Ipswich Unemployed Action.

Campaigning for Unemployed Rights.

How the Budget will affect the Unemployed.

with 32 comments

Osborne Celebrates at Pushing People into Deeper Poverty.

 

Effects of the Budget on the out-of-work.

SINGLE

Single, no children. Unemployed

2015-16 He receives jobseeker’s allowance of £73.10 a week (£57.90 if aged 16-24). Housing benefit eligibility will depend on his property size and, if he rents, where he lives.

2016-17 Jobseeker’s allowance is frozen for the next four years, so remains at £3,801 a year. Any housing benefit he may receive is also frozen for that period.

Single, one child. Unemployed

2015­-16 Income support is £73.10 a week, child tax credit is £63.98, and child benefit is £20.70. This gives an annual household income of £8,205 disregarding any housing benefit.

2016-­17 Last summer the chancellor announced he was freezing all three of her benefits for the next four years. It leaves her income unchanged, disregarding housing benefit.

Guardian.

Put simply as the cost of living rises – note that this particularly affects rent – the amount of JSA and Income support will not go up.

This will mean that people already in poverty will be pushed further down.

Disabled:

Around 640,000 claimants could lose out as a result of changes to the assessment criteria for PIP, which is designed to help people with extra costs associated with disabilities and long-term illnesses.

Disabled people will be badly affected with an expected 200,000 individuals set to lose almost £3,000 a year according to Labour Party analysis.

Metro.

Summary of 2016 Benefit changes:

The following benefit changes are set to take place in 2016, some may be subject to change or approval.

Benefit and Tax Credit rates frozen

The main rates of working age benefits and tax credits will be frozen in cash terms for 4 years from April 2016. Pensioner benefits are excluded from the benefit freeze and will be protected by the ‘triple lock’.

Disability benefits, the disability-related elements of tax credits and statutory payments including Personal Independence Payment, Attendance Allowance, Disability Living Allowance, Employment and Support Allowance (Support Group only), Maternity Allowance, Statutory Maternity/Paternity Pay and Statutory Sick Pay, will be uprated in line with the Consumer Prices Index (CPI). The CPI was announced to have fallen in the year to September 2015 so this means that the benefits mentioned above will not be increased from April 2016.

Benefit cap reduced

There is currently a benefit cap in place in England, Scotland and Wales restricting the amount in certain benefits that a working age household can receive. Any household receiving more than the cap has their Housing Benefit reduced to bring them back within the limit. The benefit cap is to be introduced in Northern Ireland from 31 May.

The cap which is currently £26,000 per year is to be reduced to £23,000 for households living in London and to £20,000 for those outside London from Autumn 2016, when exactly you will be affected will depend on where you live. For further details see our Benefit cap reduction Autumn 2016 help page.

Housing Benefit changes

Unlike other reforms the Chancellor announced directly affecting child related payments, withdrawal of the family premium in Housing Benefit (£17.45 when a claimant has one or more dependant children) will take effect from 1 May 2016, a year earlier than the reductions for children within Child Tax Credit. Removal of the family premium will affect both new claims and new births from 1 May 2016. For further details see our Family premium abolished May 2016 help page.

Housing Benefit backdating will be reduced so that new claims from working age claimants will be backdated for a maximum of one month. Currently, if you are working age, your Housing Benefit claim can be backdated for up to six months if you can show good cause for making a late claim and you would have qualified for the benefit sooner.

Tax credit allowance and taper cut

On 25th November 2015 during the Chancellor’s combined Autumn Statement and Spending Review, he announced that the widely unpopular planned tax credit changes (reduced income threshold and increased taper rate), which would have meant that any working household receiving tax credits with an annual income of more than £3,850 a year would be worse off, would in fact not be going ahead.

Tax credit income disregard cut

At the moment, if your household income increases by up to £5,000 during the tax year this increase is ignored when calculating your entitlement for that year. From April 2016 this will be reduced so that any increase in income of more than £2,500 will be taken into account. According to the Treasury, it is estimated that 800,000 people will see their entitlement to tax credits reduced by an average of £200-£300 per year due to this cut which brings the ‘income rise disregard’ back to the same level it was when tax credits were first introduced.

New State Pension

For those reaching pension age from 6 April 2016 a new State Pension is being introduced to replace the basic State Pension and State Second Pension. This affects all women born on or after 6 April 1953 and all men born on or after 6 April 1951. The new pension is designed to be much simpler than the current system and will consist of a single amount to be awarded in full if you have 35 qualifying years of National Insurance contributions. If you don’t have the contributions required for the full pension, as long as you have a minimum number of qualifying years (between 7 and 10) you will receive a pro rata amount. If you don’t have the minimum number of qualifying years you will not qualify for the single tier pension. Any contributions made under the current pension system can be used toward the new State Pension.

If you qualify for the full amount you will receive £155.65 a week. For those who do gain in state pension income, for some this will be offset by reductions in means-tested benefit entitlements and if you fall under the new single tier pension system you will not be able to claim the Pension Credit savings credit. To find out more see Age UK’s ‘what the new pension reforms mean for you’

Universal Credit changes

The work allowance in Universal Credit, the amount you can earn without your benefit being affected, will be reduced from April 2016. For disabled people and people with children it will be reduced to £192 per month if you have housing costs and £397 per month if you don’t have housing costs. The work allowance will be abolished altogether from April 2016 for non-disabled, childless claimants meaning your benefit is reduced as soon as you start earning.

The Childcare Costs element of Universal Credit currently pays for 70% of your registered childcare costs up to a monthly limit of £532 for one child or £912 for two or more children. From 11 April 2016, this will increase so that you will be able to claim back up to 85% of your paid out childcare costs up to a monthly limit of £646 for one child or £1108 for two or more children.

Other changes

National Minimum Wage increased

The National Minimum Wage will be ‘rebranded’ as the National Living Wage and will be increased to £7.20 per hour for those 25 or over from April 2016. It will reach £9.00 per hour by 2020.

Personal tax allowance increased

The Personal Tax Allowance, the amount you can earn before paying income tax, will be increased from £10,600 to £11,000 from April 2016. It will be further increased to £12,500 by 2020 and thereafter it will automatically be set at the same level as 30 times the National Living Wage (National Minimum Wage).

Rent changes for social tenants

From April 2016 social housing rents will be reduced by 1%, or in some exceptions frozen, for four years.

The Void also asks:Does The End of Social Security Lie Behind Osborne’s Savings Hand Out?

The use of personal savings accounts as a replacement fot the social security system has long been an ambition of free-market extremists desperate to eradicate any form of social spending.  As the Think Tank Review website reminded us last year, the Adam Smith Institute proposed Fortune Accounts way back in 1995.  The suggestion was that individuals should pay into a pot of money to fund any future periods of sickness or unemployment.  More recently the right-wing Policy Exhange called for the establishment of MyFund accounts in an astonishing report that did not just call for these savings pots to replace unemployment benefits but also suggested that the money could pay for “access to private sector employment support services”.  They want us to pay for our own workfare.

Government ministers are already thinking along the lines of some sort of savings or insurance based social security system.  A public sector consultant recently blogged about a meeting – sponsored by health insurers BUPA just by the way – with comedy toff Lord Fraud held at the Reform think tank.   According to the report the Minister for Welfare Reform raised the question of “why do employers insure against sickness absence and why don’t individuals?” .

More on the Void.

Advertisements

Written by Andrew Coates

March 17, 2016 at 3:59 pm

32 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. How many food banks will there be in the future, will there be any food banks at all, it’s nothing but the removal of any help whatsoever.

    enigma

    March 17, 2016 at 5:38 pm

  2. OT: As Obama said to racist Republicans “Elections have consequences – Here Budgets have Consequences, losing the cover afforded by pretending to care

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-35830452
    “Minister Justin Tomlinson defends ‘cuts’ to disability payments”

    The life long Conservative Wheelchair Runner of the ConCons Disability Group and Board member has abandoned the ConCons and shut down the website he owned & ran.

    Here is the reaction of ConCon Central office: “A Conservative Party spokesman said: “The Conservative Disability Group has not deactivated its website.

    “The owner of the domain, who is no longer a member of the group, has deactivated it without any instruction to do so.”

    So… You own and run a website at your own expense and someone else [ConCons using it to cover up what they’re really like] says you did not have permission to do as you want? Hhhhhmmmm.

    Gazza

    March 17, 2016 at 8:52 pm

  3. UC

    Applying for UC, on line, email add and phone number not necessary, at the end of the application it will state when you will receive your first UC benefits & also state how much your first payment will be, a few days later a letter arrives for that first interview, first ID check, no photo ID no problem, you will be asked a few Q’s – what day did you sign on when last on JSA, what day did your JSA go into your bank, which bank did your benefits go into, – could be other Q’s,

    Interview, welcome to UC & sanctions (if you don’t do this or don’t do that) UJM, 35 hour job search, register to view the jobcentre twitter page, facebook, linkedin, give you a job application form to fill in for a known company near you (to be returned to the JC) the job/position does not exist, they will try their best to get your email add & phone number.

    You’ll be asked about your last job, you will then be given a form to fill in asking why your last job ended & another form – consent – giving DWP permission to get in touch with your last employer.

    There are jobs (mostly temp) only you won’t see many of them on line, more & more employers are no longer advertising them, but your adviser will soon tell you where those jobs are and for what employer, your adviser will then try and setup an interview for you with that employer, in a JC.

    enigma

    March 17, 2016 at 9:20 pm

    • in the letter you first receive it states “We’ve arranged for you to meet one of our expert work coaches who will make sure you’ve done all you need to do to complete your claim, so you get your first monthly payment as soon as possible”

      Don’t be going to that first interview thinking your job search starts on that day.

      enigma

      March 17, 2016 at 10:03 pm

    • Funny, isn’t it, need an address added to the first page or it prevents you making a claim but don’t need a phone number or email address. It later goes on asking what sort of home it is (ie, rented, mortgaged, homeless).

      People should not be put in this position page one, especially if they have no desire to claim housing funds.
      It gets even worse when a person making a claim then tries to notify DWP that the address is no longer applicable (change of circumstance) at the very first interview.

      I’ve had more correspondence from the person I mentioned a while back who was in this very position. They stated apart from the DWP coach trying to insist you couldn’t make a claim for benefits if you have no address, they mentioned that despite officially notifying DWP of the change (mandated practice) that still to this day, they haven’t changed it.

      Enigma, do you have any DWP paperwork that states you must register with twitter, facebook and the likes as I would like to look at the legality of that.

      As for the fake job form, a claimant at the point of introduction is termed legally uniformed so has and DWP must afford them, time to research this vacancy (ie, whose the employer, etc). Under law your not allowed to false advertise which clearly this would be if no job was attached and you weren’t informed of such. I would also suggest putting it in your own envelope and asking DWP for the address which they cannot deny you as a company has no reasonable expectation of privacy under law, only people so if DWP state their protecting the employers name than simply say what is their job position and department like HR for instance. Again get me one of these forms enigma and will look at it.

      I’ve had not to say it isn’t the case, no reports as yet of the asking employer why job ended form.

      Definitely not true about temp jobs online, especially when you consider employers are mostly kidding people into believing their permanent after a 3 to 6 month probation period only to drop you like a sack of coal after that time.

      As for UJM, watch for agencies called adview which is just a portal for every total job, workcircle, reed which are portals from multiple sites and clearly advertises the agency or employer exactly as indeed does.

      A claimant can quite easily avoid DWPs UJM if they don’t want to apply through it.

      doug

      March 18, 2016 at 8:54 am

      • Doug

        There is no legal paperwork stating that one must register with those above, as you’ll know, it was verbal, (as above, just trying to get ones info)

        The job application form stated what company it was for, (choose from a list which position your applying for,) a search on the company website revealed no positions available, that says it all, It is well known that the DWP are working with employers, more & more job interviews are being held in JC’s, (there are always two people who interview claimants, in the local JC) I know many people who have been employed with local companies only on temp, 12 weeks, all these people were interviewed for those jobs in the local JC their job ends, then the next claimant is taken on for 12 weeks.

        I know what you mean regarding advertising temp jobs on line, but as above.(I see this happening in this area)

        Myself I don’t use UJM nor have an account on it.

        enigma

        March 18, 2016 at 10:03 am

      • Doug like you I like to hear the truth, no nonsense, I live in reality, I know what is happening & play the DWP’s game!

        enigma

        March 18, 2016 at 10:15 am

      • Sadly though not enough claimants follow suit enigma.

        We know their is no legal stature beyond this, “online presents” in UC but as I and others have mentioned, government cannot force a person to process their personal and or sensitive data, DWP MUST gain legal consent without force, threat or fraud.

        Now if every claimant just registered but with identities such as robin hood, lady gaga, etc so made up a complete fictional profile (alias) , DWP would be screwed on the whole UJM point as they have no power what’s so ever to assert one must use their real details online.

        DPA states anyone processing such data must state prior or soon after processing how and why they intend to do such and that such can only be obtained for its specific noted purposes.

        Considering one can bar and must be allowed to bar their respective profile/s, a real name or any of the details asked for are completely unnecessary and not backed up by law.
        This brings us to ones CV, which again requires legal consent from the data subject, meaning one could simply put a first name that’s real, an area rather than a street and a email address along with blotting out company names you worked for which could all be covered by such data will be forth coming but only at a physical interview that the person feels they can trust the potential employer.

        Doing this along with just going to the sites advertising the vacancy rather than going through UJM will mess up DWP bigtime.

        If all claimants did this then we could change this but the truth is their frightened of being sanctioned so no matter what you tell them, their still do what DWP ask.

        I hate to say it but the reason why DWP get away with so much is because far to many claimants allow it to happen.

        doug

        March 18, 2016 at 11:27 am

      • I am always trying to tell claimants what they should & shouldn’t do, it sure is difficult, for many people.

        Regarding the consent, past employer, I didn’t sign it and won’t as is the case for many other things but as we know many people will go ahead in signing everything that’s put in front of them.

        enigma

        March 18, 2016 at 11:57 am

      • Actually lets talk “online presence”.

        No law is allowed to contravene another unless such exemptions are duly noted like for instance when under suspicion of a crime, the suspected loses certain DPA rights under said law.

        Now having a online presence while carved into the welfare reform act is very generic to say the least, like for instance it never dawns on people that this has no time frame meaning just going on the internet let alone a job site once a day is a presence online.

        It, despite DWPs efforts to deceive doesn’t imply one needs to register,have an online profile and make it open to employers,the net or as you know, even DWP themselves. Why well as you know that thing called, legal consent required.

        Now a coach can suggest you register but really has no power to state where you register or how meaning signing up with say totaljobs or indeed is exactly the same as doing it with UJM as DWP would be at a complete loss to explain why not considering these two make a large bulk of the sites adverts.

        DWP would also be at a loss to explain why you simply couldn’t apply to the employer,site or agency direct rather than go through a portal like UJM, meaning their gateway accounts are rather pointless except in cases where an individual employer advertises but withholds their contact details which is questionable within itself because who hires people from a point of anonymity, if you knew to company and went their, would they not tell you whose hiring and even if they don’t, you could always give them your CV by hand or post marked say recruitment department or HR department.

        COMPANY NAMES OR DEPARTMENTS DONT HAVE ANY LEGAL RIGHT OR PROTECTION UNDER THE DATA PROTECTION ACT -Its not considered personal data.

        AN EMPLOYER OR APPOINTED EMPLOYEE IN A POSITION OR PUT INTO A POSITION OF HIRING HAS DEW TO THE COURSE OF THEIR BUSINESS AND THE TASK NO REASONABLE EXPECTATION OF PRIVACY UNDER THE DATA PROTECTION ACT – People who supply a service or product outside of certain secret departments must supply a name or at the very least, a company name.

        If DWP or jobmatch refuse to supply it or cannot produce it, then they do so of their own free will as the law doesn’t support this course of action in this instance meaning any confidential adverts placed on UJM can quite reasonably be viewed as fake/fraudulant until DWP or UJM prove otherwise.

        doug

        March 18, 2016 at 12:03 pm

      • doug

        good points there about registering directly on a companies website & DWP trying to force use of UJM.

        Recently, lets call her M, instructed me via direction to apply for jobs she found on UJM. I stated did ‘M’ have the power to force use of UJM and ‘M’ said no, she however continued with the Direction. I would point out that ‘M’ did not note, or copy off the jobs which I was to apply for. I found the jobs external to UJM and applied – giving DWP my usual evidence of email addresses, names and dates. ‘M’ wasn’t happy. And infact, ‘M’ did not even know what jobs she’d given me and threw the papers aside and said in effect I’d wasted her time. Considering the Sanctions culture in DWP I think everyone can draw their own conclusions.

        Gazza

        March 18, 2016 at 4:54 pm

  4. The only verdict is vengeance, a vendetta… Held as a votive not in vain, for the value and veracity of such… Shall one day vindicate the vigilant and the virtuous.

    — V

    V

    March 18, 2016 at 10:22 am

  5. !

    March 18, 2016 at 2:25 pm

  6. Thanks I,

    “There is a good chance the reports will reveal his department were misleading the public about the progress of the programme.”

    We will be watching this one like ‘awks.

    Andrew Coates

    March 18, 2016 at 5:12 pm

  7. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-35848687

    Iain Duncan Smith quits over planned disability benefit changes

    superted

    March 18, 2016 at 10:06 pm

    • He didn’t have the decency to say he f….. Up seems to be blaming the treasury.! Saying he’s been forced to make cuts and. Yet more money is going to the rich??
      Ding doing the devil’s gone!!

      katrehman

      March 18, 2016 at 10:11 pm

    • maybe he was told by the treasury [it will be interesting to see how long now passes till its release] that he can no longer waste money stopping the publication about UC and all the other rubbish he’s been hiding as its … wait for it… a waste of money!

      If there’s no appeal – that’s what I think has happened. GidIdiot will use him as a foil, saying he advised him that it was a good idea for the cuts and its all his fault – so there.

      unfortuntely, I forsee another little shit like him taking over… can anyone say Priti?

      Gazza

      March 18, 2016 at 10:57 pm

      • That’s just it Gazza, many people forget that there are other people and since we are all different who knows what kind of person takes over the role.

        enigma

        March 19, 2016 at 9:58 am

      • Maybe nothing will be released, because he’s no longer in the position to release it all, & since someone else will take over……….

        enigma

        March 19, 2016 at 10:07 am

    • Just seen it on the news this morning.

      Brilliant news.

      OOO! I think it’s party time, I’ll definitely be have a drink today.

      Good riddance to the useless git.

      IDS gone in the blink of an eye – not before time – he will never again be able to affect anyone on any kind of benefit.

      Cheers mi dears.

      Obi Wan Kenobi

      March 19, 2016 at 6:28 am

  8. superted

    March 18, 2016 at 10:37 pm

  9. Does the Pope shit in the woods? 😀

    Does George Osborne Die His Hair?

    March 19, 2016 at 1:56 am

  10. After the IDS bombshell resignation, keep a close eye on Universal Credit – there are not too many wheels left on that doomed wagon. The Treasury believes UC will never happen. And even a judge has now ordered UC Internal Reviews must now be published and not withheld as the DWP was doing:

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/03/16/universal_credit_internal_reviews_disclosure_order

    And from the New Statesman:

    “It is certainly true that this [IDS] is a man who has been waiting for an excuse to walk out of the government since the Autumn Statement in November 2015, when Osborne moved the tax credit cuts into the universal credit rollout – a sign that, as far as the Treasury was concerned, the universal credit will never happen. As civil servants in the DWP have observed, Duncan Smith has been a broken figure since that setback”.

    http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/welfare/2016/03/think-iain-duncan-smiths-resignation-masterstroke-sadly-hes-not-clever

    Tobanem

    March 19, 2016 at 8:58 am

    • More on Universal Credit

      “A recent report from Civitas said universal credit had been watered down to such an extent that “if creating an incentive to work is the goal, the present system [ie, what was in place before universal credit] meets that goal more effectively”.

      Tobanem

      March 19, 2016 at 10:05 am

  11. Tobanem

    March 19, 2016 at 9:08 am

  12. Osborne – the true mastermind of the cuts.

    Liberal Democrat leader Tim Farron says:

    “It is quite right that Iain Duncan Smith has resigned over this heartless plan to cut disability benefits, but the true mastermind of the changes, George Osborne, should also be considering his position.

    It is clear that these cuts had nothing to do with the right level of support for people with disabilities, and everything to do with George Osborne’s self imposed spending target.

    Now his plan has come unstuck he should follow Iain Duncan Smith, for once, and do the decent thing.”

    Tobanem

    March 19, 2016 at 9:17 am

    • Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn says:

      “The resignation of Iain Duncan Smith reveals a government in disarray and a chancellor who has lost the credibility to manage the economy in the interests of the majority of our people.

      The Budget has exposed George Osborne’s record of profound unfairness and economic failure.

      Not only must the cuts to support for disabled people be abandoned, but the government must change economic course.

      The chancellor has failed the British people. He should follow the honourable course taken by Iain Duncan Smith and resign.”

      Tobanem

      March 19, 2016 at 9:20 am

      • OSBORNE’S FUTURE

        “…rumb­lings among Conservative backbenchers that the anger unleashed by the disability cuts had won new converts to the “Anything But George” campaign that is seeking an alternative to Osborne as a potential future leader”.

        http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/mar/18/iain-duncan-smith-resigns-from-cabinet-over-disability-cuts

        Tobanem

        March 19, 2016 at 10:01 am

      • How long did JC take to think of that speech or did someone write it for him?

        The problem with Corbyn is, he has lost the limelight – his team shouldn’t have stopped with the PR exercises, the country is effectively Tory supporters now and as things currently stand he wouldn’t win an election if it was tomorrow. If the next Government isn’t Labour, its Tory…

        Universal Jobmatch

        March 19, 2016 at 11:55 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: