All 3 Debates between Pamela Nash and Lord Grayling

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Pamela Nash and Lord Grayling
Monday 25th June 2012

(12 years, 5 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Madeleine Moon Portrait Mrs Madeleine Moon (Bridgend) (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

14. How many people are waiting for appeal tribunals on the outcome of work capability assessments.

Lord Grayling Portrait The Minister of State, Department for Work and Pensions (Chris Grayling)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

At 31 December 2011, the latest date for which data have been published, 63,500 appeals were outstanding in which the work capability assessment was a factor, down from 84,100 in October 2010. There are always a number of live appeals at the various stages of processing before being listed for a tribunal hearing.

Pamela Nash Portrait Pamela Nash
- Hansard - -

The fact that 63,500 people are in limbo is a disgrace, and waiting for appeal results is damaging people’s health, particularly those who have mental health problems. What is the Minister doing to try to rectify the situation, and when can we expect waiting times for appeals to be at a reasonable level?

Lord Grayling Portrait Chris Grayling
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I think that the hon. Lady has misunderstood the situation. There will always be people who are waiting for appeals. If they put in an appeal submission today, they will not have a tribunal hearing this afternoon. There is always a gap to allow everyone involved to prepare for the hearing itself. We are doing everything we can to reduce the backlog of appeals, as we inherited a massive backlog two years ago from the previous Government. The figures I have just set out show that we have succeeded in reducing that. We have reduced it as far as possible, but there will always be people in the pipeline waiting for appeals, because they simply do not happen on the same day as the application goes in.

Youth Unemployment

Debate between Pamela Nash and Lord Grayling
Wednesday 16th February 2011

(13 years, 10 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Grayling Portrait Chris Grayling
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

It makes no sense at all.

I have a theory. The hon. Gentleman and I agree that apprenticeships are by far the best way of delivering long-term, sustained career opportunities for young people, but the future jobs fund was introduced a few months before the general election, and it was designed to move a large number of young people into temporary placements. He will form his own judgments as to what might have motivated that decision.

The reality is that, in early tracking—and I accept it is early tracking—of outcomes from the future jobs fund, the very first data showed that a substantial proportion, about 50%, of people who had been on the scheme were already back on benefits seven months after they started; and that did not take into account the fact that in many areas local authorities had extended future jobs fund placements by two or three extra months. In April, we will get a sense of the scheme’s real impact, but the first evidence suggests to me that it has not proved to be any more effective than previous new deals or other similar schemes that cost much less money.

Pamela Nash Portrait Pamela Nash (Airdrie and Shotts) (Lab)
- Hansard - -

On that point, do the Government honestly believe that for 50% of young people to be in work a full month after their future jobs fund placements—

Pamela Nash Portrait Pamela Nash
- Hansard - -

My point comes from the same statistics. Do the Government honestly believe that 50% of young people being in full-time work a month later is a failure? In our opinion, it is a great success for the fund.

Lord Grayling Portrait Chris Grayling
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

If that were the case. In reality, we know that a number of placements continued for seven, eight or nine months after being funded by local money, so the first indications are that the final outcome of the future jobs fund will be no better than other employment programmes, but involve a much higher price.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Pamela Nash and Lord Grayling
Monday 14th February 2011

(13 years, 10 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Pamela Nash Portrait Pamela Nash (Airdrie and Shotts) (Lab)
- Hansard - -

T5. On Friday, I visited the Reeltime youth and music group in my constituency, where I met three young men who had got their jobs through the future jobs fund. They feel that the FJF is a great success for them, and so did the group. The Scottish Labour party agrees, and has today announced that it will create 10,000 places if it wins in May. Will the Government reconsider scrapping the FJF, or do they still believe youth unemployment is a price worth paying?

Lord Grayling Portrait The Minister of State, Department for Work and Pensions (Chris Grayling)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I sometimes think Opposition Members simply do not listen. First, as we have just heard, the Labour party left behind for us the most monumental financial mess, so there are not large amounts of money in the kitty to pay for the best support we could possibly deliver or all the things that we would like to do. The reality is that we have chosen to divert the money that we have into paying for apprenticeships. We have announced tens of thousands of extra apprenticeships, as we believe that they are a much better way of delivering support to young people. There are huge numbers of opportunities for young people to take advantage of an apprenticeship and build a proper career, and there will be more and more such opportunities as the spending review goes by.