General Chat

The fact that you have to work for benefit would in itself encourage people to find work. My son's friend claimed that there was no work around. What he meant was that there was no job he wanted to do.

To me it is not acceptable to pay out money without it being earned. This does not encourage anyone to get back to work. This is giving something for nothing. It may not be much better than slavery but nobody should expect a handout. Instead of giving money maybe food, clothes etc vouchers should be issued. If the unemployed want luxuries they shouldbe worked for.

Before we even think of cuts in this country we need to stop every last penny of overseas aid. Why are we giving millions of pounds to the likes of India and China?
Then we need to realise we have no use for billions of pounds of American nuclear weapons.
Then we need to get the hell out of Bush and Blairs wars in Iraq and Afganistan which we have not the slightest hope in hell of ever "winning" but which have cost us so dear in money and precious lives.
Then total and complete independence for England from the rest of the so-called "united kingdom" which has rarely been more dis-united but which costs English tax payers millions of pounds in subsidies to Scotland, Wales and Ulster. Even Lord Barnet says his formula is unfit for purpose and leaves England hugely disadvantaged.
Now, shall we talk about tax rises for the likes of Levy and the other tory rich who are about to give us proles such a kicking?
And maybe there is some way we can claim compensation from the brainless idiots that really thought that incompetent Scottish idiot would make a good chancellor.

Well Tooty Fruity, as someone who was made redundant just over a year ago, do you really think that those sort of cuts would have helped me find a job sooner?

I'm not saying there should be no conditions to claiming jobseekers allowance, but do you know that if you do voluntary work, you can have your JSA stopped, because it renders you unavailable for jobseeking. So that idea's out of the window.

When you've been unemployed for a year, you are referred to the government's Flexible New Deal scheme. This didn't work when it was run by the jobcentre, but now it is run by private companies. Within those you HAVE to attend a certain amount of hours per week, up to 30 hours. You do get your transport paid for, and while there you have to attend various workshops, which will aid, and remotivate you on your search for a job. Your CV will be re-written, you will be shown which of your skills are transferable, enabling you to widen the search, encouraged to write speculative letters or make speculative phone calls, interview skills, even filling out application forms. You can be referred to some courses to gain qualifications or new skills if needed, and there is a minimum of 3 hours per week spent in the computer rooms on jobsearch. The FND will also do 'better off calculations' to see if you are able to take a part time job instead of full time, and many people don't realise they actually would be better off than on the dole.

People who are jobless don't need to be punished further, it's bad enough as it is being without work, applying for the obligatory three jobs per week minimum without a single note of reply, usually having about 30 to 50 applications waiting for some acknowledgement, which never comes, and coming up against choosy employees because they have the pick of the market.

I agree when unemployment is at a more realistic level, during the good times, then those long term unemployed perhaps need a little more of a helping hand in motivating them to get back to work. But if you had ever, ever spent any time unemployed you would already know how demoralising it is to be searching for work in this current climate. I currently have 47 applications out there, not one has given me a reply, not even a bog-standard letter saying I've been unsuccessful. It really is a case of apply and forget it.

The only way you are going to reduce the JSA bill, is to create jobs for the people claiming it, and give them a chance. The longer it goes on the harder it gets, not just because you are demoralised, but because employers (who really need to spend some time on the dole themselves) view long periods out of work in the negative.

The whole point is that as it stands, I have been declared fit to find work, ie sign on to Jobseekers....Whether they have got it wrong or not is actually irrelevent in this scenario... the rules are in place, the criteria has been set already - revised by the outgoing Govt and so ruling out a lot more people who are genuinely sick... did you realise that someone with cancer is not classed as a special case? That the long term effects of cancer tratment are still not recognised as sickness or disability or a syndrome? Including the neuropathy and unbelievable bouts of total and utter fatigue that can and do come out of the blue. I know the signs, and so make sure I am not driving/operating machinery when I am most at risk. Unless someone has been declared terminally ill, with 6 months or less to live... then slightly different rules apply.

Woe betide them if they live a couple of weeks past 6 months, though! It is only very recently that people with FM have had their illness recognised, and there are an awful lot of people out there who are struggling with MS but because their *episodes* can come and go.... then they are not classed as consistently disabled.

My Haemotologist was not even contacted to find out what effect the treatment has had on my mobility/quality of life/life expectancy... but the rheumotologist I was sent to, to RULE out RA was consulted.... it doesn't make sense. The doctor who conducted my medical didn't even know what my illness was, and has consistently spelt it incorrectly in the report... not the American way which is fine, but totally incorrectly. She is a qualified doctor!

So, in an ideal world, the consultant would have the final say... but that doesn't happen.

And as it stands, I am supposed to be in a fit state to start working with NO restrictions on the type of work I can do.

I am not a malingerer, I am not workshy, and never have been. But under the criteria in place today, as we speak, then I am supposed to go out to work.. to find a job.

So.... what laws would people bring in to ensure that people like me aren't made to go and resurface roads. Tell me, please, what crime have I committed to be sentenced to Community service?

Bring on the Chain Gang.

Stray is spot on... if there is work out there for people on benefits to be FORCED to do, then there is work out there, full stop.... then those people should not be paid *benefits* by the Government... they should be paid the going rate for the job, at the very least minimum wage, pension etc etc.....

Yes, Slavery springs to my mind, too. My son would happily labour, dig up/mend roads whatever... but the jobs are just not there! He has tried, is still trying.

Who would be responsible for liable ins if work was undertaken by an experienced volunteer for people under their care??one would have to be paid which can have a premium of 0000's,that wouldnt work at all...as it would be paid from public taxes....
the worker would need a contract,also what would volunteers teach them that cant be taught in college?.....good in theory but dont work in practice,,,

the only people at this time who do work without loss of benifits is done throught the probation service who undertake community hours issued by the courts.

there is a system inplace for single parents if you work min 16hours a week then childcare costs can be met if attending a nursery.

I don't have the answers but find this more acceptable than making cuts in education, health, pensions.

I would also charge for failed GP appointments.

What cuts would others make?

I will also add that almost every job I've applied for, I've been up against at least 80 going for the same job...

It's all very well thinking that the unemployed are being too choosy, that is simply not the case.

delete

they need to make cuts to the top of the boards not the lower end mangement in government departments earn far to much

and MPs should be put up in B&Bs
not have second homes at London prices
and no meal allowances at fancy restaurants

and let them use the tube like everybody else no flash cars at our exspense

and the NHS theres far to many white collar workers on fancy wages

ie eight office staff to every doctor

and as for immigration

give them nothing except a flight home
we just can afford anymore people living off our country
giving nothing back
lets follow the Aussies lead
if they cant prove they can support themselves
deport them

I do sympathise with your hunt for work and it must be disheartening when arriving for an interview to find you are up against so many. I realize that there are genuine claimants who are not scroungers but think that jobseekers could be enabled better.

Lizz, in all fairness, there are a great deal of unemployed who, like me, are genuinely looking for work on a daily basis, who are trying really hard to get off the dole and back into the rat-race.

The kind of people you are talking about are really in the minority here, and if you have evidence, you should report it. However, please resist the temptation to tar us all with the same brush.

Well, I don't find it at all acceptable as you have proposed, so if this were an election, no vote, I am afraid!

I would reduce the numbers on non essential bureaucrats and managers... the town hall jobsworths, the quangos and freeloading unelected in the government and Europe. The multitude of managers in the national health service (there are more managers than there are doctors, I believe) this would allow for an increase in Frontline staff such as nurses, doctors, cleaners, and ward administrators... they are vital, it is the top heavy managers I would do away with/whittle down.

I would try to find a way of reducing the amount of paperwork police and teachers have to complete, which takes them out of their main job, and why they went into in the first place...... and keep them in the place they need to be, that is teaching and policing.

I would reduce the number of Mickey Mouse degrees, and introduce the old fashioned Apprentice/journeyman/vocational system. Not in a half hearted way, but with a proper structure around them, so that they are supported and trained, and also treated as skilled labour in the same way that nurses are now (degrees) so that they have the eqivilent of a degree in their field of study... it shouldn't matter if that *degree* is car maintenance or nuclear physics... they both have a valid role in society. Do you know.... many of these could even be earning minimum wage while they are on work placements! But based on what they wish to do, not forced to do.

Eddie... my husband, and a lot of Welsh lads and lasses, spend their working life (and their lives) keeping your English butt safe in your towns and cities... not talking overseas here, either. If you look at the statistics, as well.... head for head, the population in Wales has LESS spent on it in terms of health, education and welfare than in England... don't know about Scotland or Ireland, so can't comment. There is beginning to be an increase in outside investment here, and many call centres are moving here. But head count wise? You certainly do not *keep* me! My husband, me, my 7 siblings and their partners, nieces, nephews, cousins... we all work/have worked in my case, and all pay our taxes into the coffers at Westminster. I am British, and have every right to remain a part of Britain.

Arriving for interview? Chance would be a fine thing. No, you only have to look at the number of applicants for a single job on any number of the jobsite currently online, to see how many others are applying for the job.

The application stage is the easiest, you sit at home and either send a CV with covering letter, or fill in an application form, and send it off, then wait.

Interviews are the rare second-stage, and it's difficult to get to the interview stage, even when you have covered every one of their essential job specification requirements. More often than not, 99.99999% of employers won't even answer your application if you have not been filtered down to the interview stage.

You can't 'enable' jobseekers any more than they are now. As it is, we have no control over our lives really. We apply for jobs, we do what we are supposed to do, if an interview comes up, we prepare for it, we take notes with us with questions to ask, or if competency-based, notes to evidence your skills and experience, and we attend said interview suited and booted.

How else, apart from creating jobs, can you 'enable' the unemployed?
We already know there is lots of help for getting back to work, they have made life a little easier in that respect, but of course, to get back to work, you have to have work to get back to. In the meantime, JSA is not a large amount to live on, it's a struggle. The majority of unemployed would much rather be out earning their own money, in spite of probably huge dents in their self-confidence and morale through being made redundant in the first place (or the third time in 5 years as I have.)

It's not easy, in fact it's damn hard, and we dont' need to be punished for it too.

when i was the link goveror of a school
we were sent to a posh hotel for a three course meal
at £60 a head and an after dinner speaker

and allowed to stay over free of cost (which i declined )
all in the name of staff training

staff training my foot the school was never mentioned all night

it was a dam waste of public money

I have been trying to find the links used just before the election to show that spending per head has decreased in Wales these last couple of years. That included the bill for benefits as well, which previous breakdowns did not include.... the only reports I can now find go back a few years, and do not include a comparison including benefits... purely NHS, Education and something else but can't think what it is just now... will get back tomorrow when brain is in gear.

By adding the benefits bills for each area, the difference was quite substantial!

HI Daffy~~~~

Are all prescriptions still free in Wales?

We can't be that much in need of cuts. Cameron is giving serving soldiers an extra £15 a day.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/jun/11/david-cameron-troops-afghanistan

Gwynne

Hiya Kay ~~~~~~~~~

For the time being, yes, they are.... but in order to do that, they had to make cuts elsewhere... they were given their housekeeping, and they were able to choose how to spend it. As I said it does mean that cuts and compromises have been made elsewhere though... so we pay, one way or another.

It was in place already, when I first moved home, so I don't know the history behind it.

Our local Health Authorities are having to make massive cuts and that is before the election, and it is frontline services that are going, not the managers and penpushers... I see the point of some of them being in their jobs, we need good administrators to oil the wheels and make sure people are paid, stock is ordered etc... but at the moment the tail is wagging the dog. But the waste is silly... it is stupid stuff that money is being wasted on.

I don't agree with our WAG (Welsh Assembly Government, but the other connotation seems apt, somehow) being elected as an extra, either. I really feel it is just another Town Hall Quango. Where are they paid from? The taxpayer.... oh whoopie dooh! So they are really just another lot of Lord Mayorites with additional control and power... tsk.

I really ought to read up more about it.

Love

Daff xxxxx

Gwynne, that is not their normal pay that is being boosted. Just their operational pay... they get it only while they are in a theatre of war. Many of them will have taken cuts in one way or another when they are deployed to war zones, so are often worse off. I remember my husband having to pay for his water n the 1st Gulf war, although a water allowance was pushed through the week he left the first time... his water took up all his deployment pay!!

*Serving soldiers* are not just those in theatre, but those who are at home on leave, or in training ready to go.... but they do not qualify for this extra.

Love

Daff xxxx

*edit to spell Gwynne's name properly, so sorry!)

Recall hearing somewhere, in France if you are single and have a baby you get no allowances That would probably stop us having the worst record for pregnancy in Europe.
Carol