LATEST CUTS SHOW “YOUNG PEOPLE NOT A PRIORITY FOR THIS GOVERNMENT” EXPERTS WARN
The government has been accused of turning its back on your generation in a time of economic hardship – as it was announced yesterday that THREE employment schemes affecting graduates were among the latest casualties of fresh rounds of government cuts.
The cancelled programmes are:
Extension of Young Person’s Guarantee to 2011/12: £450m
The scheme aimed to provide work or training places, mainly for 18 to 24-year-olds who had been out of work for six months.
Rollout of the Future Jobs Fund: £290m
A fund to support job creation for young people who were long-term unemployed which aimed to create 150,000 jobs.
Two year Jobseeker’s Guarantee: £515m
Aimed at giving jobseekers a guaranteed offer of a job, internship, volunteering placement or work experience after two years of being out of work.
Danny Alexander, Chief Secretary to the Treasury, explained:
“As a result of poor decisions made by the previous government, I have taken the decision to cancel certain projects that do not represent good value for money and suspend others pending full consideration in the spending review.”
However, Mary Bousted, general secretary of the Association of Teachers and Lecturers said the cuts were disproportionately harsh on young jobseekers.
“It is clear that young people and their futures are not a priority for this government, with nearly three-quarters of the £2bn cuts to projects agreed by the last government affecting young people and, in particular, young people who are looking for work.”
She also suggested that the cuts would not save money in the long-term and that the government had prioritised cutting the deficit over the futures of an entire generation.
“The government has justified abolishing such key employment projects as the Young Person’s Guarantee and the Future Jobs Fund, by stating that they do not represent its priorities or are not good value for money.
“Is the prospect of life on the dole for young people better value for money in the government’s terms or are they more concerned about how their fiscal policies are going to play out on the stock market?
“With the possibility that Building Schools for the Future will also be axed and the huge cutback in university places, the prospects for young people look very bleak indeed.”
But Danny Alexander defended the government’s decisions, insisting:
“We are determined to tackle the unprecedented budget deficit and bad financial management we have seen over the past decade, but are equally determined to do this in a way that is fair and responsible.”
Maths was never Graduate Fog’s strongest subject so I can’t comment on whether these schemes were good value for money or not.
But I am concerned at the timing of this decision.
Are the politicians aware that 675,000 students are about to finish their undergraduate and postgraduate courses this summer?
If these schemes are going to be replaced with more cost-effective versions, the politicians have only left themselves with a couple of weeks to implement them...
*Has the government done the right thing?
Or are you worried the axing of these three schemes will affect you directly as you hunt for work this summer?
In truth, it’s very hard to offer much of a well-informed view on this until the government give more details on what is replacing these schemes. If they introduce a more cost-effective and workable regimen – fantastic. If they leave hundreds of thousands of unemployed (especially long-term unemployed) youth to flounder, clearly that’s moronic to the highest degree.
~£2,000 per job created (and which equips the workers with industry experience, allowing them to better jump through hoops and gain access to more jobs further down the line) seems, to a layman, like a pretty reasonable price, when the alternative is to have them be dependent upon JSA/benefits which are £2,500+per annum for JSA alone, nevermind housing benefit etc.
I’m currently employed thanks to the Future Jobs Fund, so I thought I would give my two cents.
The scheme itself was far from perfect. The jobs were limited, probably because it was still in it’s infancy, but from what I could see they were designed, like much of the help offered by the Job Centre, for those with limited qualifications. This means that the jobs themselves are fairly basic, and designed to rely more on enthusiasm and energy than booksmarts. However, it is clear that it is one of the few schemes that graduates could benefit from, given the catch 22 surrounding work experience. Despite the nature of the work, I am glad to be active, and closing the gap on my CV while gaining valuable experience, contacts and references is fantastic. The hope is that this will lead onto bigger and better things, which is why I am willing to accept the low pay and less than ideal workload for the time being. The news that the scheme has been axed, with barely enough time for it to be put to use, is shocking. Based on the government statement, we can only conclude that youth unemployment simply isn’t a priority to the current government, since the cost effectiveness cannot possibly be ascertained until those currently enrolled move on. However, like Gareth, I would hazard a guess that in the long term, the investment will pay off in saved JSA payments.
The rather weak response that the scheme will be replaced is hardly a comfort, given that graduates are struggling to get the necessary job experience right now. With thousands more graduates soon to enter the fray, alongside the ominous budget which will be released tomorrow, the government is consigning two years worth of graduates to struggle with unpaid work trials and internships, simply to gain a sliver of experience. Quite how working without pay has become the norm is a mystery to me, and I struggle to understand why graduates should be forced into it.
I can only hope that the fund is replaced with a decent alternative so that future generations of graduates have some light at the end of the tunnel. I wouldn’t wish the current struggle for jobs on anyone.
@Andy Ryan
Thanks for your comment – hearing from somebody who has benefitted from the FJF is invaluable to this debate.
You and I have exactly the same concerns. It sounds to me that whatever replaces these schemes (if anything), it will effectively mean yet another delay to helping those graduates who urgently need it NOW…
@ Andy Ryan
Just watching Labour’s response to today’s Budget and Harriet Harman echoes your feelings on the FJF saying it was a disaster it was being scrapped before it’s even had a chance to be evaluated and where ‘Every young person helped into work shows its value’.
She also questions how the private sector can carry the recovery alone, when so many jobs will be slashed from the public sector. Despite tax changes to help businesses, she says ‘Private sector jobs will not spontaneously emerge.’