Ipswich Unemployed Action.

Campaigning for Unemployed Rights.

Posts Tagged ‘Welfare cuts

A Budget for the Top 10% Wealthy, as 3/4 of Welfare Cuts Remain.

with 57 comments

Image result for arthur daley

One Man’s Advice has been Heeded.

Tory Budgets are odd things.

There’s a standard pattern

A Chancellor of the Exchequer stands up and grins like a Cheshire cat, meaning that you can be sure that only fellow tubby cats are going to be happy with the announcements.

In this case the likes of Sir Philip Green(CBI  and British Chamber of Commerce) and the Sir Arthur Daley (President, Federation of Small Businesses) are lapping it up.

Phil Fleming, spokesperson for the Federation of Small Businesses, described it as “a brilliant Budget”.

He said: “It was the most enjoyable Budget speech I have ever listened to in my life.

“He shut up the Opposition, considering what he had to juggle with. It is a brilliant Budget.”

Schools, we are told, are going to get cash for ‘little extras’.

Much needed it is said, for the post-Brexit teaching programme on the reintroduction of farthings, groats, and measurements such as Els, Furlongs, and terms for the reform of local government, Wapentakes and Hides.

Meanwhile…..

On Universal Credit in  the ‘I’ reporter Serina Sandhu reports,

The rollout of Universal Credit is being delayed once more, with a new target date of December 2023 for all claimants to be transferred to the Government’s flagship new benefit. The announcement came as Chancellor Philip Hammond provided an additional £6.6 billion over the next six years to smooth the introduction of UC, which replaces a range of welfare payments. Mr Hammond revealed the Treasury would be giving £1bn over five years to the Department for Work and Pensions to help ease the transition to the controversial benefits system. He also said he was increasing the work allowance – the amount claimants can earn before Universal Credit begins to be withdrawn – by £1,000 a year, at a cost of £1.7bn annually.

Mr Hammond defended the much-blighted system, which has led to some claimants being hundreds of pounds a month worse off than on legacy benefits. Others have fallen into rent arrears caused by delays to their first payment. “The switch to Universal Credit is a long overdue and necessary reform,” he said. “It replaces the broken system left by the last Labour government, a system… that trapped millions on out of work benefits. Universal Credit is here to stay.” Welfare damage Green Party MP Caroline Lucas said: “The announcement doesn’t begin to repair damage caused by yearly welfare payment freezes, welfare reform act [and] austerity. This is no budget for strivers, grafters [and] carers.” Labour said: “[It] is inadequate. The document confirms that the work allowance change only reverses around half of the previous Tory cuts from 2015.”

The Resolution Foundation says,

Squeeze continues for low and middle income families despite Chancellor’s £55bn giveaway Budget

Almost half of Budget 2018 income tax cuts are set to go to the top ten per cent of households

The Chancellor set out a significant easing of austerity in a £55bn giveaway Budget yesterday that set out major increases in public service spending, tax cuts and a reversal of cuts to the generosity of Universal Credit. But the squeeze is set to continue for low and middle income families, the Resolution Foundation said today (Tuesday) in its overnight analysis of the Budget, How To Spend It.

Faced with a total fiscal windfall of £73.8bn from the Office for Budget Responsibility over the forecast period, the Chancellor chose to use 75 per cent of it in a £55bn giveaway Budget. But while yesterday’s Budget represents a significant shift in overall direction of public spending, it does not spell the end of the squeeze – either for unprotected public services, or over ten million working age families in receipt of benefits.

Key findings from How To Spend It include:

The squeeze continues for low and middle income families

  • The analysis shows that over three quarters of the £12bn of welfare cuts announced after the 2015 election remain government policy, despite the welcome £1.7bn boost to Work Allowances in Universal Credit.
  • Half of the welfare cuts that hit family budgets are yet to be rolled out – including a £1.5bn benefit freeze next April that will see a couple with children in the bottom half of the income distribution losing £200.

Better news for the ‘more than just managing’

  • 84 per cent of the income tax cuts announced yesterday will go to the top half of the income distribution next year, rising to 89 per cent by the end of the parliament (2022-23) when almost half (45 per cent) will go to the top ten per cent of households alone.
  • The richest tenth of households are set to gain 14 times as much in cash terms next year from the income tax and benefits giveaways in the Budget as the poorest tenth of households (£410 vs £30).
  • The overall package of tax and benefit changes announced since 2015 will deliver an average gain of £390 for the richest fifth of households in 2023-24, compared to an average loss of £400 for the poorest fifth of households.

Cuts to public services are eased, but not ended

  • Overall day-to-day departmental spending per capita is now set to rise by 4 per cent between this year and 2022-23, rather than fall by 4 per cent as previously planned.
  • However, the promises of extra spending on the NHS, defence and international aid mean that unprotected departments will continue to see cuts in every year from 2020-21. Their per capita real-terms budgets are set to be 3 per cent lower in 2023-24 than 2019-20.
  • If allocated equally this would mean day-to-day spending cuts of 48, 52 and 77 per cent between 2009-10 and 2023-24 for the departments of Justice, Business and Transport respectively.

The economic backdrop to Budget 2018

  • Despite the slight upgrade in the OBR growth forecasts, GDP per capita is set to grow by 4.9 per cent between 2018 and 2023, compared with an IMF forecast of 5.5 per cent across the rest of the G7.
  • Real average earnings are not set to return to their pre-crisis peak until the end of 2024 – representing an unprecedented 17-year pay downturn.

Torsten Bell, Director of the Resolution Foundation, said:

“The Chancellor was able to navigate the near impossible task in his Budget of easing austerity, seeing debt fall and avoiding big tax rises, thanks to a £74bn fiscal windfall. He chose to spend the vast majority of this on the NHS, income tax cuts and a welcome boost to Universal Credit.

“But while yesterday’s Budget represented a seismic shift in the government’s approach to the public finances, it spelt an easing rather than an end to austerity – particularly for low and middle income families.

The Chancellor made a very welcome £1.7bn commitment to Universal Credit, but has left intact three quarters of the benefit cuts announced following the 2015 general election. Meanwhile income tax cuts announced yesterday will overwhelmingly benefit richer households, with almost half of the long term gains going to the top ten per cent of households. On public services the NHS saw a big spending boost ­– but unprotected departments still have further cuts penciled in.

“This Budget was much easier for Philip Hammond than many expected. But there will be tougher choices for Chancellors in the years ahead. Brexit must be delivered smoothly, public spending will remain tight, and forecasts may not always be so rosy.

“Looking further ahead, living standards growth is set to be sluggish and the tax rises to meet pressures in the 2020s from our ageing society will still be needed – as and when there’s a government with the majority to deliver them. Austerity has been eased, but there are still tough times ahead.”

The Mirror gives Labour’s response:

John McDonnell: Philip Hammond gave a broken promise budget, failing to end austerity

By choosing to cut rather than invest, Tories have failed to fix the weaknesses of the economy, says the Shadow Chancellor

Welfare Cuts as Universal Credit Founders.

with 40 comments

Image result for welfare cuts 2017

“No Spending Spree…..”

There was a flicker of a chart on Channel Four News last night about the effects of the Welfare cuts on people.

I suspect that’s about the most, a very brief most, that most people – unlike us lot – will register about the issue.

The so-called Minister, Work and Pensions Secretary, Damian Green, has been quieter than the quietest mouse recently.

He did find time for this, “Our Man – Advice and Supports Services

Thursday, 23 February, 2017 (Latest Web site date).

On the whole by any reasonable measure Ashford is a prosperous town set in the middle of a generally prosperous county. But we should all be aware that even in the middle of this generally comfortable existence live people with real problems.

And he did, very curtly, respond to this.

Billions of pounds of PIP cuts ‘will put lives at risk.

The announcement of billions of pounds of cuts to the government’s new disability benefit is a discriminatory attack on people with mental health problems, will push many of them further into poverty and isolation, and will put lives at risk, say disabled activists.

Protests about the cuts to personal independence payment (PIP) have already been announced, with one due to take place outside parliament on Tuesday (7 March), the day before the spring budget.

Disability News Service is also aware of discussions among at least two groups about possible legal action over the cuts.

Work and pensions secretary Damian Green said he had made the decision to amend regulations to tighten eligibility for PIP because of two tribunal decisions that ruled against the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP).

But nothing, as yet, on the Budget...

This is how the New Statesman’s admirable Anoosh Chakelian  sums up the post-Budget position on Welfare,

What welfare changes did Philip Hammond make in his Budget 2017?

The welfare cap is still there. The four-year freeze of working-age benefits continues. This means those claiming Jobseeker’s Allowance, Employment and Support Allowance, income support, housing benefit, Universal Credit, child tax credits, working tax credits and child benefit will be worse off, as inflation increases but their benefits remain flat. Child tax credits and child benefit through Universal Credit will be limited to two children, and the government recently announced its plan to remove the entitlement to housing benefit for some 18-21 year olds. Hammond’s only offer to those depending on the state to boost their income is to reduce the taper rate at which your benefits through Universal Credit are withdrawn as you begin to earn more – from 65 per cent to 63 per cent.Hammond’s only offer to those depending on the state to boost their income is to reduce the taper rate at which your benefits through Universal Credit are withdrawn as you begin to earn more – from 65 per cent to 63 per cent. The Chancellor announced this in his Autumn Statement last November and has made no new announcements about benefits since. In fact, his only reference to welfare in his Spring Budget speech was to repeat his softening of the taper rate.

Yet…

“…remember, this isn’t giving more money to claimants .

It’s very slightly reducing the amount Universal Credit is being cut.

According to the Independent, the planned £3bn-a-year reduction in the work allowance..

has only really been reduced by about £700m by Hammond.”

People in Liverpool are not happy,

New research published today reveals the government’s flagship Universal Credit scheme is causing significant anxiety…..

and leaving many claimants reliant on the generosity of food banks to get by.

Sometimes you wish politicians and the media would concentrate more on these stories….

Written by Andrew Coates

March 10, 2017 at 12:10 pm

Iain Duncan Smith “Does not Know Where Welfare Cuts will Come from”. Vote Him Out!

with 157 comments

Iain Duncan Smith admits the Tories have not worked out where their £12bn welfare cuts will come from.

Independent.

The Conservatives have not worked out where their planned £12bn welfare cuts will come from, Iain Duncan Smith has admitted.

The Work and Pensions Secretary said the Tories had not “done the work” and were not in a position to say which benefits would be curtailed.

Asked why he could not disclose the cuts, he said: “We would have to have done the work on it. That’s why. We would have had to reach agreement as to exactly where those are… as soon as we’ve done the work and had it modelled we’ll let everybody know what that is.”

In March of this year the Institute for Fiscal Studies challenges the Conservatives over their planned cuts and said the Chancellor should spell out exactly which benefits would suffer.

“But it is now almost two years since he announced his intention of cutting welfare spending by £12bn. Since then the main announcement has been the plan not to cut anything from the main pensioner benefits,” Paul Johnson, the Institute’s Director, said.

“We have been told about no more than £2bn of the planned cuts to working-age benefits. And, remember, apparently the ‘plan’ is to have those £12bn of cuts in place by 2017-18. It is time we knew more about what they might actually involve.”

The New Statesman provides the detailed transcript of what he said,

N: Let me come – speaking of a benefits and welfare, let me come back to you  IDS. Now in March you said that you are – I quote you: ‘May or may not decide that it’s relevant to reveal to the British electorate where the £12bn of welfare cuts are going to come from in the next government’  if you win. Why don’t think it’s relevant that we should know?

IDS: Because we’d have to have done the work on it, that’s why and we’d have had to reached agreement as to exactly where those are. We’ve let know – the public know exactly one area which was that we’re going to freeze those benefits. That’s going to save between 2 and 3 three billion pounds and also –

AN: About £2bn now with low inflation.

IDS:  – and we’re going to lower the cap to £23,000 which is average earnings. But as I said on the Marr programme more recently I said, you know, as soon as we have done the work and had it properly modelled then we will let everybody know what that is.

AN: Shouldn’t you have done the work before you come to the British people to ask for re-election?

IDS: Yes, but the key area here of course –

RR: Yes.

IDS: no, well okay, but the key area here is that everyone is very clear that after the next election, if you get a Conservative government we have already said that we will save £12bn from essentially working age benefits and we’ve said that. That’s very clear. But I have locked out –

SW:  What I don’t understand is … what you won’t cut.  If you’re clear  you won’t cut pensions, child benefit, disablement benefit.

IDS: Yes.

RR: Well he hasn’t completely about child benefit.

SW: Then why can’t you be clear about what you will cut?

IDS: Well because, as I said, the work that we do on this will be done in the spending room, we will announce that out at the time.

Now we already have

  • The Benefit Cap.
  • The Bedroom Tax.
  • No rise in many benefits to meet growing cost of living.
  • Obligation to pay Council Tax percentage by all claimants.
  • Massive sanctions.

In the offing are (Guardian): “abolishing statutory maternity pay and barring under-25s from claiming incapacity benefit or housing benefit. ”

Getting employers to contribute more to the cost of statutory maternity pay – or as an alternative abolishing it entirely.

Freezing benefit payments at current levels across the board.

Limiting welfare payments by family size.

Forcing single parents on income support to seek work when their youngest child reaches the age of three (currently five).

Making it harder for sick people to claim state aid when they are out of work by introducing “stricter” fit-for-work tests and/or tighter limits on eligibility.

Increasing the bedroom tax on certain categories of renters.

Barring under-25s from claiming incapacity benefit or housing benefit.

 

They could simply cut JSA…..

I bet they’d like to.

So we’d all be begging charity from Foodbanks and the ‘Big Society’.

Vote to get rid of this crew!

Welfare Cuts: What They Mean.

with 45 comments

The Guardian today carries this excellent investigation,

What the welfare cuts mean for us.

“The government is three years into a savage programmme of welfare cuts. Coalition ministers say they aim to save billions on benefits and help ‘hard-working people’ while ending a culture of dependency. But what does this mean for people who need support?”

People contributing to Ipswich Unemployed Action have their own stories, but these are worth looking at (extracts).

Just before Christmas two years ago McPhillips received a letter that declared in angry red block capitals: “Your benefits are being cut.” Two days later he took an overdose and would have died if his brother hadn’t discovered him in time, and rushed him to hospital.

McPhillips, 59, has serious mental-health problems, which forced him, several years ago, to leave the job as an industrial saw sharpener he had held for 25 years. He depends on a handful of benefit payments – disability living allowance (DLA), employment and support allowance, and housing benefit. News of the looming wholesale benefit changes unsettled him so profoundly that he has since tried three times to take his life.

Antonia McKnight’s experience demonstrates the massive disconnect between the picture painted by the government of benefits claimants and the reality experienced by some of those who are seeing their payments cut.

No one could suggest that she is living in luxury or enjoying a lifestyle that could inspire envy in others. The small flat where she lives with her four-year-old daughter has views on to brick walls, the wiring has gone, so there is no light in the bathroom or her bedroom, and the furniture is secondhand and broken. The rent is £500 a week.

Since August, McKnight, 38, has seen her benefits capped at £500 a week, under the coalition’s new £26,000 benefit cap – introduced with the aim of bringing “fairness into the benefits system”. Since her weekly rent is exactly equal in size to her benefits, she is already in serious financial trouble.

Whether McKnight’s flat represents a dream is questionable, but it is clearly very expensive. For anyone unfamiliar with the extraordinary, unfaltering rise of the London property market, a rent of £500 a week will seem unthinkable, but soaring rents are the reason that the housing benefit bill has become so huge. Council accommodation would be far cheaper, but there is a huge shortage of it in central London, and McKnight is still waiting.

If you look at her flat you will see just how exploitative landlords are today.

This story relates to a lot of us.

In the past few years, Tony Marcola, 46, has experienced the dual pressures of the downturn and welfare reform. Having worked all his life, he lost his job as a van driver for a fruit-and-vegetable wholesale firm in 2008, when fuel prices went up, and the company’s owner decided he could no longer afford to offer a delivery service. Not long after, companies started closing offices in Burnley.

“First the jobcentre was empty and then suddenly it was packed full. People were losing jobs left, right and centre,” he says.

He attended courses, learned how to use a computer and write a CV, and continued to apply for jobs but without success. “Burnley was going down a black hole. At the time I was expected to get a job, there were a lot of places shutting down,” he says.

DWP figures show that there was a 24% increase in the number of sanctions from July 2012 to July 2013. Although the principle of getting people to show that they are seriously looking for work in order to qualify for benefits payments is one that Citizens Advice supports, they are concerned that very harsh sanctions are being applied; the charity has seen a 46% increase in problems related to sanctions in the past year, and Guy says problems such as those experienced by Marcola are “systemic”. “The system is all stick and no carrot.”

As part of the government’s drive to reform the system, much harsher conditions have been introduced to ensure that those who are receiving jobseekers’ allowance are seeking work. The use of sanctions – periods when benefits are stopped as punishment – has increased dramatically.

In July, Marcola was told that there would be new conditions attached to the benefits he received, and he was told that he had to prove that he was applying for 20 jobs a week. “I said: ‘Well, I’ll do my best.’ It jumped from four jobs a week to 20, it’s a quite a leap,” he says. He began by meeting that target, even if it meant applying for jobs that he was not qualified for, and stood little chance of being selected for, but one week in July he only managed to apply for 15 positions. He was struggling financially anyway, with increased gas and electricity costs, and a new £20 bedroom tax charge for the spare room in the house where he’d brought up a child, who was no longer living at home. After bills, he was left with about £13 a week for food. Applying for jobs involved finding places with free internet, because he couldn’t afford to have internet access, let alone a computer, at home.

There is more – you can see it through the link above.

The article ends with this,

An online campaign group, the WOW petition, which organises resistance to the “war on welfare”, has gathered over 100,000 signatures, calling for an end to the work capability assessment and a cumulative impact assessment of all cuts and changes affecting sick and disabled people.

Already Food Banks are being touted as way to meet the needs of those in dire poverty, often caused the failure of the welfare system.

The situation will get a lot worse next April when Workfare, run by greedy private companies and ‘charities’ is introduced.

We need a complete change of policies:

  • A Party that’s committed to end the war on welfare and create a just system for claimants.
  • An end to the punitive  sanctions regime.
  • Get rid of the welfare-to-work parasites running the Work Programme and replace them with real training and real paid jobs.
  • The Living Wage for all: so that when we are in work we do not have to rely on benefits.
  • A solution to the housing crisis: build council homes, and introduce rent controls.

TUC Condemns Workfare.

with 15 comments

This Motion was passed at the TUC Conference this week.

The welfare state
Motions 37, 38 and 39
Congress is proud of the role trade unions played in founding the welfare state as a social insurance from each according to their means, to each according to their needs.
Congress notes, with concern, the clear rise in levels of deprivation since May 2010.

New inequalities having a deleterious impact upon the lives of vulnerable people are increasingly obvious to all those working in the public and voluntary sectors.

Services are becoming ever more fragmented, leading to wide variations in access across geographical areas of the UK.

Vulnerable groups are experiencing increased poverty and lack of support as a direct result of government policy specifically designed to promote this same fragmentation of services to susceptible groups including children, the elderly and the disabled.
Congress further notes several aspects of government policy that will lead to additional destruction of the security of vulnerable groups.
Proposed moves such as the regionalisation of pay will lead to further attacks on the support for those groups in society that have the fewest defences of their own.
Congress notes that around £30bn of welfare cuts have been announced by the government.
Congress condemns the campaign of vilification by this government and right-wing tabloids to denigrate the welfare state and to demonise those without work or unable to work, and young people, migrants and
the disabled.

Congress is appalled that disability hate crime has soared to record levels.
On behalf of these groups Congress calls for:

  • a reiteration of the principle of fair and equal pay and the maintenance of equity in pay for all workers in the public sector, wherever they work
  • a re-instatement of the services and resource snecessary to support vulnerable groups
  • a determined and robust opposition to the threats being posed to those in society who have the fewest defences.

Congress re-iterates its commitment to the pursuance of equalities in society.
Congress further notes that millions of people are barely surviving on poverty-level benefits or need tax credits to subsidise low wages.

Congress believes we have a responsibility to support Unemployed Workers Centres which provide assistance for job searching and benefit advice.

Congress condemns ‘workfare’ policies that compel the unemployed to work for their benefits and calls on the government to make work experience schemes optional and paid.

Written by Andrew Coates

September 14, 2012 at 11:19 am

Welfare-To-Work Firms call for more Unemployed to have Benefits Sanctioned.

with 31 comments

Cut Your Benefits So I Can Keep This.

As Emma Harrison (still owner of A4E) and other Welfare-to-Work millionaires rake in profits, and get around 3,5% of their clients jobs,  they demand the government take benefits away from the unemployed, the Observer reports,

Private firms awarded multimillion-pound contracts to run the Work Programme have advised that there should be many more cases where claimants have their benefits stripped as punishment for failing to seek work.

As part of its crackdown on welfare dependency, David Cameron’s government has more than tripled the number of punishments enforced against failing jobseekers across all its schemes. The number of cases has risen from 139,000 benefit cuts under Labour in 2009 to more than 500,000 in 2011.

Corporate Watch, publishing in tandem with the Observer, has the details behind the figures,

Sanctioning – stopping someone’s benefits after a perceived infringement of the terms of their claim for between one week and six months – was a favourite policy of the previous government but figures revealed by Corporate Watch and the Observer today show the coalition, together with sub-contracted private ‘provider’ companies, has massively increased the amount of sanctions imposed.

To download as a pdf click here.

Read a personal experience of being sanctioned here.

 
139,000 sanctions were handed out to Jobseeker’s Allowance* claimants in 2009 but this more than tripled to 508,000 in 2011, the coalition’s first full calendar year in government.** There was little change in the number of people signing on in this period, meaning a much higher proportion of people have had their benefits cut.*** In February 2011 for example, 1.44 million people were claiming JSA compared to 1.42 million in 2009. 51,000 sanctions were imposed in the former month, compared to 9,000 in the latter.

Many of these sanctions are initially suggested, or ‘referred’, to the Department of Work and Pensions by the private companies the government has sub-contracted to run many of its welfare schemes, such as the flagship Work Programme, for people who have been signing on for a year or more. DWP statistics, obtained by a Corporate Watch freedom of information request (download the disclosure here), show companies such as Serco, Seetec, Working Links and A4E have been even more eager to sanction people than the government.

The article notes,

A spokesperson for claimants’ group Ipswich Unemployed Action said: “This shows that the Government is using the DWP to punish unemployed people instead of helping them get jobs.”

This is our (Work Programme’s) original investigation New Deal Sanctions Exposed.

 

Worth noting are some of the companies baying for punishing the out-of-work.

These include:

The public-private partnership giant, Working Links, which boasts a turn-over of £123m and whose shareholders include Capgemini, referred the most cases for sanctions (11,910) between June 2011 and January this year. The jobcentres accepted the argument for cuts in 6,210 of those cases.

A4e, which paid its former chairman Emma Harrison an £8.6m dividend in 2010, referred the second largest number of cases for punishment. The firm, which has been at the centre of a series of fraud allegations, requested sanctions in 10,120 cases. Jobcentres agreed to withhold benefits in 3,000 of those cases.

Other large contract holders leading the way in demanding punishment for benefit claimants included Serco, which has an annual turnover of £4bn a year. The outsourcing giant recommended punishment in 9,090 benefit claimant cases, but only 2,230 were approved.

Who are these people? Wikipedia is a good place to start.

Working LinksIn May 2011 a former auditor of Working Links claimed that the level of fraud at Working Links escalated to “a farcical situation” and was “endemic” but that he faced a “stonewall” from managers. Mr Hutchinson said he had encountered “a multi-billion-pound scandal”, after working for Working Links and A4e in the welfare-to-work industry. Working Links said: “We firmly reject any assertion of widespread fraud within our business.”

A4E needs no introduction.

SERCO is indeed a giant living of the public purse. Amongst its many activities are:

Clegg Cheers Cuts.

with 129 comments

Nick Clegg today issued a staunch defence of radical benefit cuts as he geared up for potential clashes with Liberal Democrat activists at the party’s annual conference.

The deputy prime minister said welfare should not be there “to compensate the poor for their predicament” but act as “an engine of mobility”.

Billions of pounds are to be slashed from the welfare budget by the chancellor, George Osborne, when he unveils the results of his drastic public spending review next month.

From Here. More on the Liberal Democrats Here.

So now we know that the poor are to receive no compensation for being poor.

Perhaps we shouldn’t get anything at all, unless we take it ourselves.

It would be interesting to know exactly how reducing the amount of money you have will make you more ‘mobile’.

Perhaps we should ask Clegg to take a pay cut and see if he gets a better job.

Written by Andrew Coates

September 16, 2010 at 10:06 am