Councillor David Green says scheme for finding jobs is 'worst in 20 years'

9:00am Wednesday 28th November 2012 in News Photograph of the Author By Rhys Thomas, T&A Reporter

Councillor David Green Councillor David Green

The leader of Bradford Council has slammed a Government employment scheme that helped only 3.1 per cent of those taking part in the city find a sustainable job.

Figures published by the Department for Work and Pensions showed that 10,850 Bradford people had started the Work Programme since it was launched last year, but only 340 stayed in a job for six months.

Iain Duncan Smith’s £5 billion scheme is aimed at getting people back into long-term employment.

Councillor David Green (Lab, Wibsey), leader of the Council, said: “The figures are incredibly disappointing, particularly for those unemployed people in Bradford who are relying on the scheme to gain employment.

“I think that a three per cent success rate is lower than any other Government scheme brought in during the 20 years I have been on the council.”

Nationally, 31,240 people out of 877,880 – 3.5 per cent – ended up in a long-term job as a result of the Coalition’s scheme.

Coun Green, who said the Council’s Get Bradford Working programme was more successful than the Government scheme, said: “It is my belief that some of the support schemes for getting people into employment that were abolished by the Coalition Government did prove, and continue to prove, much more successful than the one introduced by the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats.”

Coun Glen Miller (Con, Worth Valley), said he had not seen the figures. When told them by the Telegraph & Argus, Coun Miller, the Council’s Conservative group leader, said: “I have not read the report so I cannot comment on it.”

Employment minister Mark Hoban said that improvement notices had been sent to a number of organisations involved in the programme. He said that 56 per cent of people who joined the scheme had come off benefits, with one in five of the earliest participants spending at least six months off benefits.

Nationally, the scheme had a target of 5.5 per cent set for finding jobs.

e-mail: rhys.thomas@telegraphandargus.co.uk

Comments(12)

angry bradfordian says...
9:02am Wed 28 Nov 12

Why is the leader so keen to believe the results of this report, yet his party are dismissing the Ofsted report which was also written by experts.

Not surprising that the city is in it's current state when our 'leaders' are more interested in playing petty party politics.

Report this post »

markjoe says...
10:17am Wed 28 Nov 12

angry bradfordian wrote:
Why is the leader so keen to believe the results of this report, yet his party are dismissing the Ofsted report which was also written by experts.

Not surprising that the city is in it's current state when our 'leaders' are more interested in playing petty party politics.
Fully agree, it seems our 'leaders' are more concern with scoring party points then helping. The story on Bingley market is a prime example, 3 people wanting to help save the council £40,00 a year.

Report this post »

Yorkshire Lass says...
10:40am Wed 28 Nov 12

Well nobody can say that the Coalition did not try to get the younger generation into work. This scheme has cost billions and maybe the fact that although 10,850 started the "work programme" in Bradford only 340 stayed in the job for six months. So on thease figures there must be a problem that needs detecting. I am asking myself what that could be and why isn't Council Leader Dave Green focusing on that rather then playing politics?

Report this post »

Thee Voice of Reason says...
11:16am Wed 28 Nov 12

Look at it this way, 3.1% is a higher percentage than the current completion of Westfield or progress at the Odeon.

Report this post »

ANY WHERE BUT HERE says...
11:31am Wed 28 Nov 12

What a waste, £430 million for 1000 jobs,how can they carry on.
The performance level goes up from 5.5% in first year (there nowhere near) to 27% in the second, surely they cant carry on. They need to get rid and sign people up to real apprenticeships, £6000 pound for each person,they don't turn up they receive no benefits.
All the taxpayers money is ending up in individuals pockets id rather see it burnt.

Report this post »

RollandSmoke says...
2:08pm Wed 28 Nov 12

So paying people vast sums to force benefit claimants to jump through hoops doesn't actually create jobs, now there's a suprise. It's bought the circus workers some nice houses and cars though. People don't want to live in poverty, to be stigmatized, to be punished for the governments failure to create growth. How much does this growing industry charge for each person they patronise?
There's money to be made from our social problems but that gives a financial incentive to increase them. I'm starting to believe that there are those who have been incentivised.

Report this post »

Another Landless Peasant says...
3:06pm Wed 28 Nov 12

Of course the Work Programme has failed, as was predicted by the think-tank consulted in its drafting, the Social Market Foundation report said it was unworkable but the Government ignored their report and went ahead anyway. Ian Duncan Smith, Chris Grayling, and the odious Lord Freud are all barking mad and completely incompetent. End this sham now.

http://liberalconspi
racy.org/2011/08/22/
governments-work-pro
gramme-at-risk-of-co
llapse-say-experts/


And well done to Councillor David Green for speaking out against this idiocy.

Report this post »

Another Landless Peasant says...
3:11pm Wed 28 Nov 12

The Work Programme is just the latest in a long line of potty schemes designed to pull the wool over the eyes of the electorate, to try convine the masses that they are addressing the perceived 'problem' of unemployment, when in fact we are in an economic depression, there is no industry, there are no jobs, and there aren't going to be any jobs. Also it is a fact that the system needs unemployment in order to function. Full employment under a Capitalist system is an impossibility even when we are not in an economic depression, let alone when we are! Capitalism itself cannot function without unemployment. There has to be more workers than jobs in order to maintain the balance of power in favour of the Capitalists and not the workers, otherwise it seizes to Capitalism and becomes Communism. No politician will admit that, but it is an absolute fact.

Report this post »

Another Landless Peasant says...
3:14pm Wed 28 Nov 12

The unemployed provide a convenient scapegoat for failing policies in a failed system. It's all about control. The workers must be kept in fear, and the unemployed must be punished for not consuming enough.

Report this post »

Another Landless Peasant says...
3:17pm Wed 28 Nov 12

The Work Programme is not there to help anybody, it exists to bully vulnerable people into applying for insecure low-paid work under threat of having entitlement to State Benefits withdrawn. It undermines the Unions and places everyone's jobs at risk. Boycott the Work Programme!

Report this post »

RollandSmoke says...
3:47pm Wed 28 Nov 12

Another Landless Peasant wrote:
The Work Programme is just the latest in a long line of potty schemes designed to pull the wool over the eyes of the electorate, to try convine the masses that they are addressing the perceived 'problem' of unemployment, when in fact we are in an economic depression, there is no industry, there are no jobs, and there aren't going to be any jobs. Also it is a fact that the system needs unemployment in order to function. Full employment under a Capitalist system is an impossibility even when we are not in an economic depression, let alone when we are! Capitalism itself cannot function without unemployment. There has to be more workers than jobs in order to maintain the balance of power in favour of the Capitalists and not the workers, otherwise it seizes to Capitalism and becomes Communism. No politician will admit that, but it is an absolute fact.
When you say "we are in a depression" who is the we you speak of?. Yes it's undeniable that there vast swathes of the population are suffering economic hardship yet the wheels of industry continue to turn, shareholders continue to gamble their excess wealth and reap dividends. Companies like Aston Martin, Jaguar, Rolls Royce ect continue to sell their premium products to increasing markets. Your analysis that capitalism needs unemployment is of course correct. The reason for this is that workers are a commodity and as with any commodity a surplus reduces cost. Capitalism is a game of monopoly and without access to capital you've no chance of becoming a player, you are merely being played. When playing it's essential that you keep your eye on what the banker is doing because unless he can be trusted to treat all players equally and keep his fingers out of the till the game is rigged and therefore is pointless playing.

Report this post »

thruth9211 says...
6:46am Thu 29 Nov 12

it seems working isnt value for money compard to benefits.

Report this post »

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree