slave labour

This week has seen yet another glorious defeat snatched from the jaws of victory by government. What was fundamentally a good idea has been turned into a farce by a few opportunistic young lay-abouts and as usual, the band wagon press.
Why on earth should the unemployable youth of this country have to actually contribute something to society? Accusations of slave labour and exploitation have seen the government running for cover and having to defend themselves and deny that the scheme is mandatory, even though all three of the big parties agree with the idea..
 Having left school myself in 1987, and joining the Y.T.S project, there is more than a sence of de ja vou about this story. SLAVE LABOUR! As i believed then, and still believe today, slave labour is better than no labour.
With mass unemployment among the young there is little hope of employment for few. There is even less inclination among many.
 Going out to work brings many rewards other than money. The benefits of mixing with adults who have very real responsibilities, such as mortgages, wives and children to feed, is an education in its self for many young school leavers. Welcome to the real world. Actually getting up in a morning and learning to be punctual and take responsibility fore your own actions is a lesson that is i'm afraid seldom learned at school.
The Youth Traing Scheme of the 80's attracted great critisism for exactly the same reasons that this new idea has. More than twenty years later many of those who started on the scheme as plumbers, builders, plasterers and shop keepers are now the ones running the very businesses able to offer the opportunity to todays youth. Wake up Britain.  Why not revisit the basics of the scheme? An education in something relevant, leading to recognised qualifications. Guidance of older proffessionals. Actual work experience to add a CV. A chance of a future.
The flip side of all this is that if massive companies like Tesco, Poundland, Sainsburys, Greggs and Currys can provide unpaid work for these people, then surely, they could justify actuall employment. It would provide opportunities for existing staff to progress and train these people. It would give smaller businesses a hand up and help drag the growth this country desperately needs out of the coma it is in. Even just a few pounds on top of current benefits would make the scheme justifyable.
 I would make it Mandatory.
With kids staying at school until 18 now the government could force 18-20 year olds to take "jobs". Give them tax exemptions until they are 25, and it would still cost the government less than paying them benefits for the next 20years. They could make 18-25yr olds national insurance exempt to give the employers a fair chance to run these schemes properly.
 Obviously there would need to be strict legislation to protect the young people in the scheme from abuse and exploitation. With the brilliant celebrity minds this country now has in bussiness such as Lord Sugar and Sir Richard Branson there is no reason why this can not all be done relatively cheaply.  The government keeps on saying they are making apprenticeships available but there is little or no evidence of this in the employment figures. Have some balls. Get the kids of the settee, off the Xbox and into paid work where they will learn lessons which they will reap the benefits of for a life time.
 Get the economy moving and make this generation the next generation of business and enterprise rather than a lost and hopeless generation that only gets off the couch for the occasional protest.

After a week of bashing the bishops, it has been business as usual this week as the press and politocians returned to their other favourite hobby, attacking the banks. First came the announcements that Mr Hester had reluctantly given u his bonus, and after days of speculation and debate Fred Goodwin was finally relieved of his knighthood. Both of the main parties seem to be claiming the credit for these victories for us, the British tax payer. ..but should we really be rejoicing? What exactly is the message this sends out to business from abroad? We are open for business is the message the government want to give but appear to be saying, we are open but we will move the goal posts when it suits and your contracts aren't worth the paper they are written on. Further more,if your endevours fail, we will slaughter you. The headlines in the papers followong Fred Goodwins knighthood removal was in many ways remincent of the recent disgraceful coverage of dead dictators plastered on the front page. Frankly, we should be uncomfortable with savage attitude developing in this country. And at the end of it, are we any better off? What have we actually gained? There is a grave danger of making the bankers into marters if this hatred and in some cases,unfairness continues. Mr Hester is by all accounts, doing the job he was employed by us to do. If he is doing the job he was employed by us to do then it is right that we uphold our promise to pay him for it. Let me clear, i am not and will not defend the banks, but lets not forget that this government is also trying to change employment laws so that we can sack people easier and make it harder to take employers to tribunals for unfair dismissal. Does this simply pave the way for bosses to simply change their minds come payday?