Surviving on a shoestring? Stuck in the benefits trap? Why not share your experiences with the world

From our experience, the assumption that people living on benefits don’t want to work simply isn’t true. We know that trying to survive on a very low income in the UK is a tricky business. Which is why we are working with OXFAM to find people who would be willing to share their experiences and frustrations on what it’s really like trying to survive in the system.

We’d like to hear from women and men who’d be up for taking part in a blog to record your experiences, tips and ideas as the Government makes decisions that affect your lives. We also want people who are happy to talk to the media. We think it’s time that the public and politicians see what it’s really like to survive in Britain today.

If you are struggling with the system, whether in work or on JSA, receiving housing benefit, incapacity benefits, are a single parent finding it hard to get by or have recently lost your job and can commit to volunteering with us as a blogger for the next few months, please send an email to sdransfield@oxfam.org.uk

Dynamic Meetings and Benefit Blogging

On Monday I met with Deven Ghelani (Centre for Social Justice) and Chris Goulden (Joseph Rowntree Foundation), to talk about the Community Allowance and the Dynamic Benefits report. For years the CREATE Consortium has campaigned against the benefit trap and for a community solution to unemployment.  The current benefit system acts a trap – stopping people from working and creating serious financial penalties for anyone on benefits who takes on a job for under 16 hours (you earn a pound….you lose a pound). The Dynamic Benefits report from Ian Duncan Smith’s think tank – sets out a new approach – recognising the need to let people take up work opportunities for under 16 hours without making people worse off. The main objection to these plans has historically come from the Treasury and if you believe the reports in the papers the argument is still ongoing….

However, at Monday’s meeting I decided to be optimistic: IDS is going to win the argument on earning disregards – so that people can take up part-time jobs or flexible job opportunities – without risking being unable to buy food or pay the rent because our benefit system is so broken.

As we talked about the current consultation on Welfare Reform – 21^st Century Welfare, I raised the importance of the links between people and the places they live. If we don’t recognise the high concentrations of unemployment and what this does to local communities, we miss out on an important part of the problem and the solution. We need to make sure that the current consultation on benefits and decisions on The Work Programme take into account the importance of understanding the “community dimension” and seeks to involve local people and communities in shaping one of the largest areas of Government spending – benefits and employment support programmes.

So how do we make sure that the people with the most knowledge of the benefit system and employment support – the people with direct experience are involved? We are going to be working with Oxfam to highlight people’s real experiences and we are also looking for people who are interested in becoming a benefit blogger – if you want to know more email me at L.winterburn@dta.org.uk

And for those people who like responding to consultations please remember the Community Allowance in your submission

Best wishes

Louise

Inspirational project asks PM for the Community Allowance

In my last few blogs I have written about the need to make sure community ideas and solutions are heard when discussing changes to the benefit system and employment training programmes. Well yesterday, thanks to St Peter’s Partnership, David Cameron heard how one community organisation is working with its local community to support people back into work and why the Community Allowance is needed.

On a day that was dominated by talk of “cracking down on benefit cheats”, David Cameron also went to visit St Peter’s Partnership and saw the amazing work they do to support people back into work and the commitment of the unemployed people involved. St Peter’s Partnership was originally set up by a group of local residents and is a vibrant community organisation offering a wide range of community programmes. Mr Cameron met with the Greenscape Team, one of St Peter’s social enterprises delivering landscaping and gardening services plus training and employment for local unemployed people. He also heard why we need the Community Allowance – being able to offer the Community Allowance would enable St Peter’s Partnership to work more flexibly and increase the impact of their programmes for the wider community. David Cameron described the work done by St Peter’s Partnership as “inspirational”. In acknowledging their expertise and hearing directly from unemployed people, lets hope he takes away the need to let community organisations offer the Community Allowance and how committed most unemployed people are to finding work.

With St Peter’s Partnership doing such a great job of explaining to the Prime Minister why we need the Community Allowance, I have responded to two consultations the government has set up to capture ideas:

• DWP’s are currently asking for “Your Thoughts” on The Work Programme. The current consultation ends this Friday. I responded to their “How to cut costs” question by saying that DWP should not only think about saving money but seek to maximize the impact of the billions they spend on benefits and employment support programme. Multiplying the benefit of The Work Programme for unemployed people, the communities they live in and the taxpayer. I stressed the importance of working with unemployed people and community organisations to develop effective programmes that really meet the need.
• The Treasury’s Spending Challenge asks for your ideas on how to ”get more for less”. Last chance to comment tomorrow! I highlighted the importance of ensuring that opportunities are not lost to maximize the impact of any government spending. In a time of spending cuts we have to make sure that where the government is spending money we ensure that we multiple the impact of it. I suggested that this assumption should be built into their procurement process, with models such as the Community Allowance that will multiple the impact of any spending given priority (For every £1 invested in the Community Allowance, over £10 of social capital is created)

The feedback forms are really easy and quick – so why not let the government know what you think?

Best wishes

Louise

From Black Boxes to Big Society

Over the last few weeks I haven’t had chance to update my blog – like most people working in community or welfare to work organisations, I have been racing to keep up with the pace of change. I thought I would use this blog to give you a whistle-stop tour of the latest developments….  

The Work Programme

All innovation within the delivery of welfare to work services is now expected to come from within The Work Programme. Providers have been told they can adapt a “Black Box” approach to delivery. Over the last few weeks I have been talking to providers such as SERCO, about their “Black Box” and the potential contribution the Community Allowance could make. The initial response has been very positive with providers keen to hear more about how they can work with local community organisations to offer new jobs, integrated with wraparound training and support. We are keen to explore the potential for this joint working and to identify the right partners to work with.

The Welfare Reform Bill

I have just started working on our response to the consultation paper and will be sharing it with you soon. The proposals on earning disregards (the ability to work while on benefits and keep earnings below a ceiling) are still vague – no figures yet – but they have the potential to enable the Community Allowance to be offered to everyone on benefits. Finally, we may see the end of the 16 hours rule and the bizarre situation we have now that effectively bars people from taking any work under 16 hours. The proposed approach to tapering the earning disregards also mirrors the Community Allowance’s approach of progressively increasing the number of hours people work – protecting people as they start to work.

Big Society

The Community Allowance approach was developed from the first hand experience of local community organisations. A simple but powerful tool that makes a productive link between the most substantial public spending in poor neigbourhoods (billions in welfare payments) and the abilities of those neigbourhoods to liberate themselves from poverty and poor services. The Community Allowance gives communities new resources and ways of working, enabling them to develop local solutions to improve and regenerate their communities. All the jobs created by the Community Allowance are the ones that are fundamental to making and sustaining communities – the caring, sharing, supportive, cleaning, greening, keeping-safe, checking-over, sorting-out, neigbourhood managing, wardens, lollipop ladies, befriending, youth work, sports and social health living, conflict-resolving and care-taking roles.

I have written to Ministers and senior civil servants about the Community Allowance. We have been very fortunate that Ministers have also heard about the Community Allowance directly from a number of our supporters including the DTA and ACEVO. We are planning a number of events over the next few months to raise awareness and support for the Community Allowance from fringe meetings at the Party Conferences to working with our 100’s of supporters. We are also working closely with OXFAM, who have adopted the Community Allowance as a key campaign against poverty.

I have recently updated our website to reflect the changes being planned by the government – so if you haven’t visited our site for a while – please have a look and let me know what you think.

If you are interested in hearing more about our work, please do not hesitate to contact me

Best wishes

Louise

Responsibility, freedom and fairness?

The Emergency Budget reinforces the importance of ensuring that the voices of the people and communities affected by changes to the benefits system and communities solutions to the “tough choices” ahead, are heard.

We welcome the Chancellor’s commitment to make work pay – we have long campaigned on the the impact of the benefit trap. We are also looking forward to further proposals in the autumn to ensure that the benefit system becomes a “tool to support work”, rather then trapping people, while also supporting the most vulnerable.

The emergency budget provides more information on the challenges ahead with large cuts in the Welfare Budget, the speeding up of reassessment of Incapacity Benefit claimants and changes focusing on lone parents. Currently lone parents  get income support until their youngest child reaches 10. Once their child is 10 they have to start looking for employment in order to claim jobseekers’ allowance. Lone parents will now be expected to look for work once their youngest child goes to school.The government estimate that up to 15,000 lone parents could move into employment with these changes. Many will have been out of the labour market for a long time and will need support, advice, training and real work experience to successfully enter the world of work. If the context of  responsibility and fairness, we need a clear message from the government about how it will ensure that the right level of support will be provided for all these new jobseekers, especially as many organisations including Joseph Rowntree Foundation have raised serious concerns about the impact of the budget on people in poverty.

The coming weeks and months will be critical in ensuring that the development of The Work Programme and the wider welfare reform debate, includes community solutions at the heart of the government’s approach. We know communities can develop their own tools – including stepping stones to employment – if given the opportunity. Now we just need to make sure that when the government talks about responsibility, freedom and fairness that community organisations are able to share their experiences. If you would like to find out more or to add your support please visit our website.

Cameron’s difficult decisions

Prime Minister David Cameron’s speech today, warned of “difficult decisions” on pay, pensions and benefits as he set out the case for “painful” cuts ahead. He said dealing with the deficit would be “unavoidably tough” and affect “our whole way of life”. While no new details were given on what will be cut, we were offered some reassurance that he would not cut the deficit “in a way that hurts those we most need to help”.

The Department for Work and Pensions spent £87 billon on benefits last year. For many deprived areas spending on benefits payments and welfare to work programmes is the largest public investment they receive, yet has limited positive impact. It is clear that there are going to be fundamental changes to the benefit system as proposed by the Welfare Reform Bill and more support for local councils and communities to develop solutions to local issues, in the Decentralisation and Localism Bill.

Yet we know that any discussions about making the benefit system “fairer and simpler” or giving communities more power, take place against a backdrop of large scale cuts. If we are to ensure that policy discussions are not simply dominated by calls for cuts in benefit payments and sanctions, we need to make sure that positive approaches that do give power back to communities – such as the Community Allowance – are known about and understood. Developed by local community organisations and people on benefits, the Community Allowance enables people on benefits to be paid to work in their local community – a step up into employment for people on benefit and a step up for local communities.

Last week we wrote to Ministers responsible for the Welfare Reform Bill and the Decentralisation and Localism Bill asking for meetings to discuss the Community Allowance. Both these Bills provide an important opportunity to radically change the benefit system and the role of people on benefits in transforming their local communities. The Community Allowance is supported by over 300 individuals and 100 community organisations. We would like to increase the number of people who know about the benefit trap and solutions such as the Community Allowance and need your help – Is your organisation or group signed up as a supporter of the Community Allowance? – Can you help us increase the number of people who know about the benefit trap and the Community Allowance through your website, blog or newsletter? We know that if we want to make sure any “difficult decisions” the government makes includes fair, community owned and developed solutions, we need your help to be heard. Please sign up at our website or email me at L.Winterburn@dta.org.uk

IDS is Smiling in his dream job, will he help us create more dream jobs?

The Independent On Sunday claims that Iain Duncan Smith has the broadest smile in Downing Street this week, having started his dream job of Work and Pensions Secretary. We see his appointment as a real boost for the Community Allowance campaign. His work in developing the Centre for Social Justice and its role in highlighting the benefits trap highlight many areas of  real agreement on the problems with the benefit system and what needs to be changed. The Centre for Social Justice’s report on benefits – Dynamic Benefits: Towards Welfare that Works, also give us some idea of  the approach that IDS may take in the coming months and we have found some things to smile about too.

We have argued strongly that the benefit system should provide a step up for people and not act as a trap. Yet many recent discussions of welfare reform have been dominated by plans to increase compulsion and threats to withdraw benefits for non-compliance. We have demonstrated time and time again that it is the benefit system that is at fault not the people claiming benefits (see this short film if you would like to hear more). The Centre for Social Justice have also concluded  ”For many, the answer to unsustainable welfare bills is to introduce ever tighter rules for receipt of benefits, and to cut generosity for some claimants. However, this approach has never worked. it is not the particular levels and conditions that are at fault, but the structure of the system itself.”

We have also long campaigned for the role of part-time work to be recognised as a positive and valuable opportunity for people currently claiming benefits. We have asked for changes to be made to the earning disregard to enable people to take on part-time jobs and actually be better off. The Dynamic Benefits Report recognises the importance of part-time work and how the current system prevents people taking up job opportunities “For many carers, a low-hours job is all they can take on; and for others an entry-level job represents a stepping stone to higher-earning employment. yet, virtually all initial efforts to work are penalized“. The report recommends a radical change to the earning disregard to support people to take up part-time work.

The Independant on Sunday article also concluded that raising the earning disregard and allowing people to work part-time was a “no-brainer” but was concerned there would be no demand by employers for people who were on benefits. We know that part of the answer lies within local communities where we can offer  part-time jobs with training and support but also make a real difference to the local community – by ensuring the jobs have a local benefit, making a real difference to local community and to the tax payer  - as every £1 spent on the Community Allowance results in £10 worth of social value being created.  We estimated that at least 80 part-time jobs could be created in every neighbourhood through a Community Allowance – providing stepping stones on the pathway to work for thousands of benefits claimants across the country. Over 100 local community organisations have signed up to support the Community Allowance. Over 70 organisations have expressed an interest in being involved in piloted the Community Allowance in their local communities. The Dynamic Benefit Report also recognised the core role that the voluntary sector and local communities can play.

Last week Oxfam thrown its weight behind the campaign for the Community Allowance. We are now writing to IDS to ask for a meeting, hoping his understand of the benefit trap and what can be achieve by local communities will finally enable the benefit system to provide a step up for people and places. To find our more about the Community Allowance  and add your support to the campaign please visit our website at http://www.communityallowance.org/

Guest Blog – Will Hutton

Over the next two or three years unemployment is going to climb to three million, and the likelihood is that it will fall only very slowly afterwards. There is a risk it could rise even higher if the Conservative party is as serious about cutting the budget deficit as quickly and as deeply as it says. Worse unemployment disproportionately hits disadvantaged communities most.

This is a calamity. There is a famous study of what happened in the village of Marienthal, not far from Vienna, when the main factory shut its gates in the depression of the early 1930s. The unemployed  do not tend to take up the violin, read more books, or enjoy quality time with their families. Indeed, researchers found that although people had enough to eat, use of the library dropped by a third, clubs closed down and wives complained that formerly energetic men took extraordinary amounts of time to accomplish simple tasks. People stood on street corners, waiting. Time weighed heavy but people talked to each other less.

The reason, argued the psychologist Marie Jahoda whose 1980s research is still pathbreaking , is  that work provides people with a fundamental “sense of reality”, which can not be obtained through any other activity or institution. Employment of any kind has a number of key benefits. It gives structure to the day; it compels contact and shared experience with others; it demonstrates goals and purpose beyond the individual; it gives status; it forces people to be active. Take those away and people quickly became dysfunctional.

Jahoda returned to her theme in the very different period of high unemployment in the UK during the 1980s. The poverty in question was now relative rather than absolute but she argued that purposelessness loomed as large as ever. The phrases used to describe the feelings were the same: on the scrapheap, useless, not needed by anybody. The loss of work followed by prolonged joblessness entailed a sequence of psychological states – fear and distress, resignation, adaptation, and finally, if unsuccessful in the search for work, blank apathy and withdrawal. The psychological need for work goes deep.

Hard Labour, a paper I recently co-wrote with colleagues from The Work Foundation, sets out today’s evidence  on the health affects of unemployment.

• There is a positive association between mortality and unemployment for all age groups, with suicide increasing within a year of job loss.
• Cardiovascular mortality accelerates after 2 or 3 years, continuing for the next 10–15 years.
• There is an estimated 20 per cent excess risk of death for both men actively seeking work and their wives, with the possibility that this may be higher still in areas of higher unemployment.
• Upon re-employment there appears to be a reversal of these effects. While the direction of causality is difficult to determine unemployment is considered to be a significant cause of psychological distress in itself.
• Studies indicated a positive association between unemployed people and a higher  prevalence of common mental disorders.
• Those with a more negative outlook on life tend to be more damaged by unemployment while those who are unemployed but have more positive and goal-oriented outlooks fare better.

In the light of the unemployment calamity about to hit the country we have to be as flexible and imaginative as we possibly can about engaging people with work any which we way we can – and we must recognise the fears of those on Incapacity Benefit especially who believe that if they show the slightest ability to work it will be understood as a complete ability to work . I strongly support the Community Allowance. It could improve the well-being of hundreds of thousands of people – and improve the look and feel of our communities.

Will Hutton

And they’re off

Just over a week since Gordon Brown called the General Election for 6th May and all three major English political parties have now launched their manifestos. So we thought we’d reflect on the different approaches to welfare reform  each party presents.

First off, Labour and A Future Fair for All. Welfare is up front in the headlines of the ‘tough choices’ that an incoming Labour government would have to make:

“Tough choices on welfare: our reforms will increase fairness and work incentives, including £1.5 billion of savings being delivered.”

Those savings are projected to be made primarily from the transfer of the last remaining 1.5 million people who are still on Incapacity Benefit onto either Job Seekers Allowance (and from there, they hope back into work) or Employment and Support Allowance. The manifesto talks about the ‘tough-but-fair’ Work Capability Assessment that will facilitate this process. Evidence emerging from many disabled people’s charities points to a contrary experience, that it is not fair to those with disabilities who perhaps would most benefit from the support available on the Employment and Support Allowance.

There is a continued commitment to the Future Jobs Fund, a temporary measure designed to provide 6 month paid work experience for unemployed young people. That it is paid work experience is to be welcomed, that it is costing the tax payer £1 billion for such a short term solution to a long term problem is perhaps not.

Worryingly it also states that, “All those who are long term unemployed for two years will be guaranteed a job placement, which they will be required to take up or have their benefits cut.” I imagine people on JSA would be delighted at the prospect of a guarantee of a job if they have endured two years of unemployment. What isn’t clear from the manifesto is if this ‘job placement’ is paid, or whether an individual who has suffered the indignity of long term unemployment is then required to work for their benefit, a policy we wholeheartedly oppose.

What the manifesto lacks, is any commitment to reviewing the benefits system itself. As with all parties that have held office for some time, it’s difficult for Labour to critique a system it has been running for so many years. And yet the benefits system needs a fundamental overhaul, a complete review and redesign to make it fit for the 21st century. This lack of vision on the part of Labour may cost them much needed votes.

And so onto the Tories and their invitation for us to join government.

Unsurprisingly, their manifesto commitments around the benefits system read much like the Labour Party’s. This is because both parties have been advised by Lord Freud, who stopped advising James Purnell MP, former Secretary of State for DWP, to take his plans to the Conservative Party back in February 2009.

What seems out of place with Conservative policy amongst Freud’s plans for welfare reform is the continued commitment to introduce Work for your Benefit, mandatory community work placements for the long term unemployed. Already being piloted by the Labour government, this initiative flies in the face of the Tories’ plans for a Big Society.

Their manifesto states that “The Big Society runs consistently through our policy programme”. If this is the case, why are they planning on punishing the long term unemployed with community work, while simultaneously trying to persuade the rest of us it’s something we should be doing in our spare time?

Community work is a carrot, not a stick and to use it in this punitive manner sends mixed messages the electorate will not warm to.

Perhaps the most disappointing aspect of the Tories’ plans on welfare is the complete absence of much of the excellent work that has been produced by Tory think tanks over recent years. In particular, the Centre for Social Justice‘s Dynamic Benefits report, which unequivocally outlines why the welfare state is broken and must be radically changed and Policy Exchange‘s Escaping the Poverty Trap.

One can only hope that should the Conservatives win the election that Ian Duncan Smith MP is able to assert more influence over the reforms of the welfare state than he has been able to over his party’s manifesto. He seems to be one of the few MPs who in JK Rowling’s words has “taken the trouble to educate themselves about the lives of all kinds of Britons“.

And finally to the Liberal Democrats who launched their manifesto yesterday. Beyond the big headlines about making the tax and benefits system fair for all there is suprisingly little detail from them about how they plan to make the benefits system fairer. They state that, “Labour has created a hugely complex and unfair benefits system, and it needs to be reformed.” It’s somewhat disappointing then, to read on and find no information about how they plan to reform the benefits system.

Is anyone from the Liberal Democrats able to enlighten us? I’d love to know. We agree the benefits system needs to be reformed, but how? Voters are going to be wary of reforms that are unarticulated, even in the broadest of terms in an election manifesto. Please let me know if I’ve missed something.

We can only hope that the pledge to stop people who earn up to £10,000 a year paying any income tax, extends to those on benefits who take part time or sessional work while on benefits. The Centre for Social Justice’s report Dynamic Benefits has said that the current benefit withdrawal rate when someone does take work is akin to between a 75% and 95% tax rate on the poorest in our society.

Hardly the incentive the unemployed need in order to get back into work. And yet in this time of recession, this remains unaddressed by all 3 main English parties in their manifestos.

What are your thoughts on the manifesto commitments on welfare reform so far?

Guest blog from Phillip Blond

Over the last 30 years the Anglo-Saxon world has adopted the most disingenuous of economic systems. Under the guise of capitalism for all, we have produced an extraordinary amount of capital but an ever diminishing number of capitalists. Rather than trickling downwards, wealth has leveraged upwards – denying increasing numbers of people the ability to truly own, trade and prosper.

In 1976, excluding property, the bottom half of the UK population owned 12% of the marketable wealth; by 2003 that had fallen to just 1%. In the same period, the share enjoyed by the top 10% rose from 57% to 71%. Even when property is included, the bottom half of the population still only owns just 7% of the country’s wealth.” David Cameron recognised all of this and spoke at Davos early this year of the need to recapitalise the poor and create a capitalism that works for all. The key political aim of this truly transformative conservatism must be the generation of an asset effect for the decapitalised bottom half of society.

In Britain today, the poorest quarter of the population own less than 1 per cent of the UK’s total assets.  To be poor is not simply to be without income but to be without the assets necessary to have a meaningful stake in our capitalist democracy. Assets determine a person’s ability to plan, to invest and secure a future their choosing.

Assets must, however, come from somewhere, and since redistribution and expenditure via the state has such a poor record in alleviating dependency, a fresh approach is required. Welfare or public expenditure should move from a spending to an investment model. The aim must be to free the poor from welfare subsidy through the generation of asset independence.

I am very interested in the capitalisation of welfare streams. The only real viable source for welfare capitalisation is housing and child benefit. Councils have used their housing stock to generate cash income for benefit dependency for generations. By constantly raising rents, councils have created housing that the working poor cannot afford. Some sort of redress is required – a capital or asset credit, financed by a council bond, should be applied to those whose long-term benefit has, in effect, subsidised council receipts. This credit should be a tradable asset that, when conjoined with other new ventures such as community shares or social investment, can generate an asset effect for those whose routes out of poverty are presently so curtailed.

That’s not fair and it’s not right. It’s now vital that we put wealth back into the hands of the poorest so they can not only lift themselves out of poverty – but keep themselves out too. We won’t do that through the old approaches of shuffling state money around and reinforcing the culture of dependence. Through decentralisation and innovation we can succeed where the old-fashioned top-down bureaucratic approaches have failed.

Create a community right to buy. Allow local community groups to register an interest in a local eyesore or decrepit building, whether privately or publicly owned. For a fair market value, such legislation can allow local social enterprises six months to put together a funding package to turn a liability into an asset for a transformative local business.

There are many other ideas; the scaling up of employee share ownership and the extension of management buyouts to workers and social enterprises. A Community Allowance to bridge the administrative nightmare that is moving from benefits to part-time work. Community share issuance offers the prospect of popularising local ownership; the melding of time banks with equity investment; the conversion of sweat equity into real wealth.

All of the above offer the real opportunity to address the contemporary asset deficit and convert an ideology of ownership into a practised and fully participated reality. The essence of the new Conservatism is the priority of associative relationship; this is the coming political economy of that self-same vision – challenging the class-based nature of our society as never before, it offers a new Tory vision of the British commonwealth.