Unemployed? Council house? IDS removals at your service!
Discussion
Comments please. (and apologies if this should be in the Jobs section, or the houses section)
IMHO this is madness, utter madness.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/10426714.stm
Duncan Smith considers incentives to relocate jobless
Unemployed people living in council homes could be offered incentives to move to areas where there are jobs, the work and pensions secretary has said.
Iain Duncan Smith said millions were "trapped in estates were there is no work", unable to move for fear of losing their right to a home.
He told the Sunday Telegraph the system must be more flexible, but did not give a clear commitment to rehouse workers.
Shadow education secretary Ed Balls called the idea "profoundly unfair".
'On yer bike'
Mr Duncan Smith told the newspaper Britain had one of the most static workforces in the western world with people "locked" to areas.
He said the result of that was more than five-and-a-half million people who "simply don't do a job".
"Often they are trapped in estates where there is no work near there and - because they have a lifetime tenure of that house - to go to work from east London to west London, or Bristol, or whatever is too much of a risk because if you up sticks and go you will have lost your right to your house," he told the paper.
Continue reading the main story
We should be investing in jobs and growth to boost employment in our regions, not cutting it back
Ed Balls
Shadow Education Secretary
"The local council is going to tell you that you don't have a right to a house there, the housing association is not going to give you one.
"We have to look at how we get that portability, so that people can be more flexible, can look for work, can take the risk to do it."
He did not spell out exactly what sort of commitment would be offered on rehousing, but an aide said ministers would provide incentives for people to move, rather than force them to do so.
But Mr Balls accused Mr Duncan Smith of "on yer bike" politics, a reference to former Tory minister Lord Tebbit telling the unemployed in 1981 to get on their bikes to look for work.
Writing on his blog, he said: "The Tory-Liberal government is doing this at the same time as cutting investment in jobs and industries and communities with a budget that will increase unemployment by 100,000 a year.
"That's why this policy is so profoundly unfair. We should be investing in jobs and growth to boost employment in our regions, not cutting it back and effectively abandoning high unemployment areas while telling people they should move house to get off the dole."
IMHO this is madness, utter madness.
=================================
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/10426714.stm
Duncan Smith considers incentives to relocate jobless
Unemployed people living in council homes could be offered incentives to move to areas where there are jobs, the work and pensions secretary has said.
Iain Duncan Smith said millions were "trapped in estates were there is no work", unable to move for fear of losing their right to a home.
He told the Sunday Telegraph the system must be more flexible, but did not give a clear commitment to rehouse workers.
Shadow education secretary Ed Balls called the idea "profoundly unfair".
'On yer bike'
Mr Duncan Smith told the newspaper Britain had one of the most static workforces in the western world with people "locked" to areas.
He said the result of that was more than five-and-a-half million people who "simply don't do a job".
"Often they are trapped in estates where there is no work near there and - because they have a lifetime tenure of that house - to go to work from east London to west London, or Bristol, or whatever is too much of a risk because if you up sticks and go you will have lost your right to your house," he told the paper.
Continue reading the main story
We should be investing in jobs and growth to boost employment in our regions, not cutting it back
Ed Balls
Shadow Education Secretary
"The local council is going to tell you that you don't have a right to a house there, the housing association is not going to give you one.
"We have to look at how we get that portability, so that people can be more flexible, can look for work, can take the risk to do it."
He did not spell out exactly what sort of commitment would be offered on rehousing, but an aide said ministers would provide incentives for people to move, rather than force them to do so.
But Mr Balls accused Mr Duncan Smith of "on yer bike" politics, a reference to former Tory minister Lord Tebbit telling the unemployed in 1981 to get on their bikes to look for work.
Writing on his blog, he said: "The Tory-Liberal government is doing this at the same time as cutting investment in jobs and industries and communities with a budget that will increase unemployment by 100,000 a year.
"That's why this policy is so profoundly unfair. We should be investing in jobs and growth to boost employment in our regions, not cutting it back and effectively abandoning high unemployment areas while telling people they should move house to get off the dole."
Edited by J500ANT on Sunday 27th June 10:00
The real Apache said:
What a load of crap, anyone in a council house can swap with someone else, so if they wanted to get out they could
Exactly! And who'd want to move back to an area of high unemployment. I can imagine the roads out of Merthyr Tydfil are going to be busy if this comes in.Does Ed Balls make any statement that does not inckude the phrase 'deeply unfair'?
TWUNT. ON YER BIKE ED.
The biggest issue with this idea of moving people to where there are jobs is that most jobs are in the south east - already crowded and very expensive to house people.
I already think housing benefits recipients should be moved OUT of the south east to the cheaper regions - but if there is no job creation out in the sticks, there seems little point. Other thanit is possible that many of the recipients don't want to work, so we may as well ship them out to Wales, Morecambe, Scarborough etc - where rents are a damn sight lower than London.
TWUNT. ON YER BIKE ED.
The biggest issue with this idea of moving people to where there are jobs is that most jobs are in the south east - already crowded and very expensive to house people.
I already think housing benefits recipients should be moved OUT of the south east to the cheaper regions - but if there is no job creation out in the sticks, there seems little point. Other thanit is possible that many of the recipients don't want to work, so we may as well ship them out to Wales, Morecambe, Scarborough etc - where rents are a damn sight lower than London.
Tsippy said:
Politicians really do not understand the way many of those 5 million think do they? For many of them, it's a way of life and a choice rather than something they're stuck with.
This is the elephant in the room, and it's about time we had a government that shot the fecking thing with both barrels.
I don't quite see how a scheme designed to help people move in order to get a job makes the Conservatives a party of high unemployment.
However, I doubt there will be a high uptake on this - and that may be part of a somewhat Machiavellian plan. When the Govt wants to remove benefits from the lifestyle-idle, they will be able to say "there are jobs availabe, they are over there and despite the help we've offered, you won't go there and take them".
Even if that isn't the intention now, thats how it should be used.
However, I doubt there will be a high uptake on this - and that may be part of a somewhat Machiavellian plan. When the Govt wants to remove benefits from the lifestyle-idle, they will be able to say "there are jobs availabe, they are over there and despite the help we've offered, you won't go there and take them".
Even if that isn't the intention now, thats how it should be used.
colonel c said:
Worthless gestures like this is only going to add fuel to the left-wing media and reintroduce the notion of the Torie government being one of unemployment and cuts.
Or alternatively, the government of sustainable employment and affordable services. Rather than one of spending other people's money when they haven't even earned it yet while keeping unemployed figures artificially low with non-jobs and yet more borrowed money.
The left wing media needs no encouragement either way, as per the entertaining performance by the lesser microgland on interview this morning where it was pointed out that the Labour lot would have to make similar drastic cuts to meet their unspecific manifesto pledge to halve the deficit on delayed terms, delayed not for fears over a double dip recession but so they could point their deceitful incompetent finger at what's inevitably happening at the hands of others.
Odd thing is more constituencies shifted yes rather than no for realistic levels of government spending and by a long way. People knew what had to be done and what was coming but this doesn't stop activists and union barons talking out of their orifices with the usual mix of spin and misdirection.
BruceV8 said:
I don't quite see how a scheme designed to help people move in order to get a job makes the Conservatives a party of high unemployment.
I'm sure ISD is well intentioned. But just how could such a plan could be realistically executed. Indeed are there such areas of the country that are crying out for semiskilled or unskilled workers. Will there be sufficient housing available. What will local people think of 'outsiders jumping the housing list? The complexities involved look like something the last government might have tried to conjure up.Edited by colonel c on Monday 28th June 09:45
I say screw them.
"We've found you a job 90 minutes commute from your house. Take the job, or you'll be homeless by next weekend".
Like many people in the southeast, I have friends who do 90 minute commutes each way, pay their taxes, own a house, have children, etc, but most importantly - aren't a burden on the rest of society.
Anyway, its all BS. My father was a minister for a local church many years ago, but to make ends meet he worked 70 miles away. To make ends meet, he left on Monday evening, did his engineering job all week, and came back late Friday night. During the week he stayed with family. And that wasn't the first time he worked away from home either. My parents just got on with it as that's what you do to make ends meet.
But hell, why give council scroungers a bit of discomfort. Might get in the way of Jeremy Springer viewing.
"We've found you a job 90 minutes commute from your house. Take the job, or you'll be homeless by next weekend".
Like many people in the southeast, I have friends who do 90 minute commutes each way, pay their taxes, own a house, have children, etc, but most importantly - aren't a burden on the rest of society.
Anyway, its all BS. My father was a minister for a local church many years ago, but to make ends meet he worked 70 miles away. To make ends meet, he left on Monday evening, did his engineering job all week, and came back late Friday night. During the week he stayed with family. And that wasn't the first time he worked away from home either. My parents just got on with it as that's what you do to make ends meet.
But hell, why give council scroungers a bit of discomfort. Might get in the way of Jeremy Springer viewing.
Balmoral Green said:
Tsippy said:
Politicians really do not understand the way many of those 5 million think do they? For many of them, it's a way of life and a choice rather than something they're stuck with.
This is the elephant in the room, and it's about time we had a government that shot the fecking thing with both barrels.
Dixie68 said:
I moved from Lincolnshire to Essex to take up my last job, and from Essex to Hampshire to take up the current one. If benefits claimants can't put a similar effort in, without good reason, then they shouldn't get benefits.
If this plan was slightly modified to allow breadwinners to migrate to employment without the financial burden of 1. fuel/transport costs
and
2. "reasonable" and I mean enforced reasonable secondary accommodation costs, would help a lot of people to get away from the hamster-wheel of revolving debt to work.
Anything that breaks the mould HAS to be an improvement.
I think if someone can find their own job but needs help to move out of unemployment, it's no bad thing that the Government help them, though it would be better if it was a student-loan-type of arrangement. I moved From Milan to Norwich to get my job. Cost me a bomb, I'd have liked a hand seeing as I've paid into the system for long enough. (though not as long as many)
gerradiuk said:
tinman0 said:
I say screw them.
My father was a minister for a local church many years ago, but to make ends meet he worked 70 miles away.
I see he passed his goodwill to all men gene onto you.My father was a minister for a local church many years ago, but to make ends meet he worked 70 miles away.
Oh before you have your hissy about this I also used to work away all the time as a HGV driver living in a snotty tin cab to support my kids,no big deal just a job.
As for goodwill - get a grip. Jesus didn't preach that you should sit on your arse feeling sorry for yourself devising a suitable excuse as to why you should claim benefits.
Damn, you're getting me to quote the Bible. First time in 30 years. (Apart from that JW idiot who completely got the wrong end of the stick with forgiveness - another story):
Exodus 20:9 said:
For six days you shall labour and do all your work.
As opposed to:Exodus 20:9 said:
Feign a back injury and get yourself down to the benefits office.
tinman0 said:
Damn, you're getting me to quote the Bible. First time in 30 years. (Apart from that JW idiot who completely got the wrong end of the stick with forgiveness - another story):
Actualy I think that's true for a lot of badbackers. Some of them must have a total of 6 days in which they do all their work. Maybe we're the dumb ones. It doesn't say 6 days per week.Exodus 20:9 said:
For six days you shall labour and do all your work.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff