Last week there was a select committee at parliament which covered the issues surrounding sanctioning at Job Centres throughout the country. At first I was excited about this I naively thought that we might be given a decent representation and would be given chance to have our say. Not so. I myself had sent quite a few details of illegal sanctioning from Ashton Under Lyne Job Centre. I had hoped to have heard something from the committee even an acknowledgement. No not a thing. Then other organisations have contacted me stating the same thing. No response from them at all and no mention of this at all.
I’m not happy. The people of this country and the government need to be told of the reality of sanctioning. Now I am asking another question to Anne Begg who was the spokesperson for that committee. Why did you not acknowledge our concerns? I truly think that we deserve to be heard so I am calling for another fair hearing.
http://www.welfareweekly.com/letters-failure-work-pensions-select-committee/
The poor side of life 
They’re all in it together corrupt to the core
LikeLike
Reblogged this on Jay's Journal and commented:
I’m hoping that sanctioning will be stopped – this government are treating all claimants, no matter what benefits are claimed, the same as those who do need sanctioning. A small minority do need to be sanctioned, a very small minority, yet they treat us as the bad no matter what!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Reblogged this on Britain Isn't Eating.
LikeLike
That was the first evidence session, the committee has more evidence sessions scheduled, and once they have taken all of the oral evidence, they will publish a report that will also encompass relevant written evidence. Further, the committee use the written evidence received, at least in part, to frame their questions for the oral evidence sessions, even if they don’t formally acknowledge it.
LikeLike
Thank you let’s see if they actually listen to us next time. It astounds me how they can just ignore our evidence and not even give an acknowledgement.
LikeLike
As I said above, they do use other written evidence to assist with taking oral evidence. For example, see Anne Begg’s question to Matthew Oakley here:
Q16 Chair: Presumably if there were these pre-sanction written warnings it would take away an awful lot of the uncertainty, anxiety and confusion that claimants are feeling at the moment, which is what we have in a lot of the personal testimony that we have. They just do not know why they are being sanctioned and they do not understand it.
Ms Begg is clearly referring to the kind of first-hand evidence that you have supplied here. As far as I know, when the Work and Pensions Committee produce their report, they usually detail respondents to their inquiry, both individuals and organisations. However, where there have been a large number of responses from the public, they will sometimes simply list the overall numbers, but we’ll need to wait and see.
For a record of the evidence taken so far, you can read more here (large pdf file) http://data.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/committeeevidence.svc/evidencedocument/work-and-pensions-committee/benefit-sanctions-policy-beyond-the-oakley-review/oral/17289.pdf
LikeLike
Thank you. I have this already. I will watch and wait.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on sdbast.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on HumansinShadow.wordpress.com.
LikeLike