Counting the 'workless households'

Unfortunately the traditional avenues of employment for the long term unemployed/workless in industry and the building sector have been systematically eroded over the last few years as more and more businesses have folded.

For those not suited to academia the trades and semi-skilled jobs were the traditional routes for the workless. The government has no understanding of industry and such activities have been looked down on - how different to Germany, which has a pride in its tradesmen.

We must learn to value our tradesmen again - you cannot run an economy purely on the service sector.

Believe it or not, in spite of the recession, there is an excess of disposable income.

Looking back to how we lived and coped twenty, thirty years or more ago, we would have thought today's society was landed gentry.

People expect their annual holidays abroad, plasma screens, latest trainers, food on demand, unlimited alcohol on tap at any time of the day or night (not just for special occasions), the list goes on....

Some of the people on benefits find that they are actually better off financially staying on them. What they don't realise is that they would be far far better off as people, character and self esteem-wise, if they actually went out and earned the bread.

It's like alcoholism, you can't help somebody who won't help themselves.

A brilliant idea I heard on the wireless (by Petrie Hoskin on LBC I think) is that the public should EARN the right to claim benefits. In other words everybody must work but if misfortune befalls them by way of redundancy for example then the credits they have built up over the years of working can be used to claim benefits.

No work, no benefits. Tough but effective.

Good call Laura, glad you picked this up. Interesting deconstruction of the figures as well..

'The employment minister Jim Knight says the government has made real progress in tackling worklessness and points out that there are 2.5 million more people in work than in 1997.'

Problem is, Jim, there are about 5 million more immigrants in that time. So, as I read it, a net loss of around 2.5 million.

And, with the Government and personal finances of the UK in the current mess, I fear that these figures are going to get much, much worse. As a Tory, I really would vote Labour just to see this bunch of incompetents deal with the mess that will be upon UK plc.

In my experience I know of around ten people (although I'm not acquainted with them that well), who claim on some form of disability, and only two of those I'd say would struggle to do at least some type of admin or call center work.
The problem is that labour has made it to easy for people to just sit and claim, while the people who actually work and contribute, get by with in my case not alot more than if I was actually on benefits.
This is simply not right. There needs to be a better system available, where you need to work for your benefits unless there is actually a valid reason why you can't.

Quote "Out of the three million or so people claiming out of work benefits on the grounds of disability, research has suggested that at least third of them could do some form of work, and want to."

I don`t think so somehow. I live in on a very large council estate and there are many individuals who are allegedly disabled; but are as fit as a flea. I think the walking stick manufacturers must have made a killing in recent years seeling them to people claiming benefits. They will never be worn out though as the sticks only come out on special occasions. One has to ask with the best financed health service for years, why is such a high proportion of the population so unfit they canto go to work?

The mantra of the government is to care for people from the cradle to the grave - they forgot to add for a large number this also includes not having to do a days work either.

Seven out of every of our local 100 schoolgirls is a single parent and by their late teens are the mother to a bunch of children, normally by different fathers. They are at the top of the list for a nice flat plus £500 to set themselves up for their child. It also helps with their benefits, sort of benefits plus, if they can get one of their, "naughty children," (and who is suprised at their appalling behaviour coming from such a dyfunctional home where the f word is used as a prefix to everything uttered), labeled with AHD or sometihng similar.

In areas where the minimum wage is the norm, families on benefits can easily get £20K net to live on which is way above what a working man can earn. So where is the incentive. Specially when you can get so many many add ons prescriptions etc for free.

Tony Blair had the chance to turn this around when he came to power. His appointee Frank Field was asked to think the unthinkable and when he did Blair got rid of him. Now we are in such a mess no one has foggiest how to put it right. Brown doesn`t help. His good intentions to get children out of poverty was laudable; but his tax credits and the like has only inflammabed the problem. Our local filled roll shop, betting shop etc survive on people on benefit. If it wans`t for them they would all have gone long ago.

We now have second and third generation families who have never done a days work in their life. Quite clearly there is not enough money to keep on paying these people to stay at home and continue with the idle life they have become accustomed to.

Labour won`t want to upset the apple cart this side of the general election as the majority of their supporters come from the areas worst affected by this problem. Unless the tories get in with a whopping majority, which seems a bit unlikely ,they won`t be able to do anything about it. Turkeys don`t vote for xmas so I don`t see the work shy voting for a party that will do away with their giros and send them back to work.

Interesting trimes ahead. We cannot carry on like this; but unless we have a government with another Frank Field in its ranks then I don`t hold out much hope until the country goes broke. We cannot keep paying out more in benefits than we are receiving in taxation; but that appears to be Brown`s strategy at the moment. His Mr Macawber approach to governing this country.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Very interesting stuff.

More of an examination should be made of this figure historically, however, as 'people' and 'households' are not comparable.

It would be useful, for example, to find out in a historical context the number of single occupancy properties included in this figure, the number of long term unemployed who live together and how these households are clustered geographically.

4 Bluematter

Quite so because the unemployed have been kept that way by giving them generous benefits to stay at home. Important to keep labour voters poor and grateful

Less money spent on retraining because there was lots of imported cheap labour to keep wages down. Capitalism on the cheap.

We will now have to find a way out of this manufactured cess pit because there is no longer the funding to keep it as it is or the necessary jobs to train anyone to do. A double whammy.

This is certainly the story of the day. Pity it has been overshadowed by some silver spoon fed US senator.

#6 Braingare


"I don`t think so somehow. I live in on a very large council estate and there are many individuals who are allegedly disabled; but are as fit as a flea. I think the walking stick manufacturers must have made a killing in recent years seeling them to people claiming benefits. They will never be worn out though as the sticks only come out on special occasions. One has to ask with the best financed health service for years, why is such a high proportion of the population so unfit they canto go to work?"

Very interesting comment, with the millions thrown at the NHS why have we got so many people on disability allowance.
The simple truth is Labour have have found it all to convenient to shift people on to disability allowance to massage the unemployment figures.
It is truly staggering where this never ending river of welfare benefits are coming from, I truly believe when the seriousness of the UKs finances bite some very hard decisions are to be made, which present or future goverments seem to avoiding.
How much longer can the responsible be penalised and the feckless rewarded?

2#

Yup, like it FP. You watch the rush for the Heathrow and Dover if that ever happened...

6#

[[applause]]

'The employment minister Jim Knight says the government has made real progress in tackling worklessness and points out that there are 2.5 million more people in work than in 1997.'

The sad thing is that almost half of the additional jobs were created in the public services. That is absolutely not to disparage public servants. But it is simply unsustainable to add more people into jobs which depend absolutely on tax-take or government borrowing.

Statistics is a dark art. But we now have a dark heart in the UK. Too few people properly trained across the whole stretch of needs in a society. Too little respect paid to properly qualified trades people.

If you call yourself an electrician or plumber in Germany - you have to be able to prove qualifications.

The government claims to be establishing hundreds of thousands of apprenticeships. Actually they've been saying that for years, but cumulatively there appear still to be hundreds of thousands of missing vacancies... I gave up trying to count the gap between promises made and the opportunities actually delivered quite a while back.

The social problem is that so many people have been taught that "The Government" will provide.

Every child in secondary education should be taught that "The Government" doesn't have any money. It takes money away from individuals and companies by way of taxes. THEN it passes it to others. Ideally according to some common sense approach which encourages people to get engaged with "real life" and discourages people who believe that if they choose to have babies for fun, they have to accept responsibility for the economic and social consequences.

Wow. Not quite sure where that fits. In France - which by comparison with the UK is fairly empty - tax breaks for couples with children are still fairly high. In the USA, benefits are fairly limited. In China, families were for years restricted on the number of "allowable" children. The liberal bit of me says that everyone has a right to breed. But that doesn't mean that everybody else should be ordered to pick up the tab! So there's probably a little bit from across the political spectrum contained in those remarks.

9#

Well said. Keep 'em poor, but not starving, give 'em the illusion that things are getting better... but at the same time allowing the filthy rich to stay filthy rich and allow them to get even richer... that way, you can still say to your core vote, look, there is still inequality, there are still those tory types raking it in, vote for us - after all, we're one of you! We're the only ones who can look after your interests!

Those who have come to depend on it are never going to vote against it, if you hold the spectre of the nasty party coming to ruin it all. Its almost like a drug addiction. Those who are genuinely outraged will be painted as being in favour of the rich, hence against the interests of the masses. You're either for them or against them, right?

As a political strategy, it really is quite brilliant, ingenious yet simple.

And, given the political savvy of your average voter, or the lack of fight for change in the UK citizenry, the willingness to keep on taking it on the chin, rather than doing what the French would do, its also blindingly effective.

Gotta give Minky his dues, it really is a very very clever strategy.

But back to the subject... one in six households? 15%?? Thats bad. Really bad. No wonder Gordon was so quick to speak out about Teddy Kennedy then scurry back into his bunker to keep quiet. Has a nation that won two world wars and gave huge advances is technology, industry and in other fields really come to this?

NuLab really are worse than Sunny Jim's lot in '79. Labour still isn't working and all that, but the crying shame is that England will probably just vote for the other unionist tweedledums who have no interest whatsoever in fixing the UK's broken polity and want to renew Trident to strut the world stage in a way the UK has not been able to afford for half a century.

If anyone actually wants to retain a UK of any sort there is perhaps one more chance after 2010, if that.

Without real electoral and constitutional reform and sorting out the crazy asymmetric devolution there'll soon be three independent nations sharing Great Britain.

Post or reactive moderation for all except CBeebies, please!

I see we're on the "bash the disabled" routine again. Just tell me one thing, all you folks who think we're all workshy spongers - have you ever thought about how difficult it is to GET a part-time job if that's all you can manage? As my handle indicates, I'm a British ex-pat in the USA, although I doubt the UK is much different in this respect. Over here, in my line of work, you work a 50-55 hour week *as standard* or you don't work. It's that simple. So you can only do half time because of chronic illness? Thank you, next candidate please.

It's not always the disabled who don't want to do the work to the limit of which they're capable, it's the employers who can't see past the health problems and won't let them. And if I had a pound, or even a dollar, for the number of times I've heard "overqualified" I'd not need to claim benefits.

some talk on here about our "generous" benefits culture:

genuine question - don't know the answer and would like to - so why not tap into the accumulated wisdom/knowledge of the Nick Robinson Blog community is what I'm thinking to myself

and the actual GQ: are the benefits available to the unemployed in the UK particularly generous by Western European standards? ... you know, c.f. France, Germany, Scandanavia and the like?

"The shadow work and pensions secretary, Theresa May says they [the workless households figure] are "scandalous"."

Sorry but that a bit rich coming from the Tories, some of us remember the 1980s...

if the people of this country were treated fairly and did not have to compete with cheap labour from overseas unemployment would be reduced.
a return to national service (but a modern version aimed at civil service along side military service.)would again reduce unemployment.
i may seem draconian but at least its an honest opinion rather than nothing.

A couple of years ago when it was nigh on impossible to recruit manual labour, I would have said anyone under 30 [in good health] who was out of work was wilfully unemployed.

The last year or so there simply have not been the opportunities for the young workless and we need to try and find ways of utilising the young men in particular before they settle down into a mentality of worthlessness. It is the lack of aspiration as much as the lack of application that is worrying.

Laura:

So who are the 'workless'?

The simple definiton is that when all of the adult(s) in the residence (Home) are not employed.....

=Dennis Junior=

whoa peeps, before we get carried away,
let us not forget that that the Disability Living Allowance was introduced by the last Conservative government as a way of massaging the unemployment figures (anyone remember Red Ken posting the daily figures on the top of the GLC building)
The current Labour government, despite being in power for many years chose not to do anything about it.
Don't blame the idle fit for the problems of this country, nett GDI (gross domestic income per person) is well over 30 grand, I get about half this,(and I work 43 hrs/wk) I get more tax credits than I pay in tax and NI.
Yes we are being ripped off, but it is not the poor who are doing it, just who felt the benefit of the 175 million grand QE'd into the banking system, just who are the benefit scroungers here ?
It's all very well for politicians to make 'soundbite' pronouncements but they are talking about real people here, mostly good ordinary upright citizens struggling to make ends meet during the most glorious fup that is just not their fault, that they had no control over and now will apparently have to pay for.
angry...a bit

Another good blog, thanks. It is nice to get a balanced set of observations, with only a hint of judgement, but still on a very thought-provoking topic. It does seem to generate a slightly less rabid form of debate, even though participants are clearly concerned/passionate about the subject.

I know an apprentice who was paid off by a very large building firm, ( they made huge profits for the last ten years) he was then taken on by a smaller firm they have just gone bust, he cant get another firm to take him on
there are 900 other apprentices like him in the region in the same position.
Where are all the apprentice places that were promised?
Why are the big firms who made huge amounts of money over the last decade and still have large banks of land and money in the bank not made to keep these people on the books ?????????

They just don't get it, the political classes. We hear DC pontificating about one thing, GB hiding in a corner somewhere, Theresa May and HH wannabees sounding off about the latest figures.
The people of the UK are clinging on in quiet desperation, I see it everyday.
It's not like the 70's and sunny Jim, back then there was always someone making a living and recession was only in the UK.
It's not like the 80's and Mrs T battling the miners, you could always escape to sunny spain
It's not like the 90's and Norman looking sheepish as he got roasted by the ERM.
The people of the UK have nowhere to turn this time.
There is plenty of work about, just ask your local builder/carpenter/plumber/SME. It's just that no-one is paying. There is a fast declining belief that keeping on working will be enough, but no one is paying
This time it is different, the one thing that everyone sees is that the only people living it large are the political classes, they blame this group they blame that, and still the people suffer, still they live it large.
War or revolution is on the way, the thin veneer of civilisation can only be stretched so far.
And still they sit in their ivory towers, oblivious to the suffering of a once great nation, either they are complicit or they are ignorant. Either way they have got to go.

Its interesting to note that in a village close to where I live, and known for the high level of non working adults, there is a much higher number of satellite dishes, dogs and off-road motorbikes than in my village.

Hard to see how that equates to being hard up!

Despite there being high levels of unemployment, the pubs and betting shops are full, they take taxis to the supermarket to go shopping and the kids always have the latest football strips. Its not poverty, its different priorities and work is going to be low down whilst there's funding available from elsewhere.

I have no issue with disabled benefits, as I'm partially disabled myself, but don't qualify. I just think that anyone who claims by lying and isn't disabled should be much more harshly punished for falsely claiming.

Pay back the ill-gotten gains first, then the fine, then work to help genuinely disabled people as community service. Push a wheelchair, do their washing up and shopping, clear their gardens etc

As for workshy youths, clear litter, trim back overgrown hedges, wash street signs to earn their benefits, anything that needs doing, but please, please do not pay them to sit round all day playing video games!

by making the UK "the centre of europe" and giving up many of the vetos we had, making the UK the same price as manufacturing mainland europe for inward investment from around the world, what did blair/brown expect?

if i want to invest in europe, if manufacturing my product in the UK and transporting it to mainland europe was cheaper than building my factory in mainland europe, then of course i would opt for the UK, this was how it used to be.

brown tells us at every opportunity, that competition is fierce, in a "global" economy, we used to have a point of difference, to attract inward investment from around the world. now we have nothing.

brown can argue the job figures until hes blue in the face, he cannot escape the fact that he has been central to labour policies that have made investment from businesses, goto mainland europe.

this at the same time as opening our borders and letting in millions of people, where are the jobs going to come from now?

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

The simple answer is to make it compulsory for all receivers of benefits to perform some kind of work.No work, no benefits.The existing Jobseekers allowances could go towards paying people for a full time job with the balance being made up by employers.Failing that job centres could set up their own work schemes and businesses.

The problem with government is that it lacks creativity and the will to get the job done.With a bit of vision, good will and common sense more people could be working, contributing positively to the national income and doing so in an enjoyable way.

~ Flamepatricia (2)

'No work, no benefits'

Well for your information, some benefits are based on your National Insurance contributions - a bit of research on your part would have revealed that. And what do you intend to do about people who cannot get work - severely disabled, unsuccessful in the education system, young mothers abandoned by their partners? There is a 'grey area' in the benefit system. I conceed that what happens in this area can be altered and made tougher, but glib unachievable statements do not further your position, they undermine it and undermine the position of other bloggers who think and write with similar sentiments.

May I suggest that rather than trying to exclude these people from society (some, but not as many as some think, may be lazy, undeserving etc)and further their alienation, we should find ways of including them (changing their mind sets to bring them into the mainstream of society if necessary). I have ideas but no answers on how to solve that. But what I do know is that depriving people of the basics may drive some back to work, but it will also drive others (who already feel outside society) to crime. This may lead to the ultimate expression of worklessness namely prison and a massive pressure on our taxes defeating the prime motivation behind your suggestion. Your quick fix would be a disaster.

Whats the point in lauding the figures when the figures are always manipulated and massaged.

Be they Tory or Labour. (more so Labour) The fact is that they spin the information to make it sound good for them.

'Let us not foget the extra 2.5m in work' Mostly created in public services paid for by debt. Plus the extra population, how does that figure calculate taking into account immigration, population growth etc. Is it a pro-rata or 'real terms' figure.

Fact is - many humans are 'chancers' if there is a loophole to exploit it will be exploited.

The real issue is here is how a socialist government fails to take into account the human condition and by increasing welfare opportunity you are increasing the opportunity of misuse and failure.

Can poverty be eradicated? I don't know. I doubt it because there are many who are poor and many who claim poverty. They are not always the same.

A welfare state under a socialist government is unable to differentiate between the two.

The minimum wage and employment measures undertaken by this government, while laudable, have added significantly to the problem.

Small and growth potential businesses are now so stuck in the mire of red tape and restrictions that the very thought of offering someone a job comes with too many risks and obstacles, that most would rather tick over and avoid expansion.

Those that do wish to expand will often contract out work overseas because it is easier and less troublesome.

Yet without small businesses and more pro-active business government this country will continue to attract the welfare wannabe's.

Sometimes you just have to be tough in order to achieve your main objectives - this government has constantly decided to support minority opinion rather than the majority. Time for change.

17#

Typical Boiler, just like I posted before, raise that spectre of the 1980's YET AGAIN, why dont you, instead of admitting Labour got it wrong and do something to put the problem right or to try and attenuate the impact of it? Much easier to keep the ignorant poor in fear of a party that has been out of power for 12 years.... that way you dont have to do anything, just keep on lining your own pockets and accusing everyone else of heresy when they try and provide another solution..

It has all happened on YOUR watch this time Boiler. No escaping it. You cant blame it on anyone else.

16#

When you consider that virtually everything that has been taken in income tax this year Saga, is going straight back out the door in benefits (guess how the rest of the budget is going to be funded?) then yes, I'd say compared to our European partners, we're quite generous.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

it's an interesting issue, the benefits system ...

you can take one of two approaches

(1) you can proceed on the basis that people will tend to exploit it whenever possible, and look to really tighten it up

or:

(2) you can assume that people, broadly speaking, are straight up and so shouldn't have to jump through too many hoops to claim their fair dues

if you take the (1) the result will be a lower bill but more genuine hardship - and you have to accept that some of that hardship will fall on some "straight up" people (and their children)

if you go for the (2) you get less hardship but a higher bill - and you have to accept that some of "your" money is going to support the idle/feckless

so, as always in politics (hope you're there Fairly Open Mind) it comes down, not to common sense or anything like that, but a Value Judgement

I am (2) btw

36#

Raised eyebrows all round this morning when that popped up on the news... why is a regulatory head indulging in socialist dogwhistle politics when any questions of taxation, punative or otherwise are solely a matter for the chancellor and HMRC?

If you put this tax on banks or other financial organisations, they'll just find another way of making up the shortfall. They'll either charge their clients more, or they'll up sticks and leave.

Thats one of the things, one of the very curious things about this Labour administration over the last decade; their tax regime has been such that it has attracted MORE of these types of business - private equity, hedge funds, the "casino banks" etc - to the UK; hence helping to embed and propagate the bonus culture through the financial services industry. But there is far more that needs attention and there are plenty more causes for the credit crunch than just bonuses. It isnt that simple and for Turner to allude otherwise is disingenious.

As ECB says, its hardly going to impact on the bonuses at the FSA, which IMVHO have over the last twelve months at least been nothing but a reward for abject failure.

What on earth does Turner think he is doing? He would do better making his own organisation more fit for purpose before he starts pontificating on matters that should be left to elected ministers. At least if we dont like their taxation policies we can vote them out - eventually.

#28 Newshound

Yes I agree with you, a bit of lateral thinking is required to give the workless some experience of work in return for their benefits.

If implemented in a positive rather than punitive fashion it would equip these young workless with some workplace skills for when the situation starts to recover.

Morning All

It is worth getting down to the "raw data" for these figures.
Raw Data
It is quite a complicated picture. For example, they have working, workless and mixed household categories. A working household is where all individuals of working age (16-64 for men, and 16-59 for women!) are working. Workless is where all individuals are working. Then we have the mixed, where some are working, some not. This mixed category has increased by 600 thousand people, or around 300 thousand households for the last 2 years. Closer inspection shows that the increase in mixed households is due to unemployment (Table 1 & 2). This suggests a declining job market from 2008.

Lone parent households account for 40% of the total workless households or 35% of the total of workless people in workless households. Understandable, and the evidence does show an increasing in the employment rate for this group since 1997.

I think you can make what you will of the figures. Yes there is an increase on 1997 but then there is an increase in the total number. My best conclusion is that whatever has been done since 1997 has made little difference on getting fewer households out of the workless category. These figures alone are not detailed enough to pass judgment on whether there are stubborn workless households or whether incapacity benefits are to blame.

37#

You know something Saga - make sure you've got the smelling salts close by - I think your analysis of the two positions in this case is exactly the situation we find ourselves in.

HOWEVER... :-) (come on, you knew there'd be at least one....) regrettably IMVHO, we have reached that tipping point - probably travelled some way beyond it as well, where it would appear that maybe a lot of people arent quite so straight up. And, that there are a lot of deserving cases that are falling through the cracks already, where there are restrictions on whether you can claim if you have a certain amount of savings, or if your partner is in work and you are not, etc - and the other thing is just how do you decide what exactly is "fair dues"?

And it equally applies to housing as much as it does any other benefit, where the availability of it and the conditions that have been set for receipt have influenced behaviour amongst certain sections of society towards gaining those benefits. And I'm not even going to start on immigration and asylum; those have been done to death already.

Goes without saying mate, I'm afraid I'm a (1) on this occasion. It needs to be tightened, personal responsibility needs to come to the fore and I'm of the opinion that the state providing from the cradle to the grave is nothing short of buying votes for the party that advocates and implements such a scheme... gerrymandering by any other name.

#6. At 7:09pm on 26 Aug 2009, briangare wrote:
Quote "Out of the three million or so people claiming out of work benefits on the grounds of disability, research has suggested that at least third of them could do some form of work, and want to."

I don`t think so somehow. I live in on a very large council estate and there are many individuals who are allegedly disabled; but are as fit as a flea. I think the walking stick manufacturers must have made a killing in recent years seeling them to people claiming benefits. They will never be worn out though as the sticks only come out on special occasions. One has to ask with the best financed health service for years, why is such a high proportion of the population so unfit they canto go to work?

The mantra of the government is to care for people from the cradle to the grave - they forgot to add for a large number this also includes not having to do a days work either.

Seven out of every of our local 100 schoolgirls is a single parent and by their late teens are the mother to a bunch of children, normally by different fathers. They are at the top of the list for a nice flat plus £500 to set themselves up for their child. It also helps with their benefits, sort of benefits plus, if they can get one of their, "naughty children," (and who is suprised at their appalling behaviour coming from such a dyfunctional home where the f word is used as a prefix to everything uttered), labeled with AHD or sometihng similar.

In areas where the minimum wage is the norm, families on benefits can easily get £20K net to live on which is way above what a working man can earn. So where is the incentive. Specially when you can get so many many add ons prescriptions etc for free.

Tony Blair had the chance to turn this around when he came to power. His appointee Frank Field was asked to think the unthinkable and when he did Blair got rid of him. Now we are in such a mess no one has foggiest how to put it right. Brown doesn`t help. His good intentions to get children out of poverty was laudable; but his tax credits and the like has only inflammabed the problem. Our local filled roll shop, betting shop etc survive on people on benefit. If it wans`t for them they would all have gone long ago.

We now have second and third generation families who have never done a days work in their life. Quite clearly there is not enough money to keep on paying these people to stay at home and continue with the idle life they have become accustomed to.

Labour won`t want to upset the apple cart this side of the general election as the majority of their supporters come from the areas worst affected by this problem. Unless the tories get in with a whopping majority, which seems a bit unlikely ,they won`t be able to do anything about it. Turkeys don`t vote for xmas so I don`t see the work shy voting for a party that will do away with their giros and send them back to work.

Interesting trimes ahead. We cannot carry on like this; but unless we have a government with another Frank Field in its ranks then I don`t hold out much hope until the country goes broke. We cannot keep paying out more in benefits than we are receiving in taxation; but that appears to be Brown`s strategy at the moment. His Mr Macawber approach to governing this country.
-----------------------------------------------

Great post, sounds very much like where I live as well. The problem is entirely down to the welfare culture and predictably the issues of crime and anti-social behaviour also go hand in hand with the same culture.

Eleven years ago I was unemployed for two months and remember getting a letter telling me my benefit would end on such a date as my NI contributions would run out. To this day I'm still baffled as to how I could run out of benefits after two months yet millions of others who've never worked at all still manage to make a career out of it.

Above all else though, what needs to be tackled is breeding without responsibility. Child benefits for first-born only and no council-house allowance to mothers under 21 - two tactics that would improve things dramatically in this area. But I think the best option would be a scheme for paid voluntary sterilisation, say £3k to anyone under 40. In the long-term it would save the country billions.

We need a massive, radical overhall of the benefits system.

I think that we as a society have a duty to make sure all are fed, clothed, housed and have access to education and healthcare. After that our obligations end and their responsibilities begin.

And we need to think about the levels of housing we provide. The rules governing social housing mean that some new build properties are considered 'not up to standard' If I was 10 today and my dad was unemployed, the house he worked to bring us up in would be considered not up to standard because I shared a bedroom with two brothers and we only had one loo!

Thank you Laura. I felt this statistic was very contrived and that it means nothing for the reasons you give. Furthermore, I would be interested to know whether all "adults" without a job have been allocated to a household as well - if in fact all students prisoners and those in hospital long term have been included. I put this forward as a possibility, because the number of adults is roughly known and the number of households ditto - but who knows where a particular adult is living - at home or elswhere? Its a long time since the last Census. More than this, I would like to know firstly from whose political camp this piece of nonsense was issued, and I also have to ask why the BBC broadcast it as news. If I were to put forward the startling statistic that 61m Britons face death, I don't think the BBC would broadcast that.

Excellentcatblogger – Well if you had made your complaint to the right organisation you may have got a response. The FSA does not deal with complaints from members of the general public, because that is the job of the FOS (Financial Ombudsman Service). If you had checked the FSA website they make this fairly clear.

The sad fact is that the economy needs people on benefits, if nothing else it means those of us employed can hope to get a better wage when we change jobs. It is kind of amusing people moaning about a ‘socialist’ government and at the same time suggesting a socialist idea, universal employment with large chunks of the workforce being paid by the state!

16. At 9:43pm on 26 Aug 2009, sagamix wrote:

and the actual GQ: are the benefits available to the unemployed in the UK particularly generous by Western European standards? ... you know, c.f. France, Germany, Scandanavia and the like?

------------------------------------------------------------------------

As an ex benefits advisor , i can say the benefits system in the UK is incredibly generous compared to the countries you named

#37 sagamix

That's a very apt analysis of the situation, even though I have to disagree with your chosen standpoint. (2) is an idealist situation and would in a sense be better than the current one, as I believe the welfare system needs simplifying rather than further complicating. Some genuine claimants are forced to jump through hoops for what they should be entitled to, but the problem with the system is that regardless of how complex it becomes (and bearing in mind the administrative cost increases further with each complication) the people who are determined to exploit it still know how to do so.

Shoplifting is so rife because stores make allowances for theft these days, and the shoplifters themselves know that the courts won't punish them even if they get caught, and if they're unlucky they might get a fine. So shoplifting as a result of this is a profitable venture. Similarly, as there is no risk to benefit fraud these days (pay back that £17k you stole at 10p a week?), it is thus made more appealing in the process.

Complicating the system helps nobody, and the "tax credit" system is just an expensive logistical nightmare. We need simple rules regarding who is entitled to what and deterrents in place for those who exploit them. Not deterrents like the "We're watching you" nonsense that only serves to infuriate, but genuine repercussions that make the risk of benefit fraud a less attractive option.

Why do we pay 'benfefits' to the workless? Surely a simpler solution is for the government to provide for their needs (at a minimum level) but without ever actually giving them cash?

If the only way to have luxuries was to switch off Sky, get off the sofa and work perhaps worklessness would reduce?!

Long before this recession I opined that there was something fundamentally wrong with the labour market in the UK.

Education for the many seems to be of poor quality, vocational training is for the lucky, debt seems to be an ambition, the minimum wage has become the maximum wage for many, levels of income tax for the lower paid are higher than they are for the very rich, if you qualify for welfare the return is better than if you worked and paid tax, jobs disappear eastwards at the rate of knots, tax avoidance also known as the black economy is widespread, job security is poor, pensions have been raped by government and their administrators and the list goes on.

My qestion is really what incentive is there for any young person to go out and get a job given these disadvantages?

In the UK people are no longer encouraged to get a job, to add value to their own life and to wider society. The connection between work and prosperity has been allowed to fester and rot.

The problems lie in the cultural values promoted within our society. This is a function of the way we organise our society. That the rich are getting richer whilst the poor get poorer is just the start of the matter. With a government probably indebetd to the tune of GBP 200 billion for just this year alone tells me the poor are going to get a whole lot poorer before very long.

45 davidrmurrell

Thanks, I have taken your advice and e-mailed the Ombudsman.

Yet again, caring for the aged, infirm or children is not classed as work! These figures are rubbish, and worse still dangerous rubbish!

I am afraid that only when the proper cost of informal caring is accounted for properly will these activities be properly valued and then the politicians will be able to turn to genuine issues! What happened to the wages for housewives/househusbands issue get to in the political agenda?

A quick political stab: When will Theresa May stop trampling over the bodies of the very hard working, but unwaged, with he very expensive high heeled shoes!

"sagamix wrote:
it's an interesting issue, the benefits system ...

you can take one of two approaches

(1) you can proceed on the basis that people will tend to exploit it whenever possible, and look to really tighten it up

or:

(2) you can assume that people, broadly speaking, are straight up and so shouldn't have to jump through too many hoops to claim their fair dues

I am (2) btw"

I have to say that I lean towards (1). When it comes down to it I fully expect that there are many people out there who would happily defraud the government to claim extra "free" money. There are people in this country who are quite willing to rob people at knife point, or break into other people's houses, do you think they are going to think twice about defrauding the government? And that is before you consider all the people who think they are honest but would be quite happy to do some cash in hand work while claiming benefits.

Defrauding the government is considered by many as a victimless crime. Many would see it as a way of getting some of the money back that they pay in taxes.

The problem is that the benefits system is flawed in it's approach, many of the genuine people who fall on hard times (the hard working families who lose their jobs or have their hours cut) end up getting less from the system, and the long term unemployed are given extra money to massage them away from the unemployment stats. I very much doubt that the millions of people who have supposedly never worked under New Labour get by on just JSA each week?

I have a friend who is married with a small child, he is on a fairly good wage (considered too high for real goverment help) but his wife is unemployed as they can't afford to pay fees for nursery. They have found out that if they were to live apart his wife would be able to claim benefits to help pay nursery fees, tax credits, help with housing and council tax, and she would actually be able to afford to work!

As a couple they would be massively better off by defrauding the government and pretending to split up! The system is broken and in some areas it actively encourages people to break the law! The people who work hard and pay their taxes get treated badly by the government. Many of the genuine cases are slipping between the cracks because affordability is based on earned income rather then what people actually have to live on.

When it comes to being able to claim tax credits the government should look at income after tax has been paid, after housing costs and travel to work costs have been paid. These are all things that the genuine workers have to worry about.

What we need is the total figure of supporting those that are no working or any form that are not pensionors or living with parents.

The guess is this figure will be huge.

Then ask yourself would it be better that this money was spent in other
ways to create jobs rather than trapping people on benifits. That combined would equate to Mr Average having to earn £25K to be in the same positon, but they are going nothing for that £25K and when it comes to getting a job well they say we need at least £30K just to maintain the status quo of our lives why should we work?

Thus putting a whole lot of people heholden to HMG for their "wages" of benifits. Turkeys will not then vote for christmas.

Better to have schemes like buildign a High speed network which not not allow migrate workers to do the work BUT train the "others" that are not working or have become work shy to do that work.

whay we need is a complete reversal of the last 12 years of the benifits culture of money for nothing

Our parents and grandparents instilled in us that the work ethic was crucial to a useful and well adjusted society. When children left school they either went on to Further and then Higher education (if they were clever) or straight away into an apprenticeship or paid employment. Many large companies employed young people whilst sending them one day a week to an educational establishment to continue with studying and I know some who actually went on to become solicitors etc. as a result.

We were told it was absolutely shameful to go on the "DOLE" and none of us would even consider going there.

A lot of these people now think BENEFITS are just that. A gift given to them for not working.

Under Labour this problem has not, nor will it be, resolved.

It takes some tough sorting out and by God we deserve the benefits it will give to society as a whole when these people are made to work.

#43 AndyC555 wrote:

We need a massive, radical overhall of the benefits system.

You can't make radical overhauls of the benefits system unless you make an even more radical overhaul of the tax system. Benefits are so attractive to some because the income tax system bites at such a low level. And it is exacerbated by the fact that council tax, rent, etc are paid for you. Taken out of earned income, particularly those on low incomes from working, rent, council tax make a massive proportion of your monthly outgoings.

Until working actually pays for the low paid, why the hell would you not want to be on benefits?

Fubar there are lots of facets to this problem.

I can speak with experience on the disability claimants. My son was horribly injured, coma, brain surgery, is now permanently in a power wheelchair. Hands disabled by spasticity from the brain, can hardly talk. Cannot take himself to the toilet and cannot feed himself. Cognitively he is good but he requires round the clock care and always will do. He, rightly, is in the Critical category of disability awarded for life and my husband and I care for him (for no remuneration although it would cost the State £2000 per WEEK if they looked after him).

We see others - and around here it is foreigners (had to say that because it's true)with Motability cars, blue badges etc. parking on yellow lines and in disabled bays. When they alight from their huge people carriers there are about eight of them, NONE OF WHOM IS DISABLED. I have also seen many of them get out a collapsible walking stick and use it until around the corner when they fold it up and walk normally. This behaviour saves them thousands a year in parking fees.

The badges are either stolen or "borrowed" from a family member who actually is disabled - or (and I got moderated for saying this before but it is true) they have the paperwork to enable them to claim for benefits, blue parking badges etc in their places of worship by their own people who have become doctors. AND I DON'T MEAN CHURCHES.

Somebody should look into this as a matter of urgency but everybody is afraid to. What a sad sorry state.

ps. Anybody who lives in Devon or where these problems don't exist, don't criticise me because you haven't got a clue.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

The system and culture in the UK rewards failure and punishes success, so it is not surprising that we get a lot of failures. The welfare state has rotted the British character, and should be abolished. At the very least, anyone in receipt of benefits should have to spend 40 hours a week at the disposal of the tax-payer e.g. cleaning pavements with toothbrushes, or just chained to a lamp-post. We'd soon find out who really was unemployed ! I'm sick of being a tax-slave and being abused by Labour and all their hangers-on. If you want to give your money to layabouts, form a charity, but don't come looking for mine.

We have a situation where becoming a single mum is a good career option for many young girls. There are whole families where three generations have been on benefits so the kids have no role models.

In areas of high unemployment being poor means not having the latest phone, play station, or plasma screen. They have uninsured and untaxed cars, keep dogs in unsuitable properties and lets kids hang around late at night. Well, there's no worries about doing badly at school, why worry?

I don't get the logic of not issuing clothing and food vouchers because its demeaning or against their human rights? Why isn't being unemployed seen as demeaning?

If we must give these scroungers benefits can we at least make them get out of bed to collect them? How about a weekly meeting with a benefits councillor where they need to turn up as though going to a real job?

So prompt arrival, dressed appropriately and at least looking like they could go to work. A detailed interview asking what they have done since last week and what they will be doing next, guidance on improving/gaining skills based on their situation or educational abilities and a two or three hour project for later in the week. Litter picking, graffiti removal, grass cutting, anything to stop them doing nothing.

Lateness or non arrival means loss of some benefit. Any dealings with the Police, drunkenness etc, loss of benefit,. Let's stop seeing them as victims and recognise them as scroungers.

If young people can travel from the Ukraine to wash pots in hotels for the minimum wage we shouldn't be allowing our own youth to sit back and watch the world go by whilst holding their hands out.

Your know Laura, I have been thinking on this problem for some time. Until some MP or even someone of courage within our political system, stands up and says we are the most work-shy Country known to man, we will never advance. A lot of people in this Country when they are working do as little as possible and expect great rewards for doing so. Those who are working hard and progress in their jobs become disillusioned by over taxation and long hours to pay for benefits to people who can but will not work. In the end people who work hard either decide they have had enough and move abroad, or lose interest because the rewards for them are not there.

The public needs to wake up and stop thinking they have the best Country in the World and start looking at our reputation. Most foreigners see us as work-shy drunkards with very little education.

We do not have the best health care in the World, which we keep being told everyday, it is failing, particularly the elderly. All the excuses of over work, will not make nurses gain the empathy needed to deal with patients in the right way. Our education system is not reaching International standards, and soon will be so bad, no one will take qualifications seriously.

The wars are just a nightmare all the propaganda provided by the media and politicians cannot hide the truth.

Then there is the public, all who vote to gain the most advantage for themselves, instead of who will look after the Country and bring gain to us all. Well I will not vote for any of them, until we have someone brave enough to point out all the things which are wrong with this Country and are prepared to take the tough decisions to put them right. All this dancing round in a politically correct way by the public, media and politicians, is just too much to stomach for me.

It is also time for England to have its own Parliament, recent events have proved that Scotland and England have totally different agendas. Scotland wants to embrace the EU, England does not. I would like to remind people our contributions are to be increased this year to the EU, even though we cannot afford it. Having a Scottish PM has now become untenable, there is no one therefore, who is representing England in this Union. Our whole political system and our view of our place in the World needs to change and quickly.

#58 Good point.

Why should so much of the hard work that I put in every day go to someone who abuses the money I have earned - doesn't this highlight the total lack of respect engendered by a welfare state.

#37 Sagamix raised an interesting point - but rather than just accept that there are fraudsters, why not reward those that are 'straight'. For genuine cases there should be alternative care and help, money should only be a small factor.

If the government supplied food, housing, heat and light and a smaller amount of money then wouldn't the emphasis be on the individual to either accept a lower form of living or try to get emplaoyment to achieve their ambitions.

Poverty? Not if they food, clothing (but no style), heat and a roof over their heads.

A form of communism for those that have given up!? Might be worth considering.

@56
"ps. Anybody who lives in Devon or where these problems don't exist, don't criticise me because you haven't got a clue."
What is it with your propensity to offend? To the list of Scots, single mothers, and immigrants can we now add anyone to the west of Reading?
If you look at the voting records for Devon (and Cornwall - yes all you inhabitants of London village, it does exist) you will find they are genrally conservative, informed and do have a clue
Rant over.

People need to distinguish between can't work and won't work.

There is a recession - there are genuine, hardworking people who have no job at the moment. As the jobs re-appear these people will slot into them at the earliest opportunity.

One in six households with no one in a job, last year? Whilst half a million East Europeans could walk into a job and vacancies were still left unfilled? That's something different.

59#

Can someone find an oxygen bottle for Saga please, he appears to have fainted... :-)

60#

You OK Susan....? Us, the most workshy? I have a feeling that the indigenous locals of Afghanistan, Gaza and parts of the Gulf states where a majority of the working population are ex-pats or brought in from the Indian subcontinent as labourers may feature higher up that list than the UK...

(lights blue touch paper and dives under table for cover)

Well Susan, welcome back - I am sorry we continue to disappoint you.

Compromise is part and parcel of life and situations are not always black and white. Any decision has to take into account the winners and losers - this is not weakness or politically correct dancing round, it is common sense.

As ever there is an element of truth in what you say but I think you are being extremely pessimistic.

"12. At 8:48pm on 26 Aug 2009, fairlyopenmind wrote:
'The employment minister Jim Knight says the government has made real progress in tackling worklessness and points out that there are 2.5 million more people in work than in 1997.'"

Yes but the uk population has gone up by almost over 3million since then!

@55
Sum it up nicely there, as I mentioned in a earlier post I know of a few people who claim basically because they are lazy.
I asked them why they didnt at least look for a job and their honest answer "Well in order to get the amount that we are now, we'd have to be in a full time job".
I'd just like to point out that this is from a couple in their mid 20s, with no underlying health issues whatsoever.
This attitude is wrong. And will be the end of this country if its not sorted.

#59 #60

This just goes to show what an unbalanced broken country that we have become.

My partners Daughter boyfriend left school with NO GCSE, thought that took some doing , that was a year ago has not worked has not even bothered to work and has no interest.

Guess what he comes from a broken family where the father has been allowed to remain absent from his life,

an there is the route causes of many of the ills of this nation.

Then you will understand why some protest groups have been vilified by Zanu-labour. Because they new what the real issues are , Blair and Co new that they new too. And that was a dangerous combination that need to be silenced.

Fubar_Saunders 64

Yes, thank you just packing up to go.

Bit thin that one Fubar to be honest. I mean, thats why these Countries are so poor, there just is not any work much. In this Country there has been plenty of work, but the Brits would rather let immigrants do it, and live on benefits.

There is no excuse for the sort of Country we have become, which is going to make a heck of a lot more people live in poverty in time to come. The problem is no one in high places has the courage to say what is wrong.

#66

Mr Knight clearly hasn't looked at the figures because they certainly do not show real progress. There was a time when the govn would be selective with the figures to show progress. Now they do not even bother to do this.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Hold on a minute, something looks seriously fishy about some numbers somewhere.

4.8 million people of working age who live in homes where no-one has a job. So given that some unemployed people will live with employed people, that makes somewhere more than 4.8 million unemployed.

Didn't we get another set of statistics for the number of unemployed a couple of weeks ago that was only about half that figure?

What's going on? Which, if any, of these figures can be trusted?

69#

Yes, I realise the link was a little tenuous, but... theres the idle rich, I guess, and then the plain idle.

But yes, you're right, there is no excuse and it is shocking how far it has sunk in the space of 2 generations... since the end of the war in fact. And you're right, no-one has got the guts to say it, let alone do anything about it, because they're only in it for themselves. A damning indictment on a once great nation.

I have been unemployed three times in my life in the mid 1980's recession on leaving University and twice after being made redundant. Each time I claimed unemployment benefit and then job seekers allowance (when the name changed) for about the 4-6 months it took to get me back into a job. It was not really a lot of money and I have never really been tempted to exist on benefits as a career choice. I actually think a lot of the population is like this despite the urban myths of huge numbers of workshy people.
The problem we have is that jobs today require much higher level of skills than 10, 20 or 30 years ago. The number of unskilled jobs have been disappearing at a rate of about 10% per annum for the least 15 years or so. This is why education is so important. Unfortunately we seem to exist in a country where a significant percentage of youngsters think its cool to not have qualifications. They will find getting jobs really difficult (even when the tories are in power next year they will not make an impact on the NEET population like they think they will).
When Labour came to power 28% of the population could not pass standard literacy and numarcy tests i.e. they could not read and write. This figure has decreased significantly over the past 12 years or so (not that you hear about this from the tory front bench of course). Given this population that needs help to read and the decrease of unskilled manual jobs it is not surprising that there are a significant number of households without an income. This has nothing to do with the recession but everything to do with giving people the skills they need to be able to work and live a rewarding life.
I think its time we stopped moaning about how awful it is and get on with dragging ourselves out of this recession. This is the third one in my working life and each time its been OK and life has gone on and the country has become richer (even after the Thatcher self induced recession of the early 80's with her weird obsession with the money supply we got richer afterwards). It will be the same this time even with the levels of debt we have.

meninwhitecoats 65

I am not being pessimistic, I was very optimistic that we would win the cricket and we did. Only joking. Actually it is goodbye for quite sometime, but it was kind of you to welcome me back.

My belief is this, and I am not normally a pessimist. That unless Britain throws off this arrogance that we are the best Country in the World and start facing up to the real problems we have, we will, as a Country never progress. The mistakes of the past will continue, with each of the established political parties coming in and then going out, with their usual agendas, nothing will change, and change we must have, if Britain is ever going to compete in the modern Global age. This must include a Parliament for England leading to independence in my opinion. However this will only come about when there is a will, amongst the people of this Country to understand what needs to be done. We need a charismatic leader who is willing to tell the truth and make the changes necessary and I do not see one at the moment. Cameron is not even willing to look at enough benefit reform to get our people back to work or NHS reform, for fear of being unpopular, so there is no hope there. Also Cameron is determined to keep this unworkable Union alive and that again is going to cost England.

Labour had the best chance of any Government in history to make a difference, with the unpresidented growth in the economy we had during their time in office, and they threw it away. Instead of bringing the Country into the modern age they have pulled us backwards to the seventies and the whole cycle begins again, only this time it is much worse.

DisgustedOfMitchan2

There are actually 6 million adults not working, however even this seems to be an over optimistic figure.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.