1-20 of 62 results for subject:Workfare
Librarians' tools
- Search time
- 0.296 seconds
- Solr query time
- 0.002 seconds
- Search query
- subject:Workfare
- We searched for
- subject_t:Workfare OR subject_ses:86463
Type
House
Session
Year
Department
Member
More
Primary member
Answering member
Legislative stage
Legislation
Subject
More
Publisher
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what the total cost to the public purse was of historic Court of Appeal cases in respect of Workfare in terms of (a) legal bills and (b) compensation to claimants affected by judgment; and how many claimants were affected in...
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what the total cost to the public purse was of historic Court of Appeal cases in respect of Workfare in terms of (a) legal bills and (b) compensation to claimants affected by judgment; and how many claimants were affected in...
The Court of Appeal has ruled on one such case, in the case of R. (on the application of Reilly) v. Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2013] EWCA Civ 66. In this case:
(a) The Department's external legal costs in the Court of Appeal were ÂŁ19,092.00.
(b) No compensation has been paid to claimants affected by the judgment. Parliament has passed the Jobseeker's (Back to Work Schemes) Act 2013, which reverses the effects of the judgment and ensures that the Department for Work and Pensions does not have to repay benefit to people who were sanctioned for failing to participate in the relevant schemes without good reason.
The case related to two claimants, Mr Wilson and Ms Reilly. The Court of Appeal has not heard any appeals in other like cases.
That this House is concerned about the proposals made in the first clause in the Welfare Reform Bill relating to work for your benefits schemes, which give powers to introduce mandatory full-time work experience pilots from 2010 and will require some jobseekers to engage for up to six weeks in a programme of full-time community-based work experience, claiming that this will enable claimants to build up work habits and practical experience; notes that the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) defines workfare as programmes that have the aim to improve the employability and work habits of participants and that enforce the reciprocal responsibilities of those receiving social assistance through taking part in activities of benefit to the wider community; further notes the DWP research report published in 2008 examining the impact of workfare schemes that mandate participation in unpaid work activities as a condition of receiving social assistance which found that workfare has a deterrent effect that stops people claiming or encourages people to leave welfare schemes before the workfare stage; further notes that the present sum of ??60.50 per week Jobseeker's Allowance equates to ??1.73 per hour for a 35 hour week of full-time mandatory activity; and therefore calls on the Government to make work for your benefits schemes voluntary.
That this House is concerned about the proposals made in the first clause in the Welfare Reform Bill relating to work for your benefits schemes, which give powers to introduce mandatory full-time work experience pilots from 2010 and will require some jobseekers to engage for up to six weeks in...
Wednesday adjournment debate on the right to work/workfare. (Includes ref to Employment Select Committee second report of session 1995/96 - HC 82 - and government response - HC 385).
Wednesday adjournment debate on the right to work/workfare. (Includes ref to Employment Select Committee second report of session 1995/96 - HC 82 - and government response - HC 385).
That this House, noting the unanimous second report of the Employment Committee on Right to Work/Workfare, House of Commons Paper No. 82 of Session 1995-96, which recommended that a pilot right to work scheme should be instituted forthwith and urgent consideration should be given to providing a nationwide Workstart programme, calls on Her Majesty's Government to implement all the proposals contained within the report, and to make an urgent evaluation of the entire scheme set out in the Right to Work Bill of July 1995, which is designed to eliminate unemployment, increase human happiness and sense of worth, and give everybody the opportunity to earn a living; and asks Her Majesty's Government to prove or disprove the claim by the promoters of the Bill that an annual saving in public expenditure of at least ??5 billion would be achieved.
That this House, noting the unanimous second report of the Employment Committee on Right to Work/Workfare, House of Commons Paper No. 82 of Session 1995-96, which recommended that a pilot right to work scheme should be instituted forthwith and urgent consideration should be given to providing a nationwide Workstart programme,...
To comment on the Government's policy on Workfare.
To comment on the Government's policy on Workfare.