Iain Duncan Smith is obviously unrepentant. He was taken to task, you remember, for coming out with dodgy figures to justify his benefits cap, but said he believed it so it must be true. He still hasn't faced the Work and Pensions Select Committee to answer for this (although his civil servants did). Now he's doing it again. The odious Express tells us that "16,500 find jobs after clamp on benefits" in a headline, and goes on: "Tough but fair reforms to Britain's broken benefits system have helped 16,500 claimants back into work, new figures reveal." The sceptical may already perceive that there's something wrong here. What's the actual connection between this nice round number and any specific benefits change? Well, "The people living in potentially-benefit capped households were helped to find the posts by Jobcentre Plus over 18 months." Now, this is the sort of distortion that the statistics people got cross about before. There is no proven connection between the number getting jobs (who may or may not have been "helped" by JCP) and the potential for household benefits to be capped. Yet the article proceeds on the assumption that the cap is making the idle get a job. "The figures, revealed exclusively to the Daily Express, showed that Mr Duncan Smith's promise to 'make work pay' is starting to change a culture where some lifelong layabouts viewed benefits as a limitless cash machine."
Surely it's time for the select committee to do its job and hold IDS to account. As well as the dodgy statistics, there's his failure to publish any data on sanctions. If Dame Anne Begg and her committee are not concerned about this, what is their purpose?
2016.... Mainstream newspaper headline....More businesses set up the UK the uk is thriving, unemployment is down, more young people in training than ever yes the good times you were promised are here... Translation..... more businesses set up because there is no more minimum wage and free labour is on offer due to work for your dole (dole now wages minimum wage gone) now firmly entrenced into society, people in traditional trades now losing out on contracts/work due to cheap competition (will these reputable companys now be forced to drop prices/wages to compete or go under?), due to the pools of cheap employees available in the UK, and the exploitative businesses taking full advantage of the pool of cheap labour, with big corperations via their elite connections running their companys via the UKS cheap labour force.
ReplyDeleteWith all the different figures being pulled out of thin air,apparently there is no shortage of jobs,lack of training or a economic crisis,the people that are unemployed are staying unemployed because of the huge amount that they receive on benefits and are living a life of luxury...and they all lived happily after. During recent interviews a number of professional Politicians have shouted about the cost of Welfare and how the unemployed need to be monitored closely to ensure that they are searching for a job or in training as their will be no more something for nothing,no mention that the £5 Billion WP was supposed to accomplish this,have they admitted failure? and if not then why do they need the JCP to try to finish what the WP was suppose to.
ReplyDeleteIf memory serves, JCP have nothing to do with the WP. So how is it that 16,500 have supposedly found work [through JCP] when the majority of claimants are attending the WP pretty much exclusively with PRIVATE companies.
ReplyDeleteA quick poll on "Any Questions" from Ilkley in West Yorkshire.on Radio 4 just now, showed 75 percent of the audience were anti Government welfare proposals for unemployed under 25s.
ReplyDeleteAt my last WP appointment I was informed the next one would be by telephone(in writing) on a Monday,Friday I received a call and it turned out to be the WP,I asked if this was the following Mondays call and it was,I asked why the change? "You must be available at any time,regardless of appointments made,we are not required to notify you,if you are unavailable we will raise a doubt" I am sure this is not right,are they getting desperate? My new "Employment Adviser" is the 19yo former office tea lady,I asked what qualifications she had, "We are not required to have specific qualifications,but I have been in this office for a year and was promoted" fair enough,but?
ReplyDeletePathetic and defies logic. You could obviously just be out. In my case I sometimes chose not to answer the phone ..... and so on.
DeleteAs for the quality of the Adviser, when I was with A4e three years ago, they assigned one that was the closest to my age ..... She merely talked to me about the problems getting her mortgage set up!
So your under house arrest if unemployed and must answer the phone at any hour? this is ridiculous why do people take this?
DeleteI would like to think all the recent attacks against the unemployed was some brilliant plan by IDS/Cameron/Osborne to distract the public from the WP statistics,but no matter how you twist them,they are still terrible and face it they are not the sharpest bunch.
ReplyDeleteThe new "post work-program" scheme of the JCP can indeed mandate you to answer your phone any time between 8am and 6pm 5 working days a week. You get 3 opportunities to answer before sanctions apply.
ReplyDeleteI must also add charities get a bashing on here - there's certainly a lot of big nationals that are terrible and abusing these systems, but the vast majority of local charities are generally applaud at the welfare system and here to help.
I think charities only "get a bashing" when they are seen as having given up the role for which they were founded in order to be part of a despised system.
Delete@anon 01:31 As defined by DWP a phone or Internet Access device are desirable but not a necessity,so if you do not have one,by default you can't answer it.
DeleteTheir are some decent charities out there,but I have noticed at the one I was placed at that they were advertising for an assistant manager,at least 9 of us applied,as we had been running it for many Months,it was not listed on the UJM,but rather a private firm and it was not posted in the shop,good enough to do the grunt work,but not even to be considered for a paid position.
DeleteThe “Anonymous” prior to you is on the existing Work Programme and already has been subjected to sanction threats for not being there for a telephone call from a4e.
ReplyDeleteWhat if you have children to pick up from school, are visiting a sick friend, don’t hear the “phone , in the loo etc. or don’t even have a “phone. And do they phone at the same time to further catch you out?
Surely the Government aren’t so stupid and callous ..... oh yes they are. Any excuse to inflict further hardship on claimants. It’s making me so angry.
Where are the rules for what you say published Anonymous?
So Esther Mcvey Has replaced the Hopeless Hoban as Minister of State for Employment. Whilst she'll probably do no better, at the same time, she'll could hardly do worse.
ReplyDeleteJust a replacement face to defend the indefensible such as the WP, Universal Credit and Universal Job Match.
Are the Job Centre advisors intentionally told to try and find reasons to sanction people?
ReplyDeleteMy advisor seems intent on raising the Job Search quota even higher, even though she's already been consistently getting 60 jobs or other actions per fortnight.
It's like they set targets expecting people to fail, and when they don't, they feel thwarted and start demanding more and more.