for a week, but then I eventually found a temp job - then all the agency workers got laid off after a month!
the agencies do have nothing, nobody's recruiting, there's some basic xmas cover, which i'm doing for 3 weeks, but after that I've decided that as I have savings that may well be about to be made worthless I'm going to australia
Complain about this comment
seriously, if Nick is peddling labour spin why is his next blog entry ridiculing 'gordon, the saviour of the world?'
guess it would be balance
Complain about this comment
Very interesting proposal but there is one teenzy weenzy flaw, during the worst recession in several generations when unemployment is coming to some of those who are currently in work where are the additional million employment opportunities coming from DOH!
Complain about this comment
So how many shows has it taken newlabour to work out what is wrong?
We had wall to wall property development shows for five years - or 'How to rip out a bathroom and paint your house white before sellingit to another mug for a quick profit' shows.
We had wall to wall agony shows...Jeremy Kyle, Trisha, Jerry Springer, Kilroy.. Or 'Do nothing all day and blame someone else for your problems' shows.
Seems like this government only acts when defeat is staring it in the face; there is no progressive agenda, there is no fairness agenda, there is only a get back into power at the last minute agenda.
This government has created a 'Do nothing' culture. Stay at home, claim benefits and watch the telly while complaining about a bit of back pain that the whole of the working population has.
It is a sad truth that everyone in the country knows someone personally who has sigend up to Gordon Brown's 'Do Nothing' agenda and is idling their life away on benefits.
So the very idea that Gordon Brown is remotely sincere about getting people back to work is insulting in the extreme.
Call an election.
Complain about this comment
Mr Robinson, I suspect that you are the only one who actually believes that this will ever happen. We've been hearing this story since T Blair came to power, yet nothing has changed. This is another cynical soundbite for the next election, which will be forgotten by Labour's workshy army of captive voters and just might be believed by a few of the people whose taxes support them. At the rate this government is destroying the economy and increasing the number of workshy dependents, it will soon be one benefit claimant per taxpayer. Even when this government promises reform, it is promised for so far down the line that by the time it's due to happen, it's long forgotten.
Complain about this comment
#105
Laura, I sympathise, particularly with regard to the on-going cost of the student loan.
From info available on the SLC website, at the end of the 07/08 financial year, the total amount of outstanding loans in the UK was a little over GBP25bn. How much more of a 'fiscal stimulus' would there have been if the government had written this off, instead of the useless measures they propose?
Complain about this comment
Let's not forget that the sick and disabled pay their TV licence so how about giving us the right to challenge this scapegoating by New Labour?
Has anyone mentioned that most sick people have worked many years and in some circumstances their illness has either been caused by or exacerbated because of their job? They have paid tax and national insurance in order to receive benefits when they need it.
The whole point of the welfare system is that we pay into it so that when we are sick and no longer able to contribute to the work force for a given period of time the support is available.
All those moaning about their taxes need to realise that if they ever get ill or have a disability and can't work then without a welfare system they will suffer.
Hounding sick and disabled people by privatised benefits services out to make a profit will cause more suffering and hardship.
Complain about this comment
Why believe a word this lying government says?
WMD in 45 minutes?
"There will be no return to Tory boom and bust" - Gordon Brown
Oh how they laughed...
Complain about this comment
Rhodri Morgan and the Welsh Assembly Government are against these shameful new proposals as being totaly useless and inoperative here in Wales.
Complain about this comment
@106 "Many will claim it is unfair to stigmatise those already suffering from losing their job, ostensibly through no fault of their own, and I agree it is harsh. But no less so than expecting the dwindling numbers of non-public sector employed taxpayers to accept even greater demands on the wealth they generate, and which is expected to fund the government's mushrooming spending obligations."
So why don't you lead by example and sacrifice your lifestyle so that others may achieve success? There are only so many spots at the top and the mess that the government and the rich have made of the economy demonstrates how hypocritical all this welfare to work scapegoating is. Why should ordinary workers and poor people pay for this crisis when the rich caused it? Tax the rich and make them pay for their own mess. Don't scapegoat the poor.
Complain about this comment
I'm all for getting tough on benefits but fair's fair how about getting tough on MPs expense claims - but no, defeated because most Labour MPs either opposed or abstained. And how about lie detectors and fines for politicians?
Complain about this comment
vor_tecks @#90
mother lollipop lady
father school caretaker
4 children no benefits
3 chidren went to university 1979 onwards
1 own business
1HR Director world wide Multi national company
Complain about this comment
Nick,
What makes you think it is your job to interpret Labour government policy so that it won't upset people?
I can only presume that it goes with your job description at the BBC which seems to be to support Brown and his useless and danerous government at every turn.
This proposal will get nowhere with Brown and his cliche. It's a smokescreen to try to show a commitment to get welfare dependency under control. It will be dropped or pursued so weakly that nothing will happen - we've heard about welfare policies invoving "thinking the unthinkable" before, and so has Frank Field.
That is the politics of this announcement so why not concentrate on it rather than Brown's PR work?
Complain about this comment
No 118, I wouldn't mind good old Tory boom and bust. In fact, I hark after those days when banks survived unaided as the economy tanked. Tory boom and bust seems quite pleasant compared to New Labour boom and bust.
Complain about this comment
"The central proposition in today's White Paper is that all those who once were simply on benefit will be expected to agree to the goal of entering the world of work."
How wishy washy a policy is this??
For 11 years now the welfare state has been allowed to let rip. Now a tory policy to get this reformed, is dressed up as something major, but will not be put through parliament until at least after the next general election, but the basis for it is for people to agree they may look for work?
How is this enforced?
It is chasing a headline on days when the economy is currently in freefall. Industry output is down significantly. Banks are not lending. The economy is in dire straits BUT business will be expected to take on those who have not worked for up to many years rather than those who are motivated. I'm sure there will be a target for business on this as well.
Complain about this comment
"Gold is poised for a dramatic surge and could blast through $2,000 an ounce by the end of next year as central banks flood the world's monetary system with liquidity, according to an internal client note from the US bank Citigroup."
Can somebody remind us all how much Gordon sold ours for?
Complain about this comment
So after 11 years in power, labour have realised that it's a good idea to ask people on benefits to try and find a job.
Is that really such a radical idea? To me it's a non-political idea; it's simply common sense.
Benefits are supposed to just be a safety net, to help people who can't work, and to tide people over temporarily if they can work until they get a job. Labour never really understood this, and thought that as people on benefits are their core voters that they'd let them get a free ride.
However, with the economy now in ruins, even labour are forced to do something about the massive bill for it.
If you can work, but refuse to do so simply because you're lazy or because you think the job is "beneath you", then you don't deserve your benefits.
If you're offered a job which you can do then you should take it and stop expecting the tax payers to subsidise a life of sloth. If it's "beneath you" to do the job offered, then take the job while you look for a better one, just like everyone else does.
Whatever happened to personal responsibility? I'd like to be the chairman of microsoft and earn millions for signing a couple of pieces of paper each year, but I have to make-do with my own little job/business instead; you can't hold-out for the perfect job and expect other people to pay you for being idle while you reject everything you're offered; it's unfair.
Complain about this comment
@ 112
Tarquin, Nick's posting of the "I'm Here To Save The World!" moment isn't there for balance, it's there to make sure that while people have a chuckle about Gordon Brown's little faux pas, they aren't focusing on the fact that his whole approach to the way the current crisis needs addressing is fatally flawed.
I dunno - what with all this talk on the news about whether an assisted suicide should be televised, I can't help thinking that the life of this country is being slowly smothered by this incompetent, motley crew we have for a Government. And that's been on TV for years!
Complain about this comment
109 Free Cornwall, you have not answered the question, rather you attempt humour, badly by the way. The space is between newspace and man.
Life and Death exist side my side, I appreciate that, however it does not justify humans killing others in my opinion.
Maybe all those years in the military (I take it you had "nowhere to go") have warped your natural humanity.
Anyway, please let me know the factual basis for your statement "work is good for you".
Complain about this comment
Laura, post 88 the Royal Mail are taking on temporary workers UK wide even for a few weeks.
Otherwise if you are looking for a job working with languages I would suggest our friends at the EU who have huge need for translators into their many official languages.
Also the World Bank and IMF are always looking for graduates fluent in both English and French. If you can speak Spanish all the better.
For the European Parliament see the following
http://europa.eu/epso/index_en.htm
And for the IMF
http://www.imf.org/external/np/adm/rec/job/howtoap.htm
Both offer considerable room for travel and excellent salaries and pensions.
Complain about this comment
vor_tecks @#90
Mother lollipop lady
father school caretaker
4 children no benefits
3 children 1979 onwards university
1MBA
1BA
1Cert HE
1 child now HR Director world wide of a multi national company
1 school teacher Head of special need
1 Sales and Marketing manager Waste Recycling company
1 runs own business
We were the working class when the working class worked for a living when they brought their children up with morals and respect. We did the it hard way when it was hard for someone from a working class back ground to go to university. I have EARNED the right to comment on the no so working class of today.
If you want something you need to get out and work for it. Oh and yes I would privatise the councils, a right hot bed of inactivity it takes 6 people to do the job of one man.
Complain about this comment
Nick says
"...all those who once were simply on benefit will be expected to agree to the goal of entering the world of work."
Reminds me of Chief Dan George, playing a Cherokee in the film The Outlaw Josey Wales - they went to Washington and were told to "vow to endeavour to persevere". So they vowed to endeavour to persevere, then went home and declared war on the Union.
Complain about this comment
I doubt it will be fair.... I have paid taxes and worked for 42 years, recently had a heart attack and still recovering, receiving cardiac rehab and doctors still trying to sort out a few problems. I have been `forced` to sign a willingness to work just this week, I am not yet ready to work.
will I ............I need to as my house is likely to be repossessed in 3 months,(the so called mortgage help doesn`t apply to me) yes they give me a total of £300 a month my council tax is £208 per month that leaves £100 to pay mortgage gas elec and food.
I would gladly sell my house snd get out of this mess (country) but they aint selling.
There is no compassion (or real help) for the honest man who has worked for years.
With some `proper` help and compassion I should be able to get back to being employed but by being forced too quickly I will end up in hospital I am sure.
I cant afford the bus fare to the job center and the 2 mile walk on a dodgy heart takes me 3 hours with rests I have already ended up back in hospital once already with this.
Nobody listens to the genuine cases.
Complain about this comment
@133 scudo
My sympathy goes out to you. It never ceases to amaze me the minimal amount of benefits available to deserving cases such as yourself, whilst those that play the system receive the equivalent of a high salary.
If only benefits were based on what you had contributed to the economy, our society would be a far better place
Complain about this comment
Mmmm - in Gordon Brown's "I saved the world" speech he said that not one depositor has lost out. I beg to differ with the Honourable gentleman. Reductions in tax increases as proposed by New Labour is spun as a reduction in taxation - surely then a reduction in interest rates (as a result of New Labour incompetence - No More Boom and Bust) for those lucky enough to have savings on deposit, to the point where interest rates are more than eroded by true inflation well in excess of the spun 4 or 5% represents depositors losing out.
Or perhaps that is an example of how Gordon is saving the world but not saving for the future of this country?
It is time that we had some honesty here - we as a nation have over-spent, led by a Labour Government unable to save for a rainy day. The only option left to them is to try to spend their way out of trouble, using my tax pounds. This is how we ended up in this mess in the first place.
This will create a crystal-clear Blair/Brown legacy - crippling debt and taxation which will last well into future generations. If they had any of that famous, Scottish Presbyterian morality left, they should be hanging their heads in shame.
Complain about this comment
#120
This government has already signalled it intends to levy higher taxes from higher earners and I suspect that if they win the next election, the marginal rates of tax will increase and the tax band widths will narrow, so the "rich" will certainly pay even more. As I am not now, nor am I likely to be, a higher rate taxpayer, whether that will affect me remains to be seen.
Nevertheless, I think you're kind of missing the point, but then maybe that's on purpose. As I'm self-employed, I'm not sure how I can "sacrifice my lifestyle" and let an unemployed person have it, and I'm not entirely clear how that helps, swapping one person in work and paying taxes for one out of work and not paying taxes. Maybe you can explain?
Complain about this comment
Perhaps Nick David Freud should of written your comments for you. Perhaps he did - it's difficult to tell given that you simply spill out the NuLabour line at every opportunity. For once Nick please try and do some objective reporting. You don't have to agree with other viewpoints but at least try and include them in reporting instead of constantly striving to justify the latest government plan.
Complain about this comment
#117 spectralis
All those moaning about their taxes need to realise that if they ever get ill or have a disability and can't work then without a welfare system they will suffer.
................
..Try telling that to the people who are being charged for NHS treatment because they can't get the life-saving drugs they need through the NHS. Cancer patients are a typical example of Labour's double standards. These people have paid - and when they needed it, it wasn't there.
Labour are playing with people's lives. Wake Up!
Complain about this comment
#133 scudo
Your case just goes to prove how woefully inadequate the whole set-up is.
I wish you well.
Complain about this comment
Matthew Taylor has an interesting insight into the debate and he also speculates on an election next spring!
http://www.matthewtaylorsblog.com/politics/welfare-reform-a-complex-debate/
Complain about this comment
Personally I think this is Brown wanting to put the left wing of Labour back in it's place after the banker bashing and the planned tax hike on the rich. This is Brown, prompted by Mandelson trying to show that New Labour is still alive. Well they've had 11 years to do welfare reform and they've flunked it every time. If Brown was serious about it he'd have let Frank Field "think the unthinkable" back in 1997
Complain about this comment
Whilst I would like to like to see this work I don`t think it has a cat`s in hell chance of doing so.
We have millions of people in this country living on benefits and it will take decades for this situation to be reversed.
Successive governments have encouraged, either directly or indirectly, people who are unemployed to be put on invalidity benefit so they do not show up on the unemployment figures. The trouble now is that they have been there so long it has become a way of life for them.
The amount paid per week to an individual in benefits hides the truth as to what they receive in real terms. A single woman for example with 2/3 children gets an awful lot of add ons which when totalled up would surprise many and is far more than the average wage.
The minimum wage (MW) is also working to the detriment of the low paid by keeping wages artifically low. The Govt is now in reality supporting companies by the back door by paying siginificant benefits to those on the MW. If they did not do this I do not know how families would survive in many parts of this country on such poor pay. Many companies would also struggle to find workers.
However, single or married couples on the MW suffer severe hardship because the Govt do not recognise that they also need help; but they get a big fat zero.
Little wonder then there is so little incentive for young people who are poorly educated and come from a background or area where living on benefits is the norm to get out of their bed every morning to go to work.
This is a situation created by government; but made siginificantly worse by Gordon Brown`s social engineering.
When Tony Blair first came to power, he like Barack Obama had the country totally behind him and whatever he had done in the first few months of his premiership he would not have been criticsed for. He should have let Frank Field do the unthinkable and sorted out with thebenefits system. Another one of Tony`s lost opportunities.
What we now have is a seriously large number of undiserving individuals who have taken early retirement and are sticking two fingers up at the system.
Even in retirement they will be guaranteed more than anyone else who has worked all their lives and who may have a small private pension or savings.
Justice - there ain`t any in this world.
I think Mr Purnell should speak to Frank Field and go back to the drawing board. All this is just hot air with the country being primed for a general election in the new year. A final withdrawal from Iraq has just been announced. So expect some other favourable headlines over the Christmas period.
In PMQs Gordon Brown let slip he had saved the world; but I don`t think he is going to save his party from losing with this sort of policy announcement.
Complain about this comment
"Best placed to weather the global downturn" - Gordon Brown.
"The British pound has fallen to a new record low against the euro amid a grim outlook for the UK economy."
Any more announcements from Barry Chuckle today?
Complain about this comment
newspaceman1#
And your contribution to the debate is precisely what?
FreeCornwall hasnt been out of work in 50 years, I dare say has contributed to society both in and out of the Forces (and your comment about "killing other humans" is puerile and shows a complete lack of awareness of what other work HM Forces do...), probably raised a family... he's put something back. Work has liberated him, allowed him to travel the world and probably given him a sense of self worth.
And you have done what exactly? Watch Jeremy Kyle? Cash your giro? Read Nuts magazine?
Complain about this comment
DialSquareDomination
Reply to 126.
House of Lords Debate 4 nov 2008.
Lord Davies of Oldham (Deputy Chief Whip (House of Lords), HM Household; Labour) Link to this | Hansard source
My Lords, in view of the volatility of gold prices, 395 tonnes of gold were sold from the reserves as part of a restructuring programme to reduce the risk exposure of the official holdings portfolio between July 1999 and March 2002. The total proceeds were around $3.5 billion, equivalent to £1.9 billion. On 3 November, the current market value of the gold sold was around $9.3 billion, equivalent to £5.7 billion.
Complain about this comment
#130
Thanks very much for your post, I'll get looking at those web addresses. I hope there's not too much competition!
Complain about this comment
131#
Get in! Well said!
133#
My sympathies for your predicament, although I appreciate its not sympathy you need but action. You've every right to be angry about it. Unfortunately for every deserving case like yours there are at least a dozen who have just learned which buttons to push to milk the system.
The problem is the system, with its inherent weaknesses that needs complete reform.
Nobody'll do that though. Guaranteed vote loser. Politicians dont even think/plan for the life of a parliament anymore. It'll end up being someone elses problem like it always does.
Complain about this comment
The face of Tory Britain: mean little vouchers for ersatz coffie and own brand beans for the unemployed while Tory fat cats get taxdoging "vouchers" in the form of fine wines, paintings, and gold bullion.
Maybe, "getting tough" is okay for those on the bottom if those at the top have to, say, have their electricity disconnected every weekend and be banned from eating out at more than one posh restaurant a month.
I can imagine the howls of anguish...
Complain about this comment
Do you speak Polish? Na waszym bicyklu (rower) *comrade*
Complain about this comment
another irony:
wasnt it leaks against the last Conservative Government about toughening the welfare system that got Gordon Brown and Labour in such a hot headed stew in the 90s?
Complain about this comment
That was no fly. It was a Tory fly on the wall. So the truth is out. Underneath that mask you wear, is a member of a swat team.
Complain about this comment
Increasing the number of public sector workers, and increasing the number of benefit claimants, was a deliberate political act by Gordon Brown. This created hundreds of thousands of middle-class socialist cadres, sitting in judgement over, and upon, millions of politically-passive and state-dependent subjects (the new lumpenproletariat).
One feature of the oncoming depression will be increased class conflict. However, class will not be as defined by Marx, but by 21st century economic and social conflicts, refracted through the prism of globalisation and categorised mainly by the transfer of economic and military power to Asian and other emerging powers. It is these powers that will define New Capitalism (see Preston's pdf) and not the moral judgements of declining socities (i.e. Europe as a whole).
Labour will be unable to reform the benefit system because it works in the social and political interests of the new neo-socialist elites in the UK.
Complain about this comment
mr moe wrote:
"Nick, can you ask our unelected PM to call an election - Brown out!"
#############
All Prime Ministers are unelected in this country (except by their own party if they choose to do so)
We have never had a system of electing Prime Ministers, and hopefully never will. We suffer enough from personality politics as it is.
In the UK we elect a government - that is a party to form a government. The leader of the successful party is asked to form a government by the Queen, and in doing so that leader becomes the Queen's First Minister (to clarify) of that government.
The party may choose to change their choice of First Minister should they so wish. It is not up to the electorate - there is no mechanism for doing so.
Should the Tories win the next election, and if Cameron becomes Prime Minister, then he too will be unelected into that position.
I trust you will complain again at that point that we have an unelected Prime Minister.
Complain about this comment
The face of taxpaying Britain, Charles. Not familiar with that? Thought not.
The way things are going, we'll all have the electricity cut off before too long. Who you going to spout to then?
And you can depend on the howls of anguish, coming soon to every home in the country. Cheers Gordon.
Complain about this comment
58. Pot_Kettle
"Carrots are far less efficient than sticks."
Yeah a bit rude that I thought.
Sticks is the new celery Quango, were in competition for funding.
Complain about this comment
@153
If Cameron became prime minister he would do so having been the leader of his party when voted into office.
Stop with the semanticcs and understand the point that is being made.
It's always possible that some people who last voted for Labour to destroy our country would not have done so if the malevolent Brown was more visible
Complain about this comment
144, I asked a question based on a comment he wrote, for which I wished clarification/substance.
"Work is good for you"
I would just like some proof, maybe you should think about it a bit more deeply before making nonsensical allegations based on what.
It allowed him to travel the world. So what. I am quite happy here.
As regards your comments about the military and the other work they do, their main job is to fight in wars. It may be buttered up so that the likes of you fall for it, but their purpose is for war, for killing other humans.
If you are going to answer for others, at least attempt to do so rather than resorting to cheap jibes based on media myths.
I would like to think that my contribution is to make people think, and yours is exactly ?
cheers
cheers
Complain about this comment
This is definitely pre-election posturing. Welfare reform, immigration points system, taxes on the rich.
All subjects that New Labour spent 10 years denying existed or were necessary.
These measures will not come into being until after the next election. Like all Labour tough talk it will be well diluted down if Labour win. There will be personnel changes, the emphasise will alter and anyway the major uptake of "excess" jobs will be in the public sector and the taxpayer will still pay.
Complain about this comment
Nick,
there is more and more reason to believe that there will be a spring election sprung on us.
The troops will be coming out in March? The 'budget' changes will come into effect. Brown gave it away when in PMQs he referrred to Darling and his recent 'budget', not pre-Budget Report.
In the meantime the MPs are taking a longer than usual christmas break, I reckon so that they can spread the good word about what the government is doing to help 'hard working families'.
In the meantime the pound keeps falling, but lets not give a running commentary, maybe it would be seen as not being loyal.
Complain about this comment
Only this government would pick this moment to start cracking down on benefits
Who is advising these clowns ?
Complain about this comment
Looking at the timing of this announcement with as regarding to the shake - up in Welfare Reform and you cannot help but wonder if these proposals will make any real difference, or commonsense at all, while at a time of rising Unemployment both here in the U.K., as well as World - Wide, where Unemployment is set, and will grow and may last and be ongoing for over the next period of between 5 to 10 Years, for even if we do have a Short Recession of around 2 to 4 Years there are likely at the end of that period to be between 6 and 10 Million of Working Age Men, and Women without any long - term Productive Work Based Employment.
The Government cannot forever suggest that we go on looking for Full - Time, Productive Work Based Employment Places if there is no demand either here, or elsewhere around the World for Products, for even if everyone was to be given enought Money to stimulate our GDP, there is no way of knowing if any Growth can be permanently substained.
So what can our Government do about People losing their Job's in a Gobal Market Place.
Well, for a start Government should be realising that in the future ALL Employment Places for "NEW" JOB'S must be created solely in World of a Real Productive Skills based Economy, due to the rise of Marketing in the up-coming once Third - World Countries ie: China,and Brazil etc; that will aways be able to beat us on Product Cost, and it also appears in, and of Quality.
In now this interim Preiod we should be tooling - up our First Time youth Generation to tackle areas in the Export in Productive Trading aspects of Tomorrow, and not wasting what time, and what little Tax - Payer's money we have left in trying to create Non - Productive Job's further in Private Offices, Local Authorities, and Quango's, just to prove that we can create Work - Places where they are not wanted, or for that matter needed.
The Government will finally have to Bite the Bullet and be made to realise that they are living in the Twilight Zone, if they really think that they can get too a stage of Full Employment for all, as this will never happen since the U.K. is over - populated with Working Age People, and considering that the Government is going in the future to raise the Retirement Age, [ which will create further Un-employment ], when in effect they should very seriously be considering reducing the Employment Age at this moment in Time due to the needed lack of Skilled Job's, down to 55 Year's of Age, if only to open and create more Job's for our Younger Generation, some of whom have been Un - Employed, and never been on any Employment ladder since leaving School at 16, for the daft idea to raise the School leaving Age to 18 will be pointless to the point of raising further the Jobless Numbers, if there are no Full - Time Productive Work Based Emloyment places which pay's a decent living Wage available for them to walk into.
Complain about this comment
#153
But what about electing an MP who is led by the leader of the party that MP stands by and that leader says, quite categorically, that he will serve a full term. Blair said that he would serve a full term.
Now he did in fact stand for a full term, not of the parliament but he resigned his seat therefore he personally served a full term.
In the meantime Jack Straw writes an article for the Daily Mail where one is left with the impression that he thought that the Humans Right Act was a 'villains charter'.
Now a minister came on to the Today programme and says that what Straw actually said was that 'there was a sense that the Human Rights Act had become a villains charter'. Now that is very misleading.
It really is time for this pathetic parliament to come to an inglorious end. Not this government with its governance but this awful shocking absolutely discredited parliament, it is time for cahnge. Oh, and I have saved the world, what me a megalomaniac, never.
Complain about this comment
"The end of the something for nothing era."...so, this something for nothing era, that it is now the end of, tell us about that: you mean they were giving away money for nothing, wow, who'd have thought it? Did you mention it at the time?
Complain about this comment
Hmm, so Gordon Brown bankrupts the country, then in order to placate the right of centre middle England, he puts out a headline about being tougher on the long-term unemployed.
Great timing to make statements about the unemployed Gordon, just as the dole queues start to lengthen.
It does make me laugh. I'm currently unemployed and would love to update my skills by retraining in order to get a job. I'm desperate to get into work. How did my local jobcentre attempt to facillitate that goal? By offering me a loan of course!
I'd love someone to investigate any links between the companies that run training schemes for the unemployed or low paid and donations to the Labour party.
Complain about this comment
So many comments about being unfair! Jokers!
How unfair is it when you work five days a week 10 hours a day just to make ends meet. While the neighbour who is capable of working have a sleep-in (everyday), smokes and look at day time TV (all day long) then at nights disturb you with excessive laughing and movements.
Moreover, when they need moderate changes/repairs to things such as; the garden fence, they just call the local council and their Housing benefits fix it! (what a country, why work?)
While you on the other hand, have to negotiate extra shifts, whose pay is then taxed to support the benefit claimants, in order to have the same work done on your property. Now that is unfair?
Academics like myself, describes this as social inequality, and disequilibrium in intra-generational equity. But the question now is against whom?
Having worked on the government welfare to work programme for three months (only because I wanted to give myself the best chance at failing), it does not have clarity of objectives and rigorously supported by firm and decisive actions. There are some many loop holes and the individuals who need support and are sincere in getting back into work, aren?t given the required help.
To some degree, I do support contracting welfare reform out to private firms, but what?s the point when these firms are target orientated? They will hand pick individuals with the best chances of returning to work and help these individuals. Whilst ignoring the individuals who just need so extra help in finding sustainable employment. I am a strong supporter for a state less dependent on welfare. If we continue down the part of a welfare society we will be overtaken by emerging economies, like India and Brazil. What we need however, is a government controlled and implemented programme that is rigid and well-thought, with contingencies modules built-in.
Complain about this comment
Anyone who falls for this one from Labour is mad. Who is it for over ten years has poured our hard earned taxes into the benefit system which has encouraged more and more people not work, more single mothers to see welfare as a way of getting housing etc. let more immigrants into the country to do the work these people will not do. Even when the recession started people on benefits recieved more of our tax money. Now as recession bites we are expected to believe Labour are going to get them to work.
Either this is just a cynical attempt to grab votes and another policy which will never see the light of day, or the country is truely bankrupt.
Complain about this comment
Why is this happening now? How many years have our politicians had to address this? For as long as I have been working - 32 years now - the number of those who chosen to 'live' on benefits has grown and grown. We all have known this for several years, and so have our politicians (Lab and Con). Those of use who work, and therby pay our taxes, have subsidised those who like to sleep in theirs beds, eventually get up to watch tv, or play their computer games and drink and smoke etc..etc.
I agree that the benefit system should be there to support those in real need. This surely is a mark of a just society. Maybe one day I'll need state help myself. What I object to is those who abuse the system, and thus my contribution to it.
What I ask though is this really going to work, and is it really that tough. Afterall I remember the mantra 'TOUGH ON CRIME; TOUGH ON THE CAUSES OF CRIME'.
Need I say any more?
Complain about this comment
#59 Charles_E_Hardwidge wrote:
"My view is that the real problem is people's perspective. Regulations and attitudes are just an excuse. They're afraid of success so push other people into a corner. It's less of a can do approach and more of a politic around the water cooler approach."
America isn't afraid to go for it and the Japanese don't have hang-ups about cleaning toilets. The British can learn a lot from America and Japan. If Britian is to get over itself and stop being such a whiny and nasty little country, it has to drop this nonsense and focus on doing better."
"Waaah. We can't build a gigabit internet."
Well, it's not the US government that builds any type of internet improvement. (Despite Al Gore - shame upon him - saying he'd invented it... Shame on him - he also fronted a totally incorrect presentation about global warming - but that's another matter.)
OK - let's accept that the internet was a construct determined BY the US government as a means to ensure some communications linkage in the event of a war. But commercial organisations developed stuff.
The only obstacle to an improved UK service is cost. Just when did Gordon Brown decide that he would reduce tax burdens on companies who want to improve their technical delivery? NEVER.
"Waaah. We can't build a movie industry."
I seem to recall quite a number of British films that did really well. If you're saying that governments or business don't come up with enough funding, that's not exactly a Waaah moment, is it? After all, sending people to watch British films isn't what entertainment is about.
"Waaah. We can't build a Microsoft."
That's odd, Charles. You always refer to Steve Jobs, rather than the Gates phenomenon.
Guess you forgot that the UK produced the first commercially viable computer system. There was little interest from UK government at that time, so eventually IT stuff drifted to the USA. But there are many excellent organisations in the UK who create good stuff.
"Waaah. Waaah. Waaah.
One word: mediocrity."
As someone who worked for an innovative, long-established US IT organisation, I can tell you what you already know. The US approach does not necessarily favour innovation. Unless it is the type (or flavour) of innovation the company is looking for. I've seen brilliant ideas shot down because the VP doesn't like the individual bringing forward a good idea...
Mediocrity? Plenty of that in the US.
The Japanese seem to revel in core science and philosophy of management. That's not the same as basically crap stuff that "management gurus" use to inflate the costs of fairly simle IT solutions offered to government.
Realistically, educational standards in the UK have dropped several degrees in the UK over the last decade. Is that what you think is a fitting epitaph for the New Labour project?
I always read your stuff, Charles. It gives me hope - and a bit of a laugh.
Complain about this comment
#93 "They know that most of those on unemployment and incapacity benefits who should not be will vote Labour"
Naah ...
Speaking as an ex-political activist, the lumpenproletariat usually don't vote at all; they're unlikely even to be registered.
As for some of the rest of the people on this blog, you may hate "foreigners",
But
(1) Have you or someone close to you been looked after by a "foreign" doctor or nurse?
(2) Do you buy goods made abroad by people working long days in sweatshops for a pittance? Why do you deserve to be able to do this? Do you even know or care who provides your goods and services?
What actually makes you think you are superior beings? You sound more like the followers of a certain Mr Schickelgruber to me - and we know where THAT led.
Britain's vast balance of payments deficit means we have been subsidised by foreigners - for decades. It can't go on.
Complain about this comment
#105 LauraTheGinge wrote:
"I graduated in French and Linguistics. It seems to be a bad time for any Arts graduates."
Laura, I have no idea what you'd actually like to do in your life.
I've worked in management positions in UK, continental-European and USA companies.
There are plenty of opportunities out there. Some not so well paid, nowadays, but still something... Have you checked out airlines? Not as financially interesting as they once were, but they do need people who can really speak in tongues...
I've also been privy to plenty of cases where people with "special aspects" gain an income from discrimination cases.
LauraThe Ginge suggests that you have a special hair colouration. (Maybe I'm missing some street-wise stuff...)
Check whether there are any staff on the selection team with ginger hair... pop a cross - or a crescent on your necklace... wear a head scarf. Then, whenever you are turned down, you'll be able to claim there was active discrimination.
Not the same as a job, but some folk make a living out of it...
Complain about this comment
New Deal?
Frank Field was asked to "think the unthinkable". Then sacked, because he did.
What on earth makes anyone believe that the latest load of claptrap will ever see a practical delivery?
This adminsitration is strong on "announcements". Pretty useless at defining practical, workable laws and regulations. Very good at stating intent.
Useless at delivery things and ensuring that laws and rules are properly applied.
Jack Straw says he will implement changes to the HUman Rights Act. Can he? How much of it is dependent on the European Court?
It's not all the EU's fault. Some counries within the 20+ simply do what they think is right. If that means sending a murderer back to a place he "fled from", then they just do it and get on with life.
We have plenty of people who are not happy to be "sent home". I don't really see why I/we should pay for them to be kept here. If they did something wrong in their homeland, how is that different from us asking the Spanish to deport a thug/villain who sought life on a Costa?
Don't want to work? Dig a garden...
It's so good to realise that Brown's solution to our local problems - and his claim to be "saving the world" - comes down to digging for victory.
That garbage about solving the world's economic crisis would have been half-way acceptable if Brown hadn't steered our economy onto the rocks all by himself.
I just wish he'd been the "Do-nothing" Chancellor he set out to be when he followed Ken Clarke's budget plans all those years ago. In other words, tread softly. All I've seen is profligate waste.
Then more of it.
Recently, he claimed to have made Billions of pounds of "efficiency savings". If that were true, then tax would have reduced by an equivalent amount. Did it? Hell, no.
Brown wouldn't recognise efficiency if it battered him with a stick.
The man's a busted flush.
Just wish he were in my cistern...
Complain about this comment
OK - what about this then.
Supposing Gordon says he is going to get people off benefits and back into work.
"Good", I can hear you all saying.
...And just supposing Gordon will get these people off benefits and in to training courses. They will not be classified as unemployed any more - but seeking work, or training. This will massively reduce (or massage) the figures, whichever way you look at it.
...and all this just in time for a General Election!
Complain about this comment
a real labour training course for people, i was informed about last night.
the current crop of "trainees" total five people.. yes five.
none live in the same town where the course is held, two of the people on this training course, live so far away, it takes an 80 mile round trip each day to attend!
of course everyone gets travelling expenses to and from the course, as well as full benefits instead of pay.
so they are travelling unbelievable distances for a course for 18 weeks, which is totally unrealistic as regards where it is located.
under laws that labour brought in and signed upto, it is illegal to withdraw state benefit below a legal financial cut off limit...
even if benefits are stopped, by law, they must provide a minimum amount to live on each week...
so much for getting tough with the people who wont "get a job or get your benefits stopped"
Complain about this comment
BBC website Science page:
"There is a giant black hole at the centre of our galaxy, a study has confirmed."
It's at 10 Downing Street, where common sense disappears as soon as anyone starts thinking about the best date for a General Election.
Complain about this comment
157#
I've not been avoiding you, I've been looking forward to giving you exactly the answer you seek.
Right. Both FreeCornwall and I served our country for 22 years. We both came from areas where jobs were at premium and neither of us would have been born with a silver spoon in our mouths. We'd have both gone to ordinary schools, lived on ordinary estates (well, I did anyway). Never went to Uni. But, when we joined up, we did something useful, learned a lot about life and people and self reliance and the value of teamwork. And, a trade.
He will have been in the same boat as me, metaphorically. And that is why I answered for him.
After my service, I left, got several jobs, got made redundant several times during the downturn, but still worked my way up. Now I'm a consultant with my own company. Never ever relied on the state for anything in my entire life. What I've got, I've worked my chods off for.
THATS why work is good for you.
Your comment about "no matter how much it is buttered up so that you fall for it" shows a staggering amount of ignorance of a subject that you are quite plainly not qualified to answer, almost childish if I may be so bold. It comes across to me as something written by either a pedantic student with nothing better to do or a hippie. Either way, you plainly have absolutely no clue about what you are talking about.
If you think anyone who has ever been in the services are nothing but a bunch of mad eyed brain dead babykillers, then you are painfully naive. Not to mention having a narrow outlook and a very short memory. Most Air/Sea rescue is carried out by the military; the Met Office is a military organisation; the forces stood in for the firemen when they went on strike to add to their £30K+ per year, as well as being sent to Afghan and Iraq.
When you've done it, then you're fit to challenge the likes of FreeCornwall or other ex-service personnel like us.
Until then you're painfully out of your depth and I suggest you give it a rest. You wont be taken seriously.
Complain about this comment
Fubar (in reply to newspaceman1)
Spot on.
Complain about this comment
It is amusing when i see posts by tory supporters calling for an election now in the belief that DC would win the election. I want them to know that the economic crisis has really exposed the inexperience of the duo of DC and GO. These men are completely clueless about what to do in times of difficulty. GB for UK.
Complain about this comment
@162 TAG
I personally think the Human rights act has been very badly applied. I used to think it needed to be abolished immediately, but then discovered it was only really this country where the rights of the criminal are more important than decent members of society.
The problem to me would seem to be the liberal hand wringers and PC brigade, who make such a fuss about everyone's human rights.
I'm sure there may have been some good intentions when it was thought up, so how about some exclusions?
I couldn't give a toss if criminals are crammed into prison cells like sardines, as far as I am concerned they have opted out of society and are therefore excluded. Criminals should be punished, sending them to Butlins doesn't seem to do the job, so lets make prisons as unpleasant an environment as possible.
Likewise for foreign criminals, if hate preachers are going to be tortured when they get home, well I can live with that.
Until this country stops being a sof touch the human rights parasites like Cherie will continuye to extrcat the urine.
The cynical part of me still thinks that Cherie didn't let Tony get any until he pushed the act through!!
Complain about this comment
# otunko
..not half as amusing as when I read your post. I'm still laughing......:-)
Complain about this comment
#2 Mr moe
I do hope Mr Cameron is going to embark on constitutional reform so he can be an "elected PM". What was Oliver Cromwell? What about Lord Protector Cameron? Has a ring, doesn't it?
in general Loving the hostility to this policy from the neo-con element, and the assumption that Labour's core vote (working class) will be naturally hostile to tackling those who play the system. Shows what the Conservatives really think about those it hopes to win the votes of.
Complain about this comment
@177
You might want to get your medication levels adjusted...
GB FOR UK, ARE YOU DERANGED?!!!!
Crash has destroyed the UK, he is the prime numpty architect of the current depression. Note I say depression, mark my words, that will be the result of Crash's "experience". It would have been a recession, but we just had to borrow another trillion....!
I doubt we can even afford to pay the interest on the true level of national debt anymore.
If DC and GO are clueless so what? Less clueless is an improvement.... Anyone would be an improvement, lets just appoint
a new prime minister by lottery
Complain about this comment
@180 balhamu
lolololololol
You think that Labours core vote are the working class.
By definition the working class work.
Labours core vote are benefit scroungers and the public sector (which is why we need so many multi-cultural health & safety transgender PC wotsit coordinators).
Since neither of those groups work for a living I infer that Labours core vote is not the working class...!
Complain about this comment
92. At 1:54pm on 10 Dec 2008, Spectralis wrote:
"Nick Robinson's article is pure New Labour spin. He might just as well have had David Freud write it for him. When is the BBC going to get a backbone and start offering balanced and unbiased reporting that actually puts the facts out for people to weighup?.......................................................................................................................................................So less of Nick Robinson promoting New Labour's new measures to scapegoat sick and disabled people and more of him and the BBC investigating how Brown is trying to place the burden of this economic crisis on the poor and sell off the welfare system to rapacious US capitalists who got us into this economic mess in the first place."
WELL SAID.....!!
Darren
Complain about this comment
175 - you still have not answered the question and instead wallow in your instilled theories of right and wrong.
Why is work good for you, and specifically now, why is killing other humans good.
save me the blah blah we have done this, we have done that. My Grandad fought in the war, and killed people, I grew up knowing that it always affected him.
Yet you claim it is a good thing, you are surely misguided.
cheers though, I will consider joining up, maybe I will get to kill someone one day.
Perhaps you should join the dots, try 176, it should not be too much of a struggle
Complain about this comment
#178
Everyone's human rights are taken into account except those of the victims.
Frances Lawrence had no human rights at all when her husband's murderer was granted the freedom to stay in this country, along with anonymity, a new identity money, and a new home, even though she was told by a government minister that he would be extradited.
Where were Mrs Lawrence's Human Rights?
The Law needs to be far tougher on criminals, and making prisons an uncomfortable place to be is, in my mind, a very good start.
Complain about this comment
Funny, really.
I watched PMQ today.
Trying to watch Brown saying how he'd "saved the world", the site seems unable to cope.
Is it just the volume of traffic, or some effort to restrict people hearing that stupid, sub-conscious, hubristic faux-pas?
How can Gordon "save the world", when he allowed this economy (our economy) - the one he claimed to be fixed for good to go down the pan?
Complain about this comment
ps, you wrote:
"the forces stood in for the firemen when they went on strike to add to their ?30K+ per year"
My brother in law is a fireman, he does not earn 30k a year. As I have said, the military's job is fighting, basically, the forces "scabbed" the firemen and now you knock them as well by virtue of:
"as well as being sent to Afghan and Iraq."
And their purpose there in an illegal war:
killing people
I rest my case, perhaps you should do the same.
cheers
Complain about this comment
Nick.
Well, we have now heard tonight that WOOLWORTHS will tomorrow on the 11/12/1008 be holding a Closing - Down Sale at all its 815 High Street Branches, on a day in Westminster where we were told that the Government will be expecting every able - bodied person to seek out Employment Places for the future.
By contrast we also had the Prime Minister let slip that "New" Labour had just saved "The World" at P.M.'s Question Time in the House.
Now we have this notion that Away from these shores, Gordon and Darling can claim a Global Prize, while at Home they can't save Woolworths, which in many Town's up and down Great Britain are soon becoming [were], the largest Employers on many High Streets.
Both, the Labour Government, and the Conservatives have now got to SHUT UP when it comes down to them dictating how best to create Local, or National Employment, Places as they combindly don't have a Clue between them, other then guessing in some hope that they might find some worthwhile Sound- Bites to fool the British People, for the way things are going what with also the closing of many other well known Manufacturing outlets like MFI etc, M.P.'s of all Colours will soon realise that once these outlets are GONE, then when and if we ever get out of our Recessionary Period there will NO Employment Places on our High Street to Re-generate our Economy, for as I say once both Woolworths etc are gone we won't ever see their likes again.
Complain about this comment
Nick, any comments on the German Finance Minsiters views on the financial plans of Gordon Brown and co?
I will attach the link for you just in case.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7776462.stm
Complain about this comment
I am a full-time carer, paid £44 a week. I have kept my partner out of the mental health unit for 5 years, compared to 3 6 month stays in the previous 4 years. It's a 24/7 job, but saves on nurses, psychiatrists, psychologists, accomodation, and even medications!
The Local Mental Health Unit has been closed. So no help there!
When we talk about getting something for nothing - does that include the Government and Middle Class? or is it for just the poor?
I have a Doctorate (PhD) in Robotics, quite happy to work (if there is work available), if I could continue to get paid research from home... other partner still needs supervision/care!
Complain about this comment
This blog is becoming a joke. If you were writing a comedy about political affairs you coudn't do much better than this 'effort' from toenails.
'Tough'. Radical'.
Yes and I'm the queen of sheba. How tough does this sound?
'all those who once were simply on benefit will be expected to agree to the goal of entering the world of work'.
Where does one begin?!
For starters if they were able to work they shouldn't be 'simply on benefit'. This is not what the welfare state was invented to do.
That point aside, it is clear that they don't have to aim to enter the world of work but only to 'agree' to aim towards this. Not only that but they don't even have to agree they are only 'expected' to agree.
This is like one of the soft teachers at my old school trying to placate some thug or some new age parents with an unruly brat. Utterly toothless.
Never mind though. Nick Robinson will call it tough and revolutionary attracting some floating voters for his paying masters whilst the policy has no effect whatsoever.
Complain about this comment
187#
Scabbed? Its got nothing to do with scab labour, they (the forces) did as they were ordered. They dont have a trade union, remember.
Unlike the FBU, which if I recall rightly was run by a former public schoolboy from Bedford. They might not earn £30KPA any more, but thanks to the spanish practises (as they were known) that the union was trying to save, allowing them to take on second jobs, plus their Fire Brigade salary, they werent - and still arent - badly paid. Those who had no choice but to stand in for them, while they were on strike rattling buckets in the streets cadging for donations werent paid anything like their salaries, didnt have a union to represent them and moreoften than not, were soon after sent off to hot sandy places where they would get shot at, illegal or not.
Dont get me wrong, what firefighters do is dangerous. But they are not badly paid, they have union representation and they had a choice as to whether to strike or not.
And as for Iraq and Afghan - you go where your political masters tell you and you do what you have to do. By all means, criticise the politicians that send them to these places, they're electable and accountable to the electorate. Those who are in uniform are not.
You got a problem with that, petition your MP for a public inquiry as to why they sent our troops into battle on a lie. See how far that gets you. Dont forget who volunteered our forces for
a) Kosovo
b) Iraq
c) Sierra Leone
d) Afghanistan
whilst at the same time slicing the defence budget. Blair and Brown.
And not everyone in uniform is in the infantry. Not everyone who has ever served has ever fired a live round in combat. If you really think otherwise, then you would be as well resting your case.
You have absolutely no idea of the bravery and dedication of the people you are so glibly criticising. No idea whatsoever.
Thats what got my goat and provoked me into a reaction. Think before you spout off.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Have Your Say mass debate
DEBATE: Should benefit claimants earn their money?
SENT:10-Dec-2008 10:28
COMMENT:there's a bit of a blockage in publishing comments
it's not as bad as the DWP Belfast making decisions
before sending out letters from pat mcghee
COMMENT STATUS: Awaiting moderation
DEBATE: Should benefit claimants earn their money?
SENT:10-Dec-2008 09:03
COMMENT:I was told by the Job Centre that I was not allowed to go on a 3 day training course in ITIL which would help my job applications.
COMMENT STATUS: Awaiting moderation
Complain about this comment
the only practical effect of this so called welfare reform will be that a load of private sector consultants running joke courses about how to get back into work will get paid a ton of money for patronising and pretending to care about the people who will be forced to attend regardless
won't save a penny
complete waste of time
Complain about this comment
fubar @ 192
"Dont get me wrong, what firefighters do is dangerous"
Not really - the stats say that being a chartered accountant is considerably more dangerous than being a barney magrew - they have a much higher premature death rate
Complain about this comment
As i said, I rest my case.
The problem is, you like fighting, you have been trained for it.
Try my blog, the truth might hurt, but..
http://newspaceman.blogspot.com/
cheers
Complain about this comment
"Millions of people who were told there was no expectation they should even look for a job will be told that they can and should get one if at all possible"
They'd be lucky to get an answer (whether yes or no) from rude employers and agencies.
This is what the government does not understand.
Complain about this comment
#182 I_despise_Labour
@180 balhamu
lolololololol
You think that Labours core vote are the working class.
By definition the working class work.
Labours core vote are benefit scroungers and the public sector (which is why we need so many multi-cultural health & safety transgender PC wotsit coordinators).
Since neither of those groups work for a living I infer that Labours core vote is not the working class...!
Ok. So the only people that vote for Labout are benefit scroungers.
Let's have a look at the % of benefit scoungers over the past few elections:
1979 - 37% benefit scroungers
1983 - 28% benefit scroungers
1987 - 31% benefit scoungers
1992 - 34% benefit scroungers
1997 - 43% benefit scroungers
2001 - 41% benefit scroungers
2005 - 35% benefit scroungers
That's a lot of benefit scroungers. I also take it you would call some of your colleagues who claim to have voted Labour in the past benefit scroungers too - Mr U, you might want to defend yourself if you are going to keep the pretence you voted Labour in 1997, 2001 and 2005 up.
You can dig into the stats a bit more. For example, what % of people who actually turn out and vote in an election and vote Labour have a job?
You can check this out - try googling "General Election 2005" - it will lead you to some analysis from the House of Commons library (pdf so I can't link).
In 2005, there were a total of 9,552,400 "benefit scroungers" over the age of 18 who voted in the General Election for Labour (this obviously excludes children who are unable to vote and who the feckless obviously have more of).
"Benefit scroungers" are, I guess, all free-loading off the state in social housing. Turnout among this group was low compared to other groups. 51% of adults in social housing turned out to vote (v 61% of all adults).
Page 73 of the research I refer to breaks down the characteristics of the people who voted for each major party. 55% of those in social housing voted Labour, 16% Conservative.
Now a bit of maths. Multiplying turnout by % vote for Labour we find that 28% (51% * 55%) of all adults in social housing voted for Labour.
So, the 9.5 million Labour voters are the 28% of those in social housing who vote Labour. There must be 33.9 million adults - 9.5 million/28% - who live in social housing for this to work, even with your assumptions (all benefit scroungers live in council houses and no-one votes Labour but benefit scroungers.
Let's check this against Government housing statistics
The data on housing stock shows there are a total of 4.9 million council (or social) houses. Lets be kind to your argument and assume 2 adults per council house (ignoring single mothers). This generosity gets you to 9.8 million adults in council houses.
28% of 9.8 million (the % who voted Labour in 2005) gets you to 2.7 million Labour votes in council housing - the "benefit scroungers" who are the only people who vote Labour.
This is 2.7/9.5=28% of the Labour vote. So, even on generous assumptions, only 28% of Labour's 2005 vote were "benefit scroungers". Near enough 100% (give or take a factor of 4) for you I guess?
Anyway (assuming you are right for a bit of a chuckle) why are Labour trying to force them off it? Surely a stupid move for a calculating man like Brown if this is true. Surely Labour would want to entrench the rights of scroungers if that's the only people who vote for them?
Also, I admire your stand for the bigot - an unrepresented group. I hope Cameron does more for bigots - and protects their rights to discriminate against ethnic minorities and homosexuals.
I also hope he ensures businesses are able to be more lax with health and safety of their staff and the public. I look forward to more people dying in work accidents caused by lax procedures - it's worth it to avoid the health and safety malarky.
Complain about this comment
sagamix, I was top of the class in accountancy, termed a genius to be honest, but I have a numerical OCD "dis"-order.
Curiously, additionally, I have an extremely nervous disposition - there may be a link.
cheers
Complain about this comment
184#
As my last comment has been moderated, I guess that confirms the moderator wont let me describe you the way I wanted to. Never mind.
But, lastly, because you're a wind up merchant, I'll say two last things.
One, the message about why work is good for you is plainly there for you to see. You just dont want to, or cant understand it and think its much more entertaining baiting other posters.
Secondly: Your grandad served. Think about this; Its his blood and those of his mates and millions of other men and women like him that paid for the freedom you've got, that allows you to sit there with a thumb up your nose trading what you think to be funny insults with a complete stranger on a BBC blog.
I sincerely hope he's proud of you. There must be times when he wonders what on earth he did it all for.
No-one who has ever seen combat would ever advocate it as a way of solving the worlds problems.
But you ought to be thankful that men and women like your grandfather were there and still are there; prepared to pay the ultimate price.
Maybe you will be one day when you're older.
Complain about this comment
You Tory chaps, like Alex, are so manly with your bold letters and huge capitals - makes us pink types feel quite effete..
..bit like Dave and George
Complain about this comment
196#
In this financial climate sagamix, I wouldnt doubt it one jot!! :-)
Complain about this comment
Balhamu:
I dont agree with your politics, but that was quite some rebuttal. :-)
You ever thought of standing against GB in a leadership contest??
Complain about this comment
Its a good Idea as far as a labour idea can be. The systems are designed to work if you look at France they do. However this being Labour I can spot the flaws already;
1 They will not kick people out which is what you need in order to save money under the system.
2 With all the laws introduced by labour this will come into conflict with rejections. (human rights and discrimination laws)
3 It will cost 10 or 100 times more than the current system
4 Will be so complicated to run for them they will have to employ every one in Uganda to help this way save Africa at the same time. (this is of course is a joke but you get the point)
Complain about this comment
Oh, and #182 Despiser
Interesting the way things are framed to try and spark the reaction (death taxes versus inheritance tax would be another example).
People who are (mainly) in poverty and claim benefits as they are single mums looking after children (who would be feted if only they were married and staying at home looking after children) are "benefit scroungers".
Those who evade taxes (forcing them up for us mere mortals) are heroes. They use "tax avoidance". Why aren't they "tax scroungers" or free-loaders in the right-wing parlance? Especially as tax avoidance/evasion costs the Government far, far more than benefits given to those in poverty or the value of benefit fraud.
Complain about this comment
@199 Balhamu
No, I said benefit scroungers AND the public sector 'workers'. I'm sure that lot combined with a few unions is easily 35%.
I like the thoroughness of your argument and the fact that you did some research, just a pity you let yourself down by failing to properly read my comment! Maybe you should go away and recalculate and make sure you include all the public sector workers this time....
Must admit I didn't follow your link, I saw the words "Government" & "Statistics" in the same sentence
No idea what you are on about with my colleagues, no-one I know would admit to voting Labour, even if they had at some point had such a moment of temprary insanity.
I'm amused by your assumption that I'm a bigot, let me guess, because I'm against even more mass immigration I'm a racist aswell?
I'll just assume you're a troll - work for the prince of darkness by any chance?
You're certainly right that I am unrepresented. As a white, hetero-sexual working class male I am treated with contempt by your beloved labour.
Complain about this comment
This silly Labour shower should have cracked down on benefits years ago before the foreigners came in and took the jobs the layabout fraudsters didn't want such as FRUIT PICKING and WORKING IN AGRICULTURE that would have concentrated their minds somewhat.
Complain about this comment
"Criticising the UK government's decision to cut VAT from 17.5% to 15%, Mr Steinbruck (German Finance Minister) questioned how effective this will be.
"Are you really going to buy a DVD player because it now costs £39.10 instead of £39.90?" he said.
"All this will do is raise Britain's debt to a level that will take a whole generation to work off."
Saying the UK government was now "tossing around billions", Mr Steinbruck questioned why Britain was now closely following the high public spending model put forward by 20th Century economist John Maynard Keynes.
"The switch from decades of supply-side politics all the way to a crass Keynesianism is breathtaking," he said.
"When I ask about the origins of the [financial] crisis, economists I respect tell me it is the credit-financed growth of recent years and decades.
"Isn't this the same mistake everyone is suddenly making again, under all the public pressure?"
So exactly what leadership does Gordon claim?
Saving the world?
Germany remains the leading economic power in Europe. It's economy has NOT been based on a purely credit-based growth for a decade.
Brown as Saviour?
Of what?
Th Germans didn't even bother to turn up for a meet for Gordon, as they realised that all he was doing was applying lipstick, when major surgery was required.
Give me a scalpel, Gordon on a table, and I'm fairly sure... no scrap that thoughtr.
The man has broken the UK economy, quite deliberately, over a decade. Then hides behind a bunch of stupid bankers (mostly based n the USA - but helped by some in the UK), who pretended that bits of paper meant something real.
Fraud should be investigated.
Starting at the top.
Complain about this comment
Balhamu
"Those who evade taxes are heroes"
Sorry, who do you have in mind with that?
Nothing funny, just interested.
Complain about this comment
The freedom to work Fubar, is Nazi Germany any different from what this is today. We are all pals. No? Can you not think, whatn is the difference, would there be one?
As my grandad knew, it was all a nonsense, but he was the one pulling the trigger. As he said, when, as a young boy whilst playing with the little plastic models, I asked if he had killed anyone.
Obviously I was looking for an affirmative, it was already ingrained, via comics, plastic soldiers, cowboys, indians etc etc.
He said yes, but it might have been a man with a wife, with children, just like him. He felt guilty, because he could think.
And you blame the politicians, you should take responsibility for your own actions as to the type of employment you consider, especially in relation to humanity and it's collective progress - which to me is laughable. Where are we headed exactly.
As I have always said, my contention is with your esteemed heroic comrade comment - "work is good for you". Drivel and nonsense is my contention..
Have you been on a bus in the rush-hour, have you seen the peoples faces ? Are they happy ?
cheers
Complain about this comment
#204
Well said that man, a touch of generosity is most welcome and well deserved
Now don't spoil it...
Complain about this comment
#207 despiser
So the public sector are included in your "don't work for a living" group are they?
I think you confuse your vision of what is valuable work (serving the private sector, such as being a butler for a banker, or planning parties for bankers, or shining a bankers shoes), work that you consider no value (helping cure the sick, educate the young, fixing roads etc), and "work" - unless your suggesting public sector works are allowed to stay at home all day and are only nominally working to fiddle the stats?
Complain about this comment
@206 Balhamu
Who says those that avoid taxes are heroes? Certainly not in my book, doubt they are in yours either, guess you're trying to put words in my mouth? Dont bother, I've got plenty of my own!
In right wing parlance they would be tax avoiders. Cant be tax scroungers, that would involve them being given tax, and such people are hardly free loaders as they can obviously support themselves. Not sure why the terminology is relevant to you? Is there a special lefty word you want to compare to?
Feel free to spin off a load more statistics, would be interested to see evidence of the cost of tax avoidance being greater than the welfare state. ALthough if it's possible to calculate the amount of tax that should be paid perhaps someone should collect it?!!!
If only Labour had actually implemented some policies in the last 11 years that stopped tax avoidance or reduced benefit dependency. Unfortunately they are just too wasteful to have considered any such practicality.
Complain about this comment
#210 fubar
It's a cultural thing.
I certainly don't hear as much venom directed towards those who evade or avoid taxes, compared to the relatively small beer of benefit fraud or "scrounging" of benefits by being lazy.
It's about the moral judgement that tax is bad and exploitation. Therefore, it is morally justified for people who can to avoid taxes (at least once you get to a certain income level or are a corporate entitity) increasing tax on those who can't or won't do this, in a way it is not for people to take advantage of benefits they are entitled to because our lawmakers (and society) decides that this is the right thing to do.
Complain about this comment
#207 despiser
You feel discriminated against as a white, hereosexual male?
Give me an example.
Complain about this comment
211#
Look. We do what we have to do to earn, to provide for our families. All the time I was in uniform was during the cold war. I was very lucky, I never saw combat. Some of my mates did, during the Falklands and in Iraq and Afghan since. I understand 100% what your grandfather said. He has seen and experienced aspects of life none of us should, but unfortunately it happens. I admire him and respect him, even though I dont know him. Because he did what he had to do.
Yes, we all have responsibility for the employment choices we make. I stand by my decisions 100%, as I'm sure you do yours. You have to weigh it up and do what you beleive to be right. Experience will tell you in the end whether you made the right call or not. I've been lucky.
Not all of us get to do what we love doing for a living. For a good number of us, that would take a level of financial independance that we simply do not have. Meantime, we have to get by doing what we are good at instead. Are the commuters happy? Probably not. Most of 'em on autopilot, I would venture.
If you can live without working without relying on the state and the taxes of the commuters you observe in their state of stasis, then thats your call. Arent you lucky, if you have the financial independance for it.
Thats not a world I have ever known. Call it conditioning if you will, but working for a living and striving to better myself hasnt let me down yet.
Complain about this comment
212#
See, it is possible to be magnanamous (sp?) if you try....
Go on, you try it. :-)
Complain about this comment
@213 Balhamu
Too right they are. How many of the enormous number of new public sector jobs are actually in essential services?
I have no issue with necessary and essential public servants, police, nurses, dr's, teachers, fireman etec etc but the level of public sector bureaucracy is completely unjustified.
Amusing examples you've chosen btw.
Helping cure the sick? I assume you mean the NHS. Not a fan personally, privatise health care and do away with the NHS. I'd rather pay for private medical care than pay for the NHS.
Educating the young? Lol, back to education, education, education are we, just forget the (dumning down) in front...
Fixing roads?!! Lmao, I see a whole lot of potholes and I know that most of us pay alot of money in road tax. However, I dont see much fixing. When I do its generally a 50 yard section with 3 miles of cones either side, reduced speed limits, massive traffic jams and sloooow progress.
The private sector aren't paid for by my taxes, unlike the bloated public sector and their final salary pensions.
Yes, I am suggesting just that, there are far too many public sector workers, many of them just push paper around, all to improve Crash's stats.
Complain about this comment
215#
Ok Balhamu fair enough. I see what you're getting at; I think theres a bit more to it than that, but thats not the point.
Complain about this comment
@216 Balhamu
I didn't say discriminated against, I said unrepresented and treated with contempt.
Again with the not reading.... Such attention to detail, do you work in the treasury?!!
Complain about this comment
216. At 10:57pm on 10 Dec 2008, balhamu wrote:
#207 despiser
You feel discriminated against as a white, hereosexual male?
Give me an example.
+
is that hero or hetro
I was going to say most girls are not interested
but non-white (souled out) girls are
Complain about this comment
216. At 10:57pm on 10 Dec 2008, balhamu wrote:
#207 despiser
You feel discriminated against as a white, hereosexual male?
Give me an example.
+
more examples he/she
- didn't play football for england
- didn't get any o/a levels
Complain about this comment
There must be jobs available for those looking for work. It is now essential to bring back all those tens and hundreds of thousands of off-shored jobs. The treasury and the UK economy can benefit also from £billions of extra taxes. No brainer.
Complain about this comment
Fubar
Worryingly I find myself agreeing with most of what you say about work and the army. The sad faces of the commuters are not as sad as many of those lonely souls with nothing to do except watch daytime TV.
Also, my godson watched his best friend die next to him in Afghanistan recently. He suffered a nervous breakdown and now works, ironically in an Army Recruitment office. Was he right to sign up? Well he was unforunate and he put his mum, dad and himself through all kinds of horrors, but at the time his options were limited and he didn't want to end up skint in front of daytme TV for most of his life.
We all have to make a choice but some have pretty much Hobson's Choice and I'm not going to berate them for choosing the Army even though it wouldn't be my choice. Having said that if it was one of my kids, I'd tie them to the sofa and make them watch endless editions of Countdown before I'd let them sign up!
Complain about this comment
215 balhamu
You do make me chuckle. You spit out more data than a man who has been eating a bunch of grapes spits out pips. But - Avoiding tax is legal. Evading it is illegal. I would seem to me that many of our tax laws are constructed to allow avoidance if you are not on PAYE. Now why could that be.
Anyway now that Browns hot air machine is creaking and the bubble is popped just how is the current public expenditure going to be maintained. Bearing in mind that the total tax take is consistently between 43 and 46 pence in the pound and the economy is shrinking and it will be years if ever that it recovers in real terms. No dont bother answering because it is not a fair question to put to you it is for Brown to answer. Could it be means testing and privatisation.
Complain about this comment
In the land of China, peasants built the bird nest stadium.
Many of them died in the process and many never received a pay.
Jeez! the carpet-baggers that layed their bags at the most expensive houses and bought the best of cars and then proceeded with the plastic fantastic idea.
Now! want to point the finger of blame at the unemployed.
Hey! I guess when it hits the fan, theres always the peasants to lay into.
Christ! has anything changed in two thousand years? when the going gets tough!
crucify the carpenter.
Complain about this comment
It's very clear that Brown hasn't got a clue, despite believing he has saved the world.
The BBC reports that the German finance minister has said the UK's switch from financial prudence to heavy borrowing was both "crass" and "breathtaking".
Mr Steinbruck goes on to say that the UK Government is "tossing around billions". So, he is in effect saying that the government are a bunch of, er, money wasters....
Complain about this comment
#228
Come on Distant-Traveller!
Germany has pumped 480Bn euro's into saving their banks, they also put Bn's into the 200Bn STIMULUS for the EU and it,s not finished there?
No advanced economy has escaped this crisis, the real problems Is! if? America Britain, Germany, france and others invert on trade by going it alone, then we really will be farting against thunder!
Complain about this comment
There's a few good comments in there.
Thatcher removed benefit paid on a daily basis which meant that part time work became impossible for the unemployed. Also, she cut welfare and pensions in real terms. I can't remember the numbers but without that cut welfare would be about £100 per week in today's money.
John Major introduced the scheme where people on welfare couldn't stay in bed and breakfast in one place for more than three months. This was on the back of a Daily Mail wheeze which played up the idea that scroungers were taking seaside holidays on welfare.
Michael Portillo brought in the scheme which forced people to apply for nonexistant jobs in return for welfare. This bugs employers and demonises people. The reality is that if there's a job someone wants they'll apply quick enough, and demonising people just undermines already poor morale.
My general view remains that developing a more innovative business model and fairer society is key, and that a more joined up relationship between national business plan, business creation, and prospective employees is a better way than forcing the situation.
I'm not happy about the training offered to the unemployed. It's often poor quality and irrelevant, and the good stuff is priced out of reach so only folks who already have jobs benefit. Also, I'm not in favour of low status work in exchange for welfare. It just reinforces stereotypes and subsidises tax cuts for the rich.
So, I agree with the academics and unions. As it stands, the policy assumes perfect conditions of the job market and people's ability to work. Unless it's tempered with some reality I can't see this one flying, and would support the immediate and swift removal of Gordon Brown from office. Yes, you heard me.
If the Prime Minister is being clever, he's just got everyone's attention and will be working his own party for realistic contributions to modify the bill so it's realistic and effective. The Tories will have the wind taken out of their sails and his backbenchers will feel valued. I hope so because this subject puts me in a mood where I don't give second chances.
On a last note, I think, the Prime Minister needs to calm down and buy a dog. Not everyone is a superhero and getting out of the office from time to time helps give you a sense of perspective. Folks have limits to the stress they can take and getting out of the bunker can help keep social skills in tune. Heck, the mutt could even make puppies with Obama's dog and squeeze a few more votes if all else fails.
Oh, Gordon? I don't blink.
Complain about this comment
Haven't we heard all this before? The Labour party have promised to get tough on the welfare system for the past 10 years and nothing seems to have changed. I just can't see how you can get the long term unemployed, who see benefits as a way of life, back into work, especially those families who have had generations out of work. How would they cope? It would be such a culture shock and could cause a lot of resentment. What if people refuse to find work or take part in schemes? Surely, the government couldn't let them starve? Wouldn't be contravene their human rights? If anyone claiming benefits is going to be targetted it will be the easy targets such as those who want to get back into work and feel stigmatised by claiming benefits. Those who feel no such stigma and see benefits as their right will continue to claim and it will be business as usual.
Labour are all mouth and no action. When are we going to see the result of all their wonderful promises (over-hauling the human rights act, benfits culture, economic recovery, equality? Answer: Oh, sometime after the election.
Complain about this comment
To get back to the blog I will state again the Welsh Assembly Government are opposed to these Welfare proposals as not being relevant to Wales. They say they will not work here because of a different infastructure. Someone please take notice this is not just about England
Complain about this comment
@223 Kikidread
10 O levels and 5 A levels thanks, and that was before Labour developed their lowest common denominator 'education' system....
Complain about this comment
225#
Laugh:
I understand. I will never say that its the perfect choice and I understand your reservations.
I completely understand the effect that such a deployment can have on a parent, partner or loved one. There was a BBC programme last night about an ordinary soldier who had lost several of his mates in action in Afghan and the effect it had on him. I was saddened by what I saw, but not, I regret to say, surprised.
This is where the bit about "breaking the military covenant" comes in. Yes, all the services are volunteers. Nobody forces them to join up and they have a choice at any point to jack it in. But, to their credit, tens of thousands dont jack it in, they do it.
The Government and the MoD owes them and those who dont come back a debt of honour that it can probably never repay. The way the MoD has treated those with Gulf War syndrome, PTSD, combat injuries sustained in action is bordering on shameful. (500K for a WRAF typist suffering RSI, a marine awarded £160K for ending up a quadraplegic.)
Not to mention the way we have treated generations of Ghurkas, which is a national embarrassment. More Falklands veterans have been lost since the war taking their own lives, suffering from PTSD than died in the conflict itself. Thats awful.
Newspaceman1 is entitled to his views, of course he is. I'm afraid it was the proverbial red rag to the bull though. This is something that has been ingrained in me for over 20 years.
What your godson did took courage and I respect him for that.
I'm not going to say anything glib, but suffice it to say had he not done it, life may have turned out distinctly different... not necessarily better. We as a nation - and certainly MOD and Central government - need to work on rebuilding that covenant and showing those who serve that we recognise the sacrifices they make in our name. Think about where you're sending them before you volunteer them for a historical squabble that has nothing to do with us. Arguably, intervention to overthrow Mugabe would potentially be more legally justified than toppling Saddam. Or maybe we just ought to wake up to the fact that we're not big enough to be a world player any more, being the plastic plod, the PCSO to George Bush's World Policeman.
I sincerely wish him good luck for his future.
Complain about this comment
230#
Charles, is that REALLY you???
Blimey.
I'd never thought I'd say it but... well said. Factual, balanced and a soupcon of emotion.
That sounds like an epiphany.
Complain about this comment
Crass and Breathtaking! The German Finance Minister's description of Brown's borrowing binge could be used to describe almost all of Labour's response to the credit crunch.
Returning to the thread, Margaret Thatcher wrote once that the method was economics, the task was to change the soul. By rewarding work and enterprise citizens would develop a sense of personal and social responsibility (and of course be more likely to vote Conservative).
I think Labour is also trying to change the soul, but in the opposite direction. By rewarding idleness and irresponsibility, by taxing enterprise, and by increasing the number of people in thrall to the power of the state, more and more subjects will be more likely to vote Labour.
This is why a) I don't believe Labour will ever reform welfare (follow Frank Field's thoughts, for example) as Labour's political power depends on a client class; and b) Labour's love of a borrowing binge transfers wealth from the responsible to the feckless.
Neo-socialist ideology, dressed up in economic mumbo-jumbo.
Complain about this comment
235 I agree Charles's post 230 came as a shock to me too.
Some excellent comments and very good advice re the dog.
GB always looks as if he has the weight of the world on his shoulders. Being PM really aged Tony Blair and GB looks a prime candidate for a heart attack the way he is going.
Complain about this comment
Brown speaking live on LBC from 10. this morning:
Listen live
http://listen.lbc.co.uk/1/0/1
Complain about this comment
So yet again we see that what Crash Gordon thinks and what reality actually is are two completely separate things.
Gordon thinks he saved the world.
Germany think Gordon is a bit of a nutcase, off his rocking horse perhaps?
Complain about this comment
237. he's tried the be nasty shoot em down computer game, didn't win just became unpopular to say the least. Now he is trying another tack. Personally I think it is all a set up from afar - paid for by our taxes.
Complain about this comment
No2 mr moe
Mr Brown is elected, anyone who does not know that is not fit to vote.
Complain about this comment
#234
Hold on a minute - I joined this blog to wind up some of the more bigoted (you know who you are) not to engage in meaningful and positive discussion, so stop drawing me in with your wise and heartfelt comments ;)
We'll end up reaching some kind of consensus if we're not careful and I'll have to change my blog name.
Complain about this comment
Concise analysis of Brown's claims on the economic crisis - maybe you could learn something from this , Nick.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/personal-view/3703785/Gordon-Brown-must-blame-himself-not-the-USA.html
Complain about this comment
#241
Brown is elected as an MP.
He has not been elected either as PM (similarly to Major in 1990). However, Major was at least elected to be leader of his party, Brown got a free ride.
This is constitutionally acceptable, but it does highlight the contempt with which Brown holds the electorate. What more can we expect from someone who has never had a proper job, because he believes he is destined to be Prime Mentalist?
Complain about this comment
Gordon Brown quoted the November G20 declaration in support of his borrowing binge.
However, I've read it carefully and this is not correct. According to the Head of the International Monetary Fund, the G20 Summit Declaration recognizes that some countries have more room for maneuver than others. "We believe that those countries with the strongest fiscal policy frameworks, the best ability to finance fiscal expansion, and the most clearly sustainable debt should take the lead".
Since the UK has the weakest fiscal position it should have been the last country to take a lead. More arrogance and hubris from Mr Brown.
Complain about this comment
244
FACTUALLY TOTALLY INCORRECT
BROWN IS AN MP
MAJOR WAS AN MP AT THE TIME
TORIES KICKED OUT THATCHER - WITHOUT WARNING
TORIES CHOSE MAJOR WITHOUT MANDATE
FROM ELECTORATE!
MAJOR WAS PM WITHOUT MANDATE FROM COUNTRY
BLAIR ANNOUNCED IN 05 GE CAMPAIGN HE WOULD NOT SEEK A 4TH TERM
BLAIR ANNOUNCED IN 05 GE CAMPAIGN HE WOULD HAND OVER DURING 3RD TERM
BROWN WAS ELECTED BY AN OVERWHELMING MAJORITY OF THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE REQUIRED TO BE LABOUR PARTY LEADER...
CRUCIALLY - EVERYONE VOTING IN 2005 KNEW BLAIR WAS NOT SEEKING 4TH TERM AND WOULD HAND OVER DURING 3RD TERM...
Every voter had the choice on that basis NOT to vote Labour..
AND...Those who voted Tory - voted for Michael Howard as Leader at that time of 05 GE and those that voted Lib Dem voted with Ming as Leader at that time...
BROWN HAS CLEAR ELECTORAL MANDATE TO BE PM!
Complain about this comment
The unskilled manual jobs that most of those people being moved from IB to ESA unfortunately no longer exist in large numbers in this country. (Whilst there may be some in the service sector they are rapidly decreasing as the recession bites).
Even if they did, the culture of dependency, at a high level of material wealth (in comparison to the developing economies) that has been created over the last 10 years will prevent them being effective in work.
Complain about this comment
Anyone notice, the striking similarity between David Cameron's LSE speech and Herr Steinbruck's outpourings on the British economy. We are used to the queues of moles in Whitehall that Tories have harnessed but it now seems this also extends to the German Finance Ministry !
Isn't Herr Steinbruck the same gentleman who claimed few months back that the credit crunch is an Anglo-American problem and that German Banks were well placed. Not long after that German Government had rescue Hypo Real Estate with billions of Euros.
Contrast this with the time when Northern Rock ran into difficulties. George Osborne said that UK was the only country to have run on its bank and add that this was entirely to do with the Government policies and nothing to do with global events.
Great minds think alike ?
Complain about this comment
I have come to this piece late - but still the same cry is made over and over again ' get them back to work - even lone mothers/parents/fathers ' . Good - but get them back to what work ? . Looking around it seems to me that this is pure fantasy . O.K. in full employment forcing the mothers to become working mothers ( incidentally making them cheap labour as most of them will be part time to care for the kids ) could be made a case of - but really when we have had massive unemployment for the last 30 years ( however you describe it ) all these schemes to get everybody back to work deserve all the ridicule and scorn they get unless some attempt is made to create jobs - real jobs not just pushing virtual money around . We do however have a well placed manufacturing industry - in Armaments ! ( probably the only one in the country) which is why Blair stopped the investigation of alleged corruption in arms sales to the Saudis - if they had lost that contract then our manufacturing base would have become zero ....
Complain about this comment
246#
He wasnt elected, he stood unopposed!!
Complain about this comment
I am an unemployed biologist on Jobseeker's Allowance, which pays £60 a week. This is handy, but I think anybody would agree it is not much. I'm really only on it because I'm legally entitled to be, and I don't expect to be on it long (a few months at most). In addition to doing lengthy job searches, I apply for between 6 and 10 jobs, and send another half dozen or so speculative letters out each week. Finding a job is my full-time job right now. Fingers crossed...
My problem with the current system is that no further help is offered to me until I've been unemployed for six months (at which point I will have lost my home). I would love to go out and get my driver's license, as it would increase the number of jobs I can apply for. I also wouldn't mind getting a formal teaching qualification. I asked at the job centre if any financial help could be made available to cover the cost of a few driving lessons or a part-time PGCE course, and was told no. Outright. No possibility. Nada.
In my experience, and contrary to what government officials say, the employees of job centres do not bend over backwards to get people into suitable jobs - they are too hung up on targets to care, and lack the intelligence and open-mindedness to understand the employment needs of people like myself, for whom their career is their passion, not just something to do to make money. In my last "signing-on", the staff member that I saw only made eye contact with me when she made demeaning comments, and spent most of the time staring at her computer screen.
If the government wants people to work harder to find a job, in my experience they will have to do three things:
1. provide incentives such as retraining or skill upgrades straight away, not six months down the track when most job seekers have become demoralised by the whole process
2. hire job centre employment officers that don't behave like emotionless, demeaning automatons, and who actually care about people and listen to their needs and concerns
3. make job centres less depressing places to be by training all staff how to deal compassionately with people who are likely to be stressed, and feeling depressed and vulnerable
Complain about this comment
sciencevalerie
It's funny isn't it, that you have asked for help with a car and lessons, but have been refused whereas others coming in to this country have been given this on a plate.
I've been reliably informed (by an employee) that the people at Job Centres do bend over backwards to help people, but quite a lot depends on ethnicity and religious beliefs. The people who don't fit into those categories are just left to get on with it.
My own son was made redundant almost 2 weeks ago. He has a wife and 3 children to support and he is actively looking for work too. I really hope you manage to find a job soon.
Complain about this comment
#246 Major was elected by the Conservative party, beating Douglas Hurd and Michael Heseltine.
Brown did not even get elected by his own party.
Complain about this comment
No253 Dialsquare,
Mr Brown was elected leader of the Labour Party unopposed. A common occurrence in democratic organisations. Only a fool would regard that as being unelected.
Complain about this comment
Something for nothing, eh?
MPs spending less and less time in HQ for more and more money, eh?
Govt borrowing to prop up marginals? Eh?
House of Commons Committees not investigating properly because Harriet Harman has told them not to, eh? Something for nothing, what??
CAP policies in Europe?
No.......all these are GOOD THINGS. Because our friends benefit from them.
Target those lazy bastards we don't know and don't vote, let alone vote for us, eh?
That's Gordie for you.
A coward.
And he knows it.
Complain about this comment
Just say this: There are not millions of lone parents not working Actually there are 750.000 lone parents are not working In fact nearly 60% of lone parents are working. There are over 2 million on incapacity benefit but as David Freud's report shows the number has been falling not because they died but becuse they got jobs. Actually there are 30 million people employed 75% of those of working age and the Government's target was to increase this to 80% or 32 million and to reduce the costs of welfare, hence the emphasis on those getting welfare. Of course there are about 2-3 million people of working age who are not working or students and supported probably from 'family' including married women with young children on maternity leave or simply living on their partners income, and student/graduates taking a gap year.
Complain about this comment
Dear shellingout,
Thanks for your support. I hope your son finds work soon, too. We could all use a little good news at this time of year.
I didn't mean to insult ALL job centre workers, so apologies to your friend - I'm sure many of them do care and do work hard, unfortunately not the ones I've dealt with.
Complain about this comment
#256 cping500
If there are as many people in work and paying taxes as you indicate in your above comment, the government should have been awash with money when the credit crunch bit.
....and my next question is
Where did it all go?
Complain about this comment
sciencevalerie
I can well understand your view of Job Centre workers.
We have a friend who works in one in a large city in the UK. She has been spat at, and verbally and physically abused. She has now had enough and will be leaving her job soon after many years of empoyment because of this.
I'm not saying you're wrong, just that it can be hard for people on both sides of the desk.
My son phoned me this morning to say that he has an interview today. As someone said to me on this blog - it's not the person that's been made redundant, it's the job. Keep looking - something will turn up.
Complain about this comment
#246
First of all a little nag....STOP SHOUTING! If nothing else it's harder to read!
Anyway, down to business....
I'll respond to your points using your order as much as I can...
Factually incorrect :- I'd be careful about saying people are factually incorrect when some of the points you then make are wrong too.
Major and Brown both MP's :- Correct.
Kicking out Thatcher :? It was hardly without warning, there had been rumours about a Leadership challenge for a little while before Heseltine finally stuck his head above the parapet, as Thatcher at that stage was not the most popular PM we?ve had!
No mandate :? technically you vote for a party to govern, not a person in this country, although most people do view it as voting for a particular leader, so I can see your point. The Conservative Party however did have a mandate.
Blair announcing when he would go :? This is where you are a bit wrong. Blair first laid out a schedule for departure in October 2004. Ending the Labour party's conference in Brighton, Blair said "If I'm selected I would serve a third term - I do not want to serve a fourth term.? Now you could say this doesn?t confirm he would serve the full 3rd term, but on the last day of campaigning prior to the May election, Blair cut through the speculation to once more reaffirm his position?He told BBC journalist John Humphrys in an interview: "I can serve a full term."
So, ?crucially? everyone voting in 2005 knew Blair was not seeking 4th term, but did Not know he was going to resign mid-term. So they did not have the choice to Not vote for Brown on your logic.
Brown?s majority :? I agree that Brown was elected as Leader of the Labour Party, unopposed, which is where most people don?t consider that being elected. I?m not surprised Brown had an ?overwhelming majority? of the Electoral College votes though?.He was the only candidate!!! I would be astonished if he didn?t get All of the Electoral College votes!
Other party leaders :? I fail to see the relevance of this, the Tory and Lib Dems were not in power. Oh and Ming Campbell was not the Lib Dem leader, Charles Kennedy was.
Brown Mandate :? I fail to see how you can say Major did not have a mandate, but Brown does, when the situation is basically the same i.e. party in power changes their leader mid-term. But if I accept your argument that Major did not have a mandate, then Brown has even less, at least Major called a general election within 18 months of becoming PM (22/11/1990 ? 9/4/1992 ? 504 Days). On the same measure, Brown should have called an election on 12th November this year (27/6/2007 ? 12/11/2008 ? 504 days). Brown is unlikely to call an election before 2010 in my opinion?says it all really!
Complain about this comment
colthekid's hit the nail on the head; I agree he has (had?) a mandate to become PM but I also think he should have called an election by now.
My biggest problem with these welfare reforms is that we risk categorising people too heavily - a friend of mine legitimately claiming disability credits for chronic mental health problems has seen her benefits slashed this year, and the re-application form sent through last month for next year has given her all of about a third of a page (on a 30-page form) to list her mental health problems. She won't last more than a week or two in the world of work, but when this tiny paragraph of text is paled into insignificance next to the 29 and 2/3 pages of physical capabilities and incapabilities the benefit officer's first instinct is always going to be "well, she -can- work" even though it's only in their best interests to get her off their books, and certainly not for her greater good.
Complain about this comment
#261
I agree with this.
My mother-in-law is disabled, and although she is too old to work now, the form she has to fill out to claim disability allowance probably has the best part of 30 pages which she has to complete.
Quite a daunting task for any able-bodied person - let alone someone who is disabled.
Complain about this comment
As you say Nick Hopefully when the tough gets going! Im sure Golden B. is on the right track its just he does not to be able to set the points in the right direction I guess darling is in the signal box! Hopefully we can all pay enough tax to keep it all going!
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS