Ipswich Unemployed Action.

Campaigning for Unemployed Rights.

Big Society, Social Stock Exchange and University.

with 19 comments

It’s often said that we unemployed are lazy. That we sit at home, watching our plasma tellys, drinking 2 litre bottles of White Lightening with Vodka (Breakfast) , stuffing our faces with crisps and Pringles (Dinner), spending a fortune on the dogs down William Hill and the rest of the day at the local  Wetherspoon’s.

Now is the chance to prove this wrong.

Ipswich Unemployed Action is volunteering to become the first graduates of the Big Society University.

Mr Cameron and Francis Maude, the Cabinet Office minister, will today set out new measures which they hope will bring private investment into projects run by social entrepreneurs and charities.

A “Social Stock Exchange” will allow people to buy stakes in projects that bid for contracts providing public services, receiving a return as the project gets public money on a “payment by results” basis. Such stakes could then be held in new individual savings accounts.

The Big Society Bank will co-fund charitable projects, offering start-up capital alongside private investors. There are also long-term plans for a Big Society university, which would train community volunteers and social entrepreneurs.

More Here.

We do, naturally, expect to be rewarded for our efforts.

On a scale, say, consummate with pay levels for other workers on the Stock Exchange.

Advertisements

Written by Andrew Coates

February 14, 2011 at 9:55 am

19 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Nothign new here. The government is actively encouraging slavery. Infact embracing it. They can however deplore it in other countries as deplorable. A case of do as I say and not as I do me thinks

    I for one will not be putting anymoney into the peoples bank infact i am beavering around to make sure that no money of mine is left in dormant accounts. Like the one I got the the cayman islands.

    I do think however that this joke ris encouragin charities t0o get involved with the benefit system and paul farmer of mind said charities that do this are on a very slippery slope. instead of helping their victims I mean clients they will be bullying them off the benefits list.

    Andrew have you not thought of putitng up a list of charities already embroiled in the benefit system. So people can see them for what they are and not give any money to them

    Kyron

    February 14, 2011 at 11:35 am

  2. RACIAL DEMOCRACY VOTING WYSIWYG
    “One Race One Vote”
    “Integrate the Segregated”

    Racial Democracy redefined as “VOTING WYSIWYG” with “Race Codes” by the Race Equality Inspectorate.

    Could you be a representative of your “Racial Constituency” ?

    Can “VOTING WYSIWYG” work with “BIG SOCIETY”?

    http://raceequalitysecretservice.blogspot.com/2011/01/racial-democracy-one-race-one-vote.html

    RESS

    February 14, 2011 at 11:38 am

  3. Fucking joke! Why don’t “Dave” issue all those on New Deal and Flexible New Deal and the people who will start Work Programme when it begins… the requirement to play Monopoly, so we can all grasp what its like to have money – only that none of its real and even so we cannot even keep the fake money past the end of the game?

    So, basically instead of REAL avenue streams… he wants the public to collectively finance projects in return for a “tax-free return”.

    Lets forget the concept of helping communities and that nonsense. The concept is spin to make people think they can take OWNERSHIP and RESPONSIBILITY for the projects in their local area (this means less for the council and central government).

    You will not be able to buy a £5 stake for example and get a return of £30.

    It is solely a bolt on ISA scheme.

    If you invest £2000 a year (for example) you will get up to a £2000 return. The difference between the investment and the return is, unlike having to pay tax on such income, the return will be “tax free”.

    Basically, people will be able to GAMBLE their income just to assign such amount as additional tax-free income in addition to existing tax free savings like other ISA accounts.

    I would consider it rather difficult to make a “profit” as community projects etc. aren’t run as a profit. Peoples stakes might be “reimbursed” when bigger funding is achieved through grant panels etc. but its not an investment return… or is it only the rich middle classes that may get a RETURN on an investment?

    This is more of an INSULT than anything else IMO.

    Work Programme

    February 14, 2011 at 11:42 am

    • Good point, Work Programme. Stocks are a GAMBLE!! The value of a stock can drop to ZERO!!

      Bernadette Madoff

      February 15, 2011 at 12:12 am

      • It is just like being allowed extra money to be deposited into an ISA.

        99% of most community projects will not bring a return.

        They also need to be careful to these projects in regard to them being run by charities etc. Emphasis on the word “run” and not “owned” (charities have no share ownership) but where does the charity come in to this? If a project has shares, then those with the shares can choose who runs the project which in most cases means getting rid of the charity (after all it will prove expensive in comparison)

        I thought the Big Society was dead in the water… but like other big conservative fish (MT) some just don’t know how to die!

        Work Programme

        February 15, 2011 at 8:01 am

  4. Typical Tory crap which everyone sees through. We all know it’s a cynical attempt to divert attention away from their plans for more privatisation of the public sector.

    A4e Protest Banners

    February 14, 2011 at 2:25 pm

  5. It’s all about the tory ideology of destroying and not building, they are dismantling the welfare system and eventually it will be just like it is in the USA, food kitchens, vouchers for the poor, no dignity no nothing, the Lib Dems are no better and I believe they will pay the price for Nick Clegg selling his soul just for a bit of fame.

    newsextra1962

    February 15, 2011 at 3:44 am

  6. What you saying, Work Programme? That this Big Society Bank is a con? That the Big Society is a load of bullcrap?

    Rage

    February 15, 2011 at 2:06 pm

  7. From email:

    Cameron’s Big Society project: BS or visionary?

    The Periscope Post

    “There is a real risk the Big Society will become colonised by large private sector service companies such as Serco, G4S and A4E who stand to make a lot of …

    Work Programme

    February 15, 2011 at 3:29 pm

  8. The people who control everything in the world just want you to be content. You have a job or profession that you make money at and are proud. You think you have gone up the ladder of success. That is an illlusion that those in control want you to have. As long as you are content with you lot in life, they are free to manipulate the world to there liking. They really do not care about you, never have, never will. Only there interests are what they consider. They are having a great time at a wonderful party, and guess what? You are not invited….

    George Carlin

    February 15, 2011 at 4:41 pm

  9. More benefit-bashing propaganda from that piece of shit known as the BBC. Auntie Beeb should know better – being taxpayer funded. Time to shut the vile Auntie down and throw the over-paid useless staff into the river. How about it “Dave”, you could cut the deficit and all that 🙂

    Some people not willing to trade benefit in for a job’

    Labour MP for Birkenhead Frank Field tells US welfare reformer Lawrence Mead that the way some British people view unemployment benefits is not as a payment designed to tide you over until your next job, but as a minimum income you get as a right like a pension.

    UK needs to adopt tough US stance on earning welfare

    He provided the inspiration for a tough overhaul of US welfare under which unemployed people have to work for benefits. Now American academic Lawrence Mead gives his view on how the UK could benefit from a similar approach.

    Recently, I travelled to Liverpool from New York to find out whether welfare reform can succeed in the UK.

    Mostly, reform means moving people who live on benefit into jobs. For decades now, governments in Britain have favoured this approach, and the current coalition government does as well.

    But little progress has been made.

    In Britain, the share of working-aged people who are out of work – over a quarter – is unusually high.

    Close to six million people are living on benefits of one kind or another, a tenth of the whole population.

    The recession may have caused the numbers of unemployed to grow, but 4.5 million people were living on out-of-work benefits even before the recession.

    And the largest number of dependents, 2.6 million, claim to be disabled and are living on incapacity benefit.

    Steps have been taken to move all of these groups, as well as lone parents, toward employment, yet dependency on benefits remains high.

    In contrast, the US welfare reforms of the 1990s succeeded in cutting the number of people claiming welfare by over two-thirds, and in the state of Wisconsin we reduced the number by 80%.

    It was tough love – if people did not work, they lost their benefits.

    US welfare exodus

    Claimants were told to look for work as soon as they went onto aid, or even applied for it.

    Many left welfare for jobs quickly. Even larger numbers moved into work directly without going onto welfare at all.

    And the programme affected lone mothers with children, a group which in Britain is seen as less employable and faces, as yet, no definite work requirement.

    Why has the British welfare reform not achieved anything like this?

    In Liverpool, I met local people to explore this question.

    On paper at least, Liverpool is one of the most depressed cities in Britain. Its old industrial economy has collapsed, and reliance on benefits runs unusually high, even for Britain.

    One initial surprise was that the city did not appear down-at-heel. The city has a shiny centre with lots of new buildings – typical of many industrial cities which have lost their factories, but which have seen new development of other kinds.

    Most of the people I met there did not suggest that jobs were literally unavailable to the jobless. So the labour market was less a reason for high dependency than I had previously thought.

    Sense of entitlement

    More important is the fact that many people still believe in entitlement – this is the idea that you have a right to get benefits if you qualify under the income rules, and you should not have to work for them.

    I met some trades union staff who defended this attitude. They failed to see the irony – originally trade unions defended the rights of working people, but now they were defending people who lived without working, even for years at a time.

    A further influence is that even claimants who accepted the idea of compulsory work found it difficult to imagine actually going to work.

    I met a group of unemployment benefits recipients at a community centre in Anfield, one of the most depressed areas in Liverpool.

    When I broached the idea of their having to work to get aid, they came up with all kinds of problems.

    Some doubted that jobs were available, but more doubted they could get the child care or training that they needed.

    Above all, several claimed that if they took a job they would lose more in benefits than they would gain in earnings, and thus would emerge worse off.

    The government plans to reduce these disincentives. On US evidence, this will not cause many more claimants to seek work, but the belief in disincentives has become a huge obstacle to change.

    Punitive action

    The parents and children I encountered in Anfield seemed to me upbeat and well-organised.

    The community did not manifest the deeper disarray that one often encounters in poor areas in America.

    It was difficult to believe that these adults truly could not work. Indeed, employment was the only thing really lacking in their lives.

    A further problem is how benefits are administered. We visited a local Job Centre Plus, where the staff claimed that they are applying the new work expectations.

    But on close inspection, whether applicants qualify for aid is still decided on income grounds and separately from employment.

    Claimants face pressure to work only after they have been claiming for some days or weeks, and work is then presented to them as a choice they could make, not as an obligation that they owe simply for being on aid.

    The expectation to work is not strong enough to motivate change.

    I came away with the realisation that reform takes more than changing policies to promote work, as the government is doing.

    Political leaders must also clearly announce a new social contract where entitlement is ended and benefits are now seriously and immediately conditioned on work.

    And the bureaucracy must change to communicate that message more clearly.

    ‘Being lone parent should not exempt you from working’

    US academic Lawrence Mead, a proponent of the idea that the unemployed should have to work for benefits, discusses whether a single parent should be expected to work with an unemployed single mother concerned about the effect on her family.

    Watch Lawrence Mead’s film for Newsnight in full on Tuesday 15 February 2011 at 10.30pm on BBC Two and then afterwards on the BBC iPlayer and Newsnight website.

    Auntie

    February 15, 2011 at 8:54 pm

  10. More benefit-bashing propaganda from that piece of shit known as the BBC. Auntie Beeb should know better – being hard-working taxpayer funded. Time to shut the vile Auntie down and throw the over-paid useless staff into the river. How about it “Dave”, you could cut the deficit and all that 🙂

    Some people not willing to trade benefit in for a job’

    Labour MP for Birkenhead Frank Field tells US welfare reformer Lawrence Mead that the way some British people view unemployment benefits is not as a payment designed to tide you over until your next job, but as a minimum income you get as a right like a pension.

    UK needs to adopt tough US stance on earning welfare

    He provided the inspiration for a tough overhaul of US welfare under which unemployed people have to work for benefits. Now American academic Lawrence Mead gives his view on how the UK could benefit from a similar approach.

    Recently, I travelled to Liverpool from New York to find out whether welfare reform can succeed in the UK.

    Mostly, reform means moving people who live on benefit into jobs. For decades now, governments in Britain have favoured this approach, and the current coalition government does as well.

    But little progress has been made.

    In Britain, the share of working-aged people who are out of work – over a quarter – is unusually high.

    Close to six million people are living on benefits of one kind or another, a tenth of the whole population.

    The recession may have caused the numbers of unemployed to grow, but 4.5 million people were living on out-of-work benefits even before the recession.

    And the largest number of dependents, 2.6 million, claim to be disabled and are living on incapacity benefit.

    Steps have been taken to move all of these groups, as well as lone parents, toward employment, yet dependency on benefits remains high.

    In contrast, the US welfare reforms of the 1990s succeeded in cutting the number of people claiming welfare by over two-thirds, and in the state of Wisconsin we reduced the number by 80%.

    It was tough love – if people did not work, they lost their benefits.

    US welfare exodus

    Claimants were told to look for work as soon as they went onto aid, or even applied for it.

    Many left welfare for jobs quickly. Even larger numbers moved into work directly without going onto welfare at all.

    And the programme affected lone mothers with children, a group which in Britain is seen as less employable and faces, as yet, no definite work requirement.

    Why has the British welfare reform not achieved anything like this?

    In Liverpool, I met local people to explore this question.

    On paper at least, Liverpool is one of the most depressed cities in Britain. Its old industrial economy has collapsed, and reliance on benefits runs unusually high, even for Britain.

    One initial surprise was that the city did not appear down-at-heel. The city has a shiny centre with lots of new buildings – typical of many industrial cities which have lost their factories, but which have seen new development of other kinds.

    Most of the people I met there did not suggest that jobs were literally unavailable to the jobless. So the labour market was less a reason for high dependency than I had previously thought.

    Sense of entitlement

    More important is the fact that many people still believe in entitlement – this is the idea that you have a right to get benefits if you qualify under the income rules, and you should not have to work for them.

    I met some trades union staff who defended this attitude. They failed to see the irony – originally trade unions defended the rights of working people, but now they were defending people who lived without working, even for years at a time.

    A further influence is that even claimants who accepted the idea of compulsory work found it difficult to imagine actually going to work.

    I met a group of unemployment benefits recipients at a community centre in Anfield, one of the most depressed areas in Liverpool.

    When I broached the idea of their having to work to get aid, they came up with all kinds of problems.

    Some doubted that jobs were available, but more doubted they could get the child care or training that they needed.

    Above all, several claimed that if they took a job they would lose more in benefits than they would gain in earnings, and thus would emerge worse off.

    The government plans to reduce these disincentives. On US evidence, this will not cause many more claimants to seek work, but the belief in disincentives has become a huge obstacle to change.

    Punitive action

    The parents and children I encountered in Anfield seemed to me upbeat and well-organised.

    The community did not manifest the deeper disarray that one often encounters in poor areas in America.

    It was difficult to believe that these adults truly could not work. Indeed, employment was the only thing really lacking in their lives.

    A further problem is how benefits are administered. We visited a local Job Centre Plus, where the staff claimed that they are applying the new work expectations.

    But on close inspection, whether applicants qualify for aid is still decided on income grounds and separately from employment.

    Claimants face pressure to work only after they have been claiming for some days or weeks, and work is then presented to them as a choice they could make, not as an obligation that they owe simply for being on aid.

    The expectation to work is not strong enough to motivate change.

    I came away with the realisation that reform takes more than changing policies to promote work, as the government is doing.

    Political leaders must also clearly announce a new social contract where entitlement is ended and benefits are now seriously and immediately conditioned on work.

    And the bureaucracy must change to communicate that message more clearly.

    ‘Being lone parent should not exempt you from working’

    US academic Lawrence Mead, a proponent of the idea that the unemployed should have to work for benefits, discusses whether a single parent should be expected to work with an unemployed single mother concerned about the effect on her family.

    Watch Lawrence Mead’s film for Newsnight in full on Tuesday 15 February 2011 at 10.30pm on BBC Two and then afterwards on the BBC iPlayer and Newsnight website.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/newsnight/9397592.stm

    Auntie

    February 15, 2011 at 8:54 pm

    • When this came on the telly I turned it off, watched a Buffy DVD on my plasma screen, cracked open a bottle of 100 year old Scotch, and lit my opium pipe.

      Andrew Coates

      February 16, 2011 at 9:55 am

  11. A Disillusioned 99’er Shares His Disappointment With The American Dream, Welcomes Death

    “Mark”, a member of the ever growing cadre of disillusioned, disenchanted and disgruntled millions of American unemployed, has written a letter shared by A Company of One, in which he explains the plight of 99’ers (those whose extended unemployment benefits are set to expire) in which he chronicles his plight and his terminal disappointment with the American system. One can only imagine how all the “99’ers” would feel if they did not have the benefit of living at least partially subsidized for 2 years in the socialist state of America. If Bahrain is any indication, where the government’s attempt to purchase the love of its people just failed today, pretty soon not even the 99 weeks of EUCs will do much to suppress what is an unmistakably rising anger among the broad US population.

    From Mark’s letter:

    To the unemployed, sick, disabled and poor:

    Hello,

    I’m unemployed over two years now, a 99er without any benefits for three months. I followed Unemployed Friends almost from its start, never posted until now, but am grateful for my time with you all. I did as asked with calls and e-mails, etc. I’ve a confession to make to you all. I’m a criminal.

    I’ve obeyed the 10 commandments and all laws except: I’m unemployed and that’s now a crime, I’m poor and that’s a crime, I’m worthless surplus population and that’s a crime, I’m a main street American Citizen born and raised in the USA and that’s now a crime, and I’m euthanizing myself as I write this note — so arrest my corpse. This isn’t a call for help, the deed is done, it’s not what I wanted. Death is my best available option. It’s not just that my bank account is $4, that I’ve not eaten in a week, not because hunger pangs are agonizing (I’m a wimp), not because I live in physical and mental anguish, not because the landlady is banging on the door non-stop and I face eviction, not that Congress and President have sent a strong message they no longer help the unemployed. It’s because I’m a law abiding though worthless, long-term unemployed older man who is surplus population. Had I used my college education to rip people off and steal from the elderly, poor, disabled and main street Americans I would be wearing different shoes now — a petty king. Hard work, honesty, loving kindness, charity and mercy, and becoming unemployed and destitute unable to pay your bills are all considered foolishness and high crimes in America now. Whereas stealing and lying and cheating and being greedy to excess and destroying the fabric of America is rewarded and protected — even making such people petty king and petty queens among us.

    Since the end of 2008, when corporate America began enjoying the resumption of growth, profits have swelled from an annualized pace of $995 billion to the current $1.66 trillion as of the end of September 2010. Over the same period, the number of non-farm jobs counted by the Labor Department has slipped from 13.4 million to 13 million — there is no recovery for the unemployed and main street. We taxpayers have handed trillions of dollars to the same bank and insurance industry that started our economic disaster with its reckless gambling. We bailed out General Motors. We distributed tax cuts to businesses that were supposed to use this lubrication to expand and hire. For our dollars, we have been rewarded with starvation, homelessness and a plague of fear — a testament to post-national capitalism.

    Twelve years ago, I lost the last of my family. Ten years ago, I lost the love of my life, couldn’t even visit him in the hospital because gays have no rights. I fought through and grieved and went on as best I could. Seven years ago, I was diagnosed with Diabetes and Stage 2 high blood pressure with various complications including kidney problems, mild heart failure, Diabetic Retinopathy. These conditions are debilitating and painful. I am on over eight prescribed medications, which is very difficult without insurance and income. But I struggled on and my primary caregiver was very pleased with my effort overtime with my A1C at seven. Still these physical disabilities have progressively worsened, and I have had a harder and harder time functioning in basic ways. All the while, I give thanks to God because I know there are many more worse off than me — and I tried to help by giving money to charities and smiling at people who looked down and sharing what little I had.

    I am college educated and worked 35 years in management, receiving written references and praise from every boss for whom I worked. Yet, after thousands of resumes, applications, e-mails, phone calls, and drop ins, I’ve failed to get a job even at McDonalds. I’ve discovered there are three strikes against me — most 99ers will understand. Strike one — businesses are not hiring long-term unemployed — in fact many job ads now underline “the unemployed need not apply.” Strike two — I am almost 60 years old. Employers prefer hiring younger workers who demand less and are better pack mules. Strike three — for every job opening I’ve applied, there are over 300 applicants according to each business who allow a follow up call. With the U3 unemployment holding steady at 9.6percent and U6 at 17 percent for the past 18 months, the chances of me or any 99er landing a job is less than winning the Mega Million Jackpot. On top of that, even the most conservative economists admit unemployment will not start to fall before 2012 and most predict up to seven years of this crap.

    I believe the Congress and President have no intention of really aiding the unemployed — due to various political reasons and their total removal from the suffering of most Americans, their cold-hearted, self-serving natures. Had they really wanted to help us, they could have used unspent stimulus monies or cut foolish costs like the failed wars or foreign aid, and farm subsidies. The unspent stimulus money alone cold have taken care of ALL unemployed persons for five years or until the unemployment rate reached 7 percent if Congress and the President really wanted to help us — and not string us all along with a meager safety net that fails every few months. In any case, if I were to survive homelessness (would be like winning the mega-millions) and with those three strikes against me, in seven more years, I’ll be near 70 with the new retirement age at 70 — now who will hire an old homeless guy out of work for nine years with just a few years until retirement?

    So, here I am. Long term unemployed, older man, with chronic health problems, now totally broke, hungry, facing eviction. My landlady should really be an advocate for the unemployed — she bangs on my door demanding I take action. A phone call and a “please” are not enough for her — she is angry. She is right to be angry with me, I am unemployed — as apparently everyone is now angry with us unemployed.

    Two hundred and eleven and social services cannot help single men. Food banks and other charities are unable to help any more folks — they are overwhelmed with the poor in this nation. So I have the “freedom” to be homeless and destitute and “pursue happiness” in garbage cans and then die — yay for America huh? It’s the end of November and cold. A diabetic homeless older person will experience amputations in the winter months. So I will be raiding garbage cans for food, as my body literally falls apart, a foot here, a finger there. I have experienced and even worked with pain from my diseases — hardship I can face. I just cannot muster the courage to slowly die in agony and humiliation in the gutter.

    I have no family, I have no friends. For the past two years, I’ve had nobody to talk with as people who knew me react to the “unemployed” label as if it were leprosy and contagious. I am not a bad person, in fact people really like me. But everyone seems to be on a tight budget these days and living in incredible fear. It is hopeless since we all are hearing more and more that we unemployed are to blame for unemployment, that we are just lazy, that we are no good, that we are sinners, that we are druggies, yet we are the victims who suffer and are punished while the robber baron banksters and tycoons become senators, congress, presidents and petty kings. So the only option left for me is merciful self euthanasia.

    It is with a heavy heart that I have set my death in motion, but what I am facing is not living. So off I go, I have made peace with God and placed my burden on Jesus and He forgives me. This nation has become evil to the core, with cold-hearted politicians and tycoons squeezing what little Main Street Americans have left. It is not the America into which I was born — the land of the free and the home of the brave with kind folks who help neighbors — it is now land of the Tycoon-haves and the rest of us have-nots who march into hopelessness and despair.

    Every unemployed person I have met over these past two years have been saintly. Sharing what little they have, and being charitable — being kind and patient and supportive. Isn’t it amazing that we Americans who suffer so much, have not taken to the streets in violence, riots or gotten out the guillotines and marched on tycoons and Washington in revolt as would happen in most other nations? But rather we plead with deaf politicians to please help us. We don’t demand huge sums — just 300 bucks a week, barely enough to cover housing for most. Most of all we say, please help us get a job, please allow us dignity.

    I can’t help but juxtapose our plight to the tycoons and politicians. They are never satisfied with their enormous wealth, and always want more millions no matter whom it hurts. They STEAL from pension funds, banks, the people and government, and little Wall Street investors. Then rather than face punishment, they become petty kings in this world. They are disloyal to America, unpatriotic, and serve their own foreign UN-American greedy causes and demand more and more and more. I feel that this is not the nation into which I was born. I was born in America, the land of the free and the home of the brave. America, where people give as much as they receive. America, where all people work for the common good, and try to leave a better and more prosperous nation for the next generation. America, where people help their neighbors and show charity and mercy. This new America is alien to me — it is an America of greed and corruption and avarice and mean spirited selfishness and hatred of the common good — it is an America of savage beasts roaring and tearing at the weak, and bullying the humble and peacemakers and poor and those without means to defend themselves. I am not welcome here anymore. I don’t belong here anymore. It’s as if some evil beast controls government, the economy, and our lives now.

    I must go now, my home is someplace else. Goodbye and God bless you all. God bless the unemployed and poor and elderly and disabled. God bless America and the American people except the tycoons and politicians — may God retain the sins of tycoons and politicians and phony preachers and send them to the Devil.

    Mark

    http://www.zerohedge.com/article/disillusioned-99er-shares-his-disappointment-american-dream

    Zero Hedge

    February 15, 2011 at 9:11 pm

  12. Back-to-work plan to help fewer people than Labour

    The government’s new “work programme” will actually help fewer people than the existing schemes that ministers are scrapping, the BBC has learned.

    David Cameron has described the plan as the “biggest and boldest” push to get people on benefits back to work.

    But officials have said they expect 605,000 people to go through the scheme in 2011-12 and 565,000 in 2012-13.

    About 850,000 people went through the last government’s schemes in 2009-10 which are now being scrapped.

    A Whitehall source said the difference in numbers is due to “big jump” in the number of people being referred onto the programmes because of the previous rise in unemployment.

    They also said they would be more intensive support for people at Job Centres even if they are not on the work programme – which begins in the summer.

    ‘Payment by results’

    But there are concerns too about whether the new system will actually function.

    The work programme will use a new system of “payment by results” in which contractors will be paid according to how many people they get into work, how long they have been out of work, and how long they stay in a job.

    The highest payments will be up to £14,000 for someone who had been on incapacity benefit for a number of years, then secured a job and was still in employment two years later.

    But many in the industry have fears that the government has set the bar too high, and the scheme may just not be financially viable.

    Graham Hoyle, the chief executive of the Association of Learning Providers – who represents more than 100 firms and voluntary organisations bidding for Work Programme contracts – says “there is no question” that some of them will go out of business, and community groups or voluntary groups hoping to get contracts are particularly vulnerable.

    This casts doubt on the prime minister’s hope that some voluntary groups which are losing funding through council cuts could be offered a financial lifeline by successful bids to provide welfare to work programmes that he suggested at his relaunch of the Big Society initiative on Monday.

    Financial risk

    Although the ALP is supporting the overall aim of the welfare reforms, Mr Hoyle said he thought the “numbers are wrong” and some contractors had actually pulled out of the bidding process because of fears of the financial risk involved.

    “A lot of my members are making that plunge, but they are doing it looking over their shoulders, some are very worried, and some have already withdrawn.”

    There was a lot of “real interest” in the project, he said, but “the enthusiasm is being held back by some considerable fear that the whole package doesn’t stack up”.

    “We are concerned of an underestimate that is inhibiting proper business planning and proper development of an infrastructure,” he added.

    The government says 170 tenders for the work programme have been submitted from 30 organisations and believes the new programme will deliver better results than the current system.

    A Whitehall source said: “If you look at the last decade billions has been spent on a patchwork of provision which has consistently failed to get people off benefits and into work.”

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-12476342

    BBC

    February 16, 2011 at 12:03 am

    • Did Labour’s schemes actually help? haha

      I swear people are trying to crash this blog with huge comments lol

      Work Programme

      February 16, 2011 at 9:11 am

      • Yes, could we have a few cuts and mainly links please.

        Andrew Coates

        February 16, 2011 at 9:56 am

  13. and all enjoyed with a suit,after the crisis loan cash point sensationalism comes the £300 suit.

    http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2009/03/15/jobless-to-receive-300-for-an-interview-suit-115875-21199474/

    or the manicure

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-441445/Now-jobless-manicures-massages-facials–thanks-taxpayer.html

    never mind duncan smith appears again to reassure all those that the unemployed will face tough sanctions for refusing work.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-12486158

    what he’s not so keen publicise is the dire state of the job market,staggeringly high youth unemployment that these schemes have failed to address,”woeful” was new deal,a reminder.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1551465/Browns-New-Deal-on-jobs-a-woeful-failure.html

    duncan smith would do well to reflect on his own party’s failings rather then take it out on those that are victims of it.

    they have turned the country into a s**t hole.

    ken

    February 17, 2011 at 2:39 am

  14. Ministers have dropped plans to impose a 10% housing benefit cut for anyone unemployed for more than a year.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-12486158

    Crystal Balls

    February 17, 2011 at 10:17 am


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: