From April, people reaching state pension age will receive a “flat rate” worth £155.65 a week, instead of the current basic pension worth £119.30, which has additional elements. Most people will not receive the headline amounts, but will receive more or less depending on their employment circumstances. The government’s own figures show that the majority of people retiring before 2040 will be better off. Those retiring afterwards are largely worse off.

There are problems - pension schemes are going through a “data reconciliation” process with HMRC which is due to end in 2018. This process is not guaranteed to find all errors, however the data for people “contracted out” their national insurance payments between 1978 and 1997 should be accurate by then.

The Government will then decide whether to “amend” state pensions that are already in payment – if they are wrong. 

Most people’s first pension savings is likely to be through work. Many companies already offer a scheme and the number is rising thanks to the “automatic enrolment” programme that will eventually mean all employees are opted into a basic scheme.

The London Job Show Friday & Saturday 26-27 February 2016 10.00am – 6.00pm Westfield showcases some of the very best employment and training opportunities from the region’s most respected International, National, Regional and Local Employers.

The London Job Show provides direct access to a huge range of vacancies across numerous industry and business types from entry level vacancies to senior exec level!

Effects of tax-benefit policy changes across the income distributions of the EU-28 countries: 2013-14 and 2014-15

The Joseph Rowntree Foundation do some interesting work. This is from research work by the Foundation on benefit sanctions. 

Jobseeker’s Allowance claimants received a total of 500,000 sanctions however the majority of people who were sanctioned in 2013/14 received one sanction, but three in ten of those sanctioned received multiple sanctions.

In the year to March 2015 the number of sanctions that were applied to JSA claimants fell to 510,000. This represents a significant decline (43 per cent) compared with the 890,000 sanctions applied in the previous year.

In addition to the number of sanctions that were applied in 2014/15, there were a further 500,000 sanction referrals that did not result in a sanction being applied. Sanction referrals may not result in a sanction for a number of reasons: a decision-maker may decide that the referral was not appropriate, for example, or a claimant may stop claiming before the sanction can be applied.

The first graph shows the number of Jobseeker’s Allowance sanction referrals for each year 2000/01 and 2014/15. The figures are broken down to show the number of sanctions that were applied (adverse sanctions) and the number of referrals that did not result in a sanction, whether because the referral was cancelled, reversed or could not be applied. The figures are for sanction referrals rather than the number of people sanctioned

This graph shows the proportion of people sanctioned a given number of times in the 12 month period to the end of June 2014. In the 12 months to June 2014, 540,000 JSA claimants were sanctioned. The majority (69 per cent) received one sanction. But 170,000 people were sanctioned more than once, 100,000 people received two sanctions, and 35,000 received three sanctions. A further 32,000 received four or more sanctions.

Carers in Scotland will be given a greater say about the support given to them under a new law introduced by the SNP.

The Carers Bill, passed today by the Scottish Parliament, will grant carers the right to request an assessment of their need for support and entitle them to consultation over hospital discharge.

Local authorities will be required to provide information and advice to carers as well as publishing local carer strategies.

The Scottish Government has invested nearly £123 million in support programmes for carers, including funding for short breaks and for health boards to provide direct support.

Commenting, SNP MSP Joan McAlpine said:

“The Carers Bill is a significant change that recognises the enormous contribution that carers make to their families and to the country as a whole.

“We all owe unpaid carers an enormous debt of gratitude and it’s right that we ensure that sufficient support is available.  

“The steps taken in this Bill will ensure that carers are able to have a life alongside caring – as well as supporting them as they continue to provide care.”

British Prime Minister David Cameron accepted a long-standing invitation to speak at the European Parliament, where he will appear on February 16, two days before EU leaders discuss his proposals for reformed U.K. membership of the EU at a summit.

European Parliament President Martin Schulz, who has been pushing for Cameron to explain his views on the Brexit debate to the assembly since September, extended the invitation personally in London on Thursday — and Cameron has finally said Yes.

The biggest issue on the benefits side that David Cameron has is the strain put the welfare system by migration that was built on the principle that people should work and contribute before drawing on the system.

The system was not designed to finance people’s children in other countries. Nor was it designed to subsidies companies paying rock-bottom wages, employing migrants on temporary low-paid, short-term contracts with no job security.

According to Rachel Reeves,  shadow Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: -

There are 252,000 working households from the EU now receiving tax credits, including 12 per cent of all single, childless people receiving Working Tax Credit.

Some may have been working for several years, but others may be recent arrivals on short-term contracts.

The House of Commons library estimates total spending on in-work tax credits for EU migrant household’s amounts to £1.6bn a year.

Recent estimates from the House of Commons library showed 20,400 people receiving child benefit for 34,268 children living in other countries, and 4,011 people receiving Child Tax Credit for 6,838 children living in other countries.

We certainly don’t need to leave the EU to solve this problem. Although there is a vigorous Leave campaign being trumpeted by the right wing media, when it comes down to the wire, a majority of people can still see the benefits of being in a united Europe.

Analysts at Goldman Sachs are warning that sterling could fall by up to 20% if Britain votes to leave the European Union.

The US investment bank believes Britain will remain in the EU, but its macro markets strategy team has looked at what would happen to the pound if the vote goes the other way.

It predicts that such an outcome would alarm foreign investors and put them off injecting capital into Britain, placing pressure on the current account deficit.

Goldman Sachs

The German government is proposing new asylum laws, expected to be voted in Parliament at the end of February, the so-called “asylum-package 2” (Asylpaket 2), that would restrict the rights of asylum-seekers. Main points: Refugees with a status of “subsidiary protection” will not be allowed to bring their families to Germany; those with low chances of gaining approval to stay will get speedy court processes and be forced to stay in special separated housing. Morocco, Algeria and Tunisia will be added to the list of “safe countries” to minimize migration from these countries.

SNP MP Challenges Pm On Benefit Sanction "Aspirations"

SNP MP Anne McLaughlin has today challenged the Prime Minister over DWP staff being given "aspirations" for the number of benefits sanctions they impose.

Various allegations of DWP staff being pressured to hit targets for the number of benefit sanctions given out have been made previously and the SNP has consistently called for an immediate halt to all sanctions until a full and independent review of the deeply flawed sanctions regime at the DWP can be carried out.

One of Anne McLaughlin MP's constituents works for the DWP and has said that staff are given "aspirations" on the number of sanctions that should be imposed.

 Commenting, Anne McLaughlin MP said:

"There has long been allegations of DWP staff being under pressure to hit targets for the number of benefit sanctions they slap on the vulnerable but it doesn't matter what you call them - targets fail to take account of the devastating impact the withdrawal of vital welfare payments has to an individual. Benefit sanctions also do nothing to support people into work.

“And now those who are already in work are at risk of sanctions too.  Many DWP staff themselves are paid so little that they receive in work benefits and they too are now at risk of sanctions. The Prime Minister didn’t even attempt to address my question.

"The SNP is committed to fairness and supporting those on the lowest incomes by driving forward a real living wage, tackling unfair working practices and challenging the Tories attack on in work support that keeps local income families above the breadline.

"The SNP has long called for a full root and branch review of the DWP’s conditions and sanctions regime as no-one should be at risk of destitution because their welfare payments have been sanctioned.

"I think the Prime Minister should have some aspirations himself and aspire to actually help people on low incomes instead of unfairly targeting them as part of the Tories' all-out assault on the poor."

Human rights campaigners say ‘no coherent case’ for repeal of human rights act

The Faculty of Advocates and the Law Society of Scotland have joined the growing criticism of the UK Government’s plans to repeal the Human Rights Act.

Both organizations have criticized the Tory plans in written evidence to the Scottish Parliament’s European and External Relations Committee ahead of its meeting today (Thursday).

The Faculty of Advocates said that the Human Rights Act “has been beneficial for the people of Scotland” and has improved the law’s treatment of “disability, mental health, discrimination and equality”, while the Law Society of Scotland praised the Act’s “positive impact on the development of law and policy”.

The Tory plans also faced searing criticism from Amnesty International – who said that there is “simply no coherent case for the reforms proposed”.

Commenting, SNP MSP Adam Ingram said:

“Human rights are written into the devolution settlement and successive Scottish administrations have sought to embed, develop and promote them. Human rights law is not a reserved issue and the overwhelming majority of MSPs across parties strongly support the continuation of the Human Rights Act.

“Those practicing the law are clear – the Human Rights Act has been a force for good and has benefited people living in Scotland.

“Yet the Tories are intent on weakening the force of international human rights obligations by scrapping the Human Rights Act – despite a series of experts making clear the damage this regressive move would do.

“If the Tories insist on pushing forward with their ill-considered plans then we are clear that they will need the Scottish Parliament’s consent. Scotland stands for human rights – and the SNP stands ready to defend them.”

Amnesty:

It is the view of Amnesty International that the UK Government should not repeal the Human Rights Act. There is simply no coherent case for the reforms proposed. We believe that any repeal and replacement with new legislation on the basis of current proposals would represent a dilution of rights, a lowering of human rights standards in the UK and a breaking of the concept of universality which is fundamental to human rights. We base this concern not only on the policy document released by the Conservative Party1 and speeches by prominent government spokespeople but also on the toxic rhetoric that surrounds human rights in the UK. The tiny minority of controversial cases – such as those involving convicted criminals or alleged terrorists – masks the reality of the vast majority of cases of ordinary people who benefit from it every day and rely on it to secure justice and protection. These cases have had a positive impact for the individuals concerned but also on the policies and processes of public bodies.

Faculty of Advocates:

The Faculty believes that the incorporation of the ECHR rights into domestic law through the Human Rights Act and the devolution legislation has been beneficial for the people of Scotland.

The devolution and human rights legislation has revitalized the law. Almost every area of Scottish practice and procedure has been examined and tested against the ECHR. In many (perhaps most) areas, this process resulted in no substantial change. In others it has resulted in important and overdue reforms of our law. These include reforms of the appointment and tenure of judges10, disclosure to the defence of the prosecution case11, the right of a suspect to have a lawyer present when interviewed by the police12, the right of unmarried fathers to participate in proceedings concerning their children13 as well as important reforms in more technical areas such as the law on diligence on the dependence of an action14. The law’s treatment of disability, mental health, discrimination and equality has progressed significantly since incorporation of the ECHR into domestic law. All of these advances would not have been made as rapidly or at all, or maintained, without reliance on the Convention and the jurisprudence of the Strasbourg Court.

Law Society of Scotland

 We believe that the Human Rights Act 1998 (the HRA) is a key component of our society and an effective tool for the protection of our rights through the domestic courts in the UK. The HRA provides an effective means for individuals to challenge the actions of the State and seek redress in a more accessible, timely and affordable way than was possible before incorporation of the ECHR rights. The HRA has had a positive impact on the development of law and policy both in the UK and in Scotland. We therefore support the retention of the HRA, but we also accept that there is room for improvement of the Act.

The Scottish Human Rights Commission (SHRC)

The Human Rights Act also places duties on public bodies in respect of human rights by making it unlawful for them to act incompatibly with ECHR rights (section 6 HRA). This gives rise to a compliance duty that has led to positive changes in policies, practices and culture without the need for individuals to take legal action including, for example, in hospitals and other health and social care settings

Repealing the Human Rights Act would therefore undermine the current devolution settlement.

There would also be direct and adverse consequences for people in Scotland in reserved policy areas like immigration, defense, some aspects of social security, employment and privacy. This would directly affect people in all sorts of ways – disabled people looking to challenge policies like the bedroom tax; the families of Scottish soldiers whose rights are not upheld whilst operating outside of the UK; people and communities affected by immigration detention practices; employees seeking to challenge unfair employment practices; people concerned about the excessive collection of personal data.

SNP Westminster Leader Angus Robertson MP has called on the Prime Minister to defer the date of the EU referendum. 

Speaking during Prime Minister’s Questions today, Angus Robertson MP asked David Cameron for a commitment not to hold the EU referendum in June. 

Scotland’s First Minister Nicola Sturgeon, along with First Minsters from Wales and Northern Ireland, has written to the Prime Minister on the EU referendum date which “risks confusing issues when clarity is required”, and calls for the Prime Minister to “defer the EU referendum at least until later in the year”. 

SNP Foreign Affairs spokesperson Alex Salmond MSP MP, who is attending the budget in the Scottish Parliament today, told the Prime Minister yesterday that a June date for the EU referendum would inevitably "conflict" with the devolved elections and therefore be disrespectful to the democratic process in Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and London.

Angus Robertson MP said:

“The timing of the European Union referendum is extremely important. Why will the Prime Minister not respect the electorate and governments of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland and give that commitment today? 

“If David Cameron wants a fair Referendum on our membership of the EU then we need to ensure we have time for a proper debate. Rushing through a Referendum in June just after important elections in Scotland, Northern Ireland, Wales, London and across England, is totally disrespectful to those elections and will simply not give sufficient time to address the key issues about our future relationship with the EU.
 
“One of the lessons of the Scottish Independence Referendum was the importance of having a debate in which people were engaged and could have their say. To do anything other with the EU referendum has to be resisted.”

Alex Salmond MSP MP added:

“David Cameron has dissembled on his claim.

“I told the Prime Minister last night that while six weeks clearance is a necessary condition for the EU referendum, it is not a sufficient one - he knew that, and chose not to say it. It’s not surprising the Prime Minster has lost all credibility on the EU.”

Key Eurosceptics

Iain Duncan Smith, Chris Grayling, Theresa May and Theresa Villiers.