EMA withdrawall

Graham_Devon

dori2o wrote: »

this will seriously backfire on the government. Instead of paying these young people £30 to attend college and improve their prospects for the future, many will now not bother and instead claim £50.95 per week JSA and maybe never get out of the benefit trap.

That says more about the type of people in education, and the waste of time and money spent it would be educating these people if that's their attitude.

Percy1983

I remember my year was the first year this was introduced and at the time a friend would have got it while I wouldn't yet my parents didn't have the spare cash to give to me. As it is I went down the NVQ route and earnt a very small amount while doing on the job training.

As a better example my other half and 4 other friends all went to college 2 didn't get EMA and 3 did. In short the 2 who didn't get it had to work weekends while there friends who did get it would go shopping every weekend (sometimes visiting the shops there friends had to work in).

You should be at college because you want to be, not because you are paid to be. Talking to my other half she said thre was many on her course who didn't give a s**t and where just there as EMA was all they could claim until they was 18. As it is the problem may have been amplified as she was doing childcare which is often seen as the easy course to claim EMA for 2 years, but she did say at times those who clearly didn't want to be there did hold the group back at points, now if they weren't paid to be there they would just chav about elsewhere and not disturb the learning of those who want to learn.

SingleSue

I agree Graham, yes it was an incentive but to be honest, it came pretty far down the list where eldest or myself were concerned.

He wanted to continue, I wanted him to continue and have the chances I didn't have (my choice to be fair, I was rather headstrong) and the EMA, although a real help to him, was not the priority.

A good education and the prospect of better employment at the end of it was.

clarrie8466

I have three daughters, two of whom are successfully making their way in life. The third (who does not live with me) dosses around, enrolling each year for college but never going, and collecting her ema to continue what she thinks is a good life. She should not be given it. I know jobs are scarce but my ex and I can't get her to even start looking for one - and she certainly is wasting state resources being booked onto courses. Unfortunately this is common amongst her so-called 'friends'. I am pleased EMA is going.

Incidentally my elder daughters never lacked for much. I resented that friends of theirs got EMA but they did not qualify (because of my earnings), as it put pyschological pressure on me to pay it instead. £30 a week (or £1500 per year) is a lot extra to find on top of what you are already doing.

rammy007

My son has been at college now hes in his 3rd and final year,he doesnt get EMA and has had a part time job since leaving school,the amount of kids who have either left or been thrown off the course over the last 2half years is staggering and they were all on EMA,as was said before most of their parents will lose far more than the kids losin their EMA if they quit ie all child related tax credits/benefits so they will still have to support them if they quit as they cant claim anything until theyre 18.

Oldernotwiser

oz0707 wrote: »

Will it really be compulsory to stay on in education until 18? What a joke. Kid's who aren't interested will just be distracting lessons. I think your old enough to decide what path to go down at 16.

As I said, it's education and training; apprenticeships and jobs with training are included.

Oldernotwiser

paddedjohn wrote: »

if they have a job to go to then they will be able to leave before 18.

As above^^^; only if it's a job with training.

Oldernotwiser

molerat wrote: »

EMA was only brought in to massage unemployment figures. At school / college therefore not unemployed. About time it was done away with.

As young people of 16/17 cannot claim JSA (and therefore wouldn't be counted in the unemployment figures) this really isn't true.

Jowo_2

dori2o wrote: »

this will seriously backfire on the government. Instead of paying these young people £30 to attend college and improve their prospects for the future, many will now not bother and instead claim £50.95 per week JSA and maybe never get out of the benefit trap.

Good point. Currently the unemployment rate for the under 25s is 3 times the national rate of unemployment, standing at 20%.

However, a recent ONS study shows that two out of three new jobs are now being gained by immigrants.

So attention needs to be paid to make employment attractive to the young and the young attractive to employment.

Masomnia

silvercar wrote: »

Even though the EMA supposedly pays for transport and books, in practice it is the ones with the EMA that have the gadgets and get the expensive gig tickets/ designer clothes.

This is a misconception that Labour are now peddling because it suits their argument.

Back in t' day when I got EMA they made no secret of the fact that it was there just as an incentive to study and you were more than welcome to spend it on whatever you wanted.