With no more responses from Jonty Olliff-Cooper, we can turn our attention to the latest employment figures, perhaps with a sense of deja vu. The number of people unemployed fell a bit again. This time there's been no careful analysis on Newsnight or the news; no critical report by Stephanie Flanders. Presumably they didn't want another hysterical rant from Iain Duncan Smith. The item on the BBC news website does report the ONS's verdict that "it's all down to women". The number of men out of work has actually gone up. And it does show the wide variations in unemployment around the country, and that it's actually going up in many areas. Significantly for the Work Programme, it also reports that a record 1.42 million people are working part-time because they can't get full-time jobs.
Channel 4's Factcheck blog takes apart David Cameron's claim that the number of women in employment is up. And Fullfact demolishes his boast that half a million private sector jobs have been created since the election. It's also been shown that a lot of the "jobs" are accounted for by people going self-employed, often unwillingly. And, of course, we don't know who they are, these people who are getting work. They are probably not the long-term unemployed who would provide bumper payments to the WP providers. If they are taking part-time jobs, they won't provide any outcome payments to the providers. And since in many parts of the country, unemployment continues to rise, the outlook for the providers there is even bleaker.
I wonder whether there are negotiations going on to change the contracts. Will all that part-time, casual or zero hours working be redefined as success? I wouldn't be at all surprised.
Well done, historian, for giving up on Jonty Olliff-Cooper. It is impossible to defend an indefensible position but he can have fun trying to do the impossible once get gets round to it!
ReplyDeleteI saw Mark Hoban on TV the other day, trying to big up the 7,000 new jobs. That was all he wanted to do and he refused to be deflected by the BBC journalist's intelligent questions. Despite the fact that Hoban made the content of the interview meaningless, I felt that he is a less dreadful individual than that mendacious, thuggy pair IDS and Grayling.
"Despite the fact that Hoban made the content of the interview meaningless, I felt that he is a less dreadful individual than that mendacious, thuggy pair IDS and Grayling."
ReplyDeleteHe will soon learn and become a perfect clone of and Trusty Right Hand to his new master ..... Expect some less than subtle "all the 'evidence' shows it is the fault of the unemployed that they are unemployed and that means we are fully justified in taking away the benefits of those who fail to find work" at the forthcoming Conservative Party Jamboree ... those "there must be an additional £10 billion savings on top of all the previously demanded savings in welfare payments" demands coming from HM Treasury - from where Mark has come, funny that but entirely coincidental, of course! - have to be found from somewhere, and who are the easiest targets, job seekers and those who we would have described as being on "incapacity benefit" except these days, as Maria Miller pointed out and duly benefited from with her promotion, there aren't any disabled people, and Chris Grayling made it clear there aren't any incapacitated either, there are only people who are fully equipped to work and should do and people who are slightly less well fitted for work, who might find it difficult to find work when the Tories aren't in power, but when the Tories are in power they have no problems at all, because there are hundreds of thousands of new jobs created every week ....
The problem the Tory's face is they're bending the figures to try to make it look like there's a private sector led recovery, but the more they do this the more their rhetoric get's out of sync with the public. Those jobs weren't created, the majority of them were reclassifications of certain more ambiguous public sector employees.
ReplyDeleteSo the public already knows the private sector didn't grow that much, because they're the ones in the job market and they see no significant decrease in the pressure they're under. The government is putting itself in a position where it conveys confidence in an economic strategy and evidence that the public can see isn't true.
I find Cameron alone makes Priministers questions pointless, because there are never any answers. When asked about the concern the Work Programme isn't helping the long term youth unemployed, he simply responds that they implemented the Work Programme to help them, as if that's an answer.
While reading about this from various newspapers the opinion varied wildly,unemployment falling,rising or static,but regardless who reported, the underlying theme was the same..Either way it moved up or down it is a very small amount compared to the overall picture of unemployment,does this justify the cost of the WP? As figures will not be released until Autumn (Which now apparently starts in November) you have to wonder,are they waiting for a last minute miracle or will the unemployed be reclassified to alter the figures.
ReplyDeleteBefore I get told off by Historian, I know this is off topic.
ReplyDeleteJust a quick heads up to let people know that CH4 Dispatches are doing a prog called 'Secrets of Poundland'
http://www.channel4.com/programmes/dispatches/articles/secrets-of-poundland-trail
It will be interesting if they'll mention the undermining of wages and conditions via the use of workfare. I'll not hold my breath.
mmm ..... Thanks When is the programme on IMatt?
DeleteMonday, 8pm Ch4 Simonne
DeleteHistorian,also a bit off the subject,what has happened to the Indus Delta site(I followed the link from here) at one time it did get a bit out of hand,but now posts are very heavily moderated, almost as much as the A4E site where nothing with a hint of discord is published.I find that your policy of publishing both points of view as long as they are not totally out of line,even if you do not agree with them is a fair and open policy...Are those that are unwilling to accept/debate points of opinion being defensive because there is some truth in those statements? Or am I just paranoid..lol
ReplyDeleteI agree about the Indus Delta site. They want it to be a forum for professionals in the industry, but few seem to want to take part, and the moderation, while very necessary, has apparently become stifling. But it's up to them. I want to encourage debate, but there are those who just want to hurl abuse.
DeleteOn the subject of Indus Delta: I was a regular contributor. I think my contributions were always relevant and reasoned - sometimes passionate and always critical of the Work Programme. Some of the exchanges became heated(there were/are some particularly fascist contributors from the "other side")but the moderation/censorship was always very biased. Ultimately this lead to the untenable situation where any attempt to answer with an "off message" view was either heavily censored or just plain not published - frequently with the banning of the contributor.
DeleteThus I (and others) gave up contributing and the site has become a very vacuous, ineffective and flaccid mouthpiece for the worst of the Welfare to Workfare industry practioners.
That's a bit harsh. The forum was being dominated by people who wanted to criticise the WP, and the site owners decided that wasn't what they wanted. That's up to them. If you, for instance, were to turn that level of invective on to this blog, you wouldn't get published!
DeleteWhat "level of invective"? I plead "fair comment".
ReplyDeleteWhat actually happened was that only one side of the debate was being published. Any response or opinion that was "off message" didn't get to see the light of day. This in itself could be construed as an admission of defeat!
The site now seems to want to re-open the debate but finds that it has noone to debate with!
I for one have no sympathy.
We won't prolong this, but your idea of "fair comment" sometimes involves adjectives which others would consider intemperate, if not offensive, if they don't agree with you! There are forums where that simply escalates, and people without your extensive vocabulary resort to common insults.
DeleteOK Historian I take your point! I think the site owners and some of the WP contributors were surprised that some of the people from "the other side of the desk" could and would put up robust and reasoned counter arguments. Some were unable to cope with this and pleaded (successfully) for more moderation and banning of the "offenders". The correct response would have been to attempt to win the argument(s) by reason rather than force majeure.
DeleteIn its way the ID evnts are a microcosm of the Work Programme itself - "I can't beat you with reason so I'll just fall back on the power of sanction".
'Nuff said.
Just an aside. I see Chris Grayling started his new role today as justice minister. Who has replaced him in the DWP?
ReplyDeleteMark Hoban.
Delete" It's also been shown that a lot of the "jobs" are accounted for by people going self-employed, often unwillingly. And, of course, we don't know who they are, these people who are getting work. They are probably not the long-term unemployed who would provide bumper payments to the WP "
ReplyDeleteThis is the thing I have noticed after being on the a A4e Work Programme for 6 months, they are pushing people into Self Employment. They told my friend, he wont be asked how much work she has or does, but will be able to claim Working tax Credits, sign off Job seekers allowance, still get her Housing benefit and Council tax benefit, Plus 90.00 a week Low Income Working Tax credit.