“Milburn-work-shy young need tough love”
Will that solve the neets problem?
He states in The Times 12 September that: “Britain needs to take a tough love approach to young people who are on benefits by giving them greater employment support in exchange for a new “duty to engage”.
This is typical Labour stupidity. They create a problem which then needs a massive bureaucracy to fix. This further increases the size of the state and as an attractive by-product also increases the number of unionised employees. Ahhh! Socialist bliss.
How do they create the problem? By their newly introduced policies of tax and minimum wage increases and punishing new labour laws.
What is the logical outcome? How did they think that employers would react? A direct consequence is the destruction of about 100,000 new jobs in the hospitality and retail sectors, which are key entry points as first jobs for many youngsters.
And what did they think that youngsters are supposed to do? If they were unionised it would be easy, union thugs would picket hotels, restaurants and retailers and force their recruitment.
But they aren’t unionised, and they have no professional experience so they are the mercy of whatever is available, and the most readily and easily obtained source of income is PIPs.
And since PIP benefits require minimum verification, what person in their right mind would refuse an offer up to £194.60 per week (daily living plus mobility, enhanced rate). So they join the neets brigade which, because of its attractions, is increasing by seven thousand claimants per week.
Starmer tried-feebly to reform benefits
But in one of his characteristic u-turns retreated when faced with a backbench rebellion. Now, with a new prime minister a change may be possible. But initial indications are not promising.
Instead of eliminating these idiotic policies, Labour reverts to historic form, by stating that punishment (“duty to engage”) is needed to get perfectly normal sane people to get a job, when 49% of PIP claimants have expressed a willingness to work, if their condition improves.
But Labour doesn’t understand the concept of on-the-job training
It has to be organised by the state. Of course, skills are important but they vary by job and academic preparation is not always useful. This is why the loss of retail and hospitality jobs is so regrettable. Youngsters don’t need organised state nannying, they need a greater availability of jobs, and their creation must come first.
But this fact causes serious indigestion among Labour policy makers. Labour has a duty to run the country responsibly. These are not responsible policies.
So why does Labour implement them?
There are two reasons and they are so profoundly embedded in Labour’s consciousness that they have assumed the status of religious icons.
1. Labour is hobbled by its class-warfare history and does not have the guts to reduce benefit entitlements.
2. Labour cannot shake off its Marxist legacy by admitting that job creation by the private sector is a good thing.
These policies show not only that Labour doesn’t understand how modern economies function but also doesn’t understand basic human psychology.
