Is it fair that those who have paid National Insurance for decades receive the same as a 19-year-old who's never worked in his or her life?
I'm not a big fan of Labour MP Frank Field. If there ever was any grounds to kick people out of a political party for the damage they cause with their constant sniping, Mr Field would be a sure candidate. Some of the stuff he comes up with place him comfortably to the right of John Redwood.
However, for once I agree with something he wrote. Even though his article in today's Times is full of pap (he even writes that work is part of somebody's "DNA", a not so veiled reference to the idea that the unemployed may have idleness in their genes), he does raise an interesting point.
With the recent crisis, several people who are signing on for the first time are discovering that the oh-so-generous state handouts the Mail, the Express and the Sun routinely knock amount to a paltry £60-50 a week. Many are wondering what the 'plus' is for in the Job Centre Plus offices. Because, aside from the case that dole money in general should be neared to living standards, it is also unfair that those who have paid National Insurance for years -decades in some cases- receive the same as a 19-year-old who's never worked in his or her life.
Field proposes to grade the jobseeker's allowance "according to the number of years that a claimant has worked". "It could be doubled to £121 for those with, say, ten years' of NI contributions and increased to £181.50 for those with 15 years", he writes.
No comments:
Post a Comment