The following has been supplied by UnionLearn North West:
If you agree that the Government's plan to reduce 16-18 apprenticeship funding rates should be reconsidered, please sign the following e-petition:
http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/28333
This has become FE Week's first campaign - so if you agree with it, please sign and share the e-petition link with colleagues and learners. Imagine if together we were able to hit the 100,000 signature target and it was considered in Parliament!
22.3.12
Budget leaves pensioners bruised on pensions, tax allowances, retirement age and care.
The following has been supplied by the National Pensioners Convention:
Britain’s biggest pensioner organisation, the National Pensioners Convention (NPC) has criticised today’s Budget announcement for failing to address the serious concerns of Britain’s 11m older people.
On the state pension
Dot Gibson, NPC general secretary said: “The proposal to merge the basic and second state pensions into a single £140 a week payment is a classic case of smoke and mirrors – given that someone could retire today and get a combined basic and second state pension of £150 a week. In reality there will be no extra money to raise Britain’s scandalously low state pension – just a different way of packaging the payment. Not only that but it will also create a two-tier pension system with existing pensioners still having to struggle with a complicated means-tested system that leaves one in four older people in poverty.”
On the retirement age
Dot Gibson, NPC general secretary said: “The announcement of an automatic review of the state pension age is clearly a forerunner to making people work up to 70 and beyond. The chancellor is effectively stealing retirement years from millions of ordinary workers whose life expectancy is far lower than the very richest in society. This will hurt the low paid, part time workers in the north much more than the bankers in the city.”
On personal tax allowances
Dot Gibson, NPC general secretary said: “The decision to freeze the age related personal tax allowances effectively means around five million pensioner tax payers will no longer get additional reductions in their tax over the coming years – whilst those on the top rate of tax will see their bills reduced. Many older people will feel they are being asked to forego their reduction in tax to help out the super rich. There’s no fairness in that.”
Welfare and social care
Dot Gibson, NPC general secretary said: “The Chancellor’s pledge to cut welfare payments by £10bn over the next few years will also worry millions of pensioners who may think their bus passes and winter fuel allowances might be under threat and the long-awaited social care white paper is being delayed, without any explanation, while around a million older people are struggling with a broken care system that leaves many with expensive care that is often of a poor quality. The money the chancellor is giving away in tax breaks for the richest in society would fund a National Care Service for all those in need. Pensioners will feel bruised by this Budget.”
Britain’s biggest pensioner organisation, the National Pensioners Convention (NPC) has criticised today’s Budget announcement for failing to address the serious concerns of Britain’s 11m older people.
On the state pension
Dot Gibson, NPC general secretary said: “The proposal to merge the basic and second state pensions into a single £140 a week payment is a classic case of smoke and mirrors – given that someone could retire today and get a combined basic and second state pension of £150 a week. In reality there will be no extra money to raise Britain’s scandalously low state pension – just a different way of packaging the payment. Not only that but it will also create a two-tier pension system with existing pensioners still having to struggle with a complicated means-tested system that leaves one in four older people in poverty.”
On the retirement age
Dot Gibson, NPC general secretary said: “The announcement of an automatic review of the state pension age is clearly a forerunner to making people work up to 70 and beyond. The chancellor is effectively stealing retirement years from millions of ordinary workers whose life expectancy is far lower than the very richest in society. This will hurt the low paid, part time workers in the north much more than the bankers in the city.”
On personal tax allowances
Dot Gibson, NPC general secretary said: “The decision to freeze the age related personal tax allowances effectively means around five million pensioner tax payers will no longer get additional reductions in their tax over the coming years – whilst those on the top rate of tax will see their bills reduced. Many older people will feel they are being asked to forego their reduction in tax to help out the super rich. There’s no fairness in that.”
Welfare and social care
Dot Gibson, NPC general secretary said: “The Chancellor’s pledge to cut welfare payments by £10bn over the next few years will also worry millions of pensioners who may think their bus passes and winter fuel allowances might be under threat and the long-awaited social care white paper is being delayed, without any explanation, while around a million older people are struggling with a broken care system that leaves many with expensive care that is often of a poor quality. The money the chancellor is giving away in tax breaks for the richest in society would fund a National Care Service for all those in need. Pensioners will feel bruised by this Budget.”
20.3.12
Lords vote down 'cruel' legal aid move
The following has been supplied by the TUC:
Dying victims of occupational cancers should not be penalised as a consequence as a government's drive to trim £350m of the legal aid bill by 2015, peers have said. An amendment to the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill blocking government plans to force asbestos victims to use some of their damages to pay legal bills succeeded this week in the House of Lords. People who become ill after being exposed to asbestos because of their work are not entitled to legal aid if they want to sue for damages and must use conditional fee agreements to pay for their cases. At the moment they do not have to pay for legal costs out of their compensation, but the government had argued that successful claimants should hand over 25 per cent of any payout to cover lawyers' bills. Lib Dem peer Lord Alton told peers that asbestos victims 'need help not hindrance', and the government's argument that making claimants pay costs would persuade them to search for the law firm offering the best deal was 'simply fallacious.' He added: 'Dying asbestos victims have already invested enough and given their pitiable condition it is risible to suggest they will shop around.' Labour's Lord Bach called the government plan concerning industrial disease sufferers 'very unnecessary and rather cruel.' In total, the Lords have so far inflicted nine defeats on the bill.
Dying victims of occupational cancers should not be penalised as a consequence as a government's drive to trim £350m of the legal aid bill by 2015, peers have said. An amendment to the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill blocking government plans to force asbestos victims to use some of their damages to pay legal bills succeeded this week in the House of Lords. People who become ill after being exposed to asbestos because of their work are not entitled to legal aid if they want to sue for damages and must use conditional fee agreements to pay for their cases. At the moment they do not have to pay for legal costs out of their compensation, but the government had argued that successful claimants should hand over 25 per cent of any payout to cover lawyers' bills. Lib Dem peer Lord Alton told peers that asbestos victims 'need help not hindrance', and the government's argument that making claimants pay costs would persuade them to search for the law firm offering the best deal was 'simply fallacious.' He added: 'Dying asbestos victims have already invested enough and given their pitiable condition it is risible to suggest they will shop around.' Labour's Lord Bach called the government plan concerning industrial disease sufferers 'very unnecessary and rather cruel.' In total, the Lords have so far inflicted nine defeats on the bill.
15.3.12
Battle to save NHS now entering final hours
Blackpool against the cuts have provided us with the following link regarding the campaign to save the NHS. The link contains a petition to be sent to the House of Lords.
click here
click here
12.3.12
PM's approach to health and safety 'not helpful'
The following has been supplied by the TUC:
The man who was charged with reviewing workplace health and safety regulation for the government says he never described safety as a 'burden' and instead believes his review showed that it 'is not the case' that health and safety holds back business. Professor Ragnar Löfstedt told this week's opening session of the Institution of Occupational Safety and Health (IOSH) conference that his mandate was 'clearly a deregulatory one' but his overall conclusions were that there is no need for a major overhaul of the system and that bad health and safety practice is already a considerable burden on business and society. The professor, who submitted his report's findings to the government on 28 November last year, said prime minister David Cameron's January 2012 description of health and safety as a 'monster', and his overall approach to the subject, was 'not helpful.' Nor did he ever suggest cutting regulations by 50 per cent, Löfstedt said - this was a government decision. He revealed a review of existing EU legislation to ensure it is risk and evidence-based would now likely start in 2015 rather than 2014, as originally planned. He also announced that Conservative MEP Julie Girling is to set up an information committee on risk, due to be launched in September this year. Professor Löfstedt called for help in lobbying the House of Lords to set up a Select Committee on risk to consider how to engage society on this subject. He said a new informal cross-party parliamentary committee of MEPs to promote evidence-based policy making in the EU would be launched at the European Parliament in June. The professor criticised sections of the media for their unhelpful reporting and called on them to instead report on the benefits of a positive approach to health and safety.
The man who was charged with reviewing workplace health and safety regulation for the government says he never described safety as a 'burden' and instead believes his review showed that it 'is not the case' that health and safety holds back business. Professor Ragnar Löfstedt told this week's opening session of the Institution of Occupational Safety and Health (IOSH) conference that his mandate was 'clearly a deregulatory one' but his overall conclusions were that there is no need for a major overhaul of the system and that bad health and safety practice is already a considerable burden on business and society. The professor, who submitted his report's findings to the government on 28 November last year, said prime minister David Cameron's January 2012 description of health and safety as a 'monster', and his overall approach to the subject, was 'not helpful.' Nor did he ever suggest cutting regulations by 50 per cent, Löfstedt said - this was a government decision. He revealed a review of existing EU legislation to ensure it is risk and evidence-based would now likely start in 2015 rather than 2014, as originally planned. He also announced that Conservative MEP Julie Girling is to set up an information committee on risk, due to be launched in September this year. Professor Löfstedt called for help in lobbying the House of Lords to set up a Select Committee on risk to consider how to engage society on this subject. He said a new informal cross-party parliamentary committee of MEPs to promote evidence-based policy making in the EU would be launched at the European Parliament in June. The professor criticised sections of the media for their unhelpful reporting and called on them to instead report on the benefits of a positive approach to health and safety.
6.3.12
WARNING: THIS GOVERNMENT COULD SERIOUSLY DAMAGE YOUR HEALTH
The following has been provided by Blackpool Against The Cuts:
You can help by lobbying your MP or writing to the Secretary of State and your local health authority expressing your concerns over the bill.
The Coalition’s Health and Social Care Bill will be the kiss of death for our NHS.
- The NHS is a magnificent achievement and provides healthcare for all regardless of wealth or status.
- The NHS has cared for generations of working people.
- The NHS is free at the point of use.
- The Health and Social Care Bill will ruin the NHS.
- Making money will take priority over care for the sick.
- Those who can afford it will jump the queue.
- Those who can’t will be left high and dry.
The NHS needs our help before it is too late!
Don’t let the government win. Lets fight to ensure that this bill is defeated.
Don’t let the government win. Lets fight to ensure that this bill is defeated.
You can help by lobbying your MP or writing to the Secretary of State and your local health authority expressing your concerns over the bill.
Save our NHS
Work victims attack 'abhorrent' legal fees plan
The following has been supplied by the TUC:
People with deadly work-related diseases are demanding justice secretary Ken Clarke ditches his 'abhorrent' reforms that would force them to pay two new fees. The Daily Mirror is backing a campaign by asbestos disease victims, who say they will have to fork out thousands of pounds to claim compensation for their fatal illnesses. On 14 February, prime minister David Cameron backed the reforms, outlining at a Downing St convened 'insurance summit' the measures he deemed necessary to 'to tackle compensation culture, reduce legal costs and cut red tape'. However, campaigners for people affected by industrial injuries and diseases - who were not invited to the PM's summit - are warning thousands of blameless workplace victims will be put off pursuing claims. The new system would require upfront fees and would reduce payouts. Shadow justice minister Andy Slaughter said: 'The government says their reforms will stop whiplash claims. But they're not just stopping whiplash cases, they're also trying to stop serious industrial disease and workplace injury cases. This is all part of a campaign to protect insurance companies and badly behaving industrial giants at the expense of people who worked hard all their lives and did nothing wrong.'
People with deadly work-related diseases are demanding justice secretary Ken Clarke ditches his 'abhorrent' reforms that would force them to pay two new fees. The Daily Mirror is backing a campaign by asbestos disease victims, who say they will have to fork out thousands of pounds to claim compensation for their fatal illnesses. On 14 February, prime minister David Cameron backed the reforms, outlining at a Downing St convened 'insurance summit' the measures he deemed necessary to 'to tackle compensation culture, reduce legal costs and cut red tape'. However, campaigners for people affected by industrial injuries and diseases - who were not invited to the PM's summit - are warning thousands of blameless workplace victims will be put off pursuing claims. The new system would require upfront fees and would reduce payouts. Shadow justice minister Andy Slaughter said: 'The government says their reforms will stop whiplash claims. But they're not just stopping whiplash cases, they're also trying to stop serious industrial disease and workplace injury cases. This is all part of a campaign to protect insurance companies and badly behaving industrial giants at the expense of people who worked hard all their lives and did nothing wrong.'
Deregulation savings are a government 'fantasy'
The following has been supplied by the TUC:
Government claims that slashing red tape will save businesses millions have been challenged by trade unions and health and safety campaigners. Business and enterprise minister Mark Prisk claimed this week the "one-in, one-out" regulations rule and the government's Red Tape Challenge will save businesses more than £4 million in the first half of this year. Publishing his department's third statement on new regulation, Mr Prisk said: 'The one-in, one-out process is one of the best tools we have to cut the costs and burden of regulation on our businesses. The system is starting to deliver results, capping the costs to business and then driving them down.' But Hilda Palmer of the Hazards Campaign told the Morning Star newspaper the government was living 'in a fairytale world of myth, lies and apocryphal tales aimed at making us believe that workers' protection caused the economic crisis.' In the real world, she told the paper, rules preventing harm to employees or members of the public, which costs the taxpayer £20-40 billion per year, would be seen as cost effective. Preventing through proper regulation and enforcement just two of the 12,000 plus occupational cancers in the UK each year would save significantly more than the minister's claimed £4 million from deregulation. TUC general secretary Brendan Barber said: 'Of course no-one supports unnecessary or overly bureaucratic regulation but what looks like red tape to a business lobbyist may well look like vital consumer, environmental or employment protection to everyone else.'
Government claims that slashing red tape will save businesses millions have been challenged by trade unions and health and safety campaigners. Business and enterprise minister Mark Prisk claimed this week the "one-in, one-out" regulations rule and the government's Red Tape Challenge will save businesses more than £4 million in the first half of this year. Publishing his department's third statement on new regulation, Mr Prisk said: 'The one-in, one-out process is one of the best tools we have to cut the costs and burden of regulation on our businesses. The system is starting to deliver results, capping the costs to business and then driving them down.' But Hilda Palmer of the Hazards Campaign told the Morning Star newspaper the government was living 'in a fairytale world of myth, lies and apocryphal tales aimed at making us believe that workers' protection caused the economic crisis.' In the real world, she told the paper, rules preventing harm to employees or members of the public, which costs the taxpayer £20-40 billion per year, would be seen as cost effective. Preventing through proper regulation and enforcement just two of the 12,000 plus occupational cancers in the UK each year would save significantly more than the minister's claimed £4 million from deregulation. TUC general secretary Brendan Barber said: 'Of course no-one supports unnecessary or overly bureaucratic regulation but what looks like red tape to a business lobbyist may well look like vital consumer, environmental or employment protection to everyone else.'
PCS Dispute with G4S
The following has been supplied by PCS DWP Group:
On Wednesday 29 February PCS served G4S with notice of our intention to ballot our PCS G4S members working on the Telereal Trillium account within DWP workplaces for strike action.
For more information, please visit the PCS HQ website here.
On Wednesday 29 February PCS served G4S with notice of our intention to ballot our PCS G4S members working on the Telereal Trillium account within DWP workplaces for strike action.
For more information, please visit the PCS HQ website here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)