Actually, in my two bouts of unemployment over the last 5 years (in two different towns on opposite sides of the country), the way we were treated was a hell of a lot better than I ever remember it being in the 80s or 90s under the Tories. Labour actually *did* do some good stuff while they were in, and the (partial) un-dehumanisation (re-humanisation?) of the UB/JSA process was one of them. But when I hear DC and co. talking about overhauling the benefits system and "making people work who can work", I realise that the Tories are still clinging to their cozy delusion that the only way so many people could possibly be out of work at once is because most of 'em are lazy. =>:o{
Please God Cleggers and co. will be able to reign them in a bit.
I wonder if there are any MPs, in teh current crop who have ever actually experienced long-term (i.e. over a year) unemployment, *without* the convenient safety nets of personal savings and wealthy family/friends...?
I doubt it. If for no other reason than that this is exactly the way we treat trusted employees in very large firms even when said firms are in profit and not digging big holes of indebtedness the way the government is.
Rest of rant redacted because I'm preaching to the converted.
No, but I think what it's admitting is equally damning.
As Lissa says, pretty much *everyone* else in businessland is expected to both prove their expenses and minimise them, so I don't see anything "uncivilised" in expecting benefit claimants to do the same (which isn't to say there isn't much other lack of civilisation in there somewhere else).
No, the damning point is that the only reason MPs have been made to do this now is that THEY SHOWED THEY COULDN'T BE TRUSTED TO BE HONEST. So what this MP is clearly thinking is that people are only treated like this when they're dishonest, just like (he/she obviously thinks) benefit claimants are...
As a recent benefit claimant who has used the system to claim back money for travel expenses, I don't see what they're complaining about. If public tranport is not reasonable, I was allowed to claim mileage, they worked it all out for me - no problem. It's exactly the same as claiming expenses when working for anyone: submit a receipt, only claim reasonable things, money comes back.
Meanwhile, here in the great white north, our auditor general wants to audit the expenses of our federal MPs. The MPs have said absolutely not. Our dear PM has said the government has no law that would require the MPs to relinquish such information to the AG. Transparent accountable responsible government, not.
Comments 9
Reply
Please God Cleggers and co. will be able to reign them in a bit.
I wonder if there are any MPs, in teh current crop who have ever actually experienced long-term (i.e. over a year) unemployment, *without* the convenient safety nets of personal savings and wealthy family/friends...?
Reply
Rest of rant redacted because I'm preaching to the converted.
Reply
As Lissa says, pretty much *everyone* else in businessland is expected to both prove their expenses and minimise them, so I don't see anything "uncivilised" in expecting benefit claimants to do the same (which isn't to say there isn't much other lack of civilisation in there somewhere else).
No, the damning point is that the only reason MPs have been made to do this now is that THEY SHOWED THEY COULDN'T BE TRUSTED TO BE HONEST. So what this MP is clearly thinking is that people are only treated like this when they're dishonest, just like (he/she obviously thinks) benefit claimants are...
Reply
Even worse.
I was also not entirely surprised to read that most of the complainants are the older MPs.
*sigh*
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment