12 hours ago, bolty58 said:

The Count did though. More the reason for Big Nige not to.

Smart operator.

Coward who takes his ball home as soon as he starts losing the argument

And because we are all now post capped in the number of them we can make I add this on this post as well -

The missing bits from above is 21%, receiving, making it, and sickness, localised DWP data.

And I add this as well -

Edited August 16Aug 16 by Sluffy

So Jenrick and Tice have presented how much their new proposal on benefits will save. But they are unable to say how many people will be affected so not sure how they work out the saving ?

Ironic that they have said Europeans settled here won’t qualify, this is not allowed under the Brexit agreement !

Earlier today a Reform supporter posted a picture of her invite to the Clacton party on the night of the election. The invite says Nigel will be there as the results are announced. So he was never planning to be at the count so the security story is made up ! (Not checked if the invite was genuine !)

At last someone making serious plans about the army of glassbacks, dole bludgers and idle fuckers who have been taking the piss for decades.

They have already said the Brexit agreement would require renegotiation.

The 'numbers' thing is just poppycock. He should have just said 4,672,943 and called the leftie twats bluff.

2 hours ago, bolty58 said:

At last someone making serious plans about the army of glassbacks, dole bludgers and idle fuckers who have been taking the piss for decades.

They have already said the Brexit agreement would require renegotiation.

The 'numbers' thing is just poppycock. He should have just said 4,672,943 and called the leftie twats bluff.

So how do you work out the savings if you do not know how many people are affected ?

Surely it is a reasonable question ?

1 hour ago, Ani said:

So how do you work out the savings if you do not know how many people are affected ?

Surely it is a reasonable question ?

Details, details, details….yawn.

Bolty and the patriots don’t realise that Reforms’s “policies” such as this (and NHS funding) will affect them most, taking money out of their pockets to help fund the millionaires and billionaires behind Farage. Why else would they be giving him £5m bungs and propping up GBN?

Edited August 18Aug 18 by Bertie

I’d like to think most would agree with this.

The trouble with the 20 hours community work is there isn't enough community work to go round, people on probation who are ordered to carry out unpaid work often get told there is nothing for them to do. Also who would supervise it

11 minutes ago, athywhite1958 said:

The trouble with the 20 hours community work is there isn't enough community work to go round, people on probation who are ordered to carry out unpaid work often get told there is nothing for them to do. Also who would supervise it

Have a drive around Little Hulton and Halliwell. There’s plenty to be going at 😃

18 minutes ago, royal white said:

I’d like to think most would agree with this.

9.1 million of them?

The infrastructure alone to manage it would cost billions.

It's another one of these ideas that sounds alright on paper but falls apart the moment you start to operationalise it.

You'd need 91,000 supervisors for a start - and that's if they were looking after 100 people each. Plus all the backroom and support staff, transport, on costs etc.

And the co-ordination of it would be an absolute NIGHTMARE.

Apart from that. Another workable and well thought through policy from our resident populists! 😁

Edited August 18Aug 18 by kent_white

What kind of work would be carried out? And would it take work away from people who actually do work and earn money from the things these people would be doing in exchange for benefits?

Sounds like a case of the roads need sweeping, but the company that does it would prefer to have free labour than pay people to do it.. That would be right up Reforms street.

10 minutes ago, kent_white said:

9.1 million of them?

The infrastructure alone to manage it would cost billions.

It's another one of these ideas that sounds alright on paper but falls apart the moment you start to operationalise it.

You'd need 91,000 supervisors for a start - and that's if they were looking after 100 people each. Plus all the backroom and support staff, transport, on costs etc.

And the co-ordination of it would be an absolute NIGHTMARE.

Apart from that. Another workable and well thought through policy from our resident populists! 😁

9 million? I’ve no idea where you’ve hit that figure from

3 minutes ago, royal white said:

9 million? I’ve no idea where you’ve hit that figure from

There are 9.1 million people out of work aged 16-64 in the UK.

8 minutes ago, boltonboris said:

What kind of work would be carried out? And would it take work away from people who actually do work and earn money from the things these people would be doing in exchange for benefits?

Litter picking, helping in community centres, charity work. These are all jobs being mentioned

1 minute ago, kent_white said:

There are 9.1 million people out of work aged 16-64 in the UK.

It’s not aimed at all of them though. “And are able to work” is the giveaway

11 minutes ago, royal white said:

It’s not aimed at all of them though. “And are able to work” is the giveaway

So how many are you talking about then?

1 minute ago, kent_white said:

So how many are you talking about then?

330k

7 minutes ago, royal white said:

330k

Sorry mate - you're right. I was just looking at everyone out of work for any reason.

The figure I'm looking at says 474,000. It's still a hell of a workforce and would cost a lot to run. And potentially put some people out of work. But a lot more manageable that the fully unemployed figure.

I'm not against it on principle. I still have aot of questions about how it would work practically. Is it just a short programme of work? Or is it 20 hours a week permanently?

58 minutes ago, athywhite1958 said:

The trouble with the 20 hours community work is there isn't enough community work to go round, people on probation who are ordered to carry out unpaid work often get told there is nothing for them to do. Also who would supervise it

Cant be that hard Fill a POT HOLE

7 minutes ago, kent_white said:

Sorry mate - you're right. I was just looking at everyone out of work for any reason.

The figure I'm looking at says 474,000. It's still a hell of a workforce and would cost a lot to run. And potentially put some people out of work. But a lot more manageable that the fully unemployed figure.

I'm not against it on principle. I still have aot of questions about how it would work practically. Is it just a short programme of work? Or is it 20 hours a week permanently?

I’m assuming it’s until they find work. I’m sure if the Australians (work for dole) and numerous European countries can make it work then we can, regardless of who’s in power.

8 minutes ago, royal white said:

I’m assuming it’s until they find work. I’m sure if the Australians (work for dole) and numerous European countries can make it work then we can, regardless of who’s in power.

Yeah - I wouldn't disagree with this policy at all mate provided it's done fairly and nobody loses a paid job for it!

UC is £98 per week for a single person aged over 25, I think.

Are Reform really expecting folk to do 20hrs work for £98?

3 minutes ago, Traf said:

UC is £98 per week for a single person aged over 25, I think.

Are Reform really expecting folk to do 20hrs work for £98?

It’s a reward for their community work. Others do community work for free. if they dont do it they they lose their £400 a month

Edited August 18Aug 18 by royal white

2 minutes ago, royal white said:

It’s a reward for their community work. Others do community work for free. if they dont do it they they lose their £400 a month

I agree with you...however, if folk do lose their £400 per month, the Government isn't just going to let them starve to death.

Also, would there then be an upturn in crime, if they don't get their £400 per month

I'm sure Reform have it fully costed, and the detail will follow.