Spot on.
In fact the first gave me the inspiration to write my humble contribution to the debate – and what a lot of people think of the superelitist world of think tanks.

Exactly. “Modernisation”, just like “reform”, has become a buzzword which when applied to public services neccessarily means “handing over to the private sector” (Kate Belgrave’s piece about Barnet ilustrates this perfectly). And if you object, well surely no reasonable person could be opposed to “reform” or “modernisation” so you must be a reactionary, an old dinoasaur, producer interest etc.

The mindset is very much “something must be done, this is something, therefore it must be done”.

Really?? If these are good-great. I know some work-that isn’t my point but without getting far too personal, christ, some people have NO wishes of ever leaving having benefits at all…how can this be good??

And no cutting benefits wouldn’t do that. It would finally get people to wonder why the hell they need or want children. Think…do you have enough cash? Enough issues that have left??

I don’t care what people say but for me, as a woman who loves children..life and who had parents who, ‘why the hell did you have kids’ of that sort…

I don’t think it’s that simple and people need to grow up and be accountable for their actions.

But you know what would be revolutional?? If we asked so many families etc as to why and what the Welfare System exists for….not middle class kids…but the actual stakeholders we’re supposed to be helping…

(P.S I would do in ask my next door neighbours, if I didn’t know the break my face in half..)

James Lovelock started his career as a chemistry technician and then went to read chemistry at Manchester University. His ability to analyse compounds at very low concentrations led him to careeer with NASA where he developed new analytical equipment .

For technology to succeed, creativity is as only good as the practical skills and knowledge which enable it to be constructed and maintained. Practical skills are required so that the construction and maintenance are as simple and cheap as possible.

One of the great problems with wave power will be maintenance, especially in winter.
To succeed in science and engineering requires much rote learning. As Gary Player said ” it take a lot of practice to become a natural golfer”.

Sorry, but I’m gobsmacked at the hipocrasy here. It was Laurie who brought up background and experience.

Laurie’s basic argument is ‘these people don’t know what they are talking about because they are as posh as me – how can someone who shares my privilaged background possibly understand?’

You really can’t see the lack of self-awareness there?

No, cutting benefits will lead to parents thinking things like “I can’t afford to buy my children shoes” or “there’s only enough food for dinner for my kids, I’ll have to go without”. How would you cope if the amount of money you got was cut in half?

Between 1997 and 2007, benefits for lone parents increased, and the highest ever number of lone parents got jobs. Cutting benefits would undermine the things that you’d like to achieve.

“The problem is these things are simply ‘there’ so the govt can fill in quota’s and give each other a pack on the back for being ‘compassionate’”

Sorry, but this is pure ignorance. Some of these schemes are better than others, but they help a lot of people and many of them achieve exactly the aims that you want to promote.

Now we all have to have the necessary ‘authenticity’ before we comment on things eh?

No of course we don’t.

But if you are going to write a post slating educated left wing Guardianistas for developing policy on problems and issues where they do not have direct experience it is probably more convincing if you are not an educated left wing wannabe journalist.

Having said that, I think Laurie has a point in that the policy makers are now so crucially distanced from the realities they are proposing to legislate over that it is impossible for them to make good rational decisions.

Perhaps it was ever thus.

Yes they are tonne but how effective are these? I’ve read of so many with good intentions but with so many loopholes that they were never going to work, whether it is through training the local council or providing sufficient funding to voluntary groups…

The problem is these things are simply ‘there’ so the govt can fill in quota’s and give each other a pack on the back for being ‘compassionate’, further more councils are not required to ALL do this, so say you have a Tory council that sees it as a waste of time, then it won’t happen and so forth.

People are not being educated as to WHY it is a benefit to them that an angry white boy growing up with a 16 yearl old mother who relies on benefits and doesn’t want to work etc does not grow up to be an angry asbo fuelled adult who spends his whole life in and out of prison creating crime..

So how does it happen, since we are working on an income/expenditure situation here that is a country?

It was one thing providing finances to mothers in the 50-s-80-s who had to live through such sexism and couldn’t get work as women and it’s another thing to do it now with the awareness of the environment that we live in. The 21st century knowledge economy were everybody wants to get rich and quick a la Jordan and Jade.

So yes, by cutting the benefits, people STOP thinking about resource in terms of MONEY but in terms of giving time, sharing skills and re-using products.

We’re a horrid and selfish society that needs to STOP thinking money is the everything but that by sharing, re-using etc, this could really help your wellbeing.

I mean this type of thing would not only bring communities to work and understand each other but you may larger ‘family’ networks, old mothers sharing baby rearing ideas with young mothers who have no clue etc..

It should be compulsory.

Why? They’re clearly better at it, not least because (especially in China) the educational system and overall cultural environment is strongly geared to the kind of unthinking rote-learning that’s ideal in a technician.

Our education system and cultural environment favours creativity, which is why we lead the world in media and professional services…

“Next door to central London” is, erm, suburbia…

@28 Now we all have to have the necessary ‘authenticity’ before we comment on things eh?

I jolly well hope not.

Why not??”

There are plenty of government-funded schemes and voluntary groups which support mothers with mentoring, clothes exchanges etc., but how and why on earth would halving their benefits help? It’s not like if you take money away from poor mothers, they suddenly have more time to make use of this support, is it?

The Labour Party’s problems arose because they failed to tackle the core issues that the Party was set up to tackle.

The same people who were quick to call for ‘modernisation’ are the same who sit with a look of dismay as the ideological chickens come home to roost. The grotesque use of the term ‘modernisation’ to describe their policies is the most galling aspect of the whole debacle.

The term ‘modernise’ has been used to justify the re-introduction of the very things that the Labour movement were supposed to be combating. Exploitation at work the casualisation of the labour force. Unsafe working practices. Cheap Labour. Mass long term unemployment. Working conditions for many of the poorest workers have not been ‘modernised’, quite the opposite, they have returned to the Victorian values that their great grandparents suffered.

There is nothing ‘modern’ about sitting by the phone on a zero hour contract, hoping for some work. There is nothing ‘modern’ about being paid off at the end of the day and rehired two days later. There is nothing ‘modern’ about your employer deducting money from your wages to pay for safety boots and a locker. This is exploitation.

Someone once said a week is a long time in politics, well here we are, over a hundred years after the Labour Party was initiated we are still seeing the same problems that they were campaigning against during most of its existence.

One of my abiding memories in the last year was when the BMW/mini cooper guys were sacked on the spot. The anger from that group of workers were not aimed at management, it was aimed at the unions and the Labour Party. The use of agency and so-called ‘temporary’ workers has left many people vulnerable to this type of behaviour. BMW would never be allowed to deal with people in their own country, but here their workers have been discarded like last weeks chip papers.

This exploitation has been completely sanctioned by ‘New Labour’. As unemployment rises those abandoned by New Labour are now turning their back on them, well is it any wonder?

“None of you have really been where these people you propose to care about have been so you can’t know what will actually help to improve their quality of life.”

I see…

Assumedly you have no opinion on Iraq, Afghanistan, Israel/Palestine, foreign aid, Pakistan etc.?

“the Libs were for arrogant posh twats like me to hone their sophistry skills,”

Lol, still are from were I can see…

I’m actually exhausted of arguing with seemingly intelligent friends about why I chose the party I chose to vote on policies…instead of just ‘feeling’…

Whatever course you took didn’t include modules on irony or self-awareness.

I agree with what Charlie has said which hits the nail..

I have been there, been on the dole and also my mother lives in a council estate-which granted isn’t like the inner city ones but it’s one nevertheless…

Now I won’t pretend too that I went to comps because I didn’t, in fact I went (we all did) to good to very good private/public schools which my father paid for..

Ayhow, I’ve unfortunately/fortunately been able to live both sides due to circumstances beyond my control as a child/young person.

There is such a thing as killing with kindness BUT not with kindness and a huge dollop of perceptiveness and behavioural economics, which therein lies the issue we have in this country and why I turned away from Labour.

Not EVERYONE who is poor, black or a women, is nice.

The left, NEED to see through people, not at them because it’s not helping at all.

I’m staying at my mothers to save, were I see proffessional mothers who make it their lives to have kids and stay on benefit, whether they are 1, 2 or 3 generation..

Now this IS an issue because a good bunch of them are crap mothers, the kids are crying and screaming, police is called all the time because some jealous boyfriend is being abusive…so you can’t really claim that not truly looking into this area isn’t a problem??

The bottom line is people want, need, desire and are desperate for some kind of ownership in their lives, be it just some partner, a child, a job, fame, etc…we’re all just as bad as each other.

So how do we do this? Give back ownership??

Improving Wellbeing.

Ex, cutting down on child benefits and instead inc ‘giving time’ as a resource. Instead of say £100 a week if she gets a child, it could be cut by 50% and instead with the 50% left that should’ve been cash, instead it is ‘time’. By that the mother gets mentoring from other mothers to share child rearing ideas, thoughts and anxieties, plus they have an exchange of of clothes-recycling-instead of throwing away and adding to the pollution etc..

Why not??

The whole point of Laurie’s article was that people on low incomes need to be involved in having a say about what would improve their lives, rather than having think-tankers discuss this on their behalf. So you are criticising her for, um, agreeing with you.

Th day when millions poorly educated people could walk out of school on a Friday and take up unskilled employment on the following Monday are largely long gone.
When the Tories set up the YTS , a german apprentice in the car trade would complete in 6 months what a British apprentice would take 2 yrs to complete. The success of the German car industry is only possible with a very large pool of highly skilled crafstmen, technicians, scientists and engineers.

Skill enables people to move to a better place more easily. When the skilled Flemish weavers and the Huguenots moved to the UK, a combination of technical , business and language skills enabled them to prosper; mainly because we lacked them. Shumacher talks about the vital importance of ensuring people have the skills to enable them to be independent and take control of their lives.

Oh I see. Now we all have to have the necessary ‘authenticity’ before we comment on things eh?

I see Mike’s answer as ever is to sack the electorate

If you so clearly despise the people “wallowing in false consciousness” whom you wish to influence, it’s hardly surprising that they might decide to despise you back.

Leaving aside whether or not regarding someone as deeply, profoundly mistaken is the same as despising them – and even if it is, why shouldn’t I? after all, Charlie’s solution to all known human ills is to shoot all the arts and social science graduates – I would like to put just one thing on the record.

Most people live in somewhere that can more or less be called suburbia. I would sooner commit suicide than live there, and so far as I have been able to find out most suburbanites would sooner die than live, as I do, next door to central London. Whatever happened to “it takes all sorts”?

In defence of James Purnell, the point he was making was that people, you’d like to think, would rather have a job than be on benefits, that giving someone an extra £5 a week in benefits is no real solution.

So giving them less in benefits is meant to be some kind of ‘incentive’? You do realise how little Jobseekers’ Allowance actually pays out?

Well done for going to that event and enduring all that meaningless guff so we don’t have to.