Ipswich Unemployed Action.

Campaigning for Unemployed Rights.

Adam Perkins: “Breeding out Welfare dependency” and “Employment Resistant Personalities.”

with 56 comments

Perkins: Plans to Breed Out ‘Welfare Dependency’. 

The Guardian’s Dawn Foster reports on this:

Adam Perkins: ‘Welfare dependency can be bred out’

Adam Perkins’s book, The Welfare Trait, was published in December to little fanfare and barely reviewed. But last month, after a talk the lecturer in the neurobiology of personality was due to give at the London School of Economics was cancelled, Perkins’s arguments have provoked a small-scale media storm.

Several disability groups planned a peaceful protest before the talk, after which they planned to listen to Perkins’s speech and engage in debate with him. Perkins claimed he had been “no-platformed”, while the Daily Mail and the Spectator said he had been silenced for “daring to tell the truth” about the welfare state.

In his office at the Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience at King’s College London, Perkins downplays the controversy. “Everything went smoothly until the last day, then there were some threats about smashing up the lecture theatre or something, though I didn’t get any threats. But it’s not my lecture theatre; it wasn’t for me to decide.”

Just a point on this.

The reaction of the disability groups was the following:

Black Triangle among groups backing free speech, claiming college over-reacted to retorts about Adam Perkins benefits theory.

Campaigners have accused the London School of Economics of overreacting by postponing an academic’s lecture about welfare because of proposed demonstrations.

Adam Perkins was due to speak at the LSE about his new book, The Welfare Trait, which examines the relationship between personality and the welfare state, when organisers suspended the event following a backlash on social media.

Subsequent reports suggested the postponement was the latest in a series of “no-platforming” incidents, in which students have attempted to stop speakers they disagree with appearing at events.

But John McArdle, 48, co-founder of the disability rights group Black Triangle, which called for a protest on the day of Perkins’ talk, said: “Dr Perkins is absolutely within his rights to speak at LSE. We believe in freedom of speech and discussion. We weren’t trying to stop Dr Perkins from speaking – we were going to go there and disagree. We have a right to protest against what we regard as scapegoating and the marginalisation of people who have to rely on social security.”

Black Triangle runs protests against the reform of the welfare system regarding incapacity benefits. Though McArdle had not read Perkins’ book at the time of speaking he said it was enough to read the premise of the work to know that it stigmatised the long-term unemployed.

He said: “Perkins says ‘individuals with aggressive, rule-breaking and antisocial personality characteristics are over-represented among welfare claimants’. You could easily replace the term welfare claimants with the term merchant bankers, Libor traders or indeed the conduct of Iain Duncan Smith and Tory MPs, who are hammering sick and disabled people and the poor.

“But the current argument seems to be that unacceptable views cannot be opposed by people on the so-called left without saying that we’re violating someone’s fundamental right to freedom of speech. That’s complete nonsense.”

This is the reasoning in Perkin’s publication:

The argument he sets out in his book, he tells me, is essentially that the welfare state “becomes a production line for damaged kids” and encourages unemployed households to have more children than families in work.

These households, in turn, breed what he describes as an “employment-resistant personality” that is characterised by low conscientiousness and agreeableness. “If you’re not conscientious in work situations, you’re not going to be conscientious in others, like managing your income to benefit your kids,” he says. “If we happen to have a welfare state that increases the number of children born into welfare households, they are more likely to suffer neglect. If you’re born into [one of these] households there’s a risk of personality damage.

“There are some problematic links between the welfare state and personality, and the welfare state can proliferate employment resistance,” he adds. “We found that women could have a kid, and increase their income by leaving the workforce.”

This is how the hard right Adam Smith Institute’s   | received the book:

Perkins’s core argument is that the welfare state, the foundational institution of modern Britain (the Church of England having sadly declined), contains the seeds of its own eventual destruction. A large body of evidence, which Perkins reviews, supports the intuitive idea that habitual welfare claimants tend to be less conscientious and agreeable than the average person. Such habitual claimants also appear to reproduce at higher rates than the general population, a pattern found across nations and time periods. They also seem to adjust their fertility in response to changes in the generosity of welfare provision, having fewer children in times of austerity and more when governments turn on the spigot marked “spending”.

Over time, therefore, the average work motivation of the general population is lowered. This occurs through both genetic and environmental channels. Personality traits are substantially heritable (meaning that a decent percentage of the variation in these traits is due to naturally occurring genetic variation). Given this fact, habitual welfare claimants with ’employment-resistant personalities’ are likely to have offspring with similar personalities. Furthermore, Perkins argues that children raised in a household with disagreeable and unconscientious parents are likely to become more employment-resistant than they would if raised in more fortunate circumstances. It could be argued that the null shared environmental effects on personality usually found in twin studies mitigate against the family environment as a vessel for the transmission of work-resistant personality, and Perkins, surprisingly, does not really defend himself against this charge. Such a defence could be mustered however: problem families from the very lowest percentiles of socioeconomic status are rarely retained in twin studies, even if they are initially recruited.

Perkins gets off the fence and recommends concrete policy solutions for the problems that he identifies, arguing that governments should try to adjust the generosity of welfare payments to the point where habitual claimants do not have greater fertility than those customarily employed. The book no doubt went to press before the Chancellor announced plans to limit child tax credits to a household’s first two children, but such a measure is very much in the spirit of this bullet-biting book. The explicit targeting of fertility as a goal of welfare policy, however, goes beyond current government policy. Perkins perhaps should also have argued for measures to boost the fertility of those with pro-social personalities, such as deregulation of the childcare and housing markets to cut the costs of sustainable family formation.

He also argues for greater provision of early life intensive childcare, albeit highly limited in scale – essentially offered only to the offspring of the worst households. As evidence from Quebec shows, universal kindergarten provision is just warehousing, likely to do more harm than good. When such programs are implemented en masse, it is difficult to employ sufficiently high-quality staff, given the low pay and status of the work. For these and other reasons I think this is a more questionable policy proposal – it is necessary to stop such programs being taken over more affluent parents who do not really need them, but it is presumably quite difficult to get highly employment-resistant parents to sign up for Perry Preschool-style projects in the first place. Careful trials are needed – the Quebec experience, and the failure of Sure Start in the UK, illustrate the pitfalls. It is a slight weakness of the book that Perkins is overly reliant on Perry Preschool for his estimates of the economic benefits of intensive early-life educational interventions – but given the state of the extant literature there is probably little else he could have done.

Advertisements

Written by Andrew Coates

March 9, 2016 at 5:22 pm

56 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Not for one second do I believe a mother can have a kid and. Boost her income by leaving the workforce and going on benefits.. But if that’s the case it says everything about the crappy wages and in work benefits doesn’t it? I’m a working single mum I’ve been on benefits as well!

    katrehman

    March 9, 2016 at 6:31 pm

  2. There”s going to be more & more health warnings.

    enigma

    March 9, 2016 at 9:44 pm

  3. Anyone having problems get down to the Citizens Advice bureau,the phone is free and it important to deal with benefit verification and such like in the first month.

    Employment Resistant Personalities

    Breeding out Welfare dependency

    What this really means is the disabled,expect more horror stories appearing.There is constructive dismantling you could only use those words related to this,claims are being exposed to the equivalent of extracting a dna hair sample to stop benefit.Even old past voluntary work is being hauled up in these attempts.

    Its got nothing to do with work just leave you penniless.

    ken

    March 9, 2016 at 11:01 pm

  4. DWP told my terminally ill Dad to fill in a Capability For Work questionnaire

    http://www.southportvisiter.co.uk/news/southport-west-lancs/dwp-told-terminally-ill-dad-10872487

    ken

    March 9, 2016 at 11:12 pm

  5. The sharp rise in people bedding down on the streets has been driven by welfare cuts. They are unacceptable evidence of the price vulnerable are paying for austerity

    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/mar/09/the-guardian-view-on-rough-sleeping-an-outrage-that-was-predictable-and-predicted

    ken

    March 9, 2016 at 11:31 pm

    • Quote from The Guardian’s report on rough sleeping:

      “…And all this is before the impact of the next round of welfare cuts comes in, and before universal credit, which has now evolved into another benefit cut, is rolled out nationwide”.

      Tobanem

      March 10, 2016 at 10:09 am

      • What was governments last suggestion, oh that’s right, convert shipping containers and porter cabins. Remind you of what’s happening elsewhere ?

        Government wont deal with the homeless until it effects revenue and even then if they already haven’t don’t so will no doubt bring in with alterations the vagrancy act again.

        doug

        March 10, 2016 at 11:11 am

      • lol at Rich, Famous and Homeless. One the the first mentions on the credits was “Security – STI Consultants” lol How many rough sleepers have STI Security to watch their back. As if Julia Bradbury, Nick Hancock and the other forget-their-names was ever in any danger. And are we meant to believe that Julia Bradbury didn’t have a ‘freshen up’ lol One of the guys did take a night off in an hotel on-screen though. And what the fuck was Lord Birdshit doing in this?

        Rough Sleeper

        March 10, 2016 at 12:53 pm

  6. “Only used as a last resort”.

    We often hear this phrase but how often is it proven ?

    Its time those fighting against sanctions asked DWP, show us where you documented a claimants lateness so as to keep a tally 2 times prior to applying for a sanction, show us as their must be at least 2 claimants who have done it in a single jobcentre where the rule of 2 strikes and your out as been documented and applied fairly and equally, show this again as every jobcentre must have one arriving late where consistency follows that from the first jobcentre I mentioned.

    All I’m going to finish on is in all my time frequenting welfare forums, not once has a claimant ever popped up and said they were warned on prior occasions to a sanction, that unlike a sanction, they were never ever given warning letters for a first and second offence, a standard procedure for DWP when instigating any official direction/proclamation to which a claimant can be held accountable for.

    doug

    March 10, 2016 at 10:11 am

    • Warnings nil, but is a 2 week warning coming into effect this year, lets see how this plays out.

      enigma

      March 10, 2016 at 11:17 am

    • However

      Questions over new benefit sanctions warning system.

      http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-35185697

      enigma

      March 10, 2016 at 11:34 am

      • I like that article you linked to enigma as it proves contrary to what DWP say that sanctions are and have never been used as a last resort. The very fact this proposed warning is after the fact of a sanction still doesn’t highlight as I said, the 1 or 2 times you committed the same offence prior to any such action that you should have been formally warned against repeating.

        It can only be said to be a last resort if certain things prior to existed but as we know, you fall off the curb just once, a work coach is directed by way of DWP procedure to report you straight off the bat meaning no matter how you slice and dice it, it could never ever be as a last resort for either the claimant or work coach.

        doug

        March 10, 2016 at 11:51 am

  7. According to Radio 4’s You and Yours Morrisons, the supermarket has it’s own abattoirs!

    DAB

    March 10, 2016 at 12:56 pm

  8. About Dr A Perkins, [or as I will call him from hereon Dr A Prik]

    About D A Prik, where do you start about him and his so called research?

    Lets start with the basic data set used. A] he used the wrong data set from the national census – link is buried in Refuted Twitter feed from weeks ago [sorry]

    Methodology of statistics. Er wrong, transposing .00 into 00. to fiddle figures into his favour – Well he is what he is. Lets not even look at the fact that the Adam Smith Institute, the Paragons of fiscal virtue missed that little mistake in their oh so careful and thoughful review. Link to this is buried in Refuted Twitter feed from weeks ago [again sorry]

    Biological Sample set for “work ethic” – please note no animals have to my knowledge been hurt by these experiments, though going by Dr A Prik’s attitude I don’t see that lasting long… Anyway, the biological sample came from High Runner mice displaying two mental disorders: ADHD and addiction. So no Human data to back up this claim, though I am sure said data is available on both subjects…. hhhhmmmmm. Obviously there is a huge underlying population of unemployed who are addicted and suffering from ADHD.

    A more thorough debunking of this rubbish by people in the field is available here:

    https://storify.com/PsychologyBrief/criticisms-of-adam-perkins-and-the-welfare-trait

    Finally, I copy below the beginning of Chapter 6 from Dr A Priks “Errata of random Fiddled Stuff”

    Remember he is being serious about this:

    Chapter
    6
    Genetic Influences on Personality
    This chapter summarises evidence for the genetic transmission of personality characteristics from parents to offspring. This topic might seem like a matter for debate or even controversy, but it isn’t: long before the advent of behaviour genetics as a scientific discipline, farmers used selective breeding to mould the psychological as well as anatomical characteristics of their livestock. For example, sheep are docile and passive farm animals yet the wild sheep from which they are descended are feisty creatures. This change in sheep personality is not the result of education, but instead has been achieved by centuries of selective breeding for docility.

    .
    .
    .

    To be clear he says:
    – genetic transmission of personality characteristics from parents to offspring.
    – advent of behaviour genetics as a scientific discipline,
    – farmers used selective breeding to mould the psychological as well as anatomical characteristics of their livestock.
    – sheep are docile and passive farm animals
    – wild sheep are feisty creatures.
    – This change in sheep personality is not the result of education, but instead has been achieved by centuries of selective breeding for docility.

    So there you have it, we have moved on from the language of Lord Fraud and George Prentious Dynko Smith of being “Stock”, to being able to mind meld with children on a genetic level, should now be subject to selective breeding for wanted characteristics as we are now livestock [er… isn’t this the same as Stock?], are wild sheep [good one that], which need to be turned into docile sheep.

    Gazza

    March 10, 2016 at 1:11 pm

    • Example of fiddled figures used:

      0.003 is 0.3%, not 3%

      Gazza

      March 10, 2016 at 1:19 pm

      • Someone can’t do maths.

        Obi Wan Kenobi

        March 12, 2016 at 10:26 am

    • I see no ones pointed to the fact that all his claimed evidence and banter is no more than a hypothesis which as anyone in science will tell you doesn’t make a fact. That his hypothesis requires further extensive investigation before it can move beyond a point of view lacking credentials of any worthy note.

      When you discuss transferable traits in genetics, unlike physical features and anatomical timing for things like the heart, everything else is pretty much hit and miss and is in fact so random, coincidence is more whats provable.

      I too hanker to quantify human behavior, observed for years as a personal hobby and while i could group large unconnected amounts of people together (so random general public) in certain traits, i never managed to do it with siblings unless of course they were twins, very similar twins that is.

      Rich or poor, working or not, old or young or even well and unwell, i found their all capable of displaying same like traits despite coming from different backgrounds. At best and i will say its a hypothesis of mine, we learn in the conscious world rather than hereditary gained and as children’s role models have been long since replaced from parent to lime lighted prominent media advocated people, can only deduce, what ever we learn, seldom these days will it come from our parents.

      doug

      March 10, 2016 at 5:15 pm

      • There is a long history of this kind of thing:
        The Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in American Life is a 1994 book by American psychologist Richard J. Herrnsteinbshite,

        “The book argued the average genetic IQ of the United States is declining, owing to the tendency of the more intelligent to have fewer children than the less intelligent, the generation length to be shorter for the less intelligent, and the large-scale immigration to the United States of those with low intelligence.”

        Keith Joseph, “In a speech in October 1974, he expressed some of the attitudes towards ‘the lower orders’ that were once common among middle-class eugenicists. He argued that ‘a high and rising proportion of children are being born to mothers least fitted to bring children into the world and to bring them up. They are born to mothers who were first pregnant in adolescence in social classes 4 and 5 … Some are of low intelligence, most of low educational attainment.’ But the killer line was this: ‘The balance of our population, our human stock is threatened.’ Joseph’s message was clear. The poor were breeding too fast, and the danger was they were going to swamp everyone else.”

        Andrew Coates

        March 10, 2016 at 5:49 pm

      • Being poor doesn’t mean your stupid right ?

        Howard Schultz, J.K Rowling,Celine Dion all started out poor.

        doug

        March 11, 2016 at 8:37 am

  9. The law & social security. 35hr jobsearch, etc

    2 pages.

    http://dpac.uk.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Law-on-Social-Security.pdf?1d95ed

    enigma

    March 10, 2016 at 1:47 pm

  10. Interesting read here:

    !

    March 10, 2016 at 7:00 pm

    • Try this:

      !

      March 10, 2016 at 7:14 pm

      • Lets not forget how many jobs went to EU and none EU migrants.

        doug

        March 11, 2016 at 8:38 am

  11. Are all ‘work roaches’ on the £22,500 – £28,000 + EO (Employment Officer) salary? What about the ones you never see do anything other than take signings? £22,500 – £28,000 a year for being sat on your arse signing on jobseekers!? What if you see your work roach stood at the podium, when there was a podium. Does that mean they have been demoted (to a lower salary scale) as a ‘punishment’ or is it part of job rotation? £22,500 – £28,000 for being stood at the podium!? Signing staff can still, and do, raise doubts so does this make them an EO? Or do they have to conduct ‘intervention’ interviews i.e. ‘chats’ to qualify as an EO?

    Questioner

    March 11, 2016 at 8:32 am

  12. Iain Duncan Smith claims people THANK him for stopping their benefits

    http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/iain-duncan-smith-claims-people-7533615

    What a load of old tosh, people thanking IDS. I would like to see the letters please IDS if you don’t mind, especially in the light of that fraudulent sanction literature you put and had to remove once it was found to be completely false.

    He once claimed,people who were sanctioned went onto sign off and work (no evidence ever presented) so this is a bit of a climb down considering its now only improves their focus. tosh, tosh, pure tosh.

    doug

    March 11, 2016 at 8:55 am

    • A spokesperson for the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) was not immediately able to back up Mr Duncan Smith’s claim.

      Who’d have guessed.

      Another Fine Recession

      March 11, 2016 at 2:37 pm

  13. Notice how mostly all benefit fraudsters get suspended jail terms ?

    Hmmm, could it be because jail costs more and taxpayers cant get their money back when the accused asks the court to turn their debt into prison time and see it run concurrent to their fraud charge perhaps ?

    Its a proven fact, it costs the taxpayer way more even without prison costs than will ever be recovered through court fines/costs.

    doug

    March 11, 2016 at 8:59 am

  14. Family is something economists struggle to measure (a fact stab at Perkins)

    http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/family-is-something-economists-struggle-to-measure-a6923436.html

    Oh dear, looks like besides the Adam Smith institute, no one thinks Dr Adam Perkins talks anything other than sh*t.

    doug

    March 11, 2016 at 9:07 am

  15. Just to remind everybody:

    Andrew Coates

    March 11, 2016 at 10:57 am

    • It will be something that millions of people will never forget.

      enigma

      March 11, 2016 at 1:08 pm

      • What amazes me unless IDS doesn’t do the internet, that the net isn’t like peoples minds, that everything you say and do is forever immortalized and can be dragged up and thrown into peoples faces at a moments notice.
        Even when the government remove things of theirs or politicians, do they seriously think it disappears at the press of the delete button, have they never heard of harvest bots (go by many names) you capture everything on the net and archive it including all the edits not to mention times dates,etc.

        In that link i gave in the video, IDS states their all left, they all hate me but the truth is IDS, people hate you irrespective of their political view, because your really bad at pretending what your not.

        Uk people know knock off when they see it and see you they do son.

        doug

        March 11, 2016 at 4:13 pm

      • Nevertheless he has no shame whatsoever.

        Andrew Coates

        March 11, 2016 at 5:46 pm

    • & many more of the changes.

      Personal Independence Payment consultation response announced.

      11 March 2016
      The government is changing the assessment criteria for the daily living component of Personal Independence Payment (PIP).

      https://www.gov.uk/government/news/personal-independence-payment-consultation-response-announced

      enigma

      March 11, 2016 at 3:05 pm

    • Civil servants have refused to release information that would show how many secret reviews the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has carried out into benefit-related suicides in the last 15 months.

      The refusal emerged in a response to a freedom of information (FoI) request that revealed there have been a further nine “peer reviews” into benefit-related deaths completed by DWP since November 2014.

      Disability News Service (DNS) had asked DWP to update the figures it released 15 months ago, which showed there had been 49 reviews into benefit-related deaths since February 2012, of which 40 had involved suicides or attempted suicides.

      But DWP civil servants refused to say how many of the latest nine cases involved suicides.

      The refusal to release the information came as the welfare reform minister, Lord Freud, refused to monitor the number of claimants who take their own lives as a result of the £30-a-week cut for new claimants placed in the work-related activity group of employment and support allowance from April 2017.

      http://www.disabilitynewsservice.com/dwp-secrecy-over-benefit-related-suicides/

      enigma

      March 11, 2016 at 8:49 pm

  16. Judge challenges government over legal representation for vulnerable people.

    Ruling will halt thousands of applications involving those with learning disabilities who need treatment involving loss of liberty.

    A senior judge has challenged the government to provide legal representation for vulnerable people as a backlog of safeguarding cases that cannot be tried builds up in the court of protection.

    The ruling by Mr Justice Charles will, in effect, halt thousands of sensitive applications a year involving those with dementia, Alzheimer’s or learning disabilities who require treatment involving some loss of liberty.

    The judgment is the latest confrontation in the gruelling war between the legal profession and ministers over how much money should be spent on the justice system at a time of austerity.

    In his judgment, Charles, who is a high court judge and vice-president of the court of protection, has adjourned four test cases until someone – the Legal Aid Agency, local authorities or central government – agrees to pay for the unidentified claimants to be represented.

    http://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/mar/10/judge-challenges-government-over-legal-representation-for-vulnerable-people

    enigma

    March 11, 2016 at 1:40 pm

  17. Off topic. But I just got my latest extortion tax bill today (typo. Should read council tax!) I get no council tax support at all. For the first time in our south east England town, every one now has to pay something. Previously those on JSA etc were protected. This will not be happy news for many children in our school or their families

    katrehman

    March 11, 2016 at 2:58 pm

    • Some of us have had it for 2 years! Give it 2 months and you’ll notice your local shops reducing stock then closing down as they lose 15% of their income.

      Another Fine Recession

      March 11, 2016 at 3:10 pm

  18. Closing the gap: Creating a framework for tackling the disability employment gap in the UK. by Mather Oakley.

    Based on analysis of the Labour Force Survey (LFS), around 5.5 million working age individuals have a work-limiting health condition or disability. Of this group, 44% are employed, compared to 87% of those who say they are not work-limited. The gap between the two, the disability employment gap as measured on this definition, is 43 percentage points, meaning that achieving the Government’s ambition would mean helping 1.2 million more work-limited individuals into work.

    http://www.smf.co.uk/publications/disability-employment-gap/

    enigma

    March 11, 2016 at 5:11 pm

  19. Not Sanctioned, But Sectioned!

    Elderly artist sectioned under Mental Health Act after disputing eviction – activists

    “Labour run Lambeth are determined to evict anyone who stands in the way of selling public assets to private hands”

    RT

    March 11, 2016 at 7:50 pm

  20. IDS to be officially challenged over claim he made about benefit sanctions helping people:

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/mar/12/labour-refer-groundless-iain-duncan-smith-claim-statistics-watchdog

    Tobanem

    March 12, 2016 at 8:59 am

    • “Work and pensions secretary said 75% of jobseekers think benefit sanctions have helped them ‘focus and get on” sounds a bit different to,

      DWP research found 72% of jobseeker’s allowance (JSA) claimants said awareness of sanctions made them “more likely to follow the rules”.

      Well 75% of jobseekers isn’t the same as 72% of JSA claimants that were sanctioned and that’s assuming that its a head count and not a taken percentage of claimants used for the purpose of research meaning it could be even more insignificant if say only 10% of all JSA claimants who were sanctioned were interviewed for the research and thus making what appears large at 75% is merely only 75 of a 100 JSA claimants.

      To put this into context if say the total sanctioned on JSA was 100’000, then this 75% of 100 would actually only be 0.075% of the total amount. If was from a pool of 1000 then 0.75% or say from 10000 it would be 7.5%. NOT THAT IMPRESSIVE WHEN EXPRESSED THAT WAY IS IT ?

      Then theirs helped them “focus and get on” Vs awareness of sanctions made them “more likely to follow the rules”. What we can clearly see here is IDS attempt to be generic, knowing full well what he was saying could be easily misinterpreted, a common trait practiced by diagnosed sociopaths.

      I cant wait to see what the stat watchdog finds as i bet all that glitters is not gold.

      doug

      March 12, 2016 at 12:26 pm

      • Oh for the record 10% of all claimants sanctioned isnt a 100, these figures are for demonstrative purposes of a point so even though 10% was used in the same breath of 75 out of 100, the two are unrelated in math used.

        doug

        March 12, 2016 at 12:32 pm

      • By contrast 99% of slaves surveyed said that the fear of the whip made them work.

        Andrew Coates

        March 12, 2016 at 4:53 pm

      • From: John Slater

        11 March 2016

        Dear Department for Work and Pensions,

        As the Department will be aware the Secretary of State for Work and
        Pensions (“SoS”) stated in his official capacity as SoS that 75% of
        people who have had their benefits sanctioned said it helped them
        “focus and get on.”

        Please provide or direct me to the data and/or reports (official or
        otherwise) upon which the Secretary of State based his statement.

        If the Department holds no such information I respectfully remind
        it that it does have an obligation to confirm or deny.

        Yours faithfully,
        John Slater

        https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/sos_75_of_people_who_have_been_s#comment-67540

        enigma

        March 12, 2016 at 9:22 pm

  21. THROWN OUT WITH THE RUBBISH

    Another alarming statistic – this on the subject of homelessness.

    31 people were found (alive) in bins in 2014. This number had jumped to 93 in 2015, and rocketed to 175 in the “current financial year”

    11 homeless people have been killed after being crushed when the bins they were sleeping in were loaded on to bin lorries.

    http://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/mar/12/rising-number-people-sleeping-bins-refuse-collectors-warn

    Tobanem

    March 12, 2016 at 9:09 am

  22. More than half a century of sweeping educational reforms have done little to improve Britain’s social mobility, according to one of the country’s leading experts on equality.

    Instead, young people from less well-off families entering today’s labour market have far less favourable prospects than their parents or even their grandparents, despite having gained much better qualifications.

    Giving the British Academy Sociology Lectureon 15 March, Dr John Goldthorpe, a sociologist at the University of Oxford, whose work on class has proven widely influential, will claim that little has changed in British society since the second world war, largely because more advantaged families are using their economic, cultural, and social advantages to ensure that their children remain at the top of the social class ladder.

    http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/mar/12/uk-education-reforms-not-helped-social-mobility

    enigma

    March 12, 2016 at 4:33 pm

  23. No scheme or WP until 2017? – you’d be wrong.

    Continuing to roll out Universal Credit through to financial year 2020 to 2021 and extending job search conditionality to a further 1.3 million claimants to ensure that work always pays
    continuing to provide a range of employment support through Jobcentre Plus, the Work Programme (until 2017) and the new Work and Health Programme from 2017
    supporting people to become self-employed (New Enterprise Allowance)

    reforming the welfare system to support people with disabilities and health conditions into work, whilst protecting the most vulnerable. We will be publishing a White Paper in 2016 that will set out plans to improve support for people with health conditions and disabilities, including exploring the roles of employers, and promoting integration across health and employment
    continuing to provide specialist provision for people with health conditions and disabilities within Jobcentre Plus, Work Programme and Work Choice until 2017

    introducing Jobcentre Plus support into schools in England to supplement careers advice and provide routes into apprenticeships, work experience and sector-based work academy places

    https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/dwp-single-departmental-plan-2015-to-2020/dwp-single-departmental-plan-2015-to-2020

    enigma

    March 12, 2016 at 5:03 pm

  24. There looks to be a worrying trend to “Annual Verification” with an another post about stopped benefits and letters not received.

    james799 permalink
    March 11, 2016 12:28 pm

    Another “missing” returned application. They have stopped my benefit and are writing to the council to inform them of this decision. I have just been referred onto a Work Programme via working links so I am not sure how this will affect that??

    http://samedifference1.com/2015/04/20/important-jsa-annual-verification-from-27th-april/#comment-213827

    It appears this process is being used to stop benefits if the claimant returns form’s or not.

    ken

    March 12, 2016 at 6:48 pm

    • ken

      had mine – waited to last week before sign on day – then sent by registered post. Verbally checked my replacement work coach [mine seems to have gone missing in action – he’s there but not available to see me… I cannot imagine why as I am so looking forward to it… ] and was assured it wasn’t an issue. As a precaution I also had a copy which is ready for presentation for them to scan and send by email.

      I suspect the registered post bit is what fucked up their plans. Proof of postage trumps claim it wasn’t received. I would love someone to tell me that. Maladministration right there and then.

      Gazza

      March 13, 2016 at 10:52 am

  25. More than half of appealed DWP ‘fit to work’ decisions found to be wrong at tribunal

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/dwp-fit-to-work-esa-appeal-tribunal-a6923066.html

    ken

    March 12, 2016 at 10:14 pm

  26. Found this interesting comment on a forum regarding this “Annual verification Check” there is certainly more to it,the real reason and raises interesting points.The problem facing people when money is stopped is huge.

    How much of this letter not received fiasco is impossible to determine however its happening.

    I suspect that DWP are not telling us the real reasons for introducing this measure.
    What the Spending Review 2013, cited by DWP, states under the heading Supporting People into Work is:

    “requiring all claimants who are subject to conditionality to verify their claim each year – supporting this Government’s efforts to reduce fraud and error in the benefits system”

    Notice ‘all claimants’. In addition DWP have underpinned it legally by citing the recently amended Regulation 24 of the JSA Regulations 1996.

    This raises a number of questions for me.

    Why single out IBJSA claimants?
    Why does it not apply to UC claimants who are also jobseekers and been claiming for more than a year?
    Where is the amended UC legislation?
    How long before the JSA Regulations 1996 become redundant? (in practice the manner in which DWP are implementing welfare reform with regard to JSA means they are already redundant, unless a JSA claimant challenges a decision. Just look at the way JSA claimants have had the UC Claimant Commitment imposed on them.

    As others have pointed out DWP already has ‘robust’ systems in place to detect and prevent fraud. Which leads me to believe that this is not the real reason for imposing it now.

    I suspect the real reason is to do with the roll out of UC and the DWPs plans to ‘automatically transfer’ all IBJSA claimants to UC within the next 18 months and are using this as a wheeze to try and prevent errors creeping into the new benefit.

    Taken from here.

    http://unemploymentmovement.com/forum/job-centre/120-from-27-april-2015-jsa-ib-claimants-compulsury-yearly-claim-verification.html?start=14

    ken

    March 12, 2016 at 10:41 pm

    • ken

      big problem with the replacement of JSA is the tribunal finding in October last year where it was established JSA/UC et al are all contracts – contracts cannot be changed/negated against your wishes – its “Illegal” to do so said the judge.

      How long before DWP puts its “Big Schlung Trump” in the alligator trap? Ooops….

      Gazza

      March 13, 2016 at 10:55 am

  27. George Osborne has defended his decision to use cuts in disability benefits to fund tax breaks for the middle class.

    Appearing on the Andrew Marr show, he was asked about his decision to cut Personal Independence Payments currently made to over 640,000 disabled people in a bid to save some £1.2bn.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/callous-george-osborne-defends-using-12bn-disability-cuts-to-fund-middle-class-tax-break-a6928541.html

    enigma

    March 13, 2016 at 12:12 pm


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: