Reply to: Obvious common sense policy for Britain

[d000hg]

Just a same it's 'sense' of the 'non' variety.

[DimPrawn]

Election 2015: Nigel Farage pledges 'a low tax revolution' - BBC News

So much sense it hurts!

[DodgyAgent]

According to recent reports productivity per worker in the UK is the lowest in (can't remember - Europe? Western economies?)
I would prefer a lie in to hard work, given the (financial) choice.

Really??? Labour's Emily Thornberry quits over 'snobby' tweet - BBC News

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8649012.stm

[Ticktock]

According to the Tories, this is the truth:

According to recent reports productivity per worker in the UK is the lowest in (can't remember - Europe? Western economies?)
I would prefer a lie in to hard work, given the (financial) choice.

[Euler]

Anyway to summarise this thread. Read my sig.

[d000hg]

People should really learn what words mean. That's disdain at worst, not contempt. But then that wouldn't be such a good quote. Like accusing Labour of "planning to rape the rich".

[DodgyAgent]

Fake or real?

A straight answer from a decent bloke.

[darmstadt]

That's the truth, isn't it?

According to the Tories, this is the truth:

[darmstadt]

Fake or real?

[DodgyAgent]

Those who aren't as Bright as SAS won't be able to negotiate it.

neither of them?

[vetran]

Which means it is administered directly to those who need it without having large chunks siphoned off by useless, incompetent and corrupt public sector workers. It is what Cameron meant by the big society

which means organisations are understanding and measuring the problems then lobbying the government to fix them.

I'm pretty sure EO or PC will tell you how disorganised the benefits organisations are. Those who aren't as Bright as SAS won't be able to negotiate it.

[vetran]

I would agree with you that the issue has primarily been implementation and heavy-handed generalisation, and that the theory of the cuts was good. However the problem is that when you cock up the implementation of something like JSA, the consequences are pretty bad so implementation is pretty crucial

Not sure that the public being willing to rally round and prop up a failing public service should be seen as evidence it was doing OK. If they cut benefits altogether you'd probably see a massive increase in foodbanks, soup kitchens, etc from a whole range of charitable and church groups to take the strain but that's effectively the government passing the cost onto the public.

I think part of the growth in their popularity is the fact that they now exist. Friends I know help with soup kitchens and have done so for decades.

I think both are a good safety net in this world of family breakdown and stops people having to do unpleasant things to feed their kids.

for TT many visits were due to benefit issues.

Trussell Trust Foodbank Statistics

however only some of those were due to sanctions, apparently half of the sanctions are upheld when challenged. so if we can fix those it will only a small portion of the users affected by sanctions unfairly.

It still needs sorting and a weeks sanction for being 10 minutes late on the bus seems harsh.

'Emergency Use Only' - Foodbank Report 2014


The Universal credit if properly implemented may solve some of the issues.

lack of knowledge of benefits available, Low pay and delays getting benefits (which have always happened) seem to be the large percentage of the users.

The Trussell Trust | Real Life Stories

part of the deal is the advice offered

The Trussell Trust - More Than Food

other foodbanks have similar services TT seem to have the best stats & PR.

[d000hg]

Which means it is administered directly to those who need it without having large chunks siphoned off by useless, incompetent and corrupt public sector workers. It is what Cameron meant by the big society

I do think it's actually very commendable to see the public stepping up - it also gives the church an opportunity to put their money where their mouth is - but the PM crowing about saving money by effectively getting us to pay it is a bit hypocritical.

[DodgyAgent]

effectively the government passing the cost onto the public.

Which means it is administered directly to those who need it without having large chunks siphoned off by useless, incompetent and corrupt public sector workers. It is what Cameron meant by the big society

[Batcher]

They will just look for someone else willing to do it for £90.

I'll doorit forra Fiver Guv ...

Cash in hand?