This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jun/19/ed-miliband-young-people-whinge-cut-benefits-jobless-young-people

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Have you heard Ed's big idea for young people? This is why we whinge Have you heard Ed's big idea for young people? This is why we whinge
(about 1 hour later)
"Politicians don't care about me." This is the message I hear from friends, colleagues and the young people I meet, both from my own generation and those who are just coming of age. Some might call it a whinge – we're good at whingeing, us young 'uns – but whingeing is, at least, active. This is more of a passive exhalation born of disillusionment, a whisper of frustration, uttered between snapchats. The apathy is palpable."Politicians don't care about me." This is the message I hear from friends, colleagues and the young people I meet, both from my own generation and those who are just coming of age. Some might call it a whinge – we're good at whingeing, us young 'uns – but whingeing is, at least, active. This is more of a passive exhalation born of disillusionment, a whisper of frustration, uttered between snapchats. The apathy is palpable.
And can you blame us? Despite being framed as entitled and needy, so-called millennials and our kid brothers and sisters are becoming used to being thrown under the bus, most recently by Ed Miliband, who plans to cut out-of-work benefits for around 100,000 18- to 21-year-olds. On paper, the idea of replacing jobseeker's allowance with a means-tested "youth allowance" dependent on the recipient's willingness to train sounds positive. Apprenticeships are a good thing; training, when it leads to employment, is a good thing; having a qualified and able young workforce is a good thing. So why does it leave a sour taste in the mouth? And can you blame us? Despite being framed as entitled and needy, so-called millennials and our kid brothers and sisters are becoming used to being thrown under the bus – most recently by Ed Miliband, who plans to cut out-of-work benefits for around 100,000 18- to 21-year-olds. On paper, the idea of replacing jobseeker's allowance with a means-tested "youth allowance" dependent on the recipient's willingness to train sounds positive. Apprenticeships are a good thing; training, when it leads to employment, is a good thing; having a qualified and able young workforce is a good thing. So why does it leave a sour taste in the mouth?
"Britain's young people who do not have the skills they need for work should be in training, not on benefits," said Miliband, in a neat bit of sleight of hand that lays the lack of employment in this age group firmly at their own door. Never mind the absence of jobs – the problem is you. It is those without level-three qualifications (the equivalent of A-levels) who will be penalised, though quite which level-three qualifications are required for a job market comprised mainly of service-economy roles remains unclear. The measures could be an implicit acknowledgment that our state education system fails to prepare 16-year-old school-leavers for employment. That, or an obfuscation of the fact that, actually, there are few jobs. Either way, it doesn't make the country look good."Britain's young people who do not have the skills they need for work should be in training, not on benefits," said Miliband, in a neat bit of sleight of hand that lays the lack of employment in this age group firmly at their own door. Never mind the absence of jobs – the problem is you. It is those without level-three qualifications (the equivalent of A-levels) who will be penalised, though quite which level-three qualifications are required for a job market comprised mainly of service-economy roles remains unclear. The measures could be an implicit acknowledgment that our state education system fails to prepare 16-year-old school-leavers for employment. That, or an obfuscation of the fact that, actually, there are few jobs. Either way, it doesn't make the country look good.
What form will this training take, if it is not to resemble the Poundland workfare programme we're currently saddled with? Are we to send out-of-work labourers to do a sociology A-level? Will the redundant receptionist be asked to do customer service training? Or are we aiming for a whole generation of high-achieving, academic clones? It's not as though jobs for that category of school-leaver abound either. Will internships count? At present you can't sign on while volunteering or undertaking a work experience placement as, technically, it means you're "not available for work". So those who are actively seeking unpaid experience where paid is not available face financial penalties. It is absurd that the state will sponsor unpaid shelf-stacking but not a placement in a charity office. What form will this training take, if it is not to resemble the Poundland workfare programme we're currently saddled with? Are we to send out-of-work labourers to do a sociology A-level? Will the redundant receptionist be asked to do customer service training? Or are we aiming for a whole generation of high-achieving, academic clones? It's not as though jobs for that category of school-leaver abound either.
Will internships count? At present you can't sign on while volunteering or undertaking a work experience placement as, technically, it means you're "not available for work". So those who are actively seeking unpaid experience where paid is not available face financial penalties. It is absurd that the state will sponsor unpaid shelf-stacking but not a placement in a charity office.
In the end, Miliband's measures have a psychological effect not dissimilar to the youth-bashing policies that have come before: student fees, cuts to the education maintenance allowance and housing benefit for the under-25s, and the prioritising of private landlords at the expense of affordable housing. The feeling that the young are being sacrificed to placate an older voting population who have bought into a "something-for-nothing" narrative has a distancing effect. And because of this disconnect, a cycle emerges. Why vote for politicians who don't care about us? Why would politicians care about us, if we don't vote?In the end, Miliband's measures have a psychological effect not dissimilar to the youth-bashing policies that have come before: student fees, cuts to the education maintenance allowance and housing benefit for the under-25s, and the prioritising of private landlords at the expense of affordable housing. The feeling that the young are being sacrificed to placate an older voting population who have bought into a "something-for-nothing" narrative has a distancing effect. And because of this disconnect, a cycle emerges. Why vote for politicians who don't care about us? Why would politicians care about us, if we don't vote?
This month, the New York Times published an editorial, headlined "Dear millenials, we're sorry", apologising for bashing the young and their "sense of entitlement". "They get our derision when they deserve our compassion and a political selflessness we've been unable to muster," it said. But we are owed more than an apology – we are owed a place in society; a voice in politics and the media; jobs created for us; houses built for us; and wages that we can live on without having to turn to the welfare system for a top-up. But more than that, if we are to fulfil our obligation to financially support an ageing population, we need a political party that supports our interests. It sounds harsh, but the baby boomers will die off eventually and then we'll be left with a public so disengaged from politics that it'll be a miracle if anyone votes at all. Labour better start caring, and soon. This month, the New York Times published an editorial, headlined "Dear millenials, we're sorry", apologising for bashing the young and their "sense of entitlement". "They get our derision when they deserve our compassion and a political selflessness we've been unable to muster," it said. But we are owed more than an apology – we are owed a place in society. A voice in politics and the media; jobs created for us; houses built for us; and wages that we can live on without having to turn to the welfare system for a top-up. But more than that, if we are to fulfil our obligation to financially support an ageing population, we need a political party that supports our interests.
It sounds harsh, but the baby boomers will die off eventually and then we'll be left with a public so disengaged from politics it'll be a miracle if anyone votes at all. Labour better start caring, and soon.