Isn’t the 83% increase in youth unemployment since January proof enough that this government’s policies are a failure?

First topic message reminder :

The number of 16 to 24-year-olds looking for work increased by 67,000 in the quarter to September to 1.02 million, the worst total since comparable records began in 1992.
The unemployment rate among 16 to 24-year-olds is now 21.9%, also a record.
Total unemployment rose by 129,000 in the latest quarter to 2.62 million, the worst figure since 1994, giving a jobless rate of 8.3%, the highest since 1996.
Other data from the Office for National Statistics showed a 5,300 increase in the number of people claiming Jobseeker's Allowance in October to 1.6 million, the eighth consecutive monthly rise and the highest total since the start of 2010.
Meanwhile, the number of people in employment fell by 197,000 in the quarter to September to 29.07 million, the lowest figure for over a year.

For the full article:-
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/youth-unemployment-level-shocking-6262890.html

The Labour Party has come up with a five-point plan for jobs:-
1. A £2 billion tax on bank bonuses to fund 100,000 jobs for young people and build 25,000 more affordable homes.
2. Bringing forward long-term investment projects.
3. Reversing January's damaging VAT rise.
4. A one year cut in VAT to 5% on home improvements, repairs and maintenance
5. A one year national insurance tax break for every small firm which takes on extra workers

For more details:-
http://www.labour.org.uk/plan

Employment Minister Chris Grayling said: "These figures show just how much our economy is being affected by the crisis in the eurozone". Yes of course, Mr Grayling, you can’t really blame Gordon Brown for all the ills of the world any longer, so let’s blame the eurozone. Why not try putting the blame where it really belongs for once – on this corrupt and incompetent Tory-dominated government of overgrown public schoolboys who haven’t a clue what to do? A PM whose CV includes ‘Black Wednesday’ and helping Carlton TV to lose millions of pounds, and a Chancellor whose previous work experience was helping in daddy’s wallpaper shop and folding towels in Selfridges. A clueless Foreign Secretary who announced to the world that Gaddafi was on his way to Libya, while Oliver Letwin and Vince Cable fill up public litter bins with confidential papers. And that’s before we mention Fox’s antics, Coulson, a Home Secretary who lies through her back teeth, Lansley dismantling the NHS, Hammond stashing his wealth overseas, and both Cameron and Hunt deep inside the pocket of the Murdoch family. How much longer must we suffer the worst government in living memory?

A problem shared is a problem halved.

atv wrote:
"In December 2011, 5.493 million young persons (under 25) were unemployed in the EU27, of whom 3.290 million were in the euro area. Compared with December 2010, youth unemployment increased by 241 000 in the EU27 and by 113 000 in the euro area. In December 2011, the youth unemployment rate was 22.1% in the EU27 and 21.3% in the euro area. In December 2010 it was 21.0% and 20.6% respectively. The lowest rates were observed in Germany (7.8%), Austria (8.2%) and the Netherlands (8.6%), and the highest in Spain (48.7%), Greece (47.2% in October 2011) and Slovakia (35.6%)."

Oh so thats OK then, so long as others have more unemployement than us, we should just sit back and let the Tory's fleece us some more.
I really dont think you understand what most of the anti Tory vitriol is about.
I will try to explain some o0f it to you.
I really don’t think you fully understand what much of the anti Tory Vitriol is about. Let me assist you.
We all know the country is almost Tits up and that measures have to be taken to remedy the situation.
Your Tory’s though, seem to think that the only casualties should be those at the bottom of the heap, whereas Labour (I believe) think that, to use Herr Cameron’s own words “those with the broadest shoulders should carry most of the burden. My Question is who are these people with these so called broad shoulders, and where are they.
Herr Cameron has closed the Tax loophole in Switzerland, but has done nothing to the havens in other places like the Caymans etc. Why?
Could it be that one person with extremely broad shoulders (Financially, not Physically) his good mate Lord Michael Ashcroft not only owns the islands largest banks, but most of the island it seems, and that his own minister of defence openly admitted on TV that he put all his wealth into his wife’s name who in turn secreted it away in a tax haven, or that his personal friend, Bullendon Club associate and Chancellor of the Exchequer Gideon has also secreted funds somewhere safe and away from the UK tax man. How many more of his Government have their funds tucked away where Gideon cant or doesn’t want to get his filthy hands on.
This Government have done everything wrong so far. Had they hit everyone equally the same, perhaps we would be more accepting of the situation, but they are not, there is absolutely nothing fair or nothing good for the Country in anything they are doing. If Gideon at the behest of Herr Cameron got the 52 billion owed in taxes by these predominantly Tory or Tory supporters, just how many youth unemployed would we have, especially if a fair amount of that money was invested in industry, to replace the industry that was thrown out by Thatcher.
So for you to infer that because other countries have more youth unemployment than us, quiote frankly disgusts me, but I guess all is well in your world.

bobby, with respect,
I am merely pointing out that the whole of Europe is suffering from youth unemployment, not just the UK.
And regarding replacing the industry that was thrown out by Thatcher, how much industry was lost during Labour's 13 years of power?

[quote="bobby"] Herr Cameron has closed the Tax loophole in Switzerland, but has done nothing to the havens in other places like the Caymans etc. Why?

Well he has closed at least one tax hole, how many tax holes did Labour close in 13 years of power, and if not
why not?

A Barrister never asks a question in Court to which he does not already know the answer.

"Now that the muppets in charge have screwed up their own economy they are looking for scape-goats to screw up as well. An easy target in this regard is Jersey, Guernsey and the Isle of Man. There are many legitimate tax savings available to certain groups of contractors by being paid from offshore but if the current UK government gets its wish there will be nothing left of these finance centres. In reality these offshore centres have done nothing wrong or different than the UK itself. In fact without them literally 1000′s of expat British workers would not have access to suitable banking facilities as they are not allowed to bank in the UK without a UK address. Offshore finance centres do play an important role in the global economy and not all are “Tax Havens”. Some are just legitimate countries trying to attract business the same way as other countries do. The only difference being that when another country steals half a billion pounds of their depositors money they don’t have the resources to take it back!"

http://www.offshore-contractors.co.uk/when-is-an-offshore-tax-haven-not-a-tax-haven/ (3 years ago)

atv "Labour in 13 years of power did this or didn't do that". This seems to be your answer to everything. If your Tory's where so good at Governing this Country, surely Labour didn't need to do anything, as we wouldn't have had over 3 million unemployed, we wouldn't have had so many lose their homes through galloping inflation 18% I was paying at one time. we wouldnt have had countless thousands of good businesses go bust due to two Tory led Recessions, we wouldnt have had waiting lists and people dieing through lack of medical treatment after waiting in excess of two years waiting, we wouldn't have lost most of our manufacturing, we would not have had to welch on the deal to sell HMS Hermes after that pratt John Knotts disasterous cuts to our military ( and guess what Herr Cameron with the aid of the tax thief Hammond, its happening again), for the Falklands war, in fact we may not have had the Falklands war at all, we wouldn't have had the beginnings of the Social Cleansing that Herr Cameron is now continuing. Or are you in your own way, telling us that your Tory's made so many monumental cock ups in the preceeding 18 years that Labour needed to make many changes.
We have many time written lists of what Labour achieved when in power, but you Tory's can not tell us anything about your chosen Government, just keep repeating "but what did Labour do in 13 years, and when we tell you, we get no answer. why is that?

bobby wrote:atv "Labour in 13 years of power did this or didn't do that". This seems to be your answer to everything. If your Tory's where so good at Governing this Country, surely Labour didn't need to do anything, as we wouldn't have had over 3 million unemployed, we wouldn't have had so many lose their homes through galloping inflation 18% I was paying at one time. we wouldnt have had countless thousands of good businesses go bust due to two Tory led Recessions, we wouldnt have had waiting lists and people dieing through lack of medical treatment after waiting in excess of two years waiting, we wouldn't have lost most of our manufacturing, we would not have had to welch on the deal to sell HMS Hermes after that pratt John Knotts disasterous cuts to our military ( and guess what Herr Cameron with the aid of the tax thief Hammond, its happening again), for the Falklands war, in fact we may not have had the Falklands war at all, we wouldn't have had the beginnings of the Social Cleansing that Herr Cameron is now continuing. Or are you in your own way, telling us that your Tory's made so many monumental cock ups in the preceeding 18 years that Labour needed to make many changes.
We have many time written lists of what Labour achieved when in power, but you Tory's can not tell us anything about your chosen Government, just keep repeating "but what did Labour do in 13 years, and when we tell you, we get no answer. why is that?

So you are trying to convince me that before 1979, the UK was perfectly healthy, everybody had a job, we had no inflation, industry and manufacturing was booming, and it was only when the Torys took office the country went t*ts up.
I don't know what planet you were living on at that time, but history paints a different picture.
Don't take the credit for medical advances, Labour threw billions at the NHS, and reading about the deaths in hospitals around the Country through negligence and infections, it's not a proud record is it?
You talk about businesses closing and hundreds of thousands of people losing their jobs, well wakey, wakey, what do you think has been happenening since 2007?
Yes, I do know what Labour have done in the 13 years they were in power, it is well recorded, I know the good and the bad, the Internet is very well informed.
The UK the same as the rest of Europe are going through very difficult times, and you expect the Coalition to put every thing right in less than two years, you are having a laugh.
I have not heard a thing about how Labour would do any better apart from cutting slower or longer, or doing it different, but nobody knows what that really means, could explain why Labour are not points ahead in the polls.
Labour are not the party of the working classes. They may be the party of the unemployed and the public sector but not the working classes.
In finishing I tend to believe people (and these are Labour supporters as well) who tell me the truth about the 70s and 80s, and not people who blame Thatcher for destroying the UK and the world if you are anything to go by.

Rant over, I will go and take my medicine now.

Please atv. when the shit hit the fan with the Banking collapse. Gordon Brown (who you castigate) and Alastair Darling acted speedily, and not only got us out of recession, not only saving UK Banking but got growth up and unemployement down, that was done is a very short time, yet you feel Herr Cameron should be able to take countless years to cure the mess he has made worse. A tad unfair I would say.
By the way, I dont believe things where great up till 1979, but they certainly where better than the Toty's left us in 1997.
Again atv. Tell me what Herr Cameron has done other than spread misery on those who are not to blame for the financial state we are in, and to enable his rich mates to get even richer.
The people of Britain where told by the lying Tory's that if the rich got richer, there would be a trickle down effect in that the wealth makers would invest and create jobs. Where are these jobs atv, the rich have certainly got richer so I guess he half got it right.
I think it was you who mentioned the three day week and the Power cuts of the 70's. Do yourself a favour and look up Edward Heath, and if my memory serves ( as I was an adult at the time and not a school child) he was a bleeding Tory.

atv I have just had a though (strange that innit) Is your vitriol against the Labour Party, Because you simply have a hatred of them, or is it that you are a genuine Conservative lover. I ask as you have never had anything good to say for the Tory's. All you are able to do is to attack Labour. Please answer as I am genuinely interested.

[quote]

bobby wrote: By the way, I dont believe things where great up till 1979, but they certainly where better than the Toty's left us in 1997.quote]

Wasn't the UK know as "The sick man of Europe", and in 1997 the 3rd biggest economy. In 2007, the UK had the world's third largest current account deficit.

Again atv. Tell me what Herr Cameron has done other than spread misery on those who are not to blame for the financial state we are in, and to enable his rich mates to get even richer.

The rich getting richer.
The top 1 per cent of the population control 23 per cent of the country's cash, property and saleable assets - a huge gain in wealth since Tony Blair came to power.
While the richest have prospered, the number of low-paid people in poverty has grown.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1264709/In-13-years-Labour-richest-got-richer.html#ixzz1l5kwLR5J

And before you say "Oh, Tory media", read the Guardian as well.

A detailed and startling analysis of how unequal Britain has become offers a snapshot of an increasingly divided nation where the richest 10% of the population are more than 100 times as wealthy as the poorest 10% of society.
www.guardian.co.uk/society/2010/jan/27/unequal-britain-reportCached - Similar

I think it was you who mentioned the three day week and the Power cuts of the 70's.

You may recall from the MSN days, I was born in 1975. All I really remember of those days were the constant strikes, and no I don't remember the three day week, and the power cuts, but wasn't that due to the miners? I do however remember schools closing because of power cuts in the early 80s or teachers going on strike, happy days for us kids.

bobby wrote:atv I have just had a though (strange that innit) Is your vitriol against the Labour Party, Because you simply have a hatred of them, or is it that you are a genuine Conservative lover. I ask as you have never had anything good to say for the Tory's. All you are able to do is to attack Labour. Please answer as I am genuinely interested.

A Labour supporter having a thought is not strange, but I admit it is a bit unusual.

Before I start, I don't "hate" anyone or any party with the possible exception of the BNP, but even then I don't hate them, more what they stand for.

I wasn't much bothered when Tony Blair won the election in 1997, as I wasn't that much bothered in politics, but as time went on I and many others realised that New Labour wasn't all it cracked up to be, and yes I do know they won two other elections after that, but with a much reduced majority. You may also remember that New Labour lost many of their supporters, so it's not just me that started to question New Labour.

You ask I have never had anything good to say for the Tory's. I assume you mean the Coalition now and not the previous Tory Government.
Well for a start I disagree with the Winter Fuel Allowance cut and have voiced my opinion to Central Office, however I do agree with the benefit caps, and IMO it's not before time. When people on benefits can live a better life than people who work, something is wrong with the system, and many Labour supporters also agree with that, and if you don't believe me, go down to your local Labour club and ask the same question. In fact there is more vitriol against benefit cheats and immigration with imigrants taking their jobs from the Labour working class than from the average Tory.

It dosen't matter how you, or the two Ed's, or the whole Labour party come to that, try to dress it up, according to the polls more people believe the Coalition will hande the economy better than Labour, and until ypu can convince me otherwise, I will continue to vote Conservative.

When people on benefits can live a better life than people who work, something is wrong with the system

Only one person in eight receiving housing benefit is unemployed. Many of the people receiving disability living allowance are working.

I'm surprised you can sleep easily in your bed knowing that this sick government which you support is taking money from cancer patients and disabled children, that battered women are being turned away from refuges because there's been a 30% cut in their funding, that wounded soldiers are being sacked and that Cameron is the biggest liar ever to hold the office of Prime Minister. What did he tell us about his plans for the NHS before the election? Your idea of "having thoughts" seems to be swallowing all the propaganda which this government and its friends in the tabloid press spew out.

You should try reading Dr Jill Segger's excellent open letter to Iain Duncan Smith and see the devastation and misery that he's causing. Tough on benefit claimants and soft on banker bonuses will be how this government will be remembered.
https://cuttingedge2.forumotion.co.uk/t314p180-will-the-cruel-tory-welfare-reforms-save-any-money

Then perhaps we can get back to youth unemployment, which is the subject of this thread....

[quote="Ivan Then perhaps we can get back to youth unemployment, which is the subject of this thread....[/quote]

As for the jobs created under Labour, figures from the ONS show that 97% went to immigrants, which is one of the reasons why we've got a massive youth unemployment problem that started in 2004.Official figures revealed that more than nine out 10 of the 1.7 million jobs added to the economy since 1997 have gone to workers from overseas.
They also showed that nearly 300,000 fewer British-born workers were employed in the private sector than when Labour came to power.
Now who was it that said “British jobs for British workers”, Oh yes Gordon Brown. What more proof do you need that Labour the working man's party, has left British workers in a worse position than when Labour took office 13 years ago.

The Eurozone is apparently in danger of collapse, precisely because the originating member-countries retreat behind their borders when there's trouble.

British unemployed are free to visit all other EU countries searching for work. Who loses by having East European immigrants here to clean our cars, wash-up in our hotels or restaurants and wipe the arses of the elderly whom we don't want to look after for ourselves?

Who is the loser, apart from those who would always have been one of life's losers anyway?

It is indeed fortunate for Cameron that none of Britain's problems is in any way the fault of his government.

And thank heavens we have people available on the boards to tell us so...

atv, have you got a brother in Jersey.

Apart from incomers, most inhabitants on Jersey are related to most of their fellow Islanders. Fart in St.Helier and your cousin in St. Brélade will know about it before the echo dies.

Latest data from the Office for National Statistics show that Britain’s unemployment surged by 48,000 in the final quarter of 2011 to touch 2.67 million. This equates to an overall unemployment rate of 8.4%, the highest in 17 years.
In January, Jobseeker's Allowance claimants increased for the 11th month in a row adding 6,900 to bring the total to 1.6 million. Women continue to be most affected by the deterioration in the labour market, accounting for two-thirds of the increase in unemployment. This increase has been attributed to job cuts in the public sector, where more women tend to work.
The ONS data also showed that a record number of people are engaged in part-time work because of the unavailability of full-time jobs. Their numbers climbed by 83,000 in the fourth quarter to touch 1.35 million.
Youth unemployment rose to 1.04 million in the three months ended December 2011, adding 22,000 to the total of jobless youths. However, this figure includes 307,000 full-time students hunting for jobs.
Looking at the quarterly data, however the 48,000 rise in unemployment was the smallest quarterly increase since last summer. Employment numbers grew by 60,000 to 29.13 million, as the proportion of the workforce in paid work rose across the UK, the chief contributor being part-time worker numbers increasing by 90,000 to 6.6 million. The employment rate rose by 0.1 percentage point in the final quarter of 2011 to 70.3%.
Minister for Welfare Reform Lord Freud said, "The latest figures show some encouraging signs of stability despite the challenging economic climate. With more people in employment and a rise in vacancies, it is clear the private sector is still creating jobs.”
But at the same time, Freud cautioned against complacency: “With more people in the labour market we know that competition for those jobs is tough and we will continue to make it our priority to find people work” he said

.... and now for a GOOD NEWS story about people losing their jobs ....

When a Company fails, a firm of Insolvency Practitioners will take charge and liquidate the assets. One such is the firm called Begbies Traynor, whose name has been connected with winding-up several famous Companies in the last few years.

However, everyone has been trading cautiously since the Credit Crunch of 2008, and there have been fewer Company Failures, as a result of which 31 accountants have lost their jobs at Begbies in the past nine months.

Sorry for them, but glad for the healthier aspect of British Business.

Having just heard the this governments cliam that the latest rise in youth unemployment is the result of students looking for part time jobs, I have to ask how are these unemployment figure worked out?

Is done on those claiming Jobs Seekers Allowance or just on those who register with Job Centre?

The unemployment rate has increased to a near 17-year high after another rise in the jobless total to almost 2.7 million. More
that from virginmedia.com

Seems it only took the Torys 2 years to get unemployment back to the kind of figures they enjoy!

Quote Astra.

now for a GOOD NEWS story about people losing their jobs ....

When a Company fails, a firm of Insolvency Practitioners will take charge and liquidate the assets. One such is the firm called Begbies Traynor, whose name has been connected with winding-up several famous Companies in the last few years.

I believe most of us agree this Government is bankrupt. Should we not send in Begbies Traynor. At least give those 31 Accountants their jobs back. Oh. Of course, another 600+ for the employment total - MP's seeking part-time work at Tesco's. On second thoughts many of them 'moonlight' anyway. Can't win can we.



I

The Government isn't Bankrupt as long as the HMRC knows where we all live.

by oftenwrong Today at 5:17 pm



The Government isn't Bankrupt as long as the HMRC knows where we all live.
I was thinking more in terms of morals.

Morals in Government?

The last time you had that was in Classical Greece, where Laws were made by an assembly of the entire population in the Agora.

The internet provides a facility for universal government BY the people and FOR the people, but I don't expect many in Westminster to vote for that.

Re: Isn’t the 83% increase in youth unemployment since January proof enough that this government’s policies are a failure?
by oftenwrong Today at 10:47 pm




Morals in Government?

You know what Pope said. 'Hope springs eternal in the human breast'.

But then I suppose there are exceptions to everything:(

trevorw2539 wrote:by oftenwrong Today at 5:17 pm



The Government isn't Bankrupt as long as the HMRC knows where we all live.
I was thinking more in terms of morals.

Trevor
I Would say its economic policy is utterly bankrupt. as it hangs on Government borrowing and not any sort of economic fiscal growth. The failed to turn what GDP that was handed into any real economic growth. The UK needs some sort of economic policy that had MANAGEMENT and leadership within it. all this sitting on your hands hoping something may happen is a waste of public office in my view.

astradt1 wrote:Having just heard the this governments cliam that the latest rise in youth unemployment is the result of students looking for part time jobs, I have to ask how are these unemployment figure worked out?

Is done on those claiming Jobs Seekers Allowance or just on those who register with Job Centre?

Hi astradt1
a very good point. as its very hard today to work out what the true figures are.

Concerned teachers have suggested that GCSE English exams were marked too harshly this year after schools reported an unprecedented number of fails among their pupils.

Here we go, the examiners have adhered to the governments wish that fewer pupils have the opportunity to go for A levels at further education colleges.
These measures will also be used when examiners mark A level papers.
All designed IMO to cut the numbers getting to university. On top of that the university fees are out of reach of many poorer students.

Is it not the reason for these measures have been taken to keep the "lower order" numbers in check, as they are able if qualified to take professions/jobs that squeeze some of the "higher order" out of the rush to grab the best well paid jobs?
So much for helping the average youngster get into decent work. Perhaps the idea is that they should be put into a such a desperate situation that they would be fighting among themselves to get the odd lavatory cleaning job that might just come along if they are lucky at below min wage standards.

The slimy Gove wants a return to 0-level and A-level GCE exams, which were current fifty years ago and devised to test the top 25% academically, as a part of the University Entrance process.

There's nothing wrong with the Pursuit of Excellence but this Tory-led Coalition seems hell-bent on consigning most kids to the scrap-heap as a component of its survival-of-the-fittest dogma.

I totally agree OW their is nothing wrong with the Pursuit of Excellence as long as this is not at the cost of everyone else. but I feel that this has a great deal more to do with ideological right wing dogma and very little to do with Eduction and the well being of the UK children in general. but then I know that we both can see though this utter rot OW?

As this Tory-led Coalition has been going on and on about how many are passing there GCE GCE exams while telling the whole world this was due to the last government Eduction policy. Now they are up-set that too many failed the GCE exams or got the wrong marks.

Hell its like a re-run of there economic policy. as its everyone else that is failing and once more with nothing to do with them.... Gee O what shock and horror this news must come to the British Public..... NOT.

Its just amazing how everyone else is to blame from the economy to Eduction to lazy workforce too the weather or the Queen.

When will they learn that we are just not very interested in this stupid right wing blame game. as it just does not wash any more.

Finally, somebody has dared to say the education (comprehensive) system has failed the youth, presently under the labour mantra kids are leaving university with little ability in anything other than how to fill out an unemployment form. None of them have been taught anything of use and none of them have the aspiration to want to succeed (the world owes me a living syndrome). The rich must have been laughing their socks off at Blair/Brown when they pushed for more university places for people without the gumption for the work ethic as part of the course.

Back to reality, only the gifted kids should go to uni, if that's 25% of kids fine, if it was 10% of kids fine at least they have a chance of competing against the wealthy families that (like it or lump it) hold a distinct advantage over a working class kid. Give your time and support to those that have a chance and stop wasting time and money on those without the "getup and go" to make something of themselves

Uni Graduates gifted or not are finding difficulties in finding work. The whole Tory ideology on the subject is to decrease the numbers of those young people gaining degrees who will compete for the top jobs and professions that the wealthy ones are normally guaranteed to aquire, ( many through who they know and not what they know) when the country is booming.

oftenwrong wrote:The slimy Gove wants a return to 0-level and A-level GCE exams, which were current fifty years ago and devised to test the top 25% academically, as a part of the University Entrance process.

There's nothing wrong with the Pursuit of Excellence but this Tory-led Coalition seems hell-bent on consigning most kids to the scrap-heap as a component of its survival-of-the-fittest dogma.

I actually think the 'O'level and CSE system was better than the one size fits all system (GCSE's) that replaced it. It was a truer, fairer, and more flexible system. The academically inclined kids could realise their potential and take all subjects at 'O' level, and for others decent CSE grades demonstrated suitability for employment for those leaving school at 16.........of course many pupils took a combination of some CSE's and some 'O' levels - they were forwarded for 'O' levels if they demonstrated an aptitude for a particular subject.

There should be no doubt that the introduction of the GCSE has dumbed down our education system.

tlttf wrote:Finally, somebody has dared to say the education (comprehensive) system has failed the youth, ....
Back to reality, only the gifted kids should go to uni, if that's 25% of kids fine, if it was 10% of kids fine at least they have a chance of competing against the wealthy families that (like it or lump it) hold a distinct advantage over a working class kid. Give your time and support to those that have a chance and stop wasting time and money on those without the "getup and go" to make something of themselves

The last sentence is still referring to "selection", which is what has always caused so much trouble. The "eleven-plus" was said to have scrapped the chances of kids who were slow developers, and subsequent efforts at "streaming" produced howls of protest. There have been scholarships and bursaries for several hundred years, and many people consider that to be as good a scheme as any other as a reward and incentive for excellence.

Unfortunately OW, we all know that life itself is about selection. I was lucky insofar as my daughter received both a scholarship and bursary when she left her primary school, if she hadn't contrarily to what Ivan believes there wasn't a decent school available within Kensington/Chelsea. I still believe children develop at different speeds, yet those with ability should always have the door left open or them, it then becomes their option as to whether go for higher education or not.

On another note, if the government paid unemployment benefits to teenagers on condition they accepted a job where they could learn a trade, would you think it a good idea or would you believe they were looking for slave labour?

There have been so many Youth Employment initiatives under various governments, the surprise is that Job Centres are still considered necessary.

But oftenwrong, the "Youth Employment initiatives" are a sham, the best illustration of this was in 1998 when Gordon brown`s cynically-named "New Deal" was introduced. It was brought in for young people in April 1998, then extended to adults in June 1998. This was a time of relatively low unemployment because we were in a boom, which greatly troubled the ruling class who wanted interest rates to go up in order to raise unemployment. The minutes of June 1998 meeting of the Monetary Policy Committee of the Bank of England reveal a concern that wage rises indicated a need for unemployment to rise:

“the earnings data suggested that it was more likely that unemployment was below the rate compatible with stable inflation. In that case, it was probable that unemployment would have to rise to hit the inflation target on a sustainable basis.”
http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/publications/minutes/Documents/mpc/pdf/1998/Mpc9806.pdf

The Bank of England raised interest rates to 7.5% that month in its bid to raise unemployment, and when the Treasury Select Committee`s Report was published on 29th July 1998, MPs on the committee noted that the Monetary Policy Committee`s position was that “unemployment must rise if the inflation target is to be met”.

July to September 1998 was marked by an unusually open debate in the mainstream media on the amount of unemployment needed to control wage inflation.
On August 7th the Guardian reported on an interview Gordon Brown had given the previous day. Headed “UK will avoid recession, says Brown”, the article, without mentioning prospects for unemployment or the New Deal said:

“Mr Brown said the economy was witnessing a “justifiable and necessary slowdown” but that he could see no signs that growth would grind to a halt. “I am confident that we are on track to avoid recession”"

and finished with a threat from Brown, predictably aimed at wages, not prices:

”the Chancellor repeated his warning that a failure to exercise pay moderation could trigger further tough action from the Bank.”

A week after this interview, economist Robert Chote noted in the FT how candid the Bank of England had been the day before (in both its inflation report and minutes)
(Unemployment must rise to hit inflation target, Bank warns, Financial Times – August 13, 1998)
He wrote:

“Unemployment will have to rise if inflation is to be stabilised at the government’s target rate, the Bank of England said yesterday. But it refused to predict by how much the jobless total would need to increase.
The Bank has rarely been as explicit as it was yesterday that unemployment must rise, but it remains reluctant to quantify the impact.”

Chote contrasted the Bank`s relative candour with that of Gordon Brown whom he said:

”concedes that the economy faces a “necessary slowdown”, but becomes evasive when asked about the implication for unemployment.”

On September 25, the BBC, at least on its website, if not on its broadcasts, had apparently decided to ditch its bogus claim to “balance” in an article entitled “Why unemployment has to rise”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/179455.stm

“the Bank of England recognises that, however painful, unemployment has to rise for the government to hit its inflation target. And the bank is determined to reach this goal.”

Once again there was no mention of the New Deal or the Chancellor`s thinly-veiled support for the Bank`s only means of achieving an inflation target set by the government.[b][i]

More about the use of unemloyment to push wages down can be read here:
http://thetruthaboutunemployment.wordpress.com/2012/09/17/what-causes-unemployment-2/

Assuming that the soubriquet "jobseeker" is a genuine statement of personal circumstances, I am of course totally sympathetic with anyone without work, having found myself in that position more than once during a lifetime of ducking and diving. To the person without a wage, Unemployment is at 100%.

References to "1998" are ignoring the reality of reduced prospects dating from much earlier. Successive Tory governments have conspired to maintain a large pool of compliant unemployed people, disguising their efforts with such titles as "YTS" or "Work experience" etc.

atv,

Well for a start I disagree with the Winter Fuel Allowance cut and have voiced my opinion to Central Office

...in a sarcastic tone - Why? Is it 'cos it effects you? Aw! Diddums!

The internet provides a facility for universal government BY the people and FOR the people, but I don't expect many in Westminster to vote for that.

Now wouldn't that be a good initiative for Labour to offer - comments threads on proposed legislation?

That way all the hard work currently done by the professional law-makers in the upper house could be outsourced to cheerful opinionates, like ourselves, who would do it all for free!

Sorted