Ipswich Unemployed Action.

Campaigning for Unemployed Rights.

Universal basic income trials in Scotland

with 87 comments

Image result for basic incomes

Universal basic income trials being considered in Scotland.

Comment: I am not convinced of this.

We had a debate in France back in the 1980s on the idea, promoted by amongst others, the journalist and theorist André  Gorz.

Carried on the by New Economics Foundation in the UK.

We then posed some simple arguments  against it:

  • If universal basic income is available to all then why restrict it to nationals of one country?
  • How exactly will it cover things like the rent, electricity bills and the gas charges?
  • Will it actually pay the bills?

Labour’s key economist,  the ‘sovereigntist’  economist and pro-Brexit  James Meadway (former chief economist at the New Economics Foundation) comes from this Basic Income supporting background.

Anyway this is the story:

Two councils, Fife and Glasgow, are investigating idea of offering everyone a fixed income regardless of earnings.

Scotland looks set to be the first part of the UK to pilot a basic income for every citizen, as councils in Fife and Glasgow investigate trial schemes in 2017.

The councillor Matt Kerr has been championing the idea through the ornate halls of Glasgow City Chambers, and is frank about the challenges it poses.

“Like a lot of people, I was interested in the idea but never completely convinced,” he said. But working as Labour’s anti-poverty lead on the council, Kerr says that he “kept coming back to the basic income”.

Kerr sees the basic income as a way of simplifying the UK’s byzantine welfare system. “But it is also about solidarity: it says that everyone is valued and the government will support you. It changes the relationship between the individual and the state.”

The concept of a universal basic income revolves around the idea of offering every individual, regardless of existing welfare benefits or earned income, a non-conditional flat-rate payment, with any income earned above that taxed progressively. The intention is to provide a basic economic platform on which people can build their lives, whether they choose to earn, learn, care or set up a business.

The shadow chancellor, John McDonnell, has suggested that it is likely to appear in his party’s next manifesto, while there has been a groundswell of interest among anti-poverty groups who see it as a means of changing not only the relationship between people and the state, but between workers and increasingly insecure employment in the gig economy.

Scotland was recently added to the list of “places to watch” for basic income activity by the Basic Income Earth Network, founded by the radical economist Guy Standing, whose hugely influential book The Precariat identified an emerging social class suffering the worst of job insecurity and most likely to be attracted to rightwing populism.

Advertisements

Written by Andrew Coates

January 6, 2017 at 4:51 pm

Posted in DWP, Suffolk, Tories, TV Shows on Unemployed

Tagged with

87 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. The Tories at war with everyone !!!!!

    Stepping Razor Sound Plate System

    January 6, 2017 at 4:58 pm

  2. Cash Cow PLC – Sanctions PLC

    Cash Cow are a registered Trademark@ – Sanctions are a registered Trademark@

    #twittersclosingdown #facebooksclosingdown

    Stepping Razor Sound Plate System

    January 6, 2017 at 5:04 pm

    • Very propaganda – If someone is doing benefit fraud arrested them !!! Tory Propaganda.

      Stepping Razor Sound Plate System

      January 6, 2017 at 7:38 pm

      • How about boasting about £800,000 benefit fraud which I am doing. Now start working you lazy system.

        Stepping Razor Sound Plate System

        January 6, 2017 at 7:42 pm

      • That will be £20,000 to go on ITV !!!

        Stepping Razor Sound Plate System

        January 6, 2017 at 7:43 pm

      • The Tax Payer wants £30,000 for me to go on ITV !!!

        Stepping Razor Sound Plate System

        January 6, 2017 at 7:44 pm

    • Very propaganda – If someone is doing benefit fraud arrested them !!! Tory Propaganda.

      Stepping Razor Sound Plate System

      January 6, 2017 at 7:38 pm

      • Big Brother Suicide Tory Chat Bot House !!!

        Stepping Razor Sound Plate System

        January 6, 2017 at 7:39 pm

  3. Universal Basic Income is a very good idea, like human rights and eradicating poverty. However it remains to be seen if it is really practical in political terms. I doubt very much that the governing Conservative Party would be prepared to scrap the benefits system. Then start paying people money for food and rent, without them having to work , or do anything at all to receive the payment, and without sanctions or compulsion of any kind.
    It does pose a number of basic questions. Who then would work ? And even if enough people could be found for the more attractive jobs, who would do the plumbing, factory work, refuse-collection. road-sweeping etc. ?
    If there was absolutely no financial reason for them to do so ?

    Jeff Smith

    January 6, 2017 at 7:20 pm

    • Your question has already been answered by Karl Marx: we would all be artists and musicians 😉

      Engels

      January 6, 2017 at 7:41 pm

      • poets, philosophers, whatever 😉

        Engels

        January 6, 2017 at 7:41 pm

    • The Conservatives and Labour have made hay with the “us and them” rhetoric about “strivers and scroungers” and forcing slackers and spongers living like Kings and Queens on benefits into work. Not only did it enable the Tories to make swingeing cuts in social security, made food bank usage tolerable, make incompetent welfare reforms that have caused huge suffering and even premature death among the vulnerable, sick and disabled but actually worked well for them politically as they hammered benefit claimants frowned upon by a nation desensitised to such people’s plight by years of demonisation in the media.

      Division like this permitted the Conservatives to slash and burn welfare, look heroic and in the right as they did it, and enabled them to advance their worst pet dogmas and agendas in a way not previously possible. Division like this has been positively good for the Conservatives politically and I can’t see them ever, not in a million years, making any kind of effort to bring society together and reduce the poverty and misery they expanded deliberately with their “The best way out of poverty is through work” bullshit, which isn’t true when the work on offer is too poorly paid or too sparse to make any difference to the lot of the poor sods doing it.

      I don’t know about Scotland but England won’t see a basic universal income introduced while never ending welfare reform and crackdowns on benefit claimants helps political parties to win elections.

      Paul

      January 7, 2017 at 10:10 am

      • All very true Paul,yes the Tories are bastards but if you look at who are pulling their strings then you will see who the real culprits are behind these evil policies!

        foxglove

        January 7, 2017 at 2:37 pm

  4. UBI is the genocide of the Tory Party. Disabled people`s genocide is the Tories saviour !!!

    Stepping Razor Sound Plate System

    January 6, 2017 at 7:47 pm

  5. Sadly Engels, you cannot in reality have a society in which ‘we would all be artists and musicians’.
    At least, not a society as we know it. Unless of course like the ancient Greeks there is a leisured class whose activities are supported by slaves. Someone has to produce, so that others may be free to indulge in artworks and meditation.

    Jeff Smith

    January 6, 2017 at 7:53 pm

  6. I like the idea of a universal basic income as it would eradicate benefit fraud, because no one would need to commit fraud to get a basic income 😉 and also end financial poverty.

    Marie

    January 6, 2017 at 8:11 pm

  7. Can’t see it happening, the nutters that rule us want to take away not give!

    foxglove

    January 6, 2017 at 8:40 pm

  8. Stingy bastards.

    Marie

    January 6, 2017 at 8:51 pm

  9. UBI – Question – will it account for Bedroom Tax Mark 2 (Let’s Really Stuff the Poor)? Hell No – it’ll make it worse is my bet.

    Until the wrinkle of give 1 in one hand and snatch 3 away with the other, things will only get worse.

    foxglove is quite correct in his observation.

    Gazza

    January 6, 2017 at 11:55 pm

    • Gazza I will have you know that I am a lady(though some might say that is a matter of opinion)!

      foxglove

      January 7, 2017 at 2:25 pm

  10. The Conversation.

    Basic income is a radical idea bound for the political mainstream – here’s why

    An idea gaining traction in various part of the world is that everyone in society should receive an amount of money from the state to cover their basic cost of living. People would no longer be stigmatised on benefits, argue supporters.

    Particularly in an era of fears about future mass unemployment caused by automation.

    http://theconversation.com/basic-income-is-a-radical-idea-bound-for-the-political-mainstream-heres-why-69695

    news seeker

    January 7, 2017 at 9:10 am

  11. Bike courier wins ‘gig’ economy employment rights case.

    A bicycle courier has won an employment rights case in a ruling which could have implications for the “gig economy”.

    A tribunal found that Maggie Dewhurst, a courier with logistics firm City Sprint, should be classed as a worker rather than self-employed.

    As a worker, she would be entitled to basic rights including holiday and sick pay and the national living wage.

    City Sprint said it was “disappointed” 😄

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-38534524

    news seeker

    January 7, 2017 at 9:24 am

  12. Universal Income is only meaningful if it is available to everyone in need and is sufficient to meet all of a person’s basic needs, i.e., food, drink. clothing, transport, rent, utilities and so on and so forth, and whether or not it rises with wage levels and/or inflation. (If it isn’t high enough, 50% say of the median wage, and uprated annually it will start worthless and wither on the vine.) Higher benefit levels might actually be better than a low subsistence-level guaranteed basic income; let’s not forget that benefits are frozen and not being uprated until, at least, the end of the parliament despite the fact rents are increasing as is inflation.

    It all depends how it is implemented.

    Universal Credit sounded like a good idea in the beginning and look at the horror it is now.

    Paul

    January 7, 2017 at 9:55 am

    • A UBI could, will most likely turn out bad. Higher benefit levels, and an end to ‘conditionality’, sanctions, workfare, ‘work programmes’, ’employability schemes… is the way to go.

      Basic Income has been suggested in an exceptionally wide range of forms, often with completely different objectives in mind. In fact, we can draw a line between the models that are concerned with improving lives and raising living standards and those that are focused on intensifying the capacity for capitalist exploitation. Among those in the ‘progressive’ category there is considerable diversity. There’s the ‘universal demogrant’ that provides an income to everyone and the concept of a ‘negative income tax’ involving some level of means test. BI proposals come from liberal quarters that are responsibly redistributive, reduce poverty and inequality and ease up on bureaucratic intrusion. The above mentioned proposal for an Ontario pilot project would be part of this camp. Then there are the models that have more radical, transformative objectives in mind. These suggest that BI could be used to take from employers the power of economic coercion itself by severing the link between work and income. Often such ideas are tied to the notion of preparing for sweeping technological displacement and a ‘workless future’ by providing secure, adequate and unconditional income. Given the vast extent to which forms of unpaid labour are performed by women in this society, it is hardly surprising that there are also feminist arguments for BI.

      I have to say that the one really common thread that I see running through all of the notions of a progressive BI is that they pay great attention to explaining how nice their systems would be but give little if any thought to the concrete prospects of implementation. Before looking further at these deficiencies and proposing an alternative approach, it might be useful to consider more seriously the neoliberal version that is hanging like a sword over all our heads.
      Neoliberal Version

      The deeply reactionary ideas of Charles Murray have extended to some very sinister proposals for BI. There are two basic elements that shape his system. Firstly, the universal payment, after the compulsory purchase of private health insurance, is set at the dreadfully low amount of $10,000 a year. Secondly, he is utterly insistent that all other systems of provision must be dismantled as a BI is put in place. Canada’s right wing Fraser Institute, recently used its blog to stress the same points as Murray, making clear that the level of provision must not interfere with the supply of low waged workers.

      If governments today, as they intensify the neoliberal agenda, are starting to consider the possibilities of BI, I see three factors at work. Firstly, there is the not unimportant issue of legitimacy. Particularly because they are being provided with a generous amount of ‘progressive’ cover, they are able to present their deliberations on BI as a responsible weighing of the common good. The Ontario Liberals stand out as international champions in this regard. Their BI pilot project consultations, have enabled them to put in place yet another round of fake dialogue, with the empty promise of a “better way” diverting attention as they push people even deeper into poverty. The World Bank and the IMF have been worrying out loud about the backlash against their austerity agenda and its devastating impacts. That IMF economists are themselves musing about BI, is perhaps significant in this regard. It advances their agenda but can be dressed up to look progressive. It may be the best thing for the institutions of global capitalism since the myth of ‘poverty reduction’.

      The second element of BI that I think is of interest to the architects of neoliberalism is that it can fine tune economic coercion as they create an ever more elastic workforce based on the most precarious forms of employment. The income support systems that emerged out of the Poor Law tradition, stressed intense restrictions and moral policing. Along with horribly inadequate benefit levels, this has been very useful in driving people into low waged work to an unprecedented extent. It may, however, be time to rethink this to a degree. If people are moving between poverty wages and poverty level benefits more frequently in a precarious job market, perhaps they can be more effectively prodded into the worst jobs with less intrusive benefit systems. A less rule bound delivery of poverty income, that gives people a chance of retaining their housing, may be needed to keep them job ready. Linked to this, of course, is the huge boost to the employers of a BI system that constitutes a form of wage top up. Provided the payment is meagre, it will not impede the flow of low paid workers but it will mean that their employers receive a subsidy that absolves them from having to pay living wages or come under pressure to increase the amount they do provide.

      Thirdly, the great advantage of neoliberal BI is that the inadequate and dwindling payment it provides turns those who receive it into customers in the marketplace. In my opinion, BI would be far from the best way to strengthen the social infrastructure at any time but in the context of an intensifying agenda of austerity and privatization, it is a recipe for disaster. It’s really about the commodification of social provision. Your payment may actually be less conditional and somewhat larger but, as you shop through the privatized remains of the social infrastructure, with inadequate means and very few rights, you are dramatically worse off. That, in my view, is what is being prepared by those who will actually implement a system of BI and the hopes and wishes to the contrary of its progressive advocates don’t count for very much.
      Progressive Dreams

      I said previously that proposals for redistributive or transformative models of BI are generally marked by a tendency to focus on the desirability of what is being advanced while paying much less attention to actual prospects for implementation. I’ve yet to see, quite bluntly, any serious attempt to assess what stands in the way of a progressive BI and what can be done to bring it into existence. It simply isn’t enough to explain how just and fair a given model would be if it could be adopted. In order to credibly advance BI as the solution, there are some questions that must be settled.

      Firstly, income support systems came into being because, while employers welcome an oversupply of labour and the desperation that comes with it as something that boosts their bargaining power, the total abandonment of the jobless creates social unrest. Some measure of income support, provided as a reluctant concession, has proved to be necessary. However, the systems of provision that have been put in place have always been as inadequate as possible so as to undermine employer strength as little as possible. A widely delivered or even universal adequate payment would greatly tilt that balance back the other way. What reason is there to think that this is likely to be implemented?

      Secondly, over the last several decades, concessions made during the post war years have been taken back. Trade unions have been weakened, workers’ rights undermined and low waged work has increased considerably. The degrading of income support systems has been central to creating the climate of desperation needed to achieve this. Not only have benefits for the unemployed been attacked but other systems, especially for disabled people have been undermined so as to generate a scramble for the worst jobs. This has led to a shift in the balance of forces in society and we are fighting a largely defensive struggle. Given this very unfavourable situation, in which unions and movements are not in the ascendancy, how can it be supposed that those profiting from the present situation are likely to accept a measure of redistributive social reform that is at least as sweeping as anything put in place during the post war boom? What is the plan to make this happen?

      Thirdly, as right wing governments and political parties directly linked to the most reactionary business interests consider BI and set up pilot projects that provide meagre payments and focus on how to ensure people on social benefits become low waged workers, what reason is there to imagine that a progressive BI, rather than the neoliberal variant, is being cooked up?

      Regardless of these issues, it is sometimes asserted that an adequate system of provision must be put in place simply because we are moving toward a “workless future.” In such a society, it is suggested, masses of people who have been displaced will have to be provided for and the capitalists will have to think like Elon Musk, of Tesla Motors and support BI because it is the only sensible and rational solution. To imagine such responsible provision for the future is to place undue faith in a system based on the making of profit. If they won’t stop building pipelines in the face of environmental catastrophe, there’s little reason to expect them to worry too much about sensible solutions to technological displacement. There simply is no post-capitalist capitalism and no social policy innovation that is going to bring it about.

      At a recent panel on Basic Income that I spoke at, the moderator posed a challenge. She accepted that BI might not be a way forward but asked, if that were so, what “bold vision” could be advanced in its place. It’s a fair question but a realistic appraisal of what we are up against is still obligatory, even if that has some sobering aspects to it. The great problem that we have is that the neoliberal years have done a lot of damage. The level of exploitation has been increased and working class movements have been weakened. While what we demand and aspire to is very important, the bigger question is what we can win. What’s disturbing about the left wing turn to BI is that is seems to think there is a social policy end run around the realities of neoliberalism and the need to resist it. There is no such thing.
      British Labour Party and BI

      With very good reason, there has been considerable excitement internationally around the Jeremy Corbyn leadership in the British Labour Party. His close ally, Shadow Chancellor, John McDonnell, has been paying some attention to adopting BI, as part of a platform that would express a break with the austerity consensus. McDonnell, from a position on the left of a major social democratic party, raises the possibility of a ‘best case scenario’ for progressive BI. For that very reason, the question is posed of whether the ‘bold vision’ I spoke of should be framed around the universal payment concept or devoted to other objectives.

      Basic Income, when all is said and done, is a vision for nothing more than the means to be a customer in an unjust society that decides what is for sale.”

      In my opinion, if we are to consider goals we set and demands we put forward in the face of neoliberalism, that are based on the needs of workers and communities and create the conditions for challenging capitalism itself, we sell ourselves well short if we settle for something so limited and inherently conservative as the universal payment. BI, when all is said and done, is a vision for nothing more than the means to be a customer in an unjust society that decides what is for sale. How much bolder and more meaningful to fight for free, massively expanded and fully accessible systems of healthcare and public transportation? How much better to focus on the creation of social housing and try to expand it so that, not only the poorest, but most working class people enjoy its benefits? There is universal child care and vast array of important community services to pay attention to. Moreover, we can work to wrest as much power as possible out of the hands of the mandarins of state bureaucracy and fight to increase the control working class people exercise over the public services they rely on. When it comes to existing systems of income support, we should not for a moment accept their poverty level benefits, bureaucratic intrusion and forms of moral policing steeped in racism and sexism. There is a fight to be taken forward for living income, full entitlement and programs that meet the real needs of unemployed, poor and disabled people, as opposed to the present ‘rituals of degradation’ they embody. At every point, let’s try to ensure that these expanded services are not paid for by other working class people but by forcing the corporations, banks and those who own them to pay by increasing their tax burden and imposing levies on their wealth.

      The struggle to expand and improve public services would have to, of course, be linked to workers’ struggles for living wages, workplace rights and real compensation for injured workers. Beyond this, let’s challenge as much as we can the ‘business decisions’ that deplete resources, pollute and threaten us with ecological disaster.

      I am suggesting that our movements need to challenge, rather than come to terms with, the neoliberal order and the capitalist system that has produced it. For all its claims to be a sweeping measure, the notion of progressive BI is a futile attempt to make peace with that system. In reality, even that compromise is not available. The model of BI that governments are working on in their social policy laboratories will not ‘end the tyranny of the labour market’ but render it more dreadful. The agenda of austerity and privatization requires a system of income support that renders people as powerless and desperate as possible in the face of exploitation and that won’t change if it is relabelled as ‘Basic Income’. •

      John Clarke is an organizer with the Ontario Coalition Against Poverty (OCAP).

      OCAP

      January 7, 2017 at 10:34 am

    • Inflation, the bugbear of those of us on fixed/’frozen’* incomes, is starting to kick off again. Groceries are making sudden leaps from say £1 to £1.40. Even a can of 15p potatoes has leaped to 35p! Suppose this rampant profiteering can always be blamed on ‘Brexit’ or some other horseshit pretext.

      *Many thanks George Osborne – NOT!

      Eagle-eyed shoppers

      January 7, 2017 at 10:46 am

  13. Social Mobility Commission.

    Government’s £2bn-a-year apprentice scheme is disproportionately used by young people from wealthier families

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/uk-government-apprentice-scheme-better-off-families-poorer-low-income-households-social-mobility-a7492861.html

    news seeker

    January 7, 2017 at 12:45 pm

  14. Aah yes the basic income, sounds good when we hear the words universal. unconditional and robbing the wealthy to pay the poor. Well if you think land and or resource owners and wealthy businessmen are going to pick up the tab then we are all sadly mistaken. That burden i assure you will fall to the working employee taxpayer so in effect will act as a pension 2.0. We already know how the existing pension system is going so if we stare at this with capitalist eyes rather than a socialist uprising citizen smith, we are all just going to end up paying two lots of private insurance, possibly three.
    With everyday goods and services increasing,more demand for better wages and a decrease in trade, this couldn’t possibly be sustainable, especially if adopted globally. With ever increasing illness,disability and the addition of course of children we will all have to be paying for two.
    To be honest while it seems attractive,especially against the backdrop of being an unwilling participant in a savage welfare reform i cant see it logically working longterm so would look to a different chapter, one that does not involve repeating history.

    Until we base our lives on need rather than want in true unity i cant see us escaping this vicious circle we do find ourselves in far to often than not.

    doug

    January 8, 2017 at 8:22 am

  15. OT: Witch May Promises to ‘Correct Burning Injustites’

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38545674
    Theresa May vows to correct ‘burning injustices’

    Prime Minister Theresa May has promised to introduce wide-ranging social reforms to correct what she calls the “burning injustices” in modern society.
    Writing in the Sunday Telegraph, she said the UK had voted for Brexit to change the way the country works and that she wanted a “shared society”.
    Mrs May said the government had a duty to intervene, including in markets not giving consumers the best deal.

    ME: What like Housing and the mess it is?
    What Like pay like the abysmal mess it is?
    What like the exploitation of workers by agencies?
    What Like…
    You get the idea

    Nope what we will see is entrenching of the injustices at a high level to PREVENT change to the better

    Gazza

    January 8, 2017 at 10:54 am

    • You forgot the part about for only working class people.

      doug

      January 8, 2017 at 1:30 pm

    • So that’ll be an end to a five to twelve week wait, without income, for Universal Credit then? Even if you have meagre savings and no wages paid to you in arrears from you last job? And a stop put to losing financial support for week or months at a time for making a mistake, e.g., missing one appointment, in respect to your claimant commitment? And working age benefits will be uprated in line with inflation, or, better still, linked to rising wages? And local authorities will stop charging benefit claimants Council Tax which they have to pay out of benefits never designed to meet such expenses? And the Bedroom Tax will go, yea? And child benefit not limited to the first two children?

      And…

      … Oh!…

      Sorry. All those “burning injustices” were introduced by the Conservatives while Saint Theresa was Home Secretary weren’t they. In which case they must be “progressive reforms” all about “fairness” and “making work pay” and whatnot mustn’t they?

      I think when we find out what May means by a “burning injustice” is not quite the same as what it probably means to a sane and humane man or woman with no axe to grind. After all George Osborne said that the reason he froze benefits for years at a time was because it wasn’t “fair” for benefit claimants to have increases when “hard working families” weren’t getting pay increases, as if benefits and wages were one and the same.

      Fairness from a Tory?

      Don’t make me laugh!

      Paul

      January 8, 2017 at 3:34 pm

    • OT; Burning Injustices… only if have mental probs… and actually no difference as no extra staff

      Witch May Says: More focus on community care, with an extra £15m towards this, and less emphasis on patients visiting GPs and A&E

      Now £15m across the country is not going to produce any medical staff [but there will be hidden growth areas let’s not forget a big chunk of money will go to the new Managers to be appointed to make sure the service runs smoothly … and another chunk to, can anyone say MaxiArse delivery Contract?]

      If this is supposed to be headline announcement with more to follow and this is the best she can come up with how much more dross is anything else she’s going to come out with going to be?

      So all in all empty hot air – nothing about pulling up employers, nothing about levelling the legal playing field vis a vis legal aid, nothing…

      I said it would be apparent when she starts panicking as things go wrong, and this is so blatant – so early in the political cycle its obvious things are going pear shaped behind the scenes.

      Gazza

      January 9, 2017 at 5:52 am

  16. Hard BritExit it is: Witch May lets the cat out of the bag

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38546820

    “It’s about getting the right deal internationally, but it’s also about a fair deal at home.”

    yet the title says it all :

    “Theresa May: UK cannot keep ‘bits’ of EU membership

    How if you cannot get a deal internationally will that help with a fair deal at home? There won’t be a deal – nothing but chaos…

    This is not going to be good – so her announcement about “correct ‘burning injustices’” is just to distract from the chaos to come? That is the only conclusion i can draw. It will be interesting to see who in the Media picks up on this diametrically opposed facts.

    Nuts

    Gazza

    January 8, 2017 at 1:54 pm

    • I see a few are having that mental itch in the back of there mind today.

      A while back i mentioned for the Tories to get there manifesto to succeed that they would have to leave the EU. That this brexit referendum could be a ploy and so it seems that truth has revealed itself in the form of a female shapeshifter. A befitting illusion fit for a witch yes ?

      When May gave her speech i felt utterly vindicated in my words, positively upbeat as challenging parties and some brexiters realized they had been played rather than acting out of free will. Oh how the threats and demands were a plenty. So anyone ready for private everything or should i say corporate governed UK ?

      Also today brought into the limelight was another warning i gave about being made to share a debt by getting a person into one, that money is what binds us. How spending your hard earned money was the priority and thus the slave chains that would bind a person. 27.4% of household income,Mortgage repayments,respective interest rates, 20% vat on goods, 20% incomes tax, NIC at 12%, various insurances, various product monthly payments,rising goods/consumable prices, inflation,etc. Got people by the family jewels they have.

      Lets hope winter isn’t to harsh and the floods to frequent as the NHS wont be the only one who cant cope.

      doug

      January 8, 2017 at 11:50 pm

  17. Listen up, guys. Universal Jobmatch is now mobile friendly. It’s easier to register, log in and search for vacancies.

    Well la-DE-da!

    lavender

    January 9, 2017 at 11:35 am

    • yep,

      and as its DWP involved, who have no clue on Information Security, no doubt it is the easier for online hackers to break in, and just generally for it to break.

      Joy.

      Counting down to the 1st 2017 Major Government Privacy hack…. 5… 4… 3… 2…

      Gazza

      January 9, 2017 at 11:45 am

      • SERIOUS WARNING

        As you have no all doubt seen from your email accounts to name but one who uses it , mobile phone authentication is used as a premise to offer greater security.

        ITS A TRICK which is actually not legally enforceable currently hence current consent but website/services owners in places are beginning to restrict use to online products if you dont register it as there also doing with email addresses.

        UNIVERSAL JOBMATCH

        I did warn you in advance about giving DWP your mobile phone number and how indicting the use of will bind you. You already know if you read the work coaches UJM toolkit that they can validate anyone not giving permission for access via either an email address to name but one way. The moment you use your phone to access the site your meta data is nabbed and will act as evidence its you no matter how clever one thinks they are. Meta data is not personal data currently (so not covered under DPA) so DWP can legally now mine the shite out of you from that point by data matching with other sites with your LEGAL CONSENT and you cant do a damn thing about it.

        One does not have to have a phone number be it mobile or landline in order to be eligible for benefits any more than they need a home address. In UC they have nefariously moved the goal posts to CV and email address with the registering to UJM. This is to attach tethers so they can track and profile and dont forget this government wants the benefit and tax system to be completely online.

        ALSO DONT FORGET, what todate most have ignored.

        Before using someone elses system certain legal issues MUST BE ADDRESSED. Now such providers who offer a system try to down play these by not mentioning them or using to most stale technic known as IMPLIED CONSENT. Now DWP or provider alike use servers meaning the PC you use is not a single entity but is tied to a single point. This means they have to cross the server data retention/interception/process part. This like registering for benefits in the first place requires INFORMED CONSENT. This means as consent CANNOT be gained through FORCE THREAT OR DECEPTION, they CANT actually legally make you through jobseekers direction or mandate use there system or that of a provider.

        Yes gaining employment has largely and mostly all moved online but actually DWP cannot restrict your access to benefit when you first register for benefits if day one you state you wont be using online to look for work. While its quite reasonable to ask and to expect to use, it actually cant be enforced legally and is not backed by any act/regulation besides one very vague unwritten cheque as so to speak reference. This reference cannot be used to restrict your eligibility to benefits so is one you enter into via consent BUT you are tricked in doing so.
        Now dont get me wrong, i cant see how a person today will get work by far and large if they dont go online and i endorse claimants do so BUT if you use your heads, do things a certain way, life will be far more easier and safer for you against those that seek to just abuse you and your data be it personal or non personal.

        doug

        January 9, 2017 at 12:59 pm

      • Major hack. Good grief , the Russ is will allegedly get blamed. I did say allegedly.

        Hatzaetos1924

        January 9, 2017 at 1:31 pm

    • In I Danial Blake Daniel cannot use a computer.

      I know people who find the new generation of mobiles intimidating and basically only use the simplest functions.

      The world is not built around them.

      Andrew Coates

      January 9, 2017 at 2:07 pm

      • Remember walking along a row of houses at night and seeing all the VCR(Video Cassette Recorder) clock displays blinking on “12:00”? That was because back in the day there were lots of people who couldn’t set the clock on their VCR.* The world wasn’t built around them either!

        *Incidentally, some sharp-eyed entrepreneurs did spot a business opportunity in setting the VCR clock for these people. Although the bottom has now fallen out the market somewhat.

        Betamax

        January 9, 2017 at 2:16 pm

      • Most things on mobile phones are to me and many more people are of no use, my phone cost me £4,95, the basics, no cam either.

        news seeker

        January 9, 2017 at 2:35 pm

      • Exactly.

        Use the Internet, and more specifically Facebook, for social stuff.

        Use various sites, for jobs and Hotmail for job applications.

        I don’t feel it is serious applying for a job with a mobile.

        Andrew Coates

        January 9, 2017 at 3:19 pm

      • Nothing looks ‘serious’ on a mobile phone though… ‘job’ ‘apps’, ‘dating’ ‘apps’…, frivolous, time-wasting, lack of intent, doesn’t begin to describe it… you can take anything coming from a mobile phone app (‘job’ ‘applications’ included) with a large bucket of salt.

        Kandy Krush

        January 9, 2017 at 3:30 pm

      • Who knows, maybe some of those people walking down the street oblivious to anything but their mobiles as they pass through traffic and red lights are actually applying for work…..

        Andrew Coates

        January 9, 2017 at 4:37 pm

    • Dentists don’t even use pliers to extract teeth now; they rock them back and forth.

      Gumsy

      January 9, 2017 at 1:35 pm

  18. Should read the russkis

    Hatzaetos1924

    January 9, 2017 at 1:33 pm

    • And when the American cybersecurity departments like the NSA can demonstrate incontrovertible evidence we will all agree with there assertion. Something as yet that has not been forthcoming with even them admitting there is no smoking gun.

      doug

      January 9, 2017 at 1:41 pm

  19. OH LOOK, news of upcoming homelessness and fake beggars hitting the headlines.

    https://www.housing.org.uk/press/press-releases/vulnerable-north-west-residents-could-lose-73-in-housing-benefit-a-week/

    http://www.gazettelive.co.uk/news/teesside-news/revealed-middlesbrough-beggars-secretly-getting-12423193

    Well to start this Middlesborough saga it dates back to the early 2000s, JUST GOOGLE IT ALL. Without doubt most of Middlesborough hate beggars yet none of the haters can or will state every homeless person has a house let alone food and clothing. Unless Middlesborough have created a miracle, i fail to see how they have achieved this why every other town and city have not.

    Now what i particularly hate about this is that the mainstream media have jumped on it yet remodeled it as applying to every town and city.

    http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/fake-beggars-have-homes-pocket-9588720

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4101892/Beggars-pocketing-2-000-month-benefits-pretending-sleep-rough-streets-really-accommodation.html?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490

    While i dont doubt that there are scammers among the homeless, and dont doubt drugs and alcohol form a part of this story and that of homeless, its not the direct evidence i am finding personally. The figures often given about homelessness let alone beggars is highly questionable to say the least. In the case of beggars figures, only arrests and convictions as a result of arrest can substantiate that count otherwise we are admitting our police force cant even catch a beggar who stick out like a soar thumb let alone a more serious criminal so the figures given and why there always low would suggest the problem of begging where it is simply not warranted (have a house,food,etc already) isnt as big as Councillors would lead us to believe. As for the up to £2’000 in benefits a month, WHAT A LOAD OF UTTER BOLLOCKS PERIOD STROKE PERIOD as that’s £24’000 a year and the last time i checked we had a BENEFITS CAP DIDN’T WE ?

    https://www.gov.uk/benefit-cap/benefit-cap-amounts

    UPTO £13’400 a year ( is the limit for single unemployed people).

    https://www.gov.uk/housing-benefit/what-youll-get

    £90 pounds a week rent is the average in middlesborough so a homeless person if they could get such a place (couldn’t find DSS welcome accommodation), they would only receive around £163.10 a week (£8’481 a year).

    THIS IS JUST A PLOY TO DISSUADE THE PUBLIC INTO BELIEVING HOMELESSNESS IS NOT A PROBLEM, ITS NOT INCREASING OR WILL, THAT THERE ALL TRICKSTERS.

    More FAKE NEWS perpetrated by the mainstream media.

    doug

    January 9, 2017 at 3:26 pm

  20. OH LOOK, news of upcoming homelessness and fake beggars hitting the headlines. (PART 1/3)

    https://www.housing.org.uk/press/press-releases/vulnerable-north-west-residents-could-lose-73-in-housing-benefit-a-week/

    http://www.gazettelive.co.uk/news/teesside-news/revealed-middlesbrough-beggars-secretly-getting-12423193

    Well to start this Middlesborough saga it dates back to the early 2000s, JUST GOOGLE IT ALL. Without doubt most of Middlesborough hate beggars yet none of the haters can or will state every homeless person has a house let alone food and clothing. Unless Middlesborough have created a miracle, i fail to see how they have achieved this why every other town and city have not.

    Now what i particularly hate about this is that the mainstream media have jumped on it yet remodeled it as applying to every town and city.

    doug

    January 9, 2017 at 3:27 pm

    • (PART 2/3)

      http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/fake-beggars-have-homes-pocket-9588720

      http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4101892/Beggars-pocketing-2-000-month-benefits-pretending-sleep-rough-streets-really-accommodation.html?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490

      While i dont doubt that there are scammers among the homeless, and dont doubt drugs and alcohol form a part of this story and that of homeless, its not the direct evidence i am finding personally. The figures often given about homelessness let alone beggars is highly questionable to say the least. In the case of beggars figures, only arrests and convictions as a result of arrest can substantiate that count otherwise we are admitting our police force cant even catch a beggar who stick out like a soar thumb let alone a more serious criminal so the figures given and why there always low would suggest the problem of begging where it is simply not warranted (have a house,food,etc already) isnt as big as Councillors would lead us to believe. As for the up to £2’000 in benefits a month, WHAT A LOAD OF UTTER BOLLOCKS PERIOD STROKE PERIOD as that’s £24’000 a year and the last time i checked we had a BENEFITS CAP DIDN’T WE ?

      doug

      January 9, 2017 at 3:29 pm

      • (PART 3/3)

        While i dont doubt that there are scammers among the homeless, and dont doubt drugs and alcohol form a part of this story and that of homeless, its not the direct evidence i am finding personally. The figures often given about homelessness let alone beggars is highly questionable to say the least. In the case of beggars figures, only arrests and convictions as a result of arrest can substantiate that count otherwise we are admitting our police force cant even catch a beggar who stick out like a soar thumb let alone a more serious criminal so the figures given and why there always low would suggest the problem of begging where it is simply not warranted (have a house,food,etc already) isnt as big as Councillors would lead us to believe. As for the up to £2’000 in benefits a month, WHAT A LOAD OF UTTER BOLLOCKS PERIOD STROKE PERIOD as that’s £24’000 a year and the last time i checked we had a BENEFITS CAP DIDN’T WE ?

        https://www.gov.uk/benefit-cap/benefit-cap-amounts

        UPTO £13’400 a year ( is the limit for single unemployed people).

        https://www.gov.uk/housing-benefit/what-youll-get

        £90 pounds a week rent is the average in middlesborough so a homeless person if they could get such a place (couldn’t find DSS welcome accommodation), they would only receive around £163.10 a week (£8’481 a year).

        THIS IS JUST A PLOY TO DISSUADE THE PUBLIC INTO BELIEVING HOMELESSNESS IS NOT A PROBLEM, ITS NOT INCREASING OR WILL, THAT THERE ALL TRICKSTERS.

        More FAKE NEWS perpetrated by the mainstream media.

        doug

        January 9, 2017 at 3:30 pm

  21. The Tories drowning in Brexit – Theresa May is PM no more – Donald Duck Trump gets shot dead & that`s just half way through 2017.

    Tories Killing For Profit – NHS & DWP.

    The Tories save money [make money] by killing.

    Tory Killing Machine PLC

    Stepping Razor Sound Plate System

    January 9, 2017 at 5:07 pm

  22. Theresa May is talking about her Mental Health problems & has not taken her medication.

    Forget political suicide, that has already happened. Theresa May`s want`s all people with mental health to die.

    Stepping Razor Sound Plate System

    January 9, 2017 at 5:09 pm

  23. DWP FAILURE – DWP FAILURE – BREXIT FAILURE – HUMAN RIGHTS FAILURE

    RESULTING IN DEATH.

    Stepping Razor Sound Plate System

    January 9, 2017 at 5:11 pm

  24. Still going on about how the UK still has no Brexit & it`s 2027.

    Stepping Razor Sound Plate System

    January 9, 2017 at 5:12 pm

  25. Garbage & hot air – Not if it`s genocide !!!

    Stepping Razor Sound Plate System

    January 9, 2017 at 5:12 pm

  26. Press release

    Prime Minister unveils plans to transform mental health support

    9th Jan 2017

    Theresa May announces a comprehensive package of measures to transform mental health support in our schools, workplaces and communities.

    https://www.gov.uk/government/news/prime-minister-unveils-plans-to-transform-mental-health-support

    Stepping Razor Sound Plate System

    January 9, 2017 at 5:27 pm

    • A Mental Health Task Force – Who`s that ATOS, CAPITA, MAXIMUS

      Stepping Razor Sound Plate System

      January 9, 2017 at 5:28 pm

      • Spending £800 Million on Mental Health – You mean trading with Health Care Professionals with contracts.

        “”””“What I am announcing are the first steps in our plan to transform the way we deal with mental illness in this country at every stage of a person’s life: not in our hospitals, but in our classrooms, at work and in our communities.””””

        GENOCIDE

        Stepping Razor Sound Plate System

        January 9, 2017 at 5:31 pm

      • The training will be run by Mental Health First Aid UK working with the government.

        https://mhfaengland.org/

        Go on a course & be a Metal Health Expert – Also provided are the I AM IN THE MENTAL HEALTH TASK FORCE T-Shirts !!!!

        Stepping Razor Sound Plate System

        January 9, 2017 at 9:06 pm

  27. Theresa May has depression !!!! Mental

    Stepping Razor Sound Plate System

    January 9, 2017 at 5:32 pm

    • Stop talking about yourself again Theresa May

      “””“For too long mental illness has been something of a hidden injustice in our country, shrouded in a completely unacceptable stigma and dangerously disregarded as a secondary issue to physical health. Yet left unaddressed, it destroys lives, it separates people from each other and deepens the divisions within our society. Changing this goes right to the heart of our humanity; to the heart of the kind of country we are, the values we share, the attitudes we hold and our determination to come together and support each other.””””

      Stepping Razor Sound Plate System

      January 9, 2017 at 5:33 pm

    • Tory Mental Health Problems !!!! The Cure Tory Suicide.

      Stepping Razor Sound Plate System

      January 9, 2017 at 5:35 pm

  28. DWP told woman she was not ill enough for benefit on day she died

    Dawn Amos was sent letter about attendance allowance on day her husband agreed to switch off her life support machine

    TheGuardian – Thursday 7 January 2016 20.42 GMT

    A woman who suffered from a debilitating lung condition was sent a letter informing her she no longer qualified for sickness benefits on the day she died.

    Dawn Amos, 67, from Essex, died in November after suffering chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), which left her struggling to breathe.

    READ MORE:
    https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/jan/07/dwp-told-dawn-amos-not-ill-enough-for-benefit-day-she-died

    Stepping Razor Sound Plate System

    January 9, 2017 at 6:25 pm

  29. Maximus miss fitness-to-work test targets despite spiralling costs

    Company took over contract from Atos in March to carry out medical assessments of claimants for ESA. The bill for ESA and PIP assessments has now reached £579m

    TheGuardian – Friday 8 January 2016 00.01 GMT

    The firm that took over from Atos in the implementation of fitness-to-work tests is performing worse in key areas as costs continue to spiral, a report by the official auditors has disclosed.

    Maximus took over the contract in March to carry out medical assessments of claimants for employment and support allowance (ESA), the replacement for incapacity benefits.

    READ MORE:
    https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/jan/08/maximus-miss-fitness-to-work-test-targets-despite-spiralling-costs

    Stepping Razor Sound Plate System

    January 9, 2017 at 6:27 pm

  30. Do not worry about your life,what you will eat or what you will drink;nor about your body,what you will put on.Is not life more than food and the body more than clothing?Look at the birds of the air,for they neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns;yet your heavenly Father feeds them.Are you not of more value than they?

    — Matthew 6:25-26 KJV

    The Holy Bible

    January 10, 2017 at 10:11 am

  31. Taxman unleashes its ‘snooper computer’: what information does its have on you?

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/tax/return/taxman-unleashes-snooper-computer-information-does-have/

    news seeker

    January 10, 2017 at 1:55 pm

  32. Jobcentre Closures Could Violate Equality Act 2010

    “In particular, section 149 of the act, public sector equality duty, states that a public authority must have due regard to the need to advance equality of opportunity between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it.

    “One of these protected characteristics is disability and the government, under this act, must ensure they have taken removing or minimising disadvantages, are considered.

    “The government may well have looked in to this, but it has not been made clear whether they have or not. It’s important that this proposal is contested collectively, politically and legally as there is a large amount of people who are going to be worse off because of this”

    http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/news/15012533.Jobcentre_cuts_could_violate_human_rights/

    Mr C.U.T.

    January 10, 2017 at 3:14 pm

    • Violate Equality Act 2010 well that’s nothing new.

      news seeker

      January 10, 2017 at 3:44 pm

      • The Equality Act 2010 might not be new, but this story is.

        Mr C.U.T.

        January 10, 2017 at 3:46 pm

    • Under the Snooper’s Charter warrants have to be issued by the Home Secretary to hack computers and phones and browsing histories are stored for twelve months but won’t affect people without good reason. The DWP will NOT be checking what benefit claimants are doing online unless they’re visiting dodgy sites which are devoted to something potentially violent, criminal or dangerous, e.g., religious fundamentalism, paedophilia, poisons, explosives, terrorism… blah, blah, blah. Government will NOT be checking to see whether benefit claimants are adhering to their claimant commitment by analysing their browsing history but if anybody really is daft enough to try to research how to make sarin gas, fertilizer bombs, improvised explosive devices, or whatever by surfing articles on the web you’ve only got yourselves to blame for what happens to you after attracting attention to yourself by behaving quite so foolishly.

      We are not going to be put under the microscope and scrutinised atomically without good reason.

      No one is going to get sanctioned for being on Twitter when they should have been on Universal Jobmatch although if they have been tweeting favourably about ISIS, how to restore the Caliphate in the Middle East and Europe, and turning the UK into a Muslim republic by means of Jihad you are inviting trouble.

      Don’t paint a bullseye on your back and government won’t be taking shots at you without good reason.

      Poontang

      January 10, 2017 at 7:01 pm

      • Thank goodness for that! I wouldn’t like my Work Coach to know how much time I spend jerking off to Gianna Michaels, Lisa Ann and Priya Rai pictorials on Freeones when I’m supposed to be doing my jobsearch.

        Marty

        January 10, 2017 at 7:53 pm

      • This is what poontang thinks of people on this forum

        To be honest half of you seem bonkers and the other half moronic.

        A little knowledge is a dangerous thing and some of you are the living proof of it.

        And the English some of you use makes me wince. How can anybody have reached their majority and not know how to use the words like “there”, “their” and “they’re” or “to”, “too” and “two” correctly baffles me. The painful spelling and grammatical howlers in certain comments encourages me to discount them without bothering to read them. It’s impossible to take anything seriously when it’s been written by people obviously incapable of achieving a passing grade in secondary school level GCSE English Language.

        Enjoy your paranoia, suckers.

        Im not misquoting you am i poontang, still the viewers could just go and check your last post on the previous homeless thread cant they.

        Oh no wait, i can just give them a link

        https://intensiveactivity.wordpress.com/2016/12/24/rising-homelessness/

        OH I NOTICED SOMETHING IN YOUR MOST RECENT POST, YOU KNOW THE ONE ABOVE WHERE YOU SAID,

        We are not going to be put under the microscope and scrutinised atomically without good reason.

        I NOTICED you use the word WE ?

        The Reaper

        January 11, 2017 at 3:25 am

      • Well, Douggie baby, my favourite cut ‘n’ paste halfpenny scholar and plagiarist, at least I know the difference grammatically between a contraction like “they’re”, possessive adjective like “their”, and adverb of place like “there” which makes me a genius compared to a pretentious self-aggrandising poseur like you I mean, honest to God, man, you aren’t even fluent in the language of your own homeland and pretty much everything you write has been gleaned by reading articles for laymen on the web.

        Amateur is as amateur does.

        Now, before I go, and busy myself with other things let me point out that “two” is the written form of the number 2, used in sentences to represent cardinal magnitudes, e.g.,

        “Silly people paranoid about the Snooper’s Charter are two things: moronic and bonkers.”

        The word “too” is used with adverbs and adjectives to indicate a surfeit like this:

        “English grammar is far too complicated for Doug to master.”

        “Doug isn’t really qualified or intelligent; it is too difficult for him to pass exams and get qualifications.”

        And “to” is used to indicate a transition or travel “towards” something concrete or abstract, e.g.,

        “This website is inhabited by loons and morons and is going to the dogs.”

        “Doug should go to remedial English language classes and learn how to write coherent sentences.”

        No need to thank me.

        You’re welcome!

        Poontang

        January 11, 2017 at 9:59 am

    • I meant to say, the equality act has been violated many times by many, employers being one of them.

      The government looked into the consequences of their plans but still went ahead. what does that tell you.

      news seeker

      January 11, 2017 at 9:03 am

  33. Andrew Coates

    January 10, 2017 at 5:05 pm

  34. The excuses given by employers for underpaying staff the National Minimum Wage,

    underpaying a worker because she only makes the teas and sweeps the floors and believing it was acceptable to underpay workers because they aren’t worth it.

    The employee wasn’t a good worker so I didn’t think they deserved to be paid the National Minimum Wage.
    It’s part of UK culture not to pay young workers for the first 3 months as they have to prove their ‘worth’ first.
    I thought it was ok to pay foreign workers below the National Minimum Wage as they aren’t British and therefore don’t have the right to be paid it…………………………………..

    http://www.welfareweekly.com/revealed-10-of-the-worst-excuses-for-underpaying-workers-the-minimum-wage/

    news seeker

    January 11, 2017 at 9:10 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: