benefit sanctions on watchinga4e.blogspot.com

Watching A4e: August 2009

on caring The legacy of Benefit Busters Benefit Busters, episode 2 Let's not get hysterical BB2 - Preview clips Getting your retaliation in first Playing with figures Reflections Reviews of the programme Benefit Busters, episode 1 Benefit Busters - a preview And now America - tomorrow the world Leicester CLAC - the report and a correction "Firms in fraud probe set for Whitehall cash" Volunteer with A4e! Benefit Busters Prison

http://watchinga4e.blogspot.com/2009_08_01_archive.html (154.7kb)

Watching A4e: May 2010

reducing the number of benefits to two, would inevitably mean that some people were worse off, and that is hard to deal with politically. Equally tricky is the question of sanctions. It's one thing to stop the benefits of someone who isn't willing to work, but what about his wife and children? Iain Duncan Smith, in a recorded piece, talked about the real and perceived risks to the unemployed of taking up jobs, and the need to make it worth working. Asked about sanctions, he agreed

http://watchinga4e.blogspot.com/2010_05_01_archive.html (133.7kb)

Watching A4e: Benefit Busters - a preview

better out of it. “Benefit claimants” is interchangeably associated with the phrase “Benefit scroungers” (where most Benefit claimants themselves wouldn’t agree to this statement). That is the general public’s growing opinion on their hard earned cash as taxpayers’ going to fund people who aren’t entitled to the Benefit (where as the majority of Jobseekers and the majority of the 5.5 million of those claiming disability Benefits are genuine).

http://watchinga4e.blogspot.com/2009/08/benefit-busters-preview.html (109.9kb)

Watching A4e: Sanctions

http://watchinga4e.blogspot.com/2010/05/sanctions.html (58.7kb)

Watching A4e

http://watchinga4e.blogspot.com/ (85.9kb)

Watching A4e: March 2010

Allowance (Work for your Benefit Pilot Scheme) Regulations 2010 went before the House of Lords for approval yesterday. It was an interesting debate which you can read here . Posted by historian at 15:00 0 comments Labels: A4e , China , FND , Work for your Benefit Tuesday, 30 March 2010 What a good idea! It's always nice when influential people

http://watchinga4e.blogspot.com/2010_03_01_archive.html (135.3kb)

Watching A4e: September 2009

of her clients, as seen on "Benefit Busters". But profit margins are kept to 4%, she says. And for anyone who recalls that on BB she seemed unaware that the system made it impossible for people to take casual work, and it takes weeks to get back onto Benefits, we're now assured that she is very interested in "Benefit buffering". " It is a concept that Iain Duncan Smith's Tory thinktank, the Centre for Social Justice, put forward in its recent proposals for Benefit reform. Although A4e has

http://watchinga4e.blogspot.com/2009_09_01_archive.html (126.0kb)

Watching A4e: April 2010

many times about cutting off benefits for people who refuse a job. He also said that 3 years without benefit would be the penalty. Neither said where these compulsory jobs would come from. Clegg didn't compete with them. He said that people should have the incentive to work, and that raising the tax threshold would provide that incentive. Take your pick. Posted by historian at 13:59 0 comments Labels: David Cameron , Gordon Brown , Nick Clegg

http://watchinga4e.blogspot.com/2010_04_01_archive.html (120.1kb)

Watching A4e: More lazy journalism

quid on top of their paltry benefit? 9 April 2010 15:34 imatt said... When the article says "the public will not be charged for the service", this is misleading as there will be at least some set up costs. Ans where pray tell do A4e get the bulk of their cash? THE TAXPAYER!!!Also when A4e are called an employment agency, what does this mean? Especialy as they are often referred to as a 'training provider' (no giggling at the back). I guess

http://watchinga4e.blogspot.com/2010/04/more-lazy-journalism.html (61.1kb)

Watching A4e: November 2009

Work for your Benefit "Work for your Benefit" is a pilot scheme cooked up by Yvette Cooper and the DWP aimed at people who have been out of work for two years. It's explained on the DWP website . It consists of "up to six months" of " intensive work experience which will help improve their employability." You may suspect that this is punitive, or pandering to the "make 'em work" brigade, but of course that's not how it's portrayed. The two pilot areas are

http://watchinga4e.blogspot.com/2009_11_01_archive.html (139.0kb)

Watching A4e: Publicity - lots of it

http://watchinga4e.blogspot.com/2009/08/publicity-lots-of-it.html (110.7kb)

Watching A4e: July 2009

of the Future Jobs Fund to benefit your local community." (A4e's website) After describing what the Future Jobs Fund is, they say, "As a market leader of Welfare to Work services, A4e has capacity and capability to design, develop and deliver front line public services that benefit individuals, organisations and communities. This includes partnership working with the private, public and third sector organisations." We shouldn't be surprised, of course. Just by chance I came across a quote

http://watchinga4e.blogspot.com/2009_07_01_archive.html (147.2kb)

Watching A4e: January 2010

government to help people on benefits get back into employment. The not-for-profit company' s work includes boosting some clients' literacy and Kevin believes the Rockhoppas might help get the next generation hooked on reading. "Children need to be encouraged to read," he said." Have you spotted the mistake? There's no excuse for this kind of "journalism". Posted by historian at 00:20 4 comments Labels: A4e , Kevin Kelway , Plymouth Herald

http://watchinga4e.blogspot.com/2010_01_01_archive.html (111.7kb)

Watching A4e: October 2009

who were willing and able to benefit from the course. Clients then undertook vocational courses such as NVQs while doing a real work placement. Providers were rigorously audited, and payment was on the basis of weeks on the programme, qualifications gained and job outcomes. There was a great deal of flexibility, with new courses such as Basic Skills being introduced, and scope for local schemes. For one quarter, Oct - Dec 2004, there were 34,410 starters on NDYP and 24,580 on ND 25+. In

http://watchinga4e.blogspot.com/2009_10_01_archive.html (119.5kb)

Watching A4e: Can this be true?

on this than she did on Benefit Busters.What is this series really about anyway? Is it to show how far celebs have fallen? If so, then why is it being fronted by Emma H? After all, how many celebs end up in branches of A4e? Is Emma H on the verge launching a media career?At the moment, this raises more questions than answers! 20 February 2010 15:23 historian said... I had a comment from someone in Manchester who said that they had taken part in the

http://watchinga4e.blogspot.com/2010/02/can-this-be-true.html (64.1kb)

Watching A4e: A new government - the implications

But IDS does understand the benefits system and, more importantly, its effects on real people, and he will probably stand up to the private sector. benefits claimants should be worried but not, I think, frightened. The worst Tory attitudes should be tempered by their coalition partners. Posted by historian at 05:17 Labels: A4e , Ian Duncan Smith , Michael Gove , Theresa May , Work Programme 8 comments:

http://watchinga4e.blogspot.com/2010/05/new-government-implications.html (69.2kb)

Watching A4e: Competing on compulsion

http://watchinga4e.blogspot.com/2010/04/competing-on-compulsion.html (57.1kb)

Watching A4e: Famous, Rich and Jobless, Part One

with the reality of the benefits system? They were. When Craig Last explained to Meg that she had worked for 16 hours and would have to hand back the £39 they'd been given at the start, Meg refused and became a benefits cheat. Emma Harrison explained the situation to Dermot, who had also worked more than 16 hours. He says that in that situation he would not tell the Jobcentre and would break the law. Larry Lamb was the most fun. He knew he had no chance of getting a job, so

http://watchinga4e.blogspot.com/2010/03/famous-rich-and-jobless-part-one.html (63.7kb)

Watching A4e: The government's intentions - more information

later savings through lower benefit expenditure, including creating an integrated work programme with outcome funding based upon the DEL/AME switch.• We will ensure that receipt of benefits for those able to work is conditional on their willingness to work.• We support the National Minimum Wage because of the protection it gives low incomeworkers and the incentives to work it provides.• We will re-assess all current claimants of Incapacity benefit for their readiness to

http://watchinga4e.blogspot.com/2010/05/governments-intentions-more-information.html (66.2kb)

Watching A4e: "Offer" or "available"

people of working age on benefits. Cooper pointed out that they were on benefit for different reasons. Miller was asked what was different about the coalition's proposals, and then Neil wilfully misunderstood her point about simplifying the benefit system. He then pushed the fact that IDS in opposition had said that the reforms would cost £3b. Two viewers' emails were read out; one asked where the jobs were going to come from; the other said that the minimum wage was not enough to

http://watchinga4e.blogspot.com/2010/05/offer-or-available.html (61.2kb)

Watching A4e: More from Iain Duncan Smith

are going to give you.' The sanction comes into play." This is meaningless rhetoric. As I've said many a time, very few people find themselves in the position of being offered a job and refusing it. Perhaps "job opportunities" means something different. The rest of the quote means nothing unless the limit referred to is the cutting off of benefits after a fixed period. Today's news has been about schools, and there have been more references to businesses running them. We're

http://watchinga4e.blogspot.com/2010/05/more-from-iain-duncan-smith.html (63.1kb)

Watching A4e: Today Programme discussion

that they want to make the benefits system more flexible so that people can work less than full-time without losing their benefits, rather than the current, all-or-nothing approach. Jim Knight for Labour talked about a "better off in work guarantee", meaning people would be at least £40 per week better off when working. He also stressed the Future Jobs Fund and various other measures, which May scorned, re-stating her previous point about immediate help into sustainable work. Steve

http://watchinga4e.blogspot.com/2010/04/today-programme-discussion.html (58.5kb)

Watching A4e: Report on the Jobseekers' Regime

Delta Britain’s benefits system is producing useless men 1 hour ago Public Tenders Legal and commercial issues will slow down G-Cloud, not security 2 hours ago New Ordeal blog A4e 13 week IAP Induction week. Day 5 5 weeks ago DWP on welfare reform Lady Judge appointed Chair of Pension Protection fund - DWP 1 month ago Emma Harrison - a version of her story

http://watchinga4e.blogspot.com/2010/02/report-on-jobseekers-regime.html (62.2kb)

Watching A4e: Accountability

which discovered the benefits of creating "arms-length" agencies, starting with the benefits Agency. It enabled ministers to distance themselves, to say, "Not me, gov," when anything went wrong. Privatisation compounds that lack of accountability. In the sphere of welfare-to-work Jim Knight, or whichever minister is in office, can be wheeled out to face questions, whether in Parliament or in the media, but can always claim that the figures are not available or waffle meaninglessly.

http://watchinga4e.blogspot.com/2010/03/accountability.html (60.0kb)

Watching A4e: A good time to bash the unemployed

claim thousands of pounds in benefits." It's predictable stuff. "One of the pair, who were from middle-class families, told Jones that he and his girlfriend were paid about £12,000 a year in jobseeker’s allowance and housing benefit, and there was no reason for them to look for work. This is equivalent to a gross income of £15,000-£16,000." Shocking. And Jones' conclusion? "He said that while looking for a job, claimants should carry out community work — such as

http://watchinga4e.blogspot.com/2010/04/good-time-to-bash-unemployed.html (63.9kb)

Watching A4e: Gordon Brown and the unemployed

"training" or work-for-your-benefits, or even a cut-off point for benefits. There's nothing to distinguish Labour and the Conservatives, then, and whoever gets in we're going to see an increase in the resentment that so many unemployed people feel at being stigmatised. I see a growing number of posts and blogs on the internet from JSA claimants venting their anger. That is going to get worse. There's a relevant article on CFE News saying that " Charity claims NEETs view

http://watchinga4e.blogspot.com/2010/04/gordon-brown-and-unemployed.html (61.0kb)

Watching A4e: A stellar line-up for the IoD

http://watchinga4e.blogspot.com/2010/04/stellar-line-up-for-iod.html (58.4kb)

Watching A4e: Pathways - why it's not working

http://watchinga4e.blogspot.com/2010/02/pathways-why-its-not-working.html (65.5kb)

Watching A4e: Update - the government's statement

later savings in lower benefit expenditure. We agree that receipt of benefits for those able to work should be conditional on the willingness to work. This is the Work Programme; the third of the points will be of most concern to the providers, making payment dependant on results, but it also, in the fourth point, links payment to the savings the government makes in benefit payments. This could get messy. The final point is not exactly new. One good thing (and I'm sure that

http://watchinga4e.blogspot.com/2010/05/update-governments-statement.html (60.9kb)

Watching A4e: Yet more publicity

http://watchinga4e.blogspot.com/2010/04/yet-more-publicity.html (58.8kb)

Copyright © 2010 Flexible New Deal scandal.
Search engine uses the "Flexible New Deal (+http://www.flexiblenewdeal.biz)" User Agent String. No sites featured have paid for content results nor are Flexible New Deal Scandal websites weighed unfairly to other websites featured. If you have a website and wanted to be added please leave a comment on the Flexible New Deal Search Engine article on Flexible New Deal Scandal.