The New Enterprise Allowance and the Work programme

Response to this request is long overdue. By law, under all circumstances, Department for Work and Pensions should have responded by now (details). You can complain by requesting an internal review.

James Spencer-Gray

Dear Department for Work and Pensions,

I refer to your own official public domain document: - https://researchbriefings.files.parliame....

I specifically refer to point 1.2 ELIGABILITY and I quote the following: - 1.2 Eligibility The scheme is open to Jobseeker’s Allowance (JSA) and Employment Support Allowance (ESA) claimants from the start of their benefit claim. Those receiving Income Support can access NEA if they are a lone parent, or are sick or disabled. Some Universal Credit claimants may also be eligible for the scheme, including those already self-employed.5 Participants on the Work Programme or in Work Choice provision are not eligible for the NEA. Support with self-employment is instead delivered by the Work Programme or Work Choice provider.

Therefore can you please explain the reason as to why it was deemed that immediately an individual was allocated to the Work Programme THEIR ABILITY TO FORM A COMPANY was denied to them and they were purely PERMITTED TO BECOME SELF-EMPLOYED.

I dispute that this question can be ignored as being vexatious as it is all based upon official public domain documentation unless you agree such documentation is false.

Yours faithfully,

James Spencer-Gray

DWP freedom-of-information-requests, Department for Work and Pensions

This is an automated confirmation that your request for information has
been accepted by the DWP FoI mailbox.
 
By the next working day your request will be forwarded to the relevant
information owner within the Department who will respond to you direct. 
 
If your email is a Freedom of Information request you can normally
expect a response within 20 working days.
 
Email FOI responses will be issued from [1][email address]
We recommend that you add this address to your email contacts otherwise
the response may be treated as Spam or Junk mail.  
 
Should you have any further queries in connection with this request do
please contact us.
 
[2]http://www.gov.uk/dwp
 
 

show quoted sections

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]
2. http://www.gov.uk/dwp

James Spencer-Gray left an annotation ()

One would hope that as my question is dependant purely on official public domain documentation that even the DWP will have to answer the question.

If they claim its vexatious they are effectively stating their own information is not valid

James Spencer-Gray

Dear DWP freedom-of-information-requests,

I note that my request for a simple question has remained unanswered and therefore I seek an internal review.

It would appear that your staff are unable to read their own official public domain published documentation.

Logically why would the DWP wish to increase the size of the cost of the welfare bill, funded by the tax payer, if they have deemed that the individual was not qualified to receive any cash monies by virtue of any benefit payments.

Its not a vexatious or complicated question but one that purely seeks confirmation of official DWP policy otherwise there is the fear that every individual could apply for funding, via this allowance, at vast cost to the state.

Yours sincerely,

James Spencer-Gray

DWP freedom-of-information-requests, Department for Work and Pensions

This is an automated confirmation that your request for information has
been accepted by the DWP FoI mailbox.
 
By the next working day your request will be forwarded to the relevant
information owner within the Department who will respond to you direct. 
 
If your email is a Freedom of Information request you can normally
expect a response within 20 working days.
 
Email FOI responses will be issued from [1][email address]
We recommend that you add this address to your email contacts otherwise
the response may be treated as Spam or Junk mail.  
 
Should you have any further queries in connection with this request do
please contact us.
 
[2]http://www.gov.uk/dwp
 
 

show quoted sections

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]
2. http://www.gov.uk/dwp

Billy fisher left an annotation ()

James,

You know the DWP has responded multiple times to you on this and has now deemed further requests on the same subject vexatious.

Simply restating the same question over and over again using the words ‘public domain documentation ‘ won’t elicit a response.

The DWP are exercising their rights to deem repeated requests as vexatious. You may, and probably do dispute that, but in that case you need to appeal to the ICO as the DWP keep telling you to. If you refuse an£ keep up this fruitless campaign with the best will in the world DWP are probably right.

They don’t care: they’re paid to keep responding to your requests. you’re just wasting your own time. Appeal to the ICO, get their opinion as that’s the only way you’ll get a response.

James Spencer-Gray left an annotation ()

I have tried the ISO in the past but they felt they were unable to comment as I had referred to "official public domain documentation" and they stated that they were unable to comment.

Hey hoo corruption can flourish

John Slater left an annotation ()

By law the ICO has to either issue a decision notice following a complaint or explain why they are refusing to do so.

Billy fisher left an annotation ()

Well James, there are two potential routes from here. Firstly, that you’re just wasting everyone’s time and bringing FOI requests into disrepute and you should probably drop it and get on with your life.

Secondly, that the people on this site could help you frame your request in such a way that they are answerable. FOI doesn’t mean public bodies have to answer any question that you throw at them and many of your questions look like they’re loaded and designed to elicit a particular answer for you. Unsurprisingly the public bodies won’t play ball, and that you’ve raised 38 requests with only 1 partial success indicates that you need to change the way that you’re asking. Honestly few of your requests follow the advice that this site gives and many make no sense at all.

If you’ve been to the ICO and not been successful it doesn’t mean you can’t go back, but if the approach you’re taking makes no sense to them in order to be successful you need to make sense.

Albert Einstein defined insanity as’ doing the same thing over and over again hoping for a different result’. I’d suggest that you change tack and I’m sure that people here will help you.

James Spencer-Gray left an annotation ()

Dear Billy Fisher,
Ironically asking the same question in a slightly different light has proved beneficial in the past as the DWP's due diligence appears to be somewhat lax.
The DWP have provided details of their guilt, firstly by quoting the terms of the Social Security (Credits) Regulations 1975 sate that an unemployed indivual in receipt of purely National Insurance credits are legally NOT in receipt of any benefits.
They have also stated in writing that they would be GUILTY of perjuring themselves in the Supreme Court if they had demanded anyone would have been ordered to attend a mandated work placement if they were not in receipt of a benefit payment, cash.
I am the living proof that they did PERJURE themselves in the Supreme Court.
The DWP also maintain that their own published documentation can be deemed as being of "insuffient value" to be used as evidence.

I AM TRYING TO FIND ANY LEGAL REPRESENTATION BUT I'm INFORMED EITHER THEY ARE NOT QUALIFIED OR THEY ARE TO BUSY.

BY THE DWP'S OWN ADMISSION THE WORK PROGRAMME COULD BREECH THE TERMS OF ARTICLE 4 OF THE ECHR.

THE DWP NEED TO SUPPRESS THIS MATTER AS THEY COULD BE LIABLE TO REPAY THE £2.5B THEY OBTAINED FORM THE EUROPEAN SOCIAL FUND.
IT MIGHT ALSO HIGHLIGT THE SELECT COMMITTEES CONCLUSIONS MADE AFTER THE PROGRAMME CLOSED THAT IT HAD NO DIFFERENT RESULT IN HELPING UNEMPLOYMENT AS IF NOTHING EXISTED, THEY ALSO NOTED THE EXCEPTIONALLY HIGH RATE OF SUICIDE AMONGST THOOSE ALLOCATED, SOMETHING THAT DID NOT SURPRISE ME HAVING OBSERVED THE CORRUPT AND ILLEGAL ACTIONS OF STAFF AT THE DWP AND THE DESIGNATED WORK PROVIDER.

THE DWP AND THE WORK PROVIDER, SEETEC ARE STILL ADAMANT THEIR ACTIONS WERE CORRECT AND NO ONE WAS DISCRIMINATED AGAINST AS THE LAW DOES NOT COVER THOSE CLASSIFIED AS WHITE MIDDLE CLASS.

James Spencer-Gray

Dear DWP freedom-of-information-requests,

Sadly I note that yet again you have failed to comply with the legal terms of the FoI Act and I have no doubt you will try to side line your negligence by claiming the question is vexatious. An answer that would not explain why you failed to comply with the terms of an Act of Parliament.

It is a very simple question can you please confirm previous published documentation that those individuals who applied for financial assistance courtesy of the New Enterprise allowance HAD to be in receipt of a physical cash payment courtesy of either of the JSA Allowance or the ESA Allowance i.e. those purely in receipt of National Insurance credits could not qualify. These funds could be used to form a new company or to become self-employed?

Furthermore could you also confirm that individuals allocated to the Work Programme were only permitted funds from this allowance (New Enterprise Allowance) to become self-employed ONLY.

I therefore demand an internal review to answer the question and to give an explanation as to why your department has failed to comply with an Act of Parliament.

Yours sincerely,

James Spencer-Gray

DWP freedom-of-information-requests, Department for Work and Pensions

This is an automated confirmation that your request for information has
been accepted by the DWP FoI mailbox.
 
By the next working day your request will be forwarded to the relevant
information owner within the Department who will respond to you direct. 
 
If your email is a Freedom of Information request you can normally
expect a response within 20 working days.
 
Email FOI responses will be issued from [1][email address]
We recommend that you add this address to your email contacts otherwise
the response may be treated as Spam or Junk mail.  
 
Should you have any further queries in connection with this request do
please contact us.
 
[2]http://www.gov.uk/dwp
 
 

show quoted sections

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]
2. http://www.gov.uk/dwp

James Spencer-Gray left an annotation ()

Dear DWP,

I have copied and pasted the following form your own dedicated web site:-

Starting or running your own business
You may be able to get New Enterprise Allowance to help you:
start your own business
develop your business, if you’re already self-employed
Starting your own business
You could get mentoring and an allowance to help you start your own business through New Enterprise Allowance.
You may be eligible if you’re over 18 and either:
you or your partner get Universal Credit, Jobseeker’s Allowance or Employment and Support Allowance
you get Income Support and you’re a lone parent, sick or disabled.

So as per the Social Security (Credits) Regulations 1975 which categorically state that an unemployed individual purely in receipt of N.I. credits is NOT classified as being in receipt of a benefit, i.e. the formentioned benefits the answer must be NO.
Unless you wish to claim that your own public domain documentation can not be trusted to tell the truth
I await your deliberations.