Middleclass families to adopt a scrounger?

Here’s the latest ConDemned brainwave to force scroungers to work: get middleclass volunteers to sort out trouble families:

It began in December when the prime minister said: “All evidence suggests that it’s no use offering a range of different services to these families – the help they’re offered just falls through the cracks of their chaotic lifestyles. What works is focused, personalised support.” This fits neatly into Cameron’s big society narrative – cut government funding, let amateurs fill the gap, and clap yourself as social deprivation segues into riot. The government has already slashed Connexions, the catch-all advice centre for 13- to 19-year-olds, and abolished the Educational Maintenance Allowance and the Future Jobs Fund, which existed to find jobs for the young. The careers advice service for school-leavers, meanwhile, is now only a memory – and a website. But no matter – an army of Emma Harrisons is waiting.

Emma Harrison is the founder of Action for Employment (A4E), and she is establishing Working Families Everywhere on Cameron’s behalf. You may know her from Channel 4’s The Secret Millionaire, where she gave £50,000 away in front of a TV camera in 2007, after the poor had proved their worthiness for her bounty. The scheme is being piloted in Hull, Blackpool and Kensington & Chelsea, and will roll out in the next four years. Volunteers with no prior experience of social work, creepily renamed “family champions” (FCs), will enter “never-worked” families with drug, crime and child protection issues, and turn them into “working” families. Once polished, these families will inspire others, like a game of Social Democratic dominoes, but backwards. “Family champions are going to stalk the streets, they are going to find the jobs,” says Harrison, who is clearly, like Margaret Thatcher, a Nietzschean. They will get a small wage and priority access to all other services the family is using, and they will be handpicked by Harrison. They may also get badges, but this is not confirmed.

As insanely stupid social initiatives go, this is about average for the coalition. It seems tailor made for trousering yet more money from already existing social programmes to dodgy private firms like erm, Emma Harrison’s A4e while making sure the actual worth of the work these firms do is not easily quantifiable. Money for old rope, in other words.

I would hope therefore that some enterprising journalist asks Harrison the questions Watching A4e would like her to answer:

  1. Has A4e bid for the contracts the DWP is putting out, to use European Social Fund money to pay private companies to run the same scheme that you’re promoting? Are you trying to pre-empt these contracts by getting your scheme up and running first?
  2. You have argued in the past for “super-contracts” in which a private company would run all the services in a local authority area. Is this scheme a step on the way to that?
  3. Given your company’s record of missing targets by some distance in previous welfare-to-work contracts, why do you believe you will be any more successful with this?

The first cut is the deepest

the budgets cuts hit the poor in London hardest

How the cuts in the grants central government provides local councils will be divided over London. It’s the poorest countries (deep red and mainly in the centre on the map above) who get the biggest cuts, the richer outer boroughs being hit relatively lightly. From the Londonist, which also has the raw data for the stat geeks amongst youse.

Social cleansing (1)

How the cap in housing benefits will work out, courtesy of Comment is Free commenter Texaspete82 (original here:

There are four parts to the HB reforms which will all be implemented by October 2011. The key reform – which affects 750,000 people and raises half a billion pounds per year – is the first of these.

1. Local Housing Allowance capped at the 30th percentile rent in every local housing market area (i.e. the level which allows – in theory – 30% of houses in the area to be afforded)…

2. …except in London, where the cap has been set significantly below this level (£250/week for 1 beds, £400/week for 4 beds)

3. A further 10% cut will be applied to those who have been unemployed for 1 year or more, to punish them for the crime of living during a recession

4. Housing Benefit capped at the 4-bed house rate to punish large families

To look at the full impact of this, you need to consult the VOA – the Government Agency responsible for setting Local Housing Allowance rates.

They’ve helpfully provided a table looking at the median rental rates (the current caps) and the 30 percentile rental rates (the future caps) in each local housing market area http://www.voa.gov.uk/lhadirect/Documents/LHA_percentile_rates_Oct_2010.html

Do have a look.

In Central London, the 30th percentile rent for a 4-bed is £850/week. There is no chance of anyone being able to afford to live in central London on housing benefit – the cap is set at less than half of the 30th percentile level. You could consider the poor to be “cleansed” from the area perhaps.

After moving out, they will not be eligible for the £400/week payment – this is only valid in central London remember. Elsewhere the 30th percentile cap applies. Let’s say they move to Outer South London, where their rent would be capped at £299/week. This is not an outragous rent for a 4-bed house – I challenge you to find a 4-bed house at this rate in this area. I live in this area, and I pay £210/week for a very small 2-bed flat in a down-at-heel area (and even then because I got a great deal from moving in when building work was still going on around me, and the landlord had to abandon plans to sell during the recession). Even my flat is £26/week beyond the 2-bed allowance for the area – and I don’t understand where all the 2-bed flats for £800/month are around me. I’m lucky – I have a decently-paid job (for now at least) and don’t claim HB, but it must be a worrying time for families who work in minimum wage jobs and rely on Housing Benefit to make ends meet.

If they lose their job, they have the further challenge of finding a 4-bed property for £270/week (or a 2-bed for £730/month). Not a chance.

And many, many people lose out beyond London too. Let’s imagine a family live in a 5-bed house in Tyneside and both parents lost their jobs in the recession in 2008. They are currently able to claim £207/week housing allowance. After the cap is applied, they are now only able to claim £140/week (£155 minus the £15 penalty for being unemployed). The Government will take £67/week from them. £3,500 taken from the poorest in society, in addition to spending cuts and VAT rises etc etc. This is not sharing the pain fairly is it?

Can you see what the fuss is about now?

The Tories have done a great PR job on getting the focus on the £400/week cap (despite the fact next to no-one will claim this, as it only applies in central London and there are no 4-beds to rent at half the 30th percentile rent) . Maybe a journalist may like to, say, scrutinise the plans and challenge the lies.

As Pete shows that much reported maximum of 400 pounds per week people can recieve in housing benefits is a red herring. There were rents are high enough that you might get it, they’re too high to be of much use, while elsewhere you would recieve a much lower rate still not enough to cover your rent.

QotD: conservatism in bus form – the new fake Routemaster

Alex on Boris Johnson’s new buses:

In conclusion, this is modern conservatism, implemented in hardware, with your taxes. The obsession with PR, spin, and guff in general? Check. The heel-grinding contempt for the poor? Check. The pride in technical and scientific ignorance? Doublecheck. The low, ugly, spiteful obsession with getting one over on political enemies? (It’s of a piece with behaviour like this.) Check.

Read the whole post, it’s the best you’ll read today. The whole sordid anti-bendy buses jihad Boris and his cronies went for means that nobody in the UK can ever make fun of the American rightwing for being incredulous cretins ever again. It’s as daft and vicious an episode as everything they came up with.

Pat Robertson is right



Haiti has been punished for its founding sin over the centuries. But it’s not the earthquake or any other natural disaster that’s the punishment, nor is what ever diseased idea of devil worship this old asshole has dreamt up that’s the sin. The real sin for which Haiti has been punished ever since it was founded, was the simple fact that it was the Black slaves who won their independence for themselves, forming an intolerable beacon of freedom and independence:

By late 1803, to the universal astonishment of contemporary observers, the armies led by Toussaint L’Ouverture and Dessalines had broken the chain of colonial slavery at ‘what had been, in 1789, its strongest link’. [7] Renamed Haiti, the new country celebrated its independence in January 1804. I have argued elsewhere that there have been few other events in modern history whose implications were more threatening to the dominant order: the mere existence of an independent Haiti was a reproach to the slave-trading nations of Europe, a dangerous example to the slave-owning us, and an inspiration for successive African and Latin American liberation movements. [8] Much of Haiti’s subsequent history has been shaped by efforts, both internal and external, to stifle the consequences of this event and to preserve the essential legacy of slavery and colonialism—that spectacularly unjust distribution of labour, wealth and power which has characterized the whole of the island’s post-Columbian history.

Since its independence Haiti has been kept poor through domestic repression supported by foreign interference, which started with having had to pay France restitutionj (!) for the loss of its slave colony, through US supported dictatorship after dictatorship up until the present day, with the UN “peace force” stationed in Haiti since 2004 after the wrong man had been president for too long:

The real goals of the occupation that began on 29 February 2004 are perfectly apparent: to silence or obliterate all that remains of this support. During the first week of their deployment, the Franco-American invasion force operated almost exclusively in pro-Aristide neighbourhoods and killed only fl supporters. Their new puppet Prime Minister Gérard Latortue (a 69-year-old ex-un factotum and Miami talk-show host) publicly embraced the convicted mass-murderer Tatoune and his ex-army rebels in Gonaïves as ‘freedom fighters’—a move interpreted by the New York Times as ‘sending a clear message of stability’. [54] Latortue’s ‘national unity government’ is composed exclusively of members of the traditional elite. On March 14, the Haitian police began arresting Lavalas militants on suspicion of unidentified crimes, but decided not to pursue the rebel death squad leaders, even those already convicted of atrocities. The new National Police chief, Léon Charles, explained that while ‘there’s a lot of Aristide supporters’ to be arrested, the government ‘still has to make a decision about the rebels—that’s over my head’. [55] On March 22 Latortue’s new Interior Minister, the ex-General Hérard Abraham, announced plans to integrate the paramilitaries into the police force and confirmed his intention to re-establish the army which Aristide abolished in 1995. [56] In late March, anti-Aristide death squads continued to control the country’s second largest city, Cap Haïtien, where ‘dozens of bullet-riddled bodies have been brought to the morgue over the last month’. [57] While scores of other Aristide supporters were being killed up and down the country, the us Coast Guard applied Bush’s order, in keeping with usual us practice (but in flagrant violation of international law), to refuse all Haitian applications for asylum in advance.

The Security Council resolution that mandated the invading Franco-American troops as a un Multinational Interim Force on 29 February 2004 called for a follow-up un Stabilization Force to take over three months later. In March, Kofi Annan duly sent his Special Advisor, John Reginald Dumas, and Hocine Medili, to assess the situation on the ground. The ‘Report of the Secretary-General on Haiti’, published in April, took the obfuscatory euphemism of un discourse to new levels. ‘It is unfortunate that, in its bicentennial year, Haiti had to call again on the international community to help it overcome a serious political and security situation’, wrote Annan. The circumstances of the elected President’s overthrow were decorously skirted, the Secretary-General merely noting that: ‘Early on February 29, Mr Aristide left the country’. The toppling of the constitutional government was deemed to offer Haitians the opportunity of ‘a peaceful, democratic and locally-owned future’. [58]

It’s this history of domestic and foreign exploitation and repression that has not only kept Haiti poor, but has so ill prepared it for this earthquake. It costs money to make a city earthquake proof and that money had been stolen from the Haitians years ago. The tens of thousands or more of deaths are the result. But at least both the presidential palace and the UN mission were hit as well.

UPDATE: and of course the earthquake is just another opportunity to exploit the country