First topic message reminder :

[size=150:2qlk0geh]I've put this here for discussion, I have raised 2 issues! so tell me has the uk got its priorities wrong :shocked1:or do you think this is right?

Prisoners to earn minimum wage, Prisoners should get £12,000 a year to work full-time, says Ken Clarke
[size=85:2qlk0geh]Prisoners will get a substantial pay rise in a reform of behind-bars work

Prisoners who agree to work full time will be paid the minimum wage worth up to £12,000 a year tax-free, Justice Secretary Kenneth Clarke will announce today.

The convicts would receive £5.80 an hour – compared with the current maximum prison wage of £9.60 a week – and be allowed to keep about £20 a week.

The idea is for the rest of the money to be shared among the inmates’ families, victim groups and the prison service to help cover bed and board.

One idea is to pay some of it into a pot to which burglars, muggers, rapists and other criminals can gain access after going straight for two years.

New prisons could be built around existing factories to give the criminals easy access to jobs in a secure section.

Their expected tasks would include repairing shoes, recycling and inputting data for big private firms such as Cisco systems.

The Justice Secretary, who has already stoked controversy by calling for fewer convicts to be imprisoned, said he no longer wanted jails to be places of ‘institutional idleness’.
Pugh

Mr Clarke can expect criticism that prison is supposed to be a place of punishment, where inmates work for the bare minimum.

But he will claim that – by making prisoners work for 40 hours each week – they are more likely to be able to gain a job on the outside.

He will say: ‘Most prisoners lead a life of enforced, bored idleness, where getting out of bed is optional.

‘If we want to reduce the crimes these people will commit when they get out, whilst boosting the amount that can be provided for victim support, we need as many prisoners as possible to work hard for regular working hours.

‘We have to try to get those people who have the backbone to go straight. To handle a life without crime when they have finished their punishment.

‘So we will make it easier for prison governors to bring more private companies into their jails to create well-run businesses, employing prisoners in regular nine to five jobs.’

The Ministry of Justice plans to enact dormant legislation – the 1996 Prisons Earnings Act. It would allow prisoners to have deductions made from their wages.

At the moment they do not pay taxes.

The plans received the backing of the Howard League for Penal Reform, which argues that the coalition should go further by allowing prisoners to pay taxes to the state.

Director Frances Crook said: ‘I am so pleased we are getting somewhere at last.




Child benefit cuts for better off are fair - Cameron

David Cameron has defended plans to cut higher rate taxpayers' child benefit, saying it is fair to ask them to contribute to cutting the deficit.

He said he knew cutting the benefit for people on more than £44,000 would not make him popular - but it was the "
right thing to do"
.

The prime minister said he wanted to protect the poorest and neediest as the government tackled the £155bn deficit.

On Monday Chancellor George Osborne said that from 2013 the benefit would be removed from families with at least one parent earning more than about £44,000 a year.

Hours later children's minister Tim Loughton told Channel 4 News the move to cut the benefit from 1.2 million families might need revising, with possible compensating measures for those "
genuinely in need"
, and he raised the possibility thresholds could be adjusted.

But he later wrote on the social networking site Twitter that people were "
over-excited"
by his comments adding: "
Calm down. Of course I'm not calling for review. Yes it's tough but fair."


Ms Cooper, the shadow work and pensions secretary, said the government's policy was "
now unravelling"
adding: "
They have clearly been taken aback by the reaction of parents across the country.

"
George Osborne and David Cameron obviously don't understand what it means for families on middle incomes to lose thousands of pounds a year."


The child benefit threshold was aligned with the higher-rate 40% income tax threshold to avoid complex means testing but there has been criticism that the move will penalise some families where one parent stays at home to look after the children.

While families with two earners on just under £44,000 each - but collectively about £80,000 - would keep child benefit, those with one earner on more than £44,000 would lose it.

The BBC News Channel's chief political correspondent Laura Kuenssberg said many Conservative MPs were nervous about the change and a couple had suggested it could be the government's "
10p tax moment"
- a reference to Gordon Brown's decision to axe the lowest tax rate, which proved hugely unpopular.
'Makes sense'

And Conservative former shadow home secretary David Davis told the Daily Mail: "
It would be fairer to consider family income rather than that of individuals.

"
As it is, this does encourage wives or mothers to go out to work. It is an accidental piece of social policy."


Mr Cameron told BBC Radio 4's Today programme that while people on £44,000 were not rich - they were "
a lot better off"
than those trying to raise a family on £25,000 a year adding that the cut - estimated to save £1bn a year - "
makes sense"
.

"
In the spending round we're having to make difficult decisions. This is £1bn I don't have to take off the education budget.

"
I want to make sure in Britain we have real social mobility and life chances given to the poorest children in our country so they can go to the best schools and the best universities and we can have a truly mobile Britain.

"
That does mean in a spending round you have to ask better off people to make a contribution so you can protect the most vulnerable and help them have a better life."


He said it was "
an argument about fairness"
and pointed out Mr Osborne also planned to cap the amount of benefit people could receive - so they never got more than the average working family brought home in pay - estimated at about £26,000 a year.

That would mean benefits would be restricted to £500 a week from 2013 and would be thought to affect 50,000 households, who would lose an average of £93 a week.

The limit would not apply to people on disability living allowance, war widows' pensions and working tax credit.

Mr Cameron said 85% of people would continue to get child benefit and assessing the whole family's income would have necessitated "
an incredibly bureaucratic and expensive"
and "
intrusive"
system, means-testing every family in the country.

Accusing the previous Labour government of having "
bankrupted the country"
, he added: "
It is difficult. I wish I wasn't having to do this, but we have to deal with the problems in front of us."


Asked about speculation that other universal benefits - like winter fuel payments and free bus passes for pensioners - might be cut, he said: "
Obviously you have to wait for the spending review announcement but I made some pretty clear promises to pensioners in our country, and those are promises I want to keep."

When you look at why it was set up in the first place it does make you wonder why we still have it?

The '''Family Allowances Act 1945''' (8 &
9 Geo. VI c. 41) was an Act of Parliament in the United Kingdom. It came into operation from August 6, 1946, and was the first law to provide child benefit in the United Kingdom.

Family allowances had been one of the items proposed by the Beveridge Report in 1942. The Labour Party briefly debated pressing for allowances during the War, but a party conference resolution to this end was opposed by the trades unions for fear that the amount paid would be taken into account in wage negotiations, leaving workers no better off.

As passed, the Act empowered the Minister of National Insurance to pay an allowance of 5''s'' per week for each child in a family other than the eldest;
later Acts increased this sum. It was payable whilst the child was of school age, up to the age of eighteen, if they were apprenticed or in full-time school education.

Futher proof that the UK has completely lost it

A dangerously warped notion of respect

Colin Gunn is, without doubt, one of the most loathsome men in Britain.

As boss of a vicious drugs gang he brought carnage to the streets of Nottingham and beyond. Police linked him to no fewer than 50 shootings, including up to six murders.

Thankfully, he is now serving 35 years for ordering the cold-blooded slaughter of an innocent couple – Mr and Mrs John Stirland – simply because their son had crossed him.

But even such a long jail sentence has failed to dent this vile mobster’s inflated sense of his own importance.

Having already issued threats to his enemies from his cell via Facebook, Gunn is now bleating about not being accorded enough ‘respect’ by his warders.

Astonishingly, the prison ombudsman has upheld his complaint – on human rights grounds, of course – and instructed prison officers to address him as ‘Mr Gunn’.

To compound this bizarre moral inversion, Gunn was allowed to release a public statement hailing his victory over ‘rude, ignorant prison staff’ and exhorting other lags to ‘stand up for your rights’.

No one would deny that prisoners should be treated decently, but this approach is simply madness.

For a man like Gunn, an austere regime where he is addressed only by his surname and forced to submit to prison discipline is exactly what’s needed to disabuse him of the notion that he is anything other than a common criminal.

Pandering to him in this absurd way simply feeds his warped power complex.

And it betrays the memory of Mr and Mrs Stirland and all the other victims to whom Gunn and his henchmen showed no mercy – and certainly no respect.

What price their human rights?

Why on earth should anyone, including Prison Officers, have the slightest shred of respect for a cowardly murderer? He is in prison for only two reasons - punishment and keeping him off the streets because there is clearly no chance whatsoever of 'reforming' someone of his character, as this nonsense has shown.
The sooner our society wakes up to the fact that prison sentences should mean loss of life's privileges the better!! and in the meanwhile I do wish the establishment would learn the difference between a 'right' and a 'privilege',

I think someone might have got the 'P' word wrong

It should have read 'Pensioners' are going to get the minimum wage. Or this Government are taking the 'P' again.

Prison means punishment. I wonder what's for Christmas dinner

Family allowance: Well I'm a firm believer that if you put money in the pot then you are entitled to take money out of the pot :: Unfortunately there are a lot of immigrants who go to the UK and demand their rights. Claim for kids that are in another Country There are also a lot of people that have not done a days work in their lives they also want their pound of flesh. The idea of family allowance is to help those that are in need. So I suppose that if you earn over 40 k it could be perceived that you don't need it, but then again the more you have the more you want.

Your right Tony but what about this Turd who now has to me called Mr Gunn A dangerously warped notion of respect

As a very young man I was taught that respect had to be earned from your peers, by your deeds and actions. These did not include criminal activity of any kind whatsoever, far too many low life's who have never done a thing for the benefit of society, think that respect is something that should be given to them! Not so. How many people have been killed and injured by drug dealers of all colours, and those who want to have a "
Gangsta"
image, just in recent years, simply because they "
think"
(I use that word with some caution) that someone had "
Dissed"
them! It's about time people in prison had to serve their time without all the cushy extras that they think they're entitled too. Prison is not meant to be a holiday camp, sadly they do appear to be so in Britain If someone puts themselves outside the rules laid down by society, they don't deserve any respect. The Prison Ombudsman is obviously someone appointed under New Torrie's with the same ridiculous! makes my blood boil

Sorry scott hadn't read that article. But I have now

Well first question is how on earth can this 'Prisoner' talk to the outside world on 'Facebook'

For god sake he is in prison for a crime, prison is where you have no rights whatsoever. This is Political correctness gone too far. He didn't get 35 years for stealing sweets As mike said bread and water that way it will cut down on the prison bill and therefore reduce the state debt.

I agree make em work. But for no pay Maybe they should get paid in food and drink no work starve. We used to live next door to a prison warder hated he was not because he was a right bee steward but he had a drugs dog.

Gimp wrote:

As a very young man I was taught that respect had to be earned from your peers, by your deeds and actions. These did not include criminal activity of any kind whatsoever, far too many low life's who have never done a thing for the benefit of society, think that respect is something that should be given to them! Not so. How many people have been killed and injured by drug dealers of all colours, and those who want to have a "
Gangsta"
image, just in recent years, simply because they "
think"
(I use that word with some caution) that someone had "
Dissed"
them! It's about time people in prison had to serve their time without all the cushy extras that they think they're entitled too. Prison is not meant to be a holiday camp, sadly they do appear to be so in Britain If someone puts themselves outside the rules laid down by society, they don't deserve any respect. The Prison Ombudsman is obviously someone appointed under New Torrie's with the same ridiculous! makes my blood boil

Agreed gimp blame the do gooders:

What respect did this toe-rag show to his victims as he murdered them? What respect did most of the toe-rags currently residing at Her Majesties pleasure ever show to the people whose person or property they attacked? Absolutely none, so that's what they should get in return. As for the bleeding hearts who say murderers, rapists, paedophiles, etc. won't be rehabilitated unless they are called 'Sir' - I wish we'd all realised how easy it is;
this could revolutionise the penal system! I was called by my surname all the way through school. The military use surnames. Sports reporters call footballers by their surnames.

The prison population in England and Wales has reached a record high of 85,201 and to keep just one peice of s**t in jail for a year it costs the taxpayer's around £38,000 and rising, Prisoners = Holiday Hotel Guests, have their own radio station, in-cell tea and coffee making facilities, Sky TV, game consoles, access to pool tables, table tennis, libraries, gymnasiums, phones, inshops, specialised menus Plus drugs and mobile phones are smuggled in. What have the scumbags got fear? Absolutely Nothing.

I'm sorry if this offends anyone but the only thing that would be appropriate for this so human is slow death

A Charles Bronson wannabe in the making here.... What next , suing because his lunch wasn't to his liking or there wasn't anything on the TV he wanted to watch? Is he in prison or a holiday camp?????

sallyann wrote:

I'm sorry if this offends anyone but the only thing that would be appropriate for this so human is slow death

This guy got 35 years for murder. Lets not forget that it is the do gooders that ended the death penalty.

Murder is killed with intent, manslaughter was by accident. If there is any chance that these animals would kill again then there must be a death penalty, otherwise we are paying to keep these animals in a life of luxury. How dare they stand up and ask for their liberties. Quote mick again hard labour and bread and water.

The UK has lost the plot in many ways - that is why a lot of us are living in another country, can't stand the place!!!

Just been reading about plans to reform the DLA in the uk and it made my blood boil, it looks like they are now wanting to take away yet again from the people that really need this benefit :Headbang:whats wrong with this stupid government we all know that there are loads of drug users who claim incapacity benefit because of their drug use and they do nothing about it and see it as a legitimate claim yet the people who are seriously in need of help through no fault of their own they want to make life even harder for them I have copied the article below tell me whats your thoughts ?

Plans to reform DLA are announced
Plans to reform the Disability Living Allowance (DLA) have been announced by the government.

The proposals, which affect over 182,000 in NI, include renaming the benefit, the introduction of an assessment process and simplifying the system with a reduced number of rates.

There would also be an extension to the qualifying criteria with the new benefit only available to those with a long-term health condition, expected to last a minimum of 12 months. The reforms are proposed for 2013/14.

All those who are successful in being awarded the new benefit would be periodically reviewed.

As part of the consultation paper launched by the Department for Work and Pensions on Monday, the government is asking for the public's view on whether proposed reforms would include children and pensioners in receipt of DLA in the future.

Responding to the proposals, Social Development Minister Alex Attwood said he was concerned about "
the scale, pace and intention"
of the proposed changes, "
given the high number of people who are in receipt of DLA here"
.

Of those receiving the benefit in Northern Ireland, 103,500 are of working age, and it is understood this is the group that will be targeted first.
'Highest levels'

"
The Coalition government has to acknowledge the different circumstances in Northern Ireland,"
Mr Attwood said.

"
I will work to have our conditions fully recognised.

"
We have the highest levels of DLA claimants in Britain by far.

"
We don't have to look too far into Northern Ireland's past to discover why this is.

"
I met with the Westminster Welfare Minister, Lord Freud last week, for the third time.

"
I outlined to him in detail a number of measures in terms of welfare law, benefits practice and hardship needs which I believe will provide a pathway through Northern Ireland's difficult conditions in a way that would help those in need."


Mr Attwood said he would be meeting again with Lord Freud to raise his concerns about the "
potential fall-out for Northern Ireland if the reform of DLA was to go ahead here"
.

He added: "
The full impact of many of these cuts and changes is beginning to be felt and understood and this places a higher need and obligation on all of us in London and Belfast to work out how best to do everything to protect those in need."