Manifesto on benefits

[mikejgk]

For those not familiar with the parties' agendas on welfare, you might want to consider the following (summary courtesy of IFS http://www.ifs.org.uk/bns/bn95.pdf). It's a shocker, both Conservative and Labour - back to the middle ages with legalized serfdom:-

 

Manifesto announcements

The Labour Party’s manifesto restates existing government plans.

Conservative Party:

1. Replace all existing welfare-to-work programmes for the unemployed, lone parents and disabled people with one mandatory Work Programme for people on out-of-work benefits, delivered by private and voluntary sector organisations, with payment almost entirely by results, costing £600 million more than government plans over three years.4
   
2. Long-term unemployed to take part in community work programmes as a condition of receiving benefit.5
   
3. Stop out-of-work benefits for up to three years for people who refuse to accept ‘reasonable’ job offers.
   

Liberal Democrats:

1. A Work Placement Scheme for up to 800,000 workless under-25s, who would be paid £55 per week for a maximum of three months (estimated by the Liberal Democrats to cost £660 million in 2010–11).
   

The Conservative Party’s proposed Work Programme is the ‘toughest’ of the work/training schemes for young people in the sense that it will be mandatory for under-25s who have been unemployed for at least

six months,6 compared with ten months under the Labour plan and an entirely voluntary scheme under the Liberal Democrats’ plans. For those aged 25 and over, it is not clear at what stage in the unemployment spell the Conservative Party’s Work Programme would become mandatory.

[antone]

I've always loved this one:

 

Long-term unemployed to take part in community work programmes as a condition of receiving benefit.

 

So basically, people are asked to do tasks in exchange for receiving money. That sounds a lot like, say, a "job". Do you think they'll be paid minimum wage for this work?

 

Really, I see two possibilities:

 

1) There is a lot of community work that needs done. In this case, we should employ some of these people to do that work. This will get the work done and give those concerned proper work at at least NMW - with contracts of employment, paying taxes, pension schemes and so on.

 

2) There isn't really any work to be done. It's just another excuse to beat up on benefit recipients.

[Fuzzgin]

antone, you're talking sense. Politicians tend not to be fluent in this language.

[Dragon2020]

So if the government refuse benefits because someone refuses to do free work they stop benefit.

 

Under european LAW does this not breach human rights ? making people starve because they are ill ?

 

Sounds like american healthcare "PAY or DIE"

 

It seems like we are in a dictatorship.

 

 

What annoys me is they remove peolple off esa or IB . Where are the jobs coming from ? 3 million people are on JSA, who is going to hire a disabled person who is unable to work ? they wont get insurance cover for any accidents at work .... If someone with a servere back pain sue to degenerative bone or nerve damage looses the ability to work due to them being forced to work, can they sue the government ? it will cost more in compensation than it would have been to keep them on ESA or IB.

 

Cancer patient Has 3 years to live but is fit for work .... He/she cant live the life to the fullest because they are forced to work.

 

Its shocking but what can we do ? we have no-one to vote for who can offer what we need.

 

rant over

[loan_ranger]

Here's a hypothetical situation for you to ponder regarding the mandatory community work:

 

Recidivist petty criminal Steve has been or JSA for decades, he re-offends and gets found guilty of a theft for which he is sentenced to do 80 hours of community service.

Paul who was the victim of Steve's theft fails the ESA - WCA having been on I.B. for 10 years, he is then forced under JSA conditions to participate in a Community Work Programme.

 

I'm looking forward to getting my orange jump-suit with the words "Dole ****" emblazoned across the back, it's just as well that the law doesn't allow the Community Work Supervisors to have electric cattle prods!

[RaeUK]

I sort of like the idea of doing some form of community work in exchange for benefits - I say that under the safety net of being unable to work... But I would like the idea even more if you could - when able - do more hours and get more benefit!

However, I do see Loan Rangers point. It would be even worse if the offender ended up working alongside the victim

Best wishes

Rae

[loan_ranger]

I sort of like the idea of doing some form of community work in exchange for benefits - I say that under the safety net of being unable to work... But I would like the idea even more if you could - when able - do more hours and get more benefit!

However, I do see Loan Rangers point. It would be even worse if the offender ended up working alongside the victim

Best wishes

Rae

Work for Your Benefit will make people on JSA work for 30 hours a week (where possible placements will be of benefit to the community) in return for their benefits. They also have to undertake up to 10 hours a week of supported work search activity. This leaves no scope for doing more hours for more benefits. Furthermore, this equates to 40 hours effort for less than 1/3 of the legal minimum wage (JSA @ £65.45 - single adult and £51.85 if under 25). IMHO if a job is worth doing it deserves a living wage, not grinding poverty.

http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/wyb-annex3.pdf

Specialist Providers Work for Your Benefit Programme:

> Minimum level of conditionality prescribed in contract, including 30 hours work-experience per week and up to 10 hours employment support flexible for the first 4 weeks Access to the sanctions regime via JCP

The DWP’s own research shows that ‘workfare’ doesn’t work

• Their research into the effectiveness of workfare programmes in the US, Canada and Australia found that overall the Work for Your Benefit approach is not effective.
  
• Work for Your Benefit is least effective for individuals with multiple barriers to entering the labour market
  
• Welfare recipients with multiple barriers often find it difficult to meet obligations to take part in unpaid work. This can lead to sanctions and, in the most extreme cases, the complete withdrawal of benefits that leaves some individuals with no work and no income.
  
• Additional transport time on top of full time activity will be very problematic for many people, particularly those who are single parents. Experience in the US, recounted by Alison Benjamin in The Guardian, illustrates how dangerous this can be, as the impact on children can be damaging, particularly when there is no rise in income associated with the parent’s absence.
  

I'm pretty much in agreement with Dragon's earlier post, sadly alas the UK government didn't sign the relevant protocol in the European Convention on Human Rights (Protocol 12 - Discrimination)

Under european LAW does this not breach human rights ? making people starve because they are ill ?

Edited May 2, 2010 by loan_ranger
added comments

[farmlama]

Work for Your Benefit will make people on JSA work for 30 hours a week (where possible placements will be of benefit to the community) in return for their benefits. They also have to undertake up to 10 hours a week of supported work search activity. This leaves no scope for doing more hours for more benefits. Furthermore, this equates to 40 hours effort for less than 1/3 of the legal minimum wage (JSA @ £65.45 - single adult and £51.85 if under 25). IMHO if a job is worth doing it deserves a living wage, not grinding poverty.

 

 

but you could also say that housing benifit , council tax benifit, tax credits etc are all included in the benifits package so people on this community work scheme will be earning above the minimum wage.

this scheme if it comes into effect could also give long term unemployed the confidence to get back into work. i know a couple of long term unemployed people who would love to get back into work but are scared as they havent done it for so long. also wouldnt this kind of scheme generate new jobs aswell as there would have to be supervisers etc in the council

[cbbc]

Why is it that the partner of a benefit claiment does not have to look for work or sgn on?

Is it because some religions don't allow wives to work so the government just ignore this point?

[loan_ranger]

but you could also say that housing benifit , council tax benifit, tax credits etc are all included in the benifits package so people on this community work scheme will be earning above the minimum wage.

You can claim all of the benefits/credits you mention above whether you are in or out of work and whether you are on other benefits or not. I see the point which you are trying to make but you ought to check your facts first before you single-out JSA claimants. Furthermore, most single-room tenants will find that their combined JSA + HB/LHA is significantly below the minimum wage.

this scheme if it comes into effect could also give long term unemployed the confidence to get back into work. i know a couple of long term unemployed people who would love to get back into work but are scared as they havent done it for so long.

You generalise and presume, first ask them if they'd "love to get back into work" in return for bare subsistence doing a "Mickey Mouse" made-up job that has no prospect of leading to real and sustainable employment rather than returning to the dole and another useless FND course. People want REAL jobs, the WFYB programme doesn't create any real jobs.

You've also swallowed the government's "work is good for you" mantra - hook, line and sinker, what about the people with severe and enduring disabilities (for whom working would worsen their condition) who fail the "draconian" and unfair WCA and consequently have to claim JSA.

also wouldnt this kind of scheme generate new jobs aswell as there would have to be supervisers etc in the council

How do you know that the supervisors won't be other JSA claimants who have also been coerced into participating by the threat of sanctions or losing their benefits entirely, I see shades of Auschwitz here - where it was the other prisoners who worked the gas chambers in exchange for surviving another day themselves.

 

Paul.

[antone]

but you could also say that housing benifit , council tax benifit, tax credits etc are all included in the benifits package so people on this community work scheme will be earning above the minimum wage.

this scheme if it comes into effect could also give long term unemployed the confidence to get back into work. i know a couple of long term unemployed people who would love to get back into work but are scared as they havent done it for so long. also wouldnt this kind of scheme generate new jobs aswell as there would have to be supervisers etc in the council

 

I'm sure there are some people who receive more in benefits than they would be working 37 hours p/w at NMW. It won't be a majority, and in any case my point is more philosophical than that.

 

Although it shouldn't be this way, there is a stigma attached to being on benefits. If there is work to be done, then we should put our money where our mouths are and pay people a proper wage to do that work. Thus they will escape that stigma, and of course pay tax, NI and gain all the other benefits of being in work. And, as loan_ranger points out, they will still be entitled to claim CTB, HB, Tax Credits and so on if their income from work is not enough to live on.

 

If there isn't work to be done then we have no earthly business forcing a vulnerable group of people to do useless "busywork" just to quell the hysterical screechings of the Daily Mail and to allow politicians to reassure us that Something Is Being Done.

[commiekips]

Do the government not understand that we have paid national insurance contributions to cover unemployment and sickness? I thought that's what the benefit system was based on....

 

It's like an insurance company taking your money and then saying "you can't claim though"

 

Also agree with the point made about working for benefit. Why not just create jobs if those jobs are required?