Unemployment UK-Welfare Benefits & Job Search: Owen Smith New Shadow Secretery for Work and Pensi...

Unemployment UK-Welfare Benefits & Job Search: Owen Smith New Shadow Secretery for Work and Pensi...: Owen Smith MP as Welsh Secretary He is a clear speaker and appears to be a Down to Earth speaker. With an interest in Low pay even in th...

Child Tax Credit (CTC) and Working Tax Credit (WTC) U.K vote facts and opinion

Child Tax Credit (CTC) and Working Tax Credit (WTC) 

Child Tax Credit (CTC) and Working Tax Credit (WTC) replaced Working Families’ Tax Credit, Disabled Person’s Tax Credit and Children’s Tax Credit in April 2003. CTC brings together income related support for children and for qualifying young people aged 16-19 who are in full time non-advanced education or approved training into a single tax credit, payable to the main carer. Families can claim whether or not the adults are in work.

WTC 

provides in work support for people on low incomes, with or without children. A family will normally be eligible for WTC if it contains one of the following:

• a single person who is responsible for a child or young person and works at least 16 hours a week
• a couple who are responsible for a child or young person, and who jointly work 24 hours or more per week (NB one adult must be working at least 16 hours)
• a person who is receiving or has recently received a qualifying sickness or disability related benefit and has a disability that puts them at a disadvantage of getting a job, and who works at least 16 hours per week
• a person is aged 60 or over and works at least 16 hours per week

If none of the above applies, then a person will still be eligible for WTC if they are aged 25 and over and work 30 hours or more a week. Tax credits are based on household circumstances and can be claimed jointly by members of a couple, or by singles. Entitlement is based on factors such as: age, income, hours worked, number and age of children, childcare costs and disabilities. MPs have backed government plans to cut spending on tax credits in the face of opposition from Labour and the SNP. The Commons approved plans to lower the earnings level above which tax credits are withdrawn from £6,420 to £3,850 and speed up the rate at which the benefit is lost as pay rises by 35 votes. Ministers say the move, estimated to save £4.4bn, is part of wider plans to raise pay and incentivise work.     Tax Credit applies to Working familes But Labour say it is an "ideological attack" on working families. The curbs on tax credits were announced in Chancellor George Osborne's post-election Budget in June. During a 90-minute debate in the Commons, the opposition claimed three million families face losing an average of £1,000 a year from next April. But ministers said the tax credit system had, for too long, been used to subsidise low pay and the changes would bring total expenditure on tax credits back down to more sustainable levels seen in 2007-8. 'Cynical' MPs backed a motion enacting the changes by 325 votes to 290.

Treasury minister Damian Hinds said eight out of 10 households would be better off by 2018-9 as a result of measures announced in the Budget to introduce a national living wage, further increase the personal tax allowance and extend childcare subsidies. "For too long in this country, low pay has been addressed not by genuine reform and driving productivity but by subsidising the tax credit system," he said. "The changes introduced in this order will build on the last parliament's reforms and return real-terms tax credit spending to the level it was in 2007-08 - a decade into the tenure into the government of the Labour Party." But Labour's Seema Malhotra said the changes were being "sneaked through the back door". "This is a political decision made by the chancellor that is set to see over three million families lose an average of £1,000 a year," the shadow Treasury minister said. "It is ideologically driven, it is cynical and it will directly increase levels of poverty in Britain." "It is part of an ongoing attack on the incomes of some of the most hard working families in our constituencies - those very strivers the chancellor purported to support."

Eligibility The calculator

Send tax credit renewal forms to HMRC’s Netherton office.

HM Revenue and Customs - Tax Credit Office

Comben HouseFarriers WayNethertonL75 1AXUnited Kingdom

Send changes of name or address, or complaints, to HMRC’s Preston office. Make it clear why you’re writing. For example, write ‘change of circumstances’ or ‘complaint’ at the top of your letter. You do not need to include a street name or PO box.

HM Revenue and Customs - Tax Credit Office

Preston PR1 4AT 
United Kingdom

Send new tax credits claims to HMRC’s Liverpool office. You do not need to include a street name or PO box.

HM Revenue and Customs - Tax Credit Office

Liverpool L75 1AZ
United Kingdom

Reality opinion

  Source

The challenge politically is that Working Families Tax Credit's keeps many families above the basic poverty line. For many the change will take families on low incomes into a poverty
With Utility costs rising above inflation and employers saying the market will not allow them to increase pay for staff the Tax Credit system has become a key solution. As the Tax credit system has an element connected to child care this will have to be factored into the decisions on Employment. This is likely to hit many families on lower incomes particularly the Younger families that will struggle

Owen Smith New Shadow Secretery for Work and Pensions

Owen Smith MP as Welsh Secretary He is a clear speaker and appears to be a Down to Earth speaker. With an interest in Low pay even in this video
The page on his web site shows he has a background representing a poorer constituency. Ideal for defending the U.K against Welfare Reform. His new boss Jeremy made it clear that Welfare is a key issue the Labour Party will be active in so Owen knows this is an important post that the party will be measured by.  
Directly from the New Shadow Work and Pensions Secretary
"Thanks to everyone who has written to me on the Welfare Bill vote. I thought I would respond at some length with the facts of what happened and the reason why I voted as I did. Firstly, to be clear, Labour DID vote against the Welfare and Work Bill. There were two votes on Monday night. The first was a vote for or against Labour’s ‘Reasoned Amendment’ which explained some of our objections to the Bill and ‘Declined to give the Bill a Second Reading’ – that is arcane Parliamentary language for opposing the Bill. If that vote had been won then the Bill would have been defeated and the Government would have had to withdraw it.
The second vote, once we had lost ours, was a catch-all vote on whether the Bill should go on to the next stage of scrutiny and challenge – the Committee Stage and then Third Reading.
On that vote the decision taken by Harriet Harman, our interim leader, was that Labour should abstain.
 The reasoning for that was that there are some things in the Bill we agree with, for example, a new duty on Ministers to create and monitor high quality apprenticeships and a cut to social housing rents in England. I disagreed with that decision, and argued in Shadow Cabinet that there is far more in the Bill to object to than we might support. Along with Andy Burnham and others, I said that we should table a reasoned amendment, to detail our opposition to the Bill but, if that fell, we should also vote against at the second vote. However, that was not the position that Harriet took and the leadership’s decision was to abstain. That left me and others in the Shadow Cabinet with the choice whether to resign our positions to vote against the party in whose name, and on whose manifesto we were elected, or to be loyal to the leader and abide by her decision and the rules of collective responsibility.
 I clearly took the decision to do the latter. I did so for three reasons:
 1. I believe that integrity is important in politics, as in all things. I was elected as a Labour representative, not as an independent delegate, and the leader of Labour sets our position.
2. Had anyone from the Shadow Cabinet resigned, the split in the Labour party would have been horrendous, massively damaging our ability to take the fight – on this Bill and on the many other pernicious measures that we will face over the next five years – to the real enemy: the Tories.
3. The Bill would still not have been defeated with my vote – or, indeed, the votes of every Labour MP.
The Tories won the election, they have a majority, even if every opposition party in the House of Commons banded together against them.
And, as a back bencher, I would have had less chance to influence the policy of the Labour Party – the only party that can defeat the Tories in the next election and give us a chance of implementing progressive politics in Britain.
 The only people who would have benefit from such a massive split in the Labour Party are the Tories, Nationalists, Lib Dems and UKIP, parties who want to see Labour defeated. People do not vote for divided parties, as a rule – as the Tories illustrated over Europe in the 1990s – and every year out of power for Labour is another year of increased hardship for our communities here in Pontypridd and across the UK. Nye Bevan was right when he said that we have to win power if we are to be any real use to our constituents.
 They don’t just want protest, they want us to wield power on their behalf and to make a better society and a fairer economy.
We can’t do that from Opposition. But that does not mean that we cannot and will not protest against injustice when we see it in opposition.
That is why we spent much of the last five years arguing against the Bedroom Tax, low wages, cuts to disability benefits, corporate tax dodging etc. That is why Labour’s manifesto proposed not to slash 12 billion from social security spending, to increase taxes on unearned wealth and the highest incomes. And it is why Labour will continue to oppose the current Welfare Bill, word by word and line by line, at Committee stage and, unless there are massive improvements made to it (reinstating the Child Poverty targets, scrapping this awful 2-child policy etc) we will vote against it at Third Reading.
Andy Burnham, who I am supporting to be leader of the party, has made that clear, and I will be supporting him wholeheartedly in opposing the bill when we get to those crucial votes in the Autumn.
The process of opposing the Bill at Committee Stage has already started – though it will not get the headlines that Monday night’s votes did. We have already tabled amendments which seek to • Prevent the Government abolishing the targets for reducing child poverty. • Stop the 4 year freeze of Tax Credits • Change the 2 child policy These amendments, and many others fundamental changes, would have to be made to the Bill or I will be voting against it.
Now that may not be enough of an explanation, nor sufficient opposition for some, but it is an honest reflection of what happened last week from my perspective and a sincere pledge that I will continue to vote against the Bill, and fight for a Labour victory in 2020.

Jeremy Corbyn Welfare Reform

 Jeremy Corbyn has become the Labour party leader What is his track record prior to the General Election 2015? How will his leadership touch the lives of the Poor within the U.K? Jeremy is a North London M.P since 1983 as Islington North with an interest in Social issues.

 His former leader voted for it. Jeremy has made it clear his views on the Welfare Reform process as well as the Media. He points out that if Rent levels are capped then the Housing Benefit expenditure is reduced Jeremy points out that Child Poverty and Homelessness has increased in the last 5 years. He points out that there is a need for a fundamental change in direction over Welfare 

Jeremy responds to the Budget 

Jeremy Highlights Osbourne's Welfare Bill issue. As he rightly points out there are many countries that have no Welfare for their citizens. Jeremy seeks a budget where the plan is to eliminate austerities Jeremy regarding the last Budget as an attack on young people

 He commented on the 3 child policy which he feels is an attack on young people

 " What is is that the Conservative Party have got against the Young people of this country" 2/3 of Lindoners on Tax Credits are working He points out that much of the money involved in the Benefit cap goes into Private Landlords hands. The low income subsidies like Tax Credit's are often handed out due to low wages paid by employers.

From the Unemployed viewpoint-

There is more likely to be more of a defence of the poorest in society. The responce to the budget makes that clear.

Under Labour at the first test of the Bill M.P's were invited to vote alongside the Conservatives. Jeremy voted against. Indeed the media have made it clear that he was and isnt popular amongst the career politicians. Many of these politicians on the Shadow cabinet resigned despite the clear mandate that Jeremy was provided. 

I like many seek a different form of politics. Not the M.P's who are trained by their party in what they should say and those that just toe the party line.....But those that like Jeremy who engage and listen to their constituents and stand up for the belief rather than the 

Jobcentre or Job seeker Pastors

Introduction

A visit to a DWP Job Centre can be a depressing experience. There is little in the way of Pastoral support. Indeed if a Job seeker is Sanctioned there is little signposting support. Should that worry us? Yes
At a very basic level attending a Job centre is not a pleasent experience. In most cases it will be undertaken on a fortnightly basis. The staff at a Jobcentre have a very limited time for each job seeker.
A job seeker is required to sign a Job seeker agreement to obtain benefit money. If they do not undertake the requirements of the agreement then this can cause issue.

Why is there a need for Job Centre or Job Seeker Pastors

DWP statistics indicate that sanctions are placed on many JSA and ESA claiments. Job seekers find the sanctions system a tough system. If you have been informed that you have lost Welfare Benefit payments for a period of 12 weeks you may easily face feelings of despair. You may need to find a listening ear

Statistics show that Sanctions are a common issue throughout the U.K. DWP do not have the time or the manpower to support, guide or signpost attendees and listen to the issues.
At the time of writing this post there is little support for Job seekers in terms of online support, signposting or information on community support.

The Street Pastor movement set up a number of years has reached out to communities throughout the U.K. They have been a visible presence of the local Town Centre engaging with late night drinkers reducing the numbers of Police hours spent simply listening to those facing challenges.
Local Church volunteers patrol cities on a Friday and Saturday night and engage with many...often just a listening ear.

A listening ear with leaflets and support information may make a massive difference to so many accessing a Job centre in your area.

Here is a quote from a Linked in article highlighting the issues that are faced.

A recent Linkedin article from a Support manager tells a story

"Tenant visited JCP on a Friday, the systems were down and he was advised to call back Monday or use his own PC to make a claim on line. Claimant advised he did not have his “own” PC. He attempted to use the JCP telephone but the systems were unavailable. He left the building and was asked to return Monday. 
My advisor actually made the hour long claim using company telephone on the Friday, to prevent a delay in claim. 

The interview at JCP 
• The interview took over 1 hour, mainly as the start of the interview involved the advisor taking copies of identification, stamping every page of the telephone transcript, and asking the claimant to sign every page. 
• The claimant was not directly asked Tier 1 or Tier 2 questions. 
• An APA was explained but never offered. 
• The claimant was asked who the landlord was but not asked if there were current rent arrears, and was not advised to supply a copy of the tenancy agreement/rent statement. 
• The telephone number was given to the claimant for a budgeting advance, but the claimant was told he could not apply for one for at least 24 hours. *
• It was very much like a JSA interview but with contracts drawn up. 

Other points of interest: 
• The JCP advisor only has read only access to the UC claim account, ALL changes have to be made by ringing the service centre ( even small changes i.e. telephone numbers)* 
• Sanctions were briefly explained 
• The JCP coach has no access to payment information, dates or amounts, this is all done by ringing the service centre. (if the coach/advisor can get through). *

* These are areas where a Tenant can be let down by DWP and feel frustrated
This gives you an example of the challenge and indication of the needs

How 
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1525809011042796/
A group page has been set up to encourage discussion of the concept and for people to share the idea of the Pastors with each other.
From my experience 30 mins or more  outside a local job centre can make a difference. Engagement can make a massive difference

Is this a concept that might work in your area?
Is it a concept that your local Church could pray into and discuss