Thursday, 27 September 2012

The evidence won't be published

The Exaro site has just reported that the Public Accounts Committee won't be including the evidence from whistle-blowers when they publish the report into the welfare-to-work programme tomorrow.  You'll remember that the committee heard evidence from several whistle blowers in May.  One of them, Eddie Hutchinson, had his evidence leaked, and pretty damning it was.  But the PAC wanted to publish the rest of it and won't now because the people concerned have made last-minute requests to block it.  This was the evidence about A4e and Working Links.  It's a pity, but it shows the fear felt by people who go public in this industry.
We'll have a good look at the report when it comes out.


  1. Transparency! How many times has this been the mantra,an open and honest presentation of the facts.
    In my personal experience,asking even the most basic questions about the WP are meet with resistance,which brings up the question why.Emma Harrison when questioned about her £8.6 million dividend stated"This is the result of 25 years of personal risk" in that context it really is not so much,so where did the other £80 million of her net worth come from?Transparency,clarity and honesty..Three things that neither the WP or Harrison(IDS Greyling)and the rest of the gang have a clue about.....Off the subject,a verbal warning and an additional Job Search session "to clarify my responsibilities in applying for employment" Why this? On the JCP/DirectGov job search 443 available positions,i did the required 12,all with the same company,all had different job numbers(I did a lot more than 12) this only counts as 1 job when applying,but 12 openings for the job count,when asked why? That's just the way it is.

  2. From top to bottom, they're (a4e) as transparent as a sheet of lead - not even superman's x-ray vision can see through that.

    But humble 'plebs' like me can see right through a4e. They withold information from the off ("attachment fees") to their new 'customers' by claiming they don't receive payment until the 'customer' has found & held a job (usually NMW, if found for them by the "advisors") for 6months.

    Then you have the likes of oliff-cooper, coming on here with his hand-wringing, faux sincerity which immediately manifested itself as abject evasion of pertinent questions, and scuttling off to another website to gripe about how difficult his job is and perpetuate the myth about what a4e offer.

    But to cap it all, was a4e describing themselves as something they're patently not; intentionally misleading the public in the process. Then they have the brass-neck to ask what's wrong with them calling themselves something they're not?!

    "Transparency" is it? PAH!


Keep it clean, please. No abusive comments will be approved, so don't indulge in insults. If you wish to contact me, post a comment beginning with "not for publication".