70,000 job seekers' benefits withdrawn unfairly, says thinktank

First topic message reminder :

70,000 job seekers' benefits withdrawn unfairly, says thinktank
Right-of-centre Policy Exchange says people who break job search conditions for first time face unnecessary hardship

Nearly 70,000 job seekers have had their benefits withdrawn unfairly, making them reliant on food banks, the right-of-centre thinktank Policy Exchange has said .

The intervention is the first by a respected rightwing voice claiming that something has gone wrong with the administration of benefits.

A chorus of churches, charities and Labour has been warning the work and pensions secretary, Iain Duncan Smith, for months that the administration of benefit sanctions has become too punitive.

Duncan Smith has commissioned a limited independent review into the administration of sanctions, and this is likely to confirm problems in the way they are imposed, but not challenge their level.

Policy Exchange says almost a third of all people who break their job search conditions for the first time have their benefits taken away by mistake and face unnecessary hardship as a result.

Guy Miscampbell, the author of the Policy Exchange report, said: "It is clear that there are a significant number of people who have their benefit taken away from them unfairly. Four weeks without any money is driving people to desperate measures including a reliance on food banks".

The report suggests: "With some 874,000 adverse decisions being made between October 2012 and September 2013, and over 146,000 of them being successfully appealed or reconsidered it is clear that the possibility of wrongly applied sanctions, and what their effects might be, is an important one. With some estimates suggesting that 43% of those referred to food banks are there due to benefit stoppage or being refused a crisis loan, it is clear that there is not currently an adequate safety net for those who are wrongly sanctioned".

The report comes as a public health specialist, Professor Elizabeth Dowler of Warwick University, said that poverty–stricken families who cannot afford to buy sufficient food are overtaking unhealthy eating as the most pressing public health concern.

The claim is made in a BBC Panorama documentary broadcast on Monday evening, which found that over a third of local authorities in England and Wales were providing funding for food banks, despite government claims that charity food is not a part of the social security system. "Food banks are an inadequate plaster over a gaping wound," Dowler said.

On Sunday, Cardinal Vincent Nichols, the archbishop of Westminster, repeated his criticisms of the welfare system, saying that "some of the priests who are right there on the ground say it comes across as punitive". He revealed that he was bringing a group of priests together to discuss the evidence, and welcomed the inquiry into food banks being chaired by the archbishop of Truro and Frank Field.

Policy Exchange suggests issuing first-time offenders, who may or may not have been fairly sanctioned, with a 'yellow card' in the form of a benefits card. It says this would be a more compassionate way of trying to help people back into work.

Benefits would be accessed via this card for a maximum of eight weeks. If the claimant continues to breach job search conditions, the card and benefits would be taken away. This system would provide a safety net, mitigating hardship while a sanction is appealed, forcing claimants to re-engage with Jobcentre staff and deterring non-compliance through the added inconvenience of daily sign on.

They would also be asked to sign on daily as part of a proposal to create a more compassionate but stricter sanctions regime.

It suggests that repeat offenders should be punished more seriously.

The report also recommends more stringent penalties for people who consistently break the terms of their job search requirements. According to the research, between October 2012 and September 2013 there were 30,000 claimants on their third sanction or more for lower tier offences such as missing an interview with a Jobcentre adviser. Repeat offenders should have their benefits taken away for a longer period of time from 13 to 26 weeks for a third breach. For each offence, a further 13 weeks should be added.

Monday's Panorama also uncovers evidence that a jobcentre appears to be explicitly alerting its staff to the financial savings to be made through "sanctioning" job seekers when they are judged to have broken benefit conditions.

A wall chart in a Grantham jobcentre explicitly sets out the cash savings available to the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) through stopping the benefits of claimants, ranging from £227.20 a week for a four-week sanction to £3,728 for a sanction lasting one year.The DWP told Panorama: "This was an isolated incident and does not reflect our policy on sanctions."

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/mar/03/70000-job-seekers-benefits-withdrawn-unfairly-thinktank

That will be people who didn't go like the blind man who couldn't read the letter etc.

For Victor to learn:






Strengthening tax systems in countries around the world remains the most pragmatic way for nations to share their financial resources more equitably and protect the poor and vulnerable.

A global super-rich elite currently hold up to $32tn of untaxed private wealth in tax havens, almost a third of which is amassed by developing countries.

This excessive leakage of revenues could be significantly reduced through the implementation of more effective international regulations for cooperation, transparency and accountability on tax issues.

As a minimum step toward ending all forms of global tax avoidance, clamping down on tax havens and preventing corporate trade mispricing could raise more than $349bn globally each year.
Preventing illegal tax evasion, strengthening tax systems in the Global South and adopting more progressive taxation policies in rich countries could raise billions more dollars of government revenue each year.

PhilDidge wrote:

victorismyhero wrote:

rubbish...
yes your arguments normally are

there was recently the issue of starbucks and amazon i think...who ended up only paying a minute amount of what they really owed....when they could have easily been made to pay it all...they were "let off" lightly...

as to needing global consensus...this is the retreat and excuse of the moneyed few....
ONE LAW......whats made here pays tax here.....in full and on time ...or else....no relief for intracompany loans and other "loopholes"
Tax the money as it goes through the till.....THEN pay them back ONLY on legit business expense.....as decided by the revenue.
as for personal money...again...whats made here gets taxed here....NO "hideaways" no "avoidance"........

What a daft belief, you will only obtain making head way on tax fraud when globally all nations are in agreement and stop all the loop holes, it is that simple, I am shocked even you cannot figure that out, but then again you do not live in the world of reality . How do you enforce the above if corporate companies are not here and even if you try to they move on or use other companies?
Thus you have not the first clue, you need consensus throughout to enforce companies to cough up

so, starbucks and amazon could be made to "cough up" a little bit...but not the true sum outstanding??? why?...it was agreed they owed a vast sum, but no attempt was made to collect it....

how about we just execute anyone caught tax avoiding...just for a start...

victorismyhero wrote:how about we just execute anyone caught tax avoiding...just for a start...

Because that is barbaric and does not solve the problem as it would still continue, the death penalty has never been a good deterrent and again you would need global concensus

For didge to learn:


condescending
  Use Condescending in a sentence
con·de·scend·ing
[kon-duh-sen-ding] Show IPA
adjective
showing or implying a usually patronizing descent from dignity or superiority: They resented the older neighbors' condescending cordiality.
Relevant Questions
What does it mean to be condescending?
What is condescension?
What are some synonyms of condescending?
How can you use condescending in a sentence?
What is the etymology of condescending?
What is a condescending tone?
Origin:
1630–40; condescend + -ing2

Related forms
con·de·scend·ing·ly, adverb
non·con·de·scend·ing, adjective
non·con·de·scend·ing·ly, adverb
non·con·de·scend·ing·ness, noun
un·con·de·scend·ing, adjective

Synonyms
patronizing, disdainful, supercilious.
Dictionary.com Unabridged
con·de·scend
[kon-duh-send] Show IPA
verb (used without object)
1.
to behave as if one is conscious of descending from a superior position, rank, or dignity.
2.
to stoop or deign to do something: He would not condescend to misrepresent the facts.
3.
to put aside one's dignity or superiority voluntarily and assume equality with one regarded as inferior: He condescended to their intellectual level in order to be understood.
4.
Obsolete .
a.
to yield.
b.
to assent.
Origin:
1300–50; Middle English condescenden < Late Latin condēscendere (see con-, descend); replacing Middle English condescendre < Middle French

victorismyhero wrote:

PhilDidge wrote:


What a daft belief, you will only obtain making head way on tax fraud when globally all nations are in agreement and stop all the loop holes, it is that simple, I am shocked even you cannot figure that out, but then again you do not live in the world of reality . How do you enforce the above if corporate companies are not here and even if you try to they move on or use other companies?
Thus you have not the first clue, you need consensus throughout to enforce companies to cough up

so, starbucks and amazon could be made to "cough up" a little bit...but not the true sum outstanding???   why?...it was agreed they owed a vast sum, but no attempt was made to collect it....

So how do you collect it?

You have a problem, what if they pull out all their stores, they still have an empire all over the place, thus you need consensus in all nations their stores are in to get the tax back

Again I am all for solving this, but is not as easy as you think

Keith, with me and Victor it is banter, we actually like each other and I have great respect for him, so don;t worry yourself over how I am at times

Ta

PhilDidge wrote:

victorismyhero wrote:how about we just execute anyone caught tax avoiding...just for a start...

Because that is barbaric and does not solve the problem as it would still continue, the death penalty has never been a good deterrent  and again you would need global

concensus

and just what???.............. is wrong with barbaric??

Not just me, but please see me as your personality adjustment teacher. There's no charge.

@ Keith....dont feel troubled...me and didge have some fun at times biteing lumps out of one another....its actually quite funnt when you think about it....and rather takes the piss out of the REAL haters on here....
I know when didge is being OTT and likewise he knows when I am doing the same....

vis my "execute em" post above.....I mean...you dont think Didge recons that I'm actually being serious do you???

victorismyhero wrote:

PhilDidge wrote:

Because that is barbaric and does not solve the problem as it would still continue, the death penalty has never been a good deterrent  and again you would need global

concensus

and just what???.............. is wrong with barbaric??

Tad odd you go off about being heartless RW's to being a proponent of barbarity, hey ho, what ever floats your boat

victorismyhero wrote:@ Keith....dont feel troubled...me and didge have some fun at times biteing lumps out of one another....its actually quite funnt when you think about it....and rather takes the piss out of the REAL haters on here....
I know when didge is being OTT and likewise he knows when I am doing the same....

vis my "execute em" post above.....I mean...you dont think Didge recons that I'm actually being serious do you???

  


Have a good evening Victor as always is fun, take care.

sleep well didge....

PhilDidge wrote:

victorismyhero wrote:
and just what???.............. is wrong with barbaric??

Tad odd you go off about being heartless RW's to being a proponent of barbarity, hey ho, what ever floats your boat

seeing as me middle name is "conan" what else would you expect.....

victorismyhero wrote:

PhilDidge wrote:


Tad odd you go off about being heartless RW's to being a proponent of barbarity, hey ho, what ever floats your boat

seeing as me middle name is "conan" what else would you expect.....

Oh I meant to post you a good link to a new book on the Celts, will have to look it up for you if you are interested.

Cheers Victor

would be interested in that didge...cheers  ::D::