Benefit Busters: C4, 9pm 20th Aug

[Fedayn]

But it isn't a reform, it's a means of increasing the labour pool whilst safeguarding poverty level wages.

On a micro level I'm sure many low paid women have gained from it, but on a macro scale it is just another means of attacking the working class.

So was allowing women to work in many industruies, so were a number of 'reforms', yes they are 'two handed' but you display a staggering ignorance about the effect it has had on the lives of working class mainly female lone parents. Tell you what, take it away and see what happens to that same section of working-class mainly women....

 

[upsidedownwalrus]

That's true - I believe in Scandinavia they have free childcare from when the baby is born, for any family who wants it. I say 'Scandinavia' but I forget where or if it's all of them.

But it's interesting that 6-7 years ago people were saying that birth rates were at a dangerously all-time low and now they're on the up - could that be partly because the government has made it a bit easier to have kids than before?

 

[upsidedownwalrus]

So was allowing women to work in many industruies, so were a number of 'reforms', yes they are 'two handed' but you display a staggering ignorance about the effect it has had on the lives of working class mainly female lone parents. Tell you what, take it away and see what happens to that same section of working-class mainly women....

Exactly, the choice is between being stabbed to death, as we were under the Tories, or being prodded to death, as we are now, yes it would be great to see a truly revolutionary government committed to proper pay for all, but in the near future that isn't going to happen. What may well happen is Cameron getting in, abolishing all these bits and pieces and making it even worse.

 

[_angel_]

Would the idea of free childcare really be revolutionary? !

 

[upsidedownwalrus]

In this country it probably would

 

[revol68]

So was allowing women to work in many industruies, so were a number of 'reforms', yes they are 'two handed' but you display a staggering ignorance about the effect it has had on the lives of working class mainly female lone parents. Tell you what, take it away and see what happens to that same section of working-class mainly women....

Didn't I accept the fact that it it is of some benefit to working class lone parents?

I'm not suggesting a campaign to remove it or some such shit, just pointing out the fact that in the wider analysis it is a mechanism by which the government further shores up a low wage 'flexible' economy. Christ it's not even like it was a hard fought for 'reform', it was entirely a top down 'reform' from the state.

If I pointed out that the State allowing women to work in factories during the War was simply a means of maintaining the war economy and had nothing to do with any desire for sexual equality, does that imply I think women should have been removed from the factories?

 

[Fedayn]

Didn't I accept the fact that it it is of some benefit to working class lone parents?

I'm not suggesting a campaign to remove it or some such shit, just pointing out the fact that in the wider analysis it is a mechanism by which the government further shores up a low wage 'flexible' economy. Christ it's not even like it was a hard fought for 'reform', it was entirely a top down 'reform' from the state.

If I pointed out that the State allowing women to work in factories during the War was simply a means of maintaining the war economy and had nothing to do with any desire for sexual equality, does that imply I think women should have been removed from the factories?

Your implication, explicit as it was, was that it wasn't a reform at all. It was, you claimed it was "but in the final instance it an attack on the working class". As such why would we keep in such an attack in place surely it should be removed??

 

[revol68]

Your implication, explicit as it was, was that it wasn't a reform at all. It was, you claimed it was "but in the final instance it an attack on the working class". As such why would we keep in such an attack in place surely it should be removed??

It is in the final instance part of a general attack on the working class, just as the right to buy was, as was the war economy that saw women go into the factories. None of that means we should simply look to repeal them back to how they were before, that is reactionary in the true sense of the word. Instead we act from where we are, we don't ask sections of the working class to give up their "freedoms" for the benefit of the 'wider class' or some such shite, instead we we make new demands that take this freedom as a starting point but which go beyond them, eg demanding more benefits for stay at home parents.

 

[upsidedownwalrus]

They aren't making single parents on Single Parent Income Support go into work though. The most they'll do is ring you up to *suggest* work. It's the people on JSA who are being told to apply or go into work

 

[Fedayn]

It is in the final instance part of a general attack on the working class, just as the right to buy was, as was the war economy that saw women go into the factories. None of that means we should simply look to repeal them back to how they were before, that is reactionary in the true sense of the word. Instead we act from where we are, we don't ask sections of the working class to give up their "freedoms" for the benefit of the 'wider class' or some such shite, instead we we make new demands that take this freedom as a starting point but which go beyond them, eg demanding more benefits for stay at home parents.

Nowhere did I say it was 100% great, indeed paying-usually women-to stay at home has it's downsides too. I would agree with the increase in benefits though. In the first instance i'd also support an increase in WFTC. As part of a process.

 

[Paulie Tandoori]

yeah that's a good point and that's before you even mention the benefits of looking after your own kids rather than having some else do it as a job.

As was discussed earlier on, there is a complete paradox in the approach of government, so that people who want to stay at home with their kids are castigated and effectively bullied into giving up that "choice", whereas they also berate parents for not knowing what their kids are doing and not paying proper attention to their upbringing.

For 2 parent families, this can be a manageable tension, for a single parent, the choice is much less clear cut and if you're a single parent with more than one child, it's often extremely difficult to manage the simple logisitics of getting the sprogs to school/childcare and then getting to & from work, let alone deal with issues such as school holidays or disability.

 

[_angel_]

They aren't making single parents on Single Parent Income Support go into work though. The most they'll do is ring you up to *suggest* work. It's the people on JSA who are being told to apply or go into work

They are moving lone parents off income support onto job seekers allowance. This will be happening very soon.

 

[upsidedownwalrus]

They are moving lone parents off income support onto job seekers allowance. This will be happening very soon.

So will they be expected to bring their kids into the Job Centre?

 

[revol68]

They aren't making single parents on Single Parent Income Support go into work though. The most they'll do is ring you up to *suggest* work. It's the people on JSA who are being told to apply or go into work

I'm not seeing the relevance of this point, I was quite clear that it is a carrot to strengthen the stick of low wages and shitty conditions for the working class in general.

Just to give another example, technological advances are generally done with a view to undercut workers wages, deskill them or in other ways undermine any potential power or leverage they have, these are often also of quite immediate benefit of workers eg removing repetitive or tiring tasks, when such technology is introduced we don't respond to it like Luddites, instead we accept the new conditions and seek to make use of them in a manner in the interest of the class.

 

[revol68]

Nowhere did I say it was 100% great, indeed paying-usually women-to stay at home has it's downsides too. I would agree with the increase in benefits though. In the first instance i'd also support an increase in WFTC. As part of a process.

I never said you said it was great.

 

[Fedayn]

So will they be expected to bring their kids into the Job Centre?

If childcare isn't available arf arf yes they are.

 

[_angel_]

So will they be expected to bring their kids into the Job Centre?

Got absolutely no idea, I daresay a lot of will be down to the individual people in job centres/ A4E maybe it will be like my friend was told to bring her ASD kid into the centre with her - it was okay because they had "security" if he kicked off.

As usual, no one will have thought it through properly.

 

[upsidedownwalrus]

When's that happening then

 

[Paulie Tandoori]

From October this year, it's for single parents with a youngest child aged 10 or more, from October 2010, all single parents with a youngest child aged 7 or more will have to sign on for JSA.

There are plans in the latest Green Paper to extend this approach down as far as a youngest child of 3 (altho the government's adviser was pushing for from age of 1).

 

[ukbix]

Yup,their getting rid of income support...

 

[_angel_]

From October this year, it's for single parents with a youngest child aged 10 or more, from October 2010, all single parents with a youngest child aged 7 or more will have to sign on for JSA.

There are plans in the latest Green Paper to extend this approach down as far as a youngest child of 3 (altho the government's adviser was pushing for from age of 1).

Has there been anything said about "what if the parent can't get childcare" etc esp if they are on benefit for 2 years and get made to do workfare?

Has anyone even thought about this?

 

[Paulie Tandoori]

Has there been anything said about "what if the parent can't get childcare" etc esp if they are on benefit for 2 years and get made to do workfare?

Has anyone even thought about this?

The usual platitudes about personalised, tailored support being available, that takes account of people's circumstances etc etc.....

The workfare potential has definitely been raised repeatedly as a problem for single parents and disabled people being forced to claim JSA - they're clearly the people who have most to lose and the the least to gain from mandatory work for shit-all money. I was quite surprised that Cooper decided to pursue that particular policy as everyone thinks it's a pile of shit...

 

[_angel_]

The usual platitudes about personalised, tailored support being available, that takes account of people's circumstances etc etc.....

The workfare potential has definitely been raised repeatedly as a problem for single parents and disabled people being forced to claim JSA - they're clearly the people who have most to lose and the the least to gain from mandatory work for shit-all money. I was quite surprised that Cooper decided to pursue that particular policy as everyone thinks it's a pile of shit...

Basically, they are forcing people to look for jobs who may not be in a position to actually take jobs, at the very least, the ones they may be able to apply for will be so few and far between is it worth it?

 

[Awesome Wells]

if the personalised, tailored support is anything like my experience you'd be better off on your own.

they raise this shit time and time again and yet never deliver. it's a fucking scandal.

now they're doing away with IS?

 

[Awesome Wells]

Basically, they are forcing people to look for jobs who may not be in a position to actually take jobs, at the very least, the ones they may be able to apply for will be so few and far between is it worth it?

more importantly employers wont hire these people in the first place and consequently these people will then get criticised by the system for not trying hard enough and so the cicrle they find themselves in decreases ever more viciously.

 

[_angel_]

more importantly employers wont hire these people in the first place and consequently these people will then get criticised by the system for not trying hard enough and so the cicrle they find themselves in decreases ever more viciously.

I know! It is hard enough to look for a job if you are qualified and have had any time off for any reason at all (childcaring, unemployment). But people who have been off sick for any reasons at all get their health records held against them too.

Unfortunately the response to this, seems to be to say it doesn't happen and it's all down to the individual for not trying hard enough.

 

[Fedayn]

Yup,their getting rid of income support...

Well that may have just hit a glitch.... The policy of DWP to 'direct' Lone parents 'with a disability or health condition' to ESA has been declared as potentially illegal and that counsel have advised DWP that "Counsel’s opinion and solicitors advice is that we do not have sufficient legal cover for ending IS for existing lone parents if they have a disability or health condition or for them to claim ESA" . Which means they might have to re-thing the idea.....

 

[ukbix]

Well that may have just hit a glitch.... The policy of DWP to 'direct' Lone parents 'with a disability or health condition' to ESA has been declared as potentially illegal and that counsel have advised DWP that "Counsel’s opinion and solicitors advice is that we do not have sufficient legal cover for ending IS for existing lone parents if they have a disability or health condition or for them to claim ESA" . Which means they might have to re-thing the idea.....

Any chance of a link or source for that qoute?

 

[Paulie Tandoori]

Well that may have just hit a glitch.... The policy of DWP to 'direct' Lone parents 'with a disability or health condition' to ESA has been declared as potentially illegal and that counsel have advised DWP that "Counsel’s opinion and solicitors advice is that we do not have sufficient legal cover for ending IS for existing lone parents if they have a disability or health condition or for them to claim ESA" . Which means they might have to re-thing the idea.....

i've just heard the same thing as it happens. Seems that their cunning plan to shunt sick and disabled LP's off IS and onto ESA is technically illegal. Still planning to change the regs to allow this to go forward in the future tho...

 

[pboi]

fucking peasants