Why Coalition plans to force people into unpaid work will flounder
Some thoughts on the government’s new idea that people who are long term unemployed could be placed on four week mandatory placements of thirty hours per week doing jobs like cleaning litter and gardening:
1. It is a job killer.
There are lots of people who work as street cleaners, toilet cleaners, gardeners and other unglamorous and poorly paid jobs. If these policies go ahead, they will lose their jobs. No employer in their right mind would pay £6 or £7 per hour to employ street cleaners if they could get an unemployed person to do it for free.
continue reading… »
How China’s 40m unmarried men might impact the world
contribution by Matthew Turner
In 20 years China is forecasted to have 40 million men without female partners.
Chinese societal and government-influenced male preference, coupled with draconian birth control, has fostered a situation in which China faces managing the greatest male surplus in recorded history.
This task should not be underestimated. A lack of sexual affection results in an increase in violence.
James Prescott, a reputable neuropsychologist, explains this relationship in his paper ‘Body Pleasure and the Origins of Violence’ (1975). Prescott asserts that the greatest threat to world peace comes from countries where people are deprived of physical affection as children and sexual gratification as adults.
continue reading… »
It’s official: Phil Woolas isn’t coming back
I missed this earlier, but Harriet Harman this morning confirmed that Phil Woolas is not returning to front-line politics, as we have been calling for on Liberal Conspiracy.
Asked on the Andrew Marr Show whether Woolas would be reinstated if the appeal Judicial Review was successful, she said:
Whatever happens in an appeal – what might happen in an appeal, if he does appeal, it could be that they could say on the basis of the facts that the election court found it was not warranted for them to strike down the election result and disqualify him, so he might win on a legal basis.
But it won’t change the facts that were found by the election court, which was that he said things that were untrue knowing it, and that is what we are taking action on – because it is not part of Labour’s politics for somebody to be telling lies to get themselves elected.
That’s not going to change, and that’s what we regard as very serious and that’s why we have suspended him.
She also defended the decision to appoint Mr Woolas as immigration spokesman in opposition:
He was an existing member of the frontbench team in his role as immigration minister, the court hadn’t yet made its findings, so he was reappointed when we came into opposition.
But once the court finding came through – well he is no longer an MP so there is no question of him being a front-bench spokesperson and indeed he has been suspended from the Labour Party – although there will be a process after that which obviously he will be able to put forward his views in.
I’m perfectly happy with that.
Various people closer to the decision making process told me he was kept on after the election because it was felt moving him might look like they were pre-judging the outcome of the case.
Labour has now cut off any chance of Woolas making a comeback to front-line politics, and that is to be welcomed. I’m glad Harriet Harman confirmed it.
As Don Paskini said earlier – even if the court had found him guilty or not, the party can argue and will argue now, that he brought Labour into disrepute.
The Daily Mirror reported this morning that Woolas needs up to £200,000 to fight the appeal.
Watch Harriet Harman on Andrew Marr
Update: Libcon reader @PeterMEde makes this comment, suggesting that it’s worse for Woolas than people realise:
For anyone interested in legal situation re Woolas> So.. it seems pretty clear that Woolas is no longer an MP as of the moment the judgment was published. He has no right of appeal because of S144(1) Representation of People Act 1983: it is crystal clear the election court’s decision is FINAL. He’s also now barred from re-standing as an MP under s160(5) for a full 3 years having committed an “illegal act”.
His only hope now is a Judicial Review, but under English law he can’t challenge the 1983 Act of Parliament, as it’s primary legislation, so can forget that. Only real hope is to say there has been procedural impropriety or some other similar valid ground for JR: that’s pretty difficult to allege against 2 High Court Judges following rules laid out by statute.
He’s first going to have to get the High Court in London to accept his petition for JR (which they probably will) – but he’s not an MP in the meantime, and he’s got an almost impossible fight on his hands when he does get to court. All he can possibly hope to prove is that the procedural rules were not fair; the Judicial factual findings against him are pretty damning, aren’t subject to challenge, and they will in any case stick politically. If he overturns the rules, then presumably amended ones will be created, and he’ll be back in the box at some future point facing the same allegations.
–> My unskilled assessment? (Given this isn’t my area of law by a long way) – both legally and politically –
He’s screwed.
Five unanswered questions about IDS’ unpaid work programme
contribution by Elizannie
Iain Duncan Smith – as reported in today’s Observer wants Job Seekers to be penalised for their audacity in previously working for industries/workplaces that can no longer retain their services.
So to show them their sins and remind them what it is like to maintain “habits and routines” of working life, they will have to undertake “mandatory work activity” of at least 30 hours a week for a four-week period. Apparently the Department for Work and Pensions is planning to organise this by contracting private providers who will presumably arrange placing the unemployed with charities, voluntary organisations and so forth.
The sheer audacity of the way that this has been announced with no regard for the feelings of those who are unfortunate enough to be long term unemployed cannot even be described or listed. However these are just a few additional ‘objections’ that immediately occur:
continue reading… »
Housing – it’s about to get much worse
The government looks to be about to cut the number of families with a right to be re-housed – at the same time as their benefit reforms look likely to produce a massive increase in homelessness.
Experts like the National Housing Federation and the Chartered Institute of Housing have warned about the impact of the planned changes to Housing Benefit.
At the same time, the government’s defence of these changes looks increasingly threadbare.
continue reading… »
Watch: Lord James on ‘Foundation X’ on Sky
Well, he still seems deadly serious about all this. Maybe we’re saved, and Osborne won’t take the economy down!
(if you want the background, see this post by Hopi Sen)
This isn’t a working class racism problem, it’s a Labour problem
contribution by Jon Lansman
Phil Woolas is out of the House of Commons (subject to a future judicial review) and suspended from the Labour Party.
The court was concerned not with racism, but with misrepresentation such as that illustrated here, and it is not a simple matter since the policing of it also raises issues of freedom of speech in elections.
Dan Hodges at Labour Uncut said:
for his accusers in the liberal mob – their verdict was passed long ago. ‘He is guilty. Those leaflets pandered to prejudice. They have no place in the new politics’. Save your breath. Woolas was never anything more than a patsy. The fall guy. Ritual sacrifice to our conscience.
Let us make clear: we have no desire to make Woolas a scapegoat. But he was appointed as Labour’s immigration minister after his election campaign strategy in Oldham came under scrutiny (which the Tories have attacked).
continue reading… »
Bill Maher smacks down Jon Stewart
This rant by Bill Maher against Jon Stewart and the ‘rally against insanity’ is spot on, I thought, and points out that liberals should stop bending over backwards to meet Republicans in the middle.
(via @glinner)
Why the Democrats lost on Tuesday in the US mid-terms
This analysis of why the Democrats lost so heavily on Tuesday, by Drew Westen, is the best piece of commentary on the recent American elections.
It was actually written a year ago, but the points and predictions that he made were more than validated.
Two excerpts:
continue reading… »
Watch: Ed Miliband disowns Phil Woolas
In an interview with Channel 4 News last night, Ed Miliband clearly disowned Phil Woolas too.
He said:
The court’s made a very clear judgement in this case. A clear finding of fact about what happened and what Phil Woolas did and that he knowingly made false allegations about his opponent and therefore I think we’ve taken the right decision.
The right decision is to suspend him from the party and to say we’re not going to fund his further legal action.
I think reasonable people will think we’ve done the right thing.
Watch
That is a pretty unequivocal statement, and suggests they think it’s unlikely to be overturned.
Certainly, I can’t see Ed Miliband turning around later and say Phil Woolas is welcome back into the fold.
Good riddance.
You can read articles through the front page, via Twitter or RSS feed. You can also get them by email and through our Facebook group.
» The real agenda behind Telegraph’s abortion investigation
» How Scotland Yard monitors prying bloggers and journalists
» When disabled people want to work – employers can hold the back
» Revealed: the reality behind Workfare and why it doesn’t work
» Job snob? No, I’ve got the T-shirt
» Why country-by-country reporting matters to our wellbeing
» If Unions want to become stronger, they need to modernise
» Why work “reforms” in Spain are a warning for workers across Europe
» Five things you need to know about the NHS bill
» Bigger. Fatter. Gypsier. More Racist.
» Laziness levels in Britain getting lazier, wails government
|
62 Comments 15 Comments 23 Comments 8 Comments 24 Comments 19 Comments 16 Comments 83 Comments 203 Comments 85 Comments |
|
LATEST COMMENTS » the a&e charge nurse posted on The real agenda behind Telegraph's abortion investigation » Chaise Guevara posted on The real agenda behind Telegraph's abortion investigation » Chaise Guevara posted on The real agenda behind Telegraph's abortion investigation » Oliver posted on Job snob? No, I've got the T-shirt » Brummie Protestor posted on Workfare - what does the evidence show? » the a&e charge nurse posted on The real agenda behind Telegraph's abortion investigation » Hannah posted on The real agenda behind Telegraph's abortion investigation » mr_hopkinson posted on The real agenda behind Telegraph's abortion investigation » Amy Finlayson posted on The real agenda behind Telegraph's abortion investigation » the a&e charge nurse posted on The real agenda behind Telegraph's abortion investigation » pagar posted on The real agenda behind Telegraph's abortion investigation » Oliver Conner posted on The real agenda behind Telegraph's abortion investigation » Ferret Dave posted on Workfare - what does the evidence show? » Nick H. posted on Workfare - what does the evidence show? » pjt posted on The real agenda behind Telegraph's abortion investigation |
