Here we are, then – a little video I filmed on the quiet of the now-departed (post-reshuffle) Minister of State for Disabled People Mike Penning talking total bollocks at the June Independent Living Fund adjournment debate. I had to film this one on a little camera that I rested on my knee under the desk. Things were fraught at the House of Commons that day. There was an official in the room who told me off for stepping over a little rope instead of walking around it. After that, he kept looking at me like he was measuring me for a coffin. I got the distinct feeling that the very fact campaigners and journalists turned up for the ILF debate that day was getting on people’s nerves. I arrived 15 minutes early for the debate and wasn’t allowed to wait outside the room. Officials told me to go away and come back. It really was that kind of day.

Anyway – thought I’d post this video for the record. Mike Penning’s failure to support independent living for disabled people ought to haunt him forever. It will if he has any sort of conscience. This issue will not go away.

As many people know, the Independent Living Fund is a vital pot of money used by severely disabled people to pay for the added carer hours they need to live their independent adult lives. Earlier this year, Penning announced that the fund would close by the end of June next year and that people would have to rely on councils for social care. No matter that last year, the court of appeal overturned an earlier government attempt to close the ILF. Penning and Iain Duncan Smith have insisted that this attack on disabled people continue.

That ILF closure will be disastrous for ILF recipients – and for the idea that disabled people should be able to live, like everyone else. This is a crucial point – and it’s the reason why the fight for the ILF is both escalating and winning people round. There’s something fundamental to the notion that everyone is equal in this battle. As I’ve said before – saving the ILF is not just about saving a pot of money. It’s about saving the idea that disabled people deserve to live and to get out there and live. Penning argued, of course (he did it again at the adjournment debate) that councils will be able to pick up the tab for care costs for this group of people. That is garbage and everyone knows it. Councils can’t meet social care costs as it is. As readers of this site will know, I’m already talking with severely disabled people who have real problems finding adequate care. ILF recipients will join these people in their problems if their fund closes. The fund should be kept and opened up to all who need it.

Penning did tell one truth at the adjournment debate, right at the start of his speech:

“Can I guarantee that no one in receipt of ILF money today will be adversely affected by the changes that we are going to make? No, I cannot, and no minister of any colour or persuasion could.”

People know this and are responding accordingly. About ten days after he gave this speech, ILF recipients occupied the grounds of Westminster Abbey to draw attention to the threat the ILF closure poses.

Which brings me to – protests about social security cuts:

During that adjournment debate, the MP Mary Glindon observed that a group of ILF recipients had recently turned up to the DWP offices at Caxton House to protest at the ILF closure and to hand in a letter which outlined their concerns. The doors at Caxton House were shut in their faces. I know this, because I was there. I took this film on that day. “Those people simply wanted to hand a letter in to the Minister’s office, but no one was available, and I had to take the letter in by the back door,” Glindon told Penning.

Said Penning: “I am sure that it [the event] was peaceful, well-mannered and nice, but that is not always the case. If the hon. Lady looks at the side of the building she will see that paint has been thrown over it and there have been really nasty incidents outside.” (There’s a clip at the end of the Penning video above where he says that).

Interesting. I sent an FOI to the DWP to ask about the paint throwing and the “nasty incidents”. The response showed things were really not as dramatic as all that. They certainly weren’t as dramatic as Penning would lead you to believe…The paint throwing was apparently noticed in February this year. The DWP didn’t know when it was thrown, or who threw it. So that was all a bit hopeless. You can see the sad little dribble of paint they photographed in the picture they sent me here:

As far as Penning’s “nasty incidents” went, the DWP reported three events in its FOI response to me.

The first was a 2012 “invasion” (their word) of the DWP’s Caxton House reception area by protesters, which the DWP said prevented “normal access.” I was at that protest myself. My overriding memory of it was that the thing was seriously overpoliced and ended in scuffles in which a disabled protestor was injured. The police did a hell of a lot of pushing and shoving that day. You can see that in the video I took here:

Remember: people at that protest were demonstrating against horrendous social security cuts and the Atos regime. They had and have every right to make a vociferous protest against those things. Protesting against that sort of government extremism is not extreme. It is an entirely rational response.

Next, the DWP FOI response mentioned the May 2014 protest at Caxton House, too (I was at that one as well and filmed it here. There was no violence. There was a group of disabled people in wheelchairs trying to deliver their letter about the ILF as discussed above and asking people who came and went from the building if anyone had ever set eyes on Mike Penning. People were starting to wonder if he actually existed at that point.

The DWP also cites a 9 June 2014 protest where staff had to walk past protesters to return after a fire evacuation – you can watch that here. Protestors had a loudhailer and banners, and they chalked names onto the pavement. The FOI response says that police were not called.

People have the right to protest. They certainly have the right to protest about this government’s out-of-control social security cuts. And of course people wanted a response from Penning on the ILF. They wanted him to abandon his plans to close the fund. But Penning made it clear that the closure would go ahead – that came through loud and clear at the ILF adjournment debate. That left and leaves people with no option except to go back to court, which they are doing, and organise protests where they get in the establishment’s face. The ILF closure plan must be thrown out.

Until it is, people are perfectly entitled to demand that it is thrown out. Such protest is entirely justified. As far as I’m concerned, it’s the establishment that has done the escalating to date. I’ve been to plenty of these protests and was at the recent Save the ILF occupation of Westminster Abbey grounds – a peaceful but ridiculously over-policed event where a small group of disabled campaigners and supporters tried to set up a camp to draw attention to the government threat to the ILF. Look at the number of coppers that turned out for that one. Look at the vile policy protestors are campaigning against. It’s very clear to me who started all of this.

I find it very interesting that the mere act of protesting these days – that is, standing outside a building with banners, loudhailers and leaflets – is written off as nasty or extreme and used as a justification to stick to a massively unpopular decision, and to ignore the people whose lives are being destroyed by that decision. Without ILF money to pay for personal assistants, ILF recipients face lives at home with grossly inadequate levels of care, or stuck in carehomes. Nobody deserves that. Nobody voted for that. It is this government that is extreme. Even Nick Clegg is getting that. So, you know – expect a goddamn response. It amazes me that people on the receiving end of the coalition’s appalling attacks on social security have kept their cool for as long as they have. The government keeps escalating. Who knows what the future holds.

To Caxton House and Victoria Street today, where Disabled People Against Cuts blocked all traffic at the top of Victoria Street to protest at the government’s plans to close the Independent Living Fund. The ILF is a fund disabled people used to pay for the extra support they need to live independent lives. The government wants to close the fund. The government is not going to find that easy.

ILF recipient Kevin Caulfield fights to save the ILF and the police fight to save…Barclays

Last Saturday, disabled people occupied the grounds of Westminster Abbey to protest at the proposed closure of the ILF. That protest generated an extraordinarily large and unfriendly police response, and zero support from the good Christians of the Abbey. Today’s coppers seemed to have learned something from the bad publicity Saturday’s effort generated. The police sent to the Independent Living Fund tea party outside DWP HQ in Tothill Street today and then to Victoria Street when protestors blocked the road appeared to have done a bit more by way of affability training. Still, protestors blocked Victoria Street for long enough to make the point about the ILF again… and the police definitely wanted them gone:

The copper in the video above kept rattling on about the impact the protest was having on the traffic – an odd line to take, given that disrupting London traffic was the point of the exercise.

“What about the long term impact on me of not being able to leave my house and doing what you take for granted?” ILF recipient Sam Brackenbury asked him.

“I can’t do anything about that, me,” said the copper. “What I can do is ask yourselves to consider the impact on the traffic you’re causing.”

Long may that impact and disruption continue. Without the ILF, disabled people will not be able to afford the day-to-day support that allows them to leave their houses, go to work, socialise – everything that everyone else takes for granted. That’s why these Save ILF protests are so vital and why they’re gaining momentum. Saving the ILF is not just about saving a pot of money. It’s about saving the idea that disabled people deserve to live.

Protestors block the buses to Clapham:

A letter to government:

Protestors sitting on Victoria Street:

This shot is from Bob Ellard: the tailback of buses as Victoria Street is blocked:

Sunday 29 June: more updates, including more footage of the protest, police standing on tents and us arguing with police about press access added at the end of the post:

———————————————————-

Saturday 28 June:

A lot more to video to come – here’s a starter.

Went with Disabled People Against Cuts to the blockade of Westminster Abbey today as severely disabled people continued ther fight to save the Independent Living Fund. The ILF is a fund that severely disabled people to pay for the extra carer hours they need to live independent lives. Iain Duncan Smith and Mike Penning, needless to say, plan to close the fund and leave these people in carehomes, or stuck at home with dangerously low levels of care. The court of appeal overturned a government ILF closure decision last year, but that’s not the sort of thing that puts Pennning off. The government announced this year that it would close the fund by 2015

Disabled people continue to fight for the ILF through the courts. Today, they attempted to take things to another level and set up a camp in the grounds of Westminster Abbey. The hope was that the church of England would see the point of this extremely serious and important protest, and help facilitate a protest camp and discussion. The lives of these disabled people will be threatened without that ILF money. It’s as simple as that.

Unfortunately, the church seemed to miss that point – perhaps in its rush to get the Met on the line. Christianity was in very short supply at the Abbey today. Police poured through the gates to stop the protest and to stamp on tents, to make sure they couldn’t be pitched. They were very heavy-handed all round and must easily have outnumbered protestors ten to one. Have a look at some of this.

Here’s a short clip of the police chasing one protestor across the grounds, then grabbing one young woman and cuffing her after shoving her against a tree. This was pretty brutal – you’ll see towards the end of the clip that they twist her arm right up behind her:

Here they are standing on a tent so that disabled people couldn’t pitch the tent in the Abbey grounds to make their protest:

This next photo shows disabled people grabbing onto each other when police rushed their line of wheelchairs. This was extraordinary – the police just raced at the line of wheelchairs:

another cop standing on a tent:

In this video, you’ll see some of the severely disabled people who had their wheelchairs chained together to protest at the ILF’s closure – and then a short clip of the sort of police numbers sent in to deal with them. Unreal:

And in this video, disabled protestors getting into the grounds through a smaller gate and chaining their wheelchairs together:

More to come tomorrow. As I say – this is a vital protest. Saving the ILF is not just about saving a pot of money. It’s about saving the idea that severely disabled people deserve to live – like everybody else. Pity the church doesn’t get that. At all. Today’s display was utterly shameful. Those behind it better start praying that there isn’t a god.

————————————————————————————–

Updates 29 June 2014:

Here’s a video of a few of us arguing with police about press access for filming, and then more footage of police standing on tents and then again of their sheer numbers. I had the weirdest discussion with the clown you see at the start of this video. I wanted to walk through the police kettle to talk to disabled protestors on the other side of the police line and the railings, so I showed this copper my press pass. He said I couldn’t go through, because I was using my pass for “suspect” purposes and that if I was a journalist, I’d know what he meant. I am a journalist and I had absolutely no idea what he meant. I still have no idea. I can only assume that they didn’t want people who were inside the protest to have any sort of contact with people on the other side of the fence. He got out his little notebook and pen and told me to give him my name. I turned my pass around so he couldn’t see my name and told him to get lost. Jesus:

Another photo of disabled people being shoved into each other as police rush their line of wheelchairs:

More footage of protestors and of applause for their efforts when they were finally forced to leave the Abbey:

DPAC’s next action: Save the Independent Living Fund party this week on July 4. See you there.

Am surfacing briefly today to make the point to Ed Miliband and other Labour greats that quite a few of the young people I meet who claim jobseekers’ allowance ARE in work. The problem these young people have is that they’re in and out of work, because the work they get is very insecure and low-paid. They pay in while they’re working. They just don’t get enough ongoing work to pay in on a regular, ongoing basis. Because that’s our era, Ed. People can train all they like and as hard as they like, but that won’t count for much if the only work on offer is badly paid, or not paid at all. That’s the point to focus on, Ed. That’s the ONLY point to focus on. If Ed is really serious about sorting out youth unemployment and low pay, he might like to support a few boycott workfare protests.

The young people who I’ve spoken to outside jobcentres this year generally report that they land a few months at a job here and a few weeks at a job there, and then the work dries up and they have to sign on until another crap job comes along. Said Ravi 22: “Contract work – it’s not ideal. Once the contract is over and you haven’t got any backup, then yeah, you lose everything that you’ve worked for. You save up and when the contract ends, if you haven’t got another job, everything that you’ve saved up goes onto your bills and stuff like that and you’ve got to start again.”

These people also seem keen on meaningful, paid work and often say things like “I don’t really want to go back to dealing.” Said Gio, 19, below: “I don’t want to be on the streets drug dealing and stuff to earn the money, because I’ve been through that stage.”

Etc.

Anyway.

Here is:

Ravi, aged 22. Signs on at Kilburn jobcentre. We met in March. He’d last worked in January. He worked in sectors like retail and banking. He wanted something ongoing, but was struggling to find permanent work. He was trying to sort out a sanction the day that we spoke – he was waiting to go into the jobcentre for a meeting where he hoped things would be worked out.

Ravi said:

“I have to come here every week. One week is to just sign on and one week is to speak to an advisor – but it’s not really to speak to an advisor. It’s just to sit in front of them and they are just going to say “there’s nothing to really match your criteria here – retail – so see you next week.” It is a system set up for you to fail. If you don’t turn up for an appointment – because [for example] you have got to come in every morning and they say, well, you didn’t turn up, so you’re suspended.

“They suspended my benefit. Apparently, the reason was that my jobsearch wasn’t correct. Apparently, you can’t hand out CVs any more. They go – “95% of your jobs are online” and they [said to me] “a few of your jobsearches say that you handed out CVs and these places don’t accept CVs. Therefore, you’ve been suspended.”

“I was sanctioned, yeah. I think I still am. I’ve got to come back to talk to someone at 3.15pm and they are going to explain it. It’s a bit difficult. My adviser [that I’m talking to today] – out of all of them, he’s okay. He’s more understanding, unlike the rest of them. I think they’re fed up with their own jobs to be honest. He’s quite good. He’s really understanding. He would actually advise me, unlike the rest of them.

“I asked them – what was the reason for the sanction? I asked them like three times and they kept diverting the conversation. So I honestly didn’t know. [It came about this way]. Basically, I came in on time and it was 9.15am or something, and then one of the advisers looked through the [jobsearch] sheet and he said “come back at 11.15am to the third floor.” So I came back at 11.15am, not knowing what I was coming back for. She said “the reason why you’ve been told to come back is that your jobsearch is incorrect.” I asked her “Why? What’s wrong with it?” and she was like “some dates are missing,” and I was like “it’s all there. Maybe I’ve just made a few mistakes on it.” She actually gave me the chance to do it again in front of her, so I literally done it again in front of her. I spent like 15 or 20 minutes doing it again and I handed to to her and she said “it’s still incorrect” and I said – “I honestly do not know what you want me to do. I’ve done it again.” I don’t like arguing and things like that – some people there really argue and shout – but I’m not like that. I was like,

“Okay, fair enough.” It’s their decision, so I just left them and I’ve been told to come back today to sort it out.

“This is my first time of being sanctioned, so it was pretty confusing. This is my second time at the jobcentre since I’ve been 16. I’ve always been working, so I’m not used to the system. I’m not sure what it’s all about to be honest. So it’s changed. It’s more confusing. They were telling me that there’s like a million people from age 18 to 24 on benefits, so obviously they’re probably frustrated behind the scenes and all, but I think that the way they take it out on us is not right. I’ve seen the way that they treat people upstairs myself and I don’t say anything, but I think it’s not right.

Continue reading →

This one goes out to every prat MP and commentator who says we must keep hacking away at social security until there is nothing left to cut. I like to think this story will remind those people about some of the crap that disabled people have to put up with as they take the brunt of cuts:

Video: I didn’t have a carer and I was so thirsty I went to Asda at 5am in my wheelchair to get a drink with a straw and help

A week or two ago, I again accompanied Angela Smith of Wembley as she travelled to her jobcentre and work programme appointments in her wheelchair. (I first went with Angela to Wembley jobcentre about a month ago). Angela has a master’s degree and worked for about 20 years in policy and disability support until she was made redundant in a couple of years ago. Angela has cerebral palsy. She must sign on once a fortnight at the jobcentre and once a fortnight with her work programme provider, which is the Reed Partnership in Harrow. She uses public transport – the bus – to get to both places.

So. When I arrived at Angela’s house before we set off to Wembley jobcentre, Angela told me that she was very tired. There was a reason for this. She’d woken up very early – at 4am – because she’d been very thirsty. There was a reason for this, too. Angela’s afternoon carer had been off sick the day before, which meant that Angela had not had anything to drink since 2pm the previous afternoon. She finds getting a drink for herself very challenging: the involuntary movements of her head and arms makes co-ordination and turning on the watertaps difficult. Her afternoon carer usually leaves her something to drink, but didn’t on this occasion, because she didn’t come to work. So Angela woke up at about 4am, thirsty. By about 5am, Angela was so thirsty that she decided to get out of bed, climb into her motorised wheelchair and travel down the road to the 24-hour Asda to buy a drink. She said that staff at Asda helped her – “they are very nice over there.” Angela showed me the receipt from that excursion – you can see the date and 5.14am time stamped on it:

Receipt from Asda 5.14am

You see where I’m going here. This is the sort of reality that disabled people get to enjoy while career twats like George Osborne, Chris Leslie and Andrew Rawnsley blather on about social security cuts being an unavoidable fact of modern life. They leave disabled people in a dangerous position indeed. I asked Brent council for a comment on this Asda situation and on Angela’s care and the council’s care and cover systems generally. That was about ten days ago and I haven’t heard a single thing back. I understand that the council has since had a meeting with Angela, but a response this way would be welcome, too. Angela is embroiled in an ongoing battle with the council about care services. The whole thing is a complete mess.

I’ve seen plenty of correspondence about it. Angela doesn’t like the agencies the council uses, or some of the carers that agencies send. She doesn’t like the restrictions placed on her direct payments spending (this is a point that several disabled people have raised with me recently). She has made formal complaints. The council argues in its correspondence that it makes adequate provision to cover care and that Angela could hire her own carers with direct payments. Angela’s point is that she doesn’t want cover from agencies that she doesn’t trust and that it’s hard to hire good people in an ongoing way when you only have a small amount of hours and money to offer.

The upshot of all this is that Angela’s younger brother is now her carer, more or less. He has been coming around in the morning to get her out of bed, washed, dressed and fed. He’s certainly been there most mornings when I’ve visited. It may be that sometimes, family is easier to negotiate, or work with or rely on. I’ve fed Angela breakfast on days when her brother has had to leave early. I fed Angela lunch on the day of the 4am Asda journey, because if I hadn’t, she would not have had lunch that day. Continue reading →

Callout from Disabled People Against Cuts:

“We are slowly coaxed to believe we are too expensive to keep alive and it’s kinder if we are convinced to die.” (From an article Penny Pepper and I did last year on the government’s attacks on disabled people).

The future of the Independent Living Fund – the fund that severely disabled people use to pay for extra carer hours so that they can live independently in their own homes – will be debated in the House of Commons for the first time this Wednesday 18 June from 11 to 11.30am.

As many MPs as possible need to know this is happening and will be there to stand up for the ILF and the future of independent living support for disabled people.

The fight for the ILF is far from over.

In March, the Minister for Disabled People Mike Penning announced a new decision to permanently close the ILF in June 2015. He did this despite a ruling by the Court of Appeal in November 2013 which quashed this government’s previous decision to close the fund.

Last week ILF recipients launched a fresh legal challenge which you can read about here.

Meanwhile, #SaveILF supporters have been busy contacting their local councillors and MPs collecting sign ups to the campaign statement and spreading the word with the brilliant ILF postcard campaign: www.facebook.com/ILFpostcard

One supportive MP Nic Dakin MP for Scunthorpe has managed to get a debate on the future of the Independent Living Fund for this Wednesday: 18 June 11 – 11.30am.

It is only half an hour, but it is the first time that the ILF and the fundamental question of the removal of disabled people’s right to independent living which its closure represents, has had a debate in parliament.

This is an opportunity to make sure politicians know what the ILF is and why it is so important.

We need to take urgent action to write to our MPs, urging them to attend the debate, telling them why it matters and most importantly sharing your stories and experiences that show why we need not only to keep the ILF open but to reopen it to new applicants.

You can find your MPs email address and post address here.

Here is a briefing about the ILF you can download and send them as an attachment. ILF briefing 13 June 2014 (this link opens the briefing).

If they can do it in Scotland, why not here?

See Disabled People Against Cuts for more.

ILF recipient Penny Pepper on the threat to the fund:

“There is this bizarre idea coming our way that you can eat sandwiches, lie in bed and use incontinence pads. If that happens, then that is, in effect, the end of my career. The basic idea of having a separate pot of money like the ILF did give you choice and control. Now, we’re being forced backwards into having to go on about how pathetic we are as individuals – you know, with your poor legs and your this and your that. The idea of choice is being narrowed and narrowed and narrowed. If the council ever tries to put me in a care home [because it cannot afford to fund independent living costs ] I will take it to court.”

“I need support to do most things of a physical and practical nature – from getting out of bed, using the bathroom, getting dressed and food preparation to moving from A to B, getting into my wheelchair and getting out of my wheelchair. I would not be able to work without that funding. This is what is terrifying to me.”

To Clacton-on-Sea, where I spent a day recently setting things up for a longer project – more on that in the coming weeks.

For now – a few transcripts and a bit of a rant.

When I was in Clacton a couple of weeks ago, I went to the CAB and spent some time with officers there. I also stood outside the jobcentre for a while, to see I could find anyone who was prepared to speak about JSA, sanctions and work experiences in Clacton.

We talked about those things and then generally about the people they hold responsible for tough times. I find this part of things interesting, especially in our burgeoning We Hate Europe era. I spend most of my time talking with people who have been badly hit by public service cuts, job losses, wage cuts, insecure work, etc, and they come from a very wide range of groups. The thing is – people don’t talk to me about European politics very much, or certainly haven’t in the past few years. Not spontaneously. Not as the first thing out of their mouths. I don’t think I’ve ever heard anyone mention their MEP to me. Maybe people need prompting. Maybe that will change as politicians and the press keep belting out the anti-EU message. I do hear anti-immigration talk and that usually has to do with the housing shortage – who gets housing and why, who should be prioritised for it and who is being prioritised for it. The point I want to make, though, is that I still notice people talking about the failures of the local political class, which you’ll see in the transcripts and quotes below. They talk about their immediate tormentors.

I’m guessing that it suits local politicians better to paint this part of the picture out. It’s still there, though. That needs to be said. People still talk a great deal about greedy MPs and bankers and bonuses, Iain Duncan Smith, jobcentre staff, organisations that run the work programme and companies that employ people on wages too low to live on. People make these points unprompted.

There is absolutely no doubt that this is why the political class is so desperate to turn our attention to Europe and immigrants, and why Labour is prepared – this still floors me, although it shouldn’t – to fanny around with fascism and to talk about controls instead of leading any global charge for equality. It is perfectly clear such a line is thought more expedient than taking responsibility for the fact that we’ve reached a point where a few people have everything and most other people have stuff all. We can add to this perverse picture the fact that the people who are trying to tell us how things should be are in no position to. I mean – we’re hardly going to have a balanced dialogue about distribution while people like Yvette Cooper are involved in it (I’ve just read her latest watery “article” on immigration, which is why I’m thinking about her. I usually try not to). Let’s face it. People like Cooper are not well-placed to join the rest of us in pointing the finger at MPs who milk expenses, to take an example. Which is a pity, because a lot of people are still very upset about things like MPs’ expenses. Very upset indeed, as you’ll see from the quotes below. I am not much of a strategist, but even I can see why someone like Cooper would find it much easier, and much less compromising, to rattle on about controlling immigration instead of addressing the monumental equalities crisis in which she and other politicians are implicated.

This is the sort of thing that people say to me a lot – I’ve pulled out some quotes from my articles from the past few years:

“People like us are screwed to the ground. They’ve legalised bullying. They wear suits….They’re getting away with it. It’s the fucking bankers that ought to be done for it….They’re pointing the fingers in the wrong direction.”

“The government don’t give a shit about the people. Just their friends. They’re given massive tax breaks and they’ll never spend it if they live for another 100 lifetimes. You got people at the other end who can’t even afford to put their heating on and buy some food. They’ve got to be the biggest bastards ever on the planet. They’re not kings. They don’t look after their people.”

“The expenses, you know, that some people are claiming for pornographic DVDs…. Just got no respect. The kids have got no respect now. [Leaders need to] lead by example. Right now, they’re making it up.”

You see my point. A lot of not-rich people understand that the political class wants to flush them like turds. They’re not too happy about it. Little wonder that politicians are falling over themselves to direct that anger elsewhere.

Anyway.

I’m an EU immigrant myself, so may be forced to take a break from all this soon to pack for Dublin (am here on an Irish passport). Before I go – here’s a bit more on the sort of crap that people have to put up with from the political class, as opposed to immigrants:

It’s a Tuesday afternoon and there’s a group of older guys standing outside the Clacton jobcentre on Station Road. They’re lining up at a side door, waiting to be let into some work training thing or other. Nobody seems to know exactly what they’ll be doing at the training, or why. All they know is they have to be there and that they have to line up at this locked door like they’re six and waiting to be let into school.

The first guy I talk with is an older bloke with white hair. We don’t talk for long. He is furious about Universal Jobmatch. “The worse thing I ever done is looking for a job on that computer,” he says. “It’s a waste of time. I’ve looked for about 1500 jobs on it.”

The second guy is Mark*, 45. He’s been signing on for five months. Before that, he worked in caravan parks and as a printer. He’s trying to retrain because “for the last 30 years I’ve earned my living through hard manual labour. I can’t do it now, because I’m 45 and I’m tired. That’s why I’m taking myself to school.”

He says:

“There’s about 468,000 jobs across the UK, yet there’s two and a half million people unemployed, so if them jobs was filled tomorrow, you’re going to have two million people going to the jobcentre, fighting over them. But they don’t tell you that. You have to search and find out yourself. You go onto Universal Jobmatch and they monitor it. They can see what you’re doing, because you give them a government ID number. It’s effectively a virtual chip. They can see all your job search that you’ve done to look for work. I think that what they’re forgetting about is the miseries that they are causing.

Continue reading →