More inequality in Labour constituencies

If you are born in some Labour held seats, there is a 1000% higher chance of unemployment than if you were born into some Tory heartlands

The study below shows how ridiculous the notion of 'equality of opportunity' is. You inherit inequality. You start from the back of the grid with a half tank of fuel if you are lucky. There is a Ferrari on row one and it is roaring to go. That's the way life works. The national unemployment rate as of September 2010 was 7.2%. Above is the top 15 Parliamentary constituencies with the highest unemployment rate as of then. The main finding is that the regional disparity in the UK unemployment rate is vast. For example, in the case of Birmingham Ladywood the rate is nearly 350% higher than the national average. Labour represent 14 out of the top 15 seats with the highest unemployment.

The chart also shows those seats with the lowest unemployment rates. 6 seats unemployment rates were that low they could not be included on the graph but as we can see in the case of Wiltshire, Henley and Cambridge their unemployment rate is more than 300% smaller than the national average. As a young person growing up, the greatest postcode lottery of our age is whether or not you will get a job. Forget ability and work ethic, if you are born into certain parts of Birmingham and Nottingham your chances of being unemployed are nearly a 1000% higher than if you were born in Henley. The governments harshness on benefit claimants should be more reflective of the fact that work is hard to find in some areas.

This massive disparity distorts people's views on unemployment and general notions of benefit scrounging. There are areas of England where work is just scarce. It is too simplistic to say that people are lazy or unwilling to work. The Tory party is traditionally firm some might say unduly harsh on tackling benefit fraud. But I wonder if the key is convincing them to be just as dedicated to job creation.

A case of being laughable

Now here’s something to laugh at - David Cameron and Nick Clegg were together at an event yesterday to launch a government drive on youth unemployment.

The prime minister and his deputy will announce a £60m package to boost work prospects and vocational education.

They will commit in their appearance in London to tackle "structural barriers" to young people starting a career.

The launch comes a year after Mr Clegg and Mr Cameron walked into Downing Street together.

The government said it would provide funding for 250,000 more apprenticeships over the next four years and 100,000 work placements over the next two years.

More than 100 large companies and tens of thousands of small businesses had pledged to offer work experience places, ministers added.

Mr Cameron said: "It's time to reverse the trend of rising youth unemployment that has held back our country for far too long and help our young people get the jobs on which their future - and ours - depends.

"But government can't act alone. We need employers who are prepared to give young people a go.

"So I'm delighted that over 100 large companies and tens of thousands of small and medium sized enterprises have already responded to our call for work experience placements so that tens of thousands of young people can take those vital first steps in experiencing the world of work."

Mr Clegg said: "We all have a responsibility - government, business, charities, education providers - to work together to find a solution."

But TUC general secretary Brendan Barber said the proposals failed to match the guarantees given by the now cut Future Jobs Fund.

"The best thing the government could do is stop their deep rapid spending cuts that are running the whole economy into the ground, with the young as the worst victims,"

How absolutely true, but come on Brendan, surely you can do better than that? Almost a quarter of young people are without work and despite their best efforts the government have not been able to reverse the trend. Work experience is all very well, but it isn’t paid employment and it isn’t permanent. Moreover, the government are pitching their money on the private sector being wiling and able to pick up the tab of employing all these young people, but with inflation likely to rise to 5% over the coming year, industry is going to be hard-pushed to be competitive anyway – and that’s without the additional staff numbers coming from youth.

Citizen Dave and Tricky Nicky need to get their acts together and recognise there is a very real problem affecting an entire generation and it will not go away unless the government are prepared to invest in programmes that can help young people secure permanent and sustainable employment. Half-hearted measures that pay lip service to the needs of the young are an embarrassment and need to be treated with total scorn. These measures will do nothing to address the number of young people unemployed and it will give little to allay the fears of those set to leave school in June.

What baffles me is how few people see the lack of care Citizen Dave and Tricky Nicky have for the people of this country. Dave is the worst kind of Tory – a Thatcherite with a PR face. On face value he looks squeaky clean, but when you aren’t looking he’ll rip your heart out and laugh as he’s doing it. As for Clegg, he is just a puppet following his master’s will, but make no mistake, he knows what he is doing and, even worse, he agrees with Tory policy.

Why many ESA claimants aren't 'fit for work'

The government is on its latest tirade against the poor, the sick and the unemployment. Now they have discovered three-quarters of people who apply for sickness benefit are found fit to work or drop their claims before they are completed, official figures show. Department for Work and Pensions figures showed 887,300 of 1,175,700 employment and support allowance (ESA) applicants over a 22-month period failed to qualify for assistance. Of those 39% were judged fit to work, while 36% abandoned their claim.

As a result, Employment Minister Chris Grayling has said the welfare system needed changing. He said the figures underlined the need to reassess people still on the old incapacity benefit - a process which the government began rolling out last month.

"Once again we have clear evidence of the need for change in our welfare system. We now know very clearly that the vast majority of new claimants for sickness benefits are in fact able to return to work. That's why we are turning our attention to existing claimants, who were simply abandoned on benefits. That's why we are reassessing all of those claimants, and launching the work programme to provide specialist back to work support. We will, of course, carry on providing unconditional support to those who cannot work, but for those who can it's right and proper that they start back on the road to employment."

Before he opens his mouth this man really should engage his brain. When people go to doctors, health visitors, Citizen’s Advice Bureaux, or welfare rights organisations they are often advised to apply for incapacity benefit (or employment and support allowance as it is now). There is no subterfuge on the part of the working classes, no plot to overthrow the state and we aren’t a nation full of social security scroungers either.

The reality is that many of these assessments have been found to be inhumane, lacking or evidence of genuine care and designed exclusively to trap people into a situation where they can no longer claim benefit.

Take some of the following cases:

“In Hull, my Atos doc showed up on the cancelled day (I had another appointment to go to that I could not reschedule) and I had to send him away, then I attended the centre for the next attempt, it is in a busy area, buzzer at door, terrible chairs and long corridors. My wheelchair broke in the car park they watched me and my friend struggling with it out of the window and did not offer help. In the end we gave up and I used my crutches. We told the doc exactly what happened so she made no mention of it on my assessment and said I only use crutches! Amongst other 'mistakes' and flat out falsification, I was refused all help and am still awaiting an appeal date a year later.”

“The fellow came to my house as I was housebound - they knew I was housebound and yet they kept trying to find evidence of me walking.”Don't you go round to the shops?" No, I don't, it was too far in winter and unsafe, and if they had called my carer at all she could have told them that (The DWP never even contacted her). He managed to drag out that I had been fed up with being stuck at home for three months so I dragged myself into town to get some flowers and visit my favourite coffee shop - it was the same day my son ended up getting excluded and so I spent the three days afterwards trying to recover with an autistic hyperactive child, drugged to the gills on Tramadol. Result on the assessment form? "Can walk up to 500 yards pain free." Once I got the arthritis scan in there which shows damage to the bones in my feet, I wanted to appeal the "no mobility allowance" grounds but missed the appeal date by three days. I now have to file, yet again, for change in circumstances, which is the second time I've had to do this after appealing my first claim. It's doing my head in, and I'm appalled that it seems they never bothered to follow up either my GP report, the OT report or my carer's input.”

“The centre in Bristol is at flowers hill. It's a concrete bunker at the end of a long and boring bus ride. Very awkward to get to and depressing place. Not great if you're suffering from post-traumatic stress and depression. Having let food rot in the fridge and been too stressed to leave the house I figured out I could demand a home visit so I did. Haven't been back there since and I have no intention of doing so if I can avoid it. The first and only time I went there the assessor twisted everything I said and dumped me off incapacity benefit. The copy of the form (I had to request in advance) was full of lies. Didn't have it in me to appeal at the time and it took ages before I could reapply to go back onto IB. Home visits have been better for all the obvious reasons. The first home visit was done by a real doctor and I had a person from the mental health authority there as a witness. (The doctor was shocked at the earlier story and didn't believe it until the health worker confirmed it). The last visit was done by someone who came over as being helpful and pleasant enough. That surprised me. I did my prep work like all these well connected tax dodging bigshots so gave him the answers I wanted to give him. As far as I'm concerned if they put as much effort into finding the sort of job I'd like to do that paid an amount I could live on it would be a better use of their money. But they won't do that because they'd have to give up control and admit they're wrong. “

These are just a minute sample of the vast quantity of complaints customers have about the assessment process. So before Grayling sounds off about the number of people who are refused ESA he needs to look at two things. Firstly he needs to understand the process and acknowledge how many social care workers advocate clients make a claim for ESA, even if their chances of success are small. Secondly he needs to completely revamp the entire assessment process and make it far more client-friendly.

But then if he did that he wouldn’t get the kind of results he is getting at the moment and he would find the vast majority of claimants are genuinely in need.