Benefits Proposal

1. The maximum amount of benefit should never exceed 55% percent the average National salary which is currently approx 26K (pre tax) apart from incapacity benefit which would be a top up (means tested ) and child benefit but this would be capped.

2. Child benefit should not all be cash but should include vouchers for School clothes and School dinners.

3. People should be able work for up to 20 hours per week to top up their benefit without fear of losing it completely , which would not only add money and tax into the economy but would also help in training people and getting them off benefit completely.

4. People should be offered subisded public transport to assist them when working or looking for work.

5. Benefits should be dreased over a period of time at intervals so the incentive is to contine working.

6. Housing benefit should also only be for a period of time and then it's incorpated in to the main benefits so people don't just assume their given right for free housing for the rest of their lives.

7. People moving from 20 hours per week to full time employment would get a lump sum …to help with the transition of coming off benefits. They would still recieve subsided public transport for a given time.

8. People on benefits not actively looking for jobs, going for interivews and not taking jobs without a good reason would have benefits penalised for a period of time.

9. Child Benefit should only cover the first 3 children up to the age of 13. Any more kids thereafter should be the parents responsibilty.

10. Immigrants should only be entitled to the basic benefit and not as much as fully fledged citizens but ideally I would like us to follow our European neighbours whereby you can't claim them for 6 months. In Return ,they should be given temporary NI Cards and allowed to work until their application is processed.

Why is this idea important?

1. The maximum amount of benefit should never exceed 55% percent the average National salary which is currently approx 26K (pre tax) apart from incapacity benefit which would be a top up (means tested ) and child benefit but this would be capped.

2. Child benefit should not all be cash but should include vouchers for School clothes and School dinners.

3. People should be able work for up to 20 hours per week to top up their benefit without fear of losing it completely , which would not only add money and tax into the economy but would also help in training people and getting them off benefit completely.

4. People should be offered subisded public transport to assist them when working or looking for work.

5. Benefits should be dreased over a period of time at intervals so the incentive is to contine working.

6. Housing benefit should also only be for a period of time and then it's incorpated in to the main benefits so people don't just assume their given right for free housing for the rest of their lives.

7. People moving from 20 hours per week to full time employment would get a lump sum …to help with the transition of coming off benefits. They would still recieve subsided public transport for a given time.

8. People on benefits not actively looking for jobs, going for interivews and not taking jobs without a good reason would have benefits penalised for a period of time.

9. Child Benefit should only cover the first 3 children up to the age of 13. Any more kids thereafter should be the parents responsibilty.

10. Immigrants should only be entitled to the basic benefit and not as much as fully fledged citizens but ideally I would like us to follow our European neighbours whereby you can't claim them for 6 months. In Return ,they should be given temporary NI Cards and allowed to work until their application is processed.

is the dole fair?

A person who lives near me, is on the dole and the housing pay £700 a month so the person can live on a nice private housing estate. there is lots of space on the social housing estate across the road. Also the person can afford to run a nice new car. when i go to work the person is still in bed.

How is this fair?  also there is no incentive for the person to go to work if you can get what you want on the social.

I would like to see all people on the dole in social housing only.

Why is this idea important?

A person who lives near me, is on the dole and the housing pay £700 a month so the person can live on a nice private housing estate. there is lots of space on the social housing estate across the road. Also the person can afford to run a nice new car. when i go to work the person is still in bed.

How is this fair?  also there is no incentive for the person to go to work if you can get what you want on the social.

I would like to see all people on the dole in social housing only.

Benefits shouldn’t be a LifeStyle Choice

There are currently about 50 different types of benefits people can claim. The current system is so flawed and open to abuse that the people who really need it , don't get enough and the people who don't , play the system and get more.

In alot of cases, The average family living on benefits has more disposable per month than the average working person. They also get housing, no council tax and all the other goodies thrown in.

My proposal :

1 – There should be a cap on the maximum amount any person can claim.

2 – Anyone claiming benefit must do x number of hours per week community work to get the entitlement. Alternatively , they can attend apprentership classes in order to claim it. No turn up…no money.

3 – When going for interviews , use Feedback from potential employers to see whether the applicant was genuine in trying to get a job or being rude so they don't get the job and stay on benefits. This can help determine whether their benefit should be cut.

4 – Having more kids shouldn't be a god given right for a bigger house and more money. If you can't afford kids, then don't have them. Why should the tax payer always pick up your bill !.

5 –  Child Benefit should either be for the first 2 kids only or only up until the age of 13.

6 – We should create zones because Job Seekers allowance would be more needed in areas where there is genuinely no work and more help should be given to the people here to find jobs. People in bad zones whereby there is no jobs, should get the help more than those in areas where the jobs are there, but people just wont do them.

7, In good zones – Job seekers allowance should be cut after a period of time extending to nothing at all if the applicant is blatantly not looking for work. 

8 – I was pleased to see the tax threashold go up but I think it needs to be more like 12K tax free or people just won't come off benefits.

 

 

 

Why is this idea important?

There are currently about 50 different types of benefits people can claim. The current system is so flawed and open to abuse that the people who really need it , don't get enough and the people who don't , play the system and get more.

In alot of cases, The average family living on benefits has more disposable per month than the average working person. They also get housing, no council tax and all the other goodies thrown in.

My proposal :

1 – There should be a cap on the maximum amount any person can claim.

2 – Anyone claiming benefit must do x number of hours per week community work to get the entitlement. Alternatively , they can attend apprentership classes in order to claim it. No turn up…no money.

3 – When going for interviews , use Feedback from potential employers to see whether the applicant was genuine in trying to get a job or being rude so they don't get the job and stay on benefits. This can help determine whether their benefit should be cut.

4 – Having more kids shouldn't be a god given right for a bigger house and more money. If you can't afford kids, then don't have them. Why should the tax payer always pick up your bill !.

5 –  Child Benefit should either be for the first 2 kids only or only up until the age of 13.

6 – We should create zones because Job Seekers allowance would be more needed in areas where there is genuinely no work and more help should be given to the people here to find jobs. People in bad zones whereby there is no jobs, should get the help more than those in areas where the jobs are there, but people just wont do them.

7, In good zones – Job seekers allowance should be cut after a period of time extending to nothing at all if the applicant is blatantly not looking for work. 

8 – I was pleased to see the tax threashold go up but I think it needs to be more like 12K tax free or people just won't come off benefits.

 

 

 

benefit reform of carers allowance.

There is a regulation which I believe should be repealed.

Currently there is no right of appeal in respect to change your pay week-ending day or the change from weekly to fortnightly payments for benefit payments.

This is due to (regulations 20-24) of the Social Security (Claims and Payments) Regulations 1987 and paragraph 5(j) of Schedule 2 to the Social Security and Child Support (Decisions and Appeals) Regulations 1999.

This is not to create even more chaos into the benefit system, but rather to assist carers who have had their income support element of their benefits changed this week without consultation.

Anyone who is a carer ought to be able to stay on weekly payments, even better have both parts of their benefit paid on the same day to assist them.

The above regulation prevents this, it is grossly unfair – giving some carers £5.95 for 8 days to live on. The above regulation prevents an appeal and should, in itself, be repealed.

Thank you

 

 

Why is this idea important?

There is a regulation which I believe should be repealed.

Currently there is no right of appeal in respect to change your pay week-ending day or the change from weekly to fortnightly payments for benefit payments.

This is due to (regulations 20-24) of the Social Security (Claims and Payments) Regulations 1987 and paragraph 5(j) of Schedule 2 to the Social Security and Child Support (Decisions and Appeals) Regulations 1999.

This is not to create even more chaos into the benefit system, but rather to assist carers who have had their income support element of their benefits changed this week without consultation.

Anyone who is a carer ought to be able to stay on weekly payments, even better have both parts of their benefit paid on the same day to assist them.

The above regulation prevents this, it is grossly unfair – giving some carers £5.95 for 8 days to live on. The above regulation prevents an appeal and should, in itself, be repealed.

Thank you

 

 

Stiffer Sentences for Benefit Fraud

Commit benefit fraud and you will go to Prision and you will lose benefits to help pay for it back.

Time and time again we read in the press about people commiting this in quite large amounts only to get a let off with a suspended prision sentence or community service and then not lose their all their benefits to pay for it.

Whilst they may have a nominal amount cut to pay it back, it's normally so low that it doesn't even make dent in their vast weekly claims anyway so the money is never recovered.

The signal currently being sent out , is that Fraud pays. Do it on a large enough scale and the punishment is  well worth the crime.. !!!..

I would like to see :

1 -A much higher proportion of benefit cut to recover the money.

2 – Custodial sentences for larger amounts of fraud.

3 – People claiming asylum who commit doing benefit fraud to be automatically deported and lose their right to claim. 

 

Why is this idea important?

Commit benefit fraud and you will go to Prision and you will lose benefits to help pay for it back.

Time and time again we read in the press about people commiting this in quite large amounts only to get a let off with a suspended prision sentence or community service and then not lose their all their benefits to pay for it.

Whilst they may have a nominal amount cut to pay it back, it's normally so low that it doesn't even make dent in their vast weekly claims anyway so the money is never recovered.

The signal currently being sent out , is that Fraud pays. Do it on a large enough scale and the punishment is  well worth the crime.. !!!..

I would like to see :

1 -A much higher proportion of benefit cut to recover the money.

2 – Custodial sentences for larger amounts of fraud.

3 – People claiming asylum who commit doing benefit fraud to be automatically deported and lose their right to claim. 

 

Enable Home Businesses

I'll use myself as an example. I care for my quadriplegic partner, who needs constant attendance, so I am completely unable to work outside the home. While I've been at home, alongside learning physiotherapy and advanced form-filling, I have tried to develop useful skills for my circumstances; through volunteering online I have learnt web and software development, video editing and postproduction, graphic design, and documentation skills: all things I can do from home while still doing a good job as a carer. (I want to be clear: I don't think carers are all able or should be forced to work from home, but I would personally like to as I have a cognitive surplus going on here.)

But it's impossible to start a small home business because I cannot immediately replace the support my partner needs, and the bureaucracy is so inflexible. I care for my partner unsupported 22 hours a day, but if I start a business I would immediately have to pay care and equipment costs for the small amount of help I do get. This, combined with the loss of Carer's Allowance, Council Tax and Housing Benefit means I can never realistically earn escape velocity.

While I, as a fit and healthy 27 year old, could easily eat ramen and wear an extra jumper for 18 months to startup, my partner is too ill to undergo further privation. Similarly, we cannot lose this adapted accommodation as there is no accessible alternative. So I can't take the risk because it's not my risk to take.

If Carer's Allowance was made a real payment made on the basis of how much caring work you do, rather than how much other work you don't do, or if the earning restriction was raised to the average national wage instead of £5,200 per year, it could be a really enabling benefit.

If severely disabled people could claim housing costs independently from their partners it would reduce the risk of working. (Even better if severely disabled people could get access to adapted social housing or were permitted to save money for a deposit on an adapted/adaptable property, but obviously that's a pipe dream.)

If people stuck at home due to caring responsibilities were given 18 months to get a home business going before the disabled partner lost entitlements and exemptions (like Council Tax,  Adult Social Care costs and the disabled person's Income Support, though obviously not my own) I could take the risk. This allowance would cost the state NO money.

To summarise:

Pay Carer's Allowance on basis of work done instead of work not done and/or means test it at national average wage.

Encourage home businesses by continuing exemptions for the first 18 months.

Guarantee housing support for people with special housing needs without condemning their entire household to welfare limbo.

Why is this idea important?

I'll use myself as an example. I care for my quadriplegic partner, who needs constant attendance, so I am completely unable to work outside the home. While I've been at home, alongside learning physiotherapy and advanced form-filling, I have tried to develop useful skills for my circumstances; through volunteering online I have learnt web and software development, video editing and postproduction, graphic design, and documentation skills: all things I can do from home while still doing a good job as a carer. (I want to be clear: I don't think carers are all able or should be forced to work from home, but I would personally like to as I have a cognitive surplus going on here.)

But it's impossible to start a small home business because I cannot immediately replace the support my partner needs, and the bureaucracy is so inflexible. I care for my partner unsupported 22 hours a day, but if I start a business I would immediately have to pay care and equipment costs for the small amount of help I do get. This, combined with the loss of Carer's Allowance, Council Tax and Housing Benefit means I can never realistically earn escape velocity.

While I, as a fit and healthy 27 year old, could easily eat ramen and wear an extra jumper for 18 months to startup, my partner is too ill to undergo further privation. Similarly, we cannot lose this adapted accommodation as there is no accessible alternative. So I can't take the risk because it's not my risk to take.

If Carer's Allowance was made a real payment made on the basis of how much caring work you do, rather than how much other work you don't do, or if the earning restriction was raised to the average national wage instead of £5,200 per year, it could be a really enabling benefit.

If severely disabled people could claim housing costs independently from their partners it would reduce the risk of working. (Even better if severely disabled people could get access to adapted social housing or were permitted to save money for a deposit on an adapted/adaptable property, but obviously that's a pipe dream.)

If people stuck at home due to caring responsibilities were given 18 months to get a home business going before the disabled partner lost entitlements and exemptions (like Council Tax,  Adult Social Care costs and the disabled person's Income Support, though obviously not my own) I could take the risk. This allowance would cost the state NO money.

To summarise:

Pay Carer's Allowance on basis of work done instead of work not done and/or means test it at national average wage.

Encourage home businesses by continuing exemptions for the first 18 months.

Guarantee housing support for people with special housing needs without condemning their entire household to welfare limbo.

Right to Benefits

I think if you migrate to the UK from outside the EU for any reason (including asylum), then you should not be able to claim any sort of government benefit (including the use of NHS and council housing) for a minimum of 5 years.  To claim benefits after this period, a check on how much National Insurance has been paid should be completed.  I also believe a full health check, with a government appointed doctor, should be completed as part of the criteria to migrate to the UK.

Why is this idea important?

I think if you migrate to the UK from outside the EU for any reason (including asylum), then you should not be able to claim any sort of government benefit (including the use of NHS and council housing) for a minimum of 5 years.  To claim benefits after this period, a check on how much National Insurance has been paid should be completed.  I also believe a full health check, with a government appointed doctor, should be completed as part of the criteria to migrate to the UK.

Maximum Benefit

No-one on benefits should be able to receive more than 60% of the nett pay for the job which they are seeking.  Ie if they found a job and were working calculate the net pay and work out 60%

Why is this idea important?

No-one on benefits should be able to receive more than 60% of the nett pay for the job which they are seeking.  Ie if they found a job and were working calculate the net pay and work out 60%

Housing, Benefits & Jobs

Having had the misfortune of being made redundant through ill health last November and also being made homeless for part of this year, I have had to hunt high and low for somewhere to live and it has been far from being easy!

The biggest problem with being unemployed, is the simple fact that a great many landlords do not accept DSS tenants. Look at most adverts for property that is available to rent and you will see the words NO DSS attached to the end of the advert. 

Having researched the problem myself, I have discovered that there is a serious level of discrimination towards those who are unfortunate enough to have lost their jobs through no fault of their own.

Your government may be looking to cut benefits in order to reduce the national debt, but for someone like myself who is desperate to get back in to work and also done their damned hardest to get off the street, benefits are vital until new employment can be found. By councils delaying benefits or constantly messing people around, they are adding even more stress to what is already a difficult time.

Yes, the benefits system needs a re-think and yes, there are people who abuse it, but there are a hell of a lot of people who need it, that are struggling to survive! 

I am on Job Seekers Allowance of £65 per week. £7.65 per week  is deducted from that because I had no choice except to apply for a Social Fund Loan in order to be able to get the house I am now living in. This leaves me with just over £57 a week to survive on. Once I pay for electric, gas and food, I am left with virtually nothing. I do not own a television and even if I did, I would not be able to afford a licence! I have no car, and yet again if I did, I could not afford to run it! 

What I am asking is that the government start to look at the reasons why the people on DSS are struggling to find employment…. is it because of a lack of jobs? A lack of skills? There could be any number of reasons. 

In my particular case, I was made redundant through ill health last year, since making a recovery, I have applied for over 180 jobs since March this year. Out of the 180 jobs I have applied for, I have had exactly 8 letters telling me I was not suitable for the position or was not qualified enough and I have been asked to one (1) interview! The rest I have not heard anything from! So as a part of looking at the reasons why people are struggling to find employment, look at the jobs which are being advertised! 

I have been registered with Jobs Today, Monster and several other websites. Since registering, I have checked them daily and all I see is a repeat of the same adverts by the same companies with very little difference elsewhere. Many of these companies when you read their adverts often talk about career prospects within the company and how you can advance through the ranks. If this is the case, how come so many of the companies advertising these claims of fabulous career prospects are advertising elsewhere…why are they not promoting their current staff to the managerial jobs which dominate the Jobs website pages and replacing the staff who are promoted?

Why is this idea important?

Having had the misfortune of being made redundant through ill health last November and also being made homeless for part of this year, I have had to hunt high and low for somewhere to live and it has been far from being easy!

The biggest problem with being unemployed, is the simple fact that a great many landlords do not accept DSS tenants. Look at most adverts for property that is available to rent and you will see the words NO DSS attached to the end of the advert. 

Having researched the problem myself, I have discovered that there is a serious level of discrimination towards those who are unfortunate enough to have lost their jobs through no fault of their own.

Your government may be looking to cut benefits in order to reduce the national debt, but for someone like myself who is desperate to get back in to work and also done their damned hardest to get off the street, benefits are vital until new employment can be found. By councils delaying benefits or constantly messing people around, they are adding even more stress to what is already a difficult time.

Yes, the benefits system needs a re-think and yes, there are people who abuse it, but there are a hell of a lot of people who need it, that are struggling to survive! 

I am on Job Seekers Allowance of £65 per week. £7.65 per week  is deducted from that because I had no choice except to apply for a Social Fund Loan in order to be able to get the house I am now living in. This leaves me with just over £57 a week to survive on. Once I pay for electric, gas and food, I am left with virtually nothing. I do not own a television and even if I did, I would not be able to afford a licence! I have no car, and yet again if I did, I could not afford to run it! 

What I am asking is that the government start to look at the reasons why the people on DSS are struggling to find employment…. is it because of a lack of jobs? A lack of skills? There could be any number of reasons. 

In my particular case, I was made redundant through ill health last year, since making a recovery, I have applied for over 180 jobs since March this year. Out of the 180 jobs I have applied for, I have had exactly 8 letters telling me I was not suitable for the position or was not qualified enough and I have been asked to one (1) interview! The rest I have not heard anything from! So as a part of looking at the reasons why people are struggling to find employment, look at the jobs which are being advertised! 

I have been registered with Jobs Today, Monster and several other websites. Since registering, I have checked them daily and all I see is a repeat of the same adverts by the same companies with very little difference elsewhere. Many of these companies when you read their adverts often talk about career prospects within the company and how you can advance through the ranks. If this is the case, how come so many of the companies advertising these claims of fabulous career prospects are advertising elsewhere…why are they not promoting their current staff to the managerial jobs which dominate the Jobs website pages and replacing the staff who are promoted?

Employment often makes a benefit claimant less well off and the benefits system reinforces this through poor incentives.

Solution:
Raise the archaic and out-of-date allowance a benefit claimant is allowed to earn before benefits are affected, fro £5-00 a week to a quid-pro-quo deal where every £2-00 earned results in £1-00 deducted fro JSA (housing benefit and hence home security, is not affected). Available to job-seekers who are prepared to take part-time low paid work , less than 20 hours a week.

Why is this idea important?

Solution:
Raise the archaic and out-of-date allowance a benefit claimant is allowed to earn before benefits are affected, fro £5-00 a week to a quid-pro-quo deal where every £2-00 earned results in £1-00 deducted fro JSA (housing benefit and hence home security, is not affected). Available to job-seekers who are prepared to take part-time low paid work , less than 20 hours a week.

Reform the Benefits System

Combine Housing and Council Tax Benefits with Job Seeker's Allowance.

Reduce JSA by 50p for every £1 earned.

Require at least half of all housing stock built over the next decade to be social housing, and give Housing Associations the right to compulsory purchase of any property suitable for social housing which has stood empty for six months or more.

Why is this idea important?

Combine Housing and Council Tax Benefits with Job Seeker's Allowance.

Reduce JSA by 50p for every £1 earned.

Require at least half of all housing stock built over the next decade to be social housing, and give Housing Associations the right to compulsory purchase of any property suitable for social housing which has stood empty for six months or more.