IT says it all that the Tories are giving wholehearted backing to the welfare reforms being presented to Parliament just before MPs go off on their summer holidays.
Proposals presented yesterday by James Purnell have already been slammed by child poverty campaigners and they must be opposed by Labour MPs. In today's Guardian, LRC Chair John McDonnell has slammed the proposals as a "disgrace" and many more MPs must now speak out.
Anti-poverty activists and living wage advocates insist that compelling people to work in low-paid jobs is not the way to eradicate poverty.
And the Tories are already boasting that the government is merely copying their policies.
The paper to be presented in Parliament today endorses the recommendations of a report by investment banker David Freud, who claims that two million people are "unnecessarily" claiming incapacity benefit.
"Only those with the greatest needs" will be exempt from being expected to find work in future, Mr Purnell will announce - an attack on the poorest that was fully endorsed by Tory shadow work and pensions secretary Chris Grayling, who claimed: "Once again, it is Conservative ideas that are setting the political agenda."
But the Child Poverty Action Group warned that it was an absence of affordable child care which trapped families into dependence on benefits.
Child welfare charity Barnardo's added that "because of this, for too many people, even a job is not a route out of poverty."
The government's draft paper also includes US-style "work for dole" sanctions to force the unemployed to work for benefits and will enable private companies which find jobs for claimants to be paid from resulting savings in benefits.
Mr Freud, whose advice the DWP has accepted "100 per cent," according to Barnardo's, has claimed that private firms could rake in "millions of pounds" in public money through this proposal.
Community activists London Citizens lead organiser Neil Jameson said that the government "must raise the minimum wage to a meaningful living wage."
And one-parent families support group Gingerbread stated that, to end poverty, "jobs with fair pay are vital.
Tory leader David Cameron has pledged "absolute support" from his MPs to get the government's measures through Parliament in the face of any rebellion by Labour backbenchers It is truly depressing that, just as the Party's grassrooots are recognising the changes that must be made to win the next election, the Government is relying on Tory support to get punitive welfare reforms through. They must be opposed by all the wider labour movement.
Monday, 21 July 2008
OPPOSE THESE WELFARE REFORMS
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
10 comments:
Susan, I worry about you at times. You don't seem to realise that your government is broke - skint - its pockets pulled inside out and not a brass farthing falls out - to put it crudely, it lacks even a pot to piss in! It is borrowing money from international money-lenders like you and me running up and over our overdraft limits.
It's no use you saying that they should start taxing 'big business', because they are already doing that and the result is that more and more of them are simply decamping to Ireland or where-ever it's cheaper to do business. Likewise with rich individuals who can live in much more attractive places than Britain and wil do so if they get taxed to hard - and those other countries are only to pleased to have them because they recognise that rich individuals spend their money and they would like to be the recipients.
So please, 'get real', your government is verging on bankruptcy!
Sorry, should have been 'too' not "to", above. Also this from CityWire:
"This week Darling is said to be ready to give in to businesses that are threatening to quit the UK unless he takes a red pen to the Budget and scraps reforms to the taxation of profits made by foreign companies on British soil.
This year several large companies have left our shores. It is not only the greater corporate tax burden that British companies have to meet when compared with their competitors in France, Germany, and Switzerland, but also the complexity of the system."
Good report, though tbh, the thing is Susan, apart from John McDonell and his EDM comdemning the reforms, the unions, churches, much of the voluntary sector and civil society has ignored these reforms or wished they would just go away. Most of the PLP support them, even a nominal left winger like Paul Flynn who says:
, All MPs know from our daily contact with constituents that there is abuse in the welfare system. The Tories in the late eighties encouraged 100,000s of redundant workers to sign on the sick so that they would not swell even further the embarrassingly large unemployment totals’
Yet as I said in another thread, in other countries there have been mass movements against such reforms, here none, this is a truly
'f***** up country!
As I have said before, if there are community based jobs which need to be done, then establish them as proper jobs and ensure that they are ring-fenced for the long-term unemployed.
It displays only too well why I don't honestly want this government to win next time. They are not listening, and I can't see there being any sort of change in direction whilst in government.
No, mm, we shouldn't pigeonhole certain jobs as only suitable for people on IB; we should train people on IB for ordinary jobs and make sure employers don't discriminate against them.
However, Purnell's proposals will not get more people in work in a time when the economy is in trouble and job opportunities are struggling to keep pace with redundancies
We knew that most of these measures were going to come in, but the most worrying things are the vague statements about "working for the dole", something that was not included in the Hain proposals. If people are forced to work for the dole, then a) they will be likely gaining less than minimum wage for their JSA, and b) they will be doing work which doesn't benefit the economy in the long term but which prevents them from doing training. I can accept compulsory training schemes with a living wage as reimbursement, but if Purnell's proposals mean anything less than that, they will be both reactionary and bad for the economy in the long term.
What a nice man, off you go...
In my area we have a get back to work club for the disabled, we have people who write out CV's, who can give advice, we have no funding when we asked we were told nope sorry. The next week another get back to work club was started with funding from the council and the government, what was the difference, well our club was run by the disabled for the disabled, the other was run by a ex manager of the NHS was was sacked. he employed sixteen people in his get back to work club none were disabled. Both clubs failed to get one single disabled person into a job.
Before my accident I played a lot of sport, the council wanted a disability sports officer so I was asked to get trained up upgrade my coaching badge and I could have a job, I did this paying out a lot of money and guess what they did, they made the job voluntary, no money no funding no wages.
I once went down to the CAB to work as a trainee, great until they said the office is up three flights of stairs.
I went down to my local health board for a medical, the sign said we are sorry if your disabled but the lift is broke, it's been broke for three years, once you did get up the lift open the door of the lift guess what you had three steps.
I'd love to work but without legs I need help, I've applied through my job center for 272 jobs and have had two replies.
I asked my MP how many disabled people are employed in percentage in the houses of Parliament and the house of commons and lords, the answer was 2.67, not a lot is it.
SAID mate if you go to the doctor I'm sure he will find your actually ill perhaps with a serious mental health problem, your to thick just to be stupid.
Tim: I am afraid that I have no faith in private business not discriminating against long term unemployed people, hence I do think there may be a place for ring-fencing. The problem with attempting to enforce anti-discrimination measures is that it isn't at all easy to do. There are too many loopholes.
I don't think its a case as certain jobs being only suitable for people on benefit, but a recognition that there are roles which we require to be carried out, and that it is right that a decent society ensures that long term unemployed people have a chance of getting them. I simply don't have any faith that the private sector will respond.
Post a Comment