Free Internet Access for those on Benefit/ Low Income

spen666

This story has been around for a while. It is in today's media

Free internet access plans revealed

Details of a government initiative to give disadvantaged children free computers and internet access were announced on Tuesday.

Schools minister Jim Knight said the programme will begin in February with two year-long pilot schemes in Oldham and Suffolk.

Grants will be provided to allow families to buy an "approved home access package" which will include a computer or lap top, basic software and broadband access for one year.

The £300 million initiative was announced by the prime minister at the Labour party conference last month and is intended to help ensure every child has access to a computer and the internet for their school or college work. Ministers hope the initiative will help to close the achievement gap between those from rich and poor backgrounds.

The programme will be rolled out nationally next autumn with every five to 19-year-old in England having internet access by 2011.

Mr Knight has said previously that said around 35% of families have no internet access.

Launching the first schemes at Lilian Baylis Technology School in south London on Tuesday morning, Mr Knight said that 20,000 children aged seven to 18, from low income families, will qualify for the pilots.

High profile marketing campaigns in local communities and schools will help to raise awareness about the importance of home access and the educational benefit of IT. The value of the home access grant will be announced in January.

IT suppliers will be invited to apply for approved supplier status, with those approved announced in January.

All local authorities will be able to submit proposals for additional funding for specific vulnerable groups, such as looked after children, pupils in alternative provision and low-income families in National Challenge schools.

Evening Standard


I have to say that this scheme has caused me to have some concerns. It seems to be the case that yet another thing that working people pay for out of their income is to be provided to those on benefits for free.

Surely providing these things free in the home for the unemployed is reducing the incentive to work.

Perhaps we should ensure that access is available at local libraries- as is usually the case. Then at least children etc can have access to the internet for school needs etc, but there remains an incentive for adults to get a job to provide for the children.

Big Red S

They've announced this a few times before under different names, with different critera, haven't they?

spen666

Big Red S wrote:

They've announced this a few times before under different names, with different critera, haven't they?

I've never looked closely at the details - had time today

biondino

It seems to be the case that yet another thing that working people pay for out of their income is to be provided to those on benefits for free.

And thank the lord we live somewhere civilised enough to do so! Three cheers for altruism and philanthropy!

redddraggon

I agree with Spen, why work if the government will eventually give you everything you desire for free?

avoidingmyphd

yep, let's deny the kids an increasingly essential resource as a way of incentivising their parents to find work.

COVEC

My queries would be;

Who gains the most benefit from the free computer and internet access?

Will the access be cut off during school and working hours to stop misuse by unemployed parents?

Will there be any limits on the sites avialable to view?

Will there be any download limit?

Sounds like another great government initiative that has had minimal research carried out prior to announcement, no doubt it will go away as soon as the right questions are asked about the details of the planned implementation.

COVEC

squired

Who wants to bet that these computers with internet access will mainly be used for illegal downloads, viewing pornography and internet shopping? Of course we tax payers will no doubt have to pay for replacement laptops when they are "stolen" or broken, etc.

redddraggon

avoidingmyphd wrote:

yep, let's deny the kids an increasingly essential resource as a way of incentivising their parents to find work.

Put in a library. If they need it for learning they'll go to the library.

Kids don't internet access at home for learning. I didn't have internet at home when I was school, however all my friends had the internet, but I didn't seem to be at a disadvantage.

Internet shouldn't be used for learning anyway really, it just encourages plagiarism and the information is generally not peer reviewed. Better, more useful information can be found in the library.

I'm in full time education where I actively need to hunt out information, but this comes well down the list of my internet usage at home.

- Bikeradar
- torrenting (!)
- online gaming
- buying stuff

The internet might be handy, but it's not a necessity for learning. What do they need it for anyway?

biondino

squired wrote:

Who wants to bet that these computers with internet access will mainly be used for illegal downloads, viewing pornography and internet shopping?

Why would they use them for anything different from what everyone else uses them for?

If you really want to be looked after by the state, commit a serious crime and hand yourself in. By your logic, prison is the platonic ideal.

spen666

biondino wrote:

squired wrote:

Who wants to bet that these computers with internet access will mainly be used for illegal downloads, viewing pornography and internet shopping?

Why would they use them for anything different from what everyone else uses them for?

If you really want to be looked after by the state, commit a serious crime and hand yourself in. By your logic, prison is the platonic ideal.

Ever wonder why we have so many repeat offenders?

N4PALM

What about the people on long term sick, disabled etc. Too ill to work and often forced to stay home, cut off from the world? Why is it that when people think of those on benefits they automaticly think "work shy dole scroungers"? There are also a lot of people in the world stuggling by on minimum wage, single people, particularly single parents. Not everyone is or is even able to work a job that pays in excess of 15, 20, 25+K per year. There are a lot of people out there turning the gears of your comfortable lives for bugger all money. Working all the shitty jobs that no one else wants to do. Minimum wage is only 5.52ph and many people have to work every day of the week in order that they can afford to live on that wage. Rent, food, heating bills all add up and if you and your partner arent working a nice comfortable 9-5 paying decent money you spend all your life trying to just get by. Its not like you can just get a nice cheap place to live either. And dont expect the council to get you a place via the housing register. Many people stay on that register for year and years and years and never ever get offered a home. Oh and dont think you can just go to college and get a better job cos in the real world its not like that. Who is going to pay that rent while your at college? Who's going to pay for the college fee's? Oh sure there is funding, if you meet the stupidly narrow criteria to qualify for it. Maybe you can go to college in the day, and work at night? Sleep is for the weak eh?

Not everyone in the world has a nice comfortable life with all trimmings, it really pee's me off hearing those that do moaning about "their tax money". Judge not til you have walked a mile in their shoes.

Big Red S

squired wrote:

Who wants to bet that these computers with internet access will mainly be used for illegal downloads, viewing pornography and internet shopping? Of course we tax payers will no doubt have to pay for replacement laptops when they are "stolen" or broken, etc.

Apart from the illegal downloads, why not?
I wasn't aware there were plans to give away laptops under this incarnation, either.

redddraggon wrote:

avoidingmyphd wrote:

yep, let's deny the kids an increasingly essential resource as a way of incentivising their parents to find work.

Put in a library. If they need it for learning they'll go to the library.

Kids don't internet access at home for learning. I didn't have internet at home when I was school, however all my friends had the internet, but I didn't seem to be at a disadvantage.

How long ago was this?
My recent request that my brother's school buy him a copy of Windows and Office for him to do his must-be-done-in-excel homework was met with some surprise.

Internet shouldn't be used for learning anyway really, it just encourages plagiarism and the information is generally not peer reviewed. Better, more useful information can be found in the library.

I don't see how using the internet encourages plagiarism any more than using a library does. Except for the fact that it's easier to copy-and-paste, but if you're doing it that crudely you'd do it from a book, and you'd get caught irrespective of source.
I've had large amounts of success learning from internet sources, both peer-reviewed and not.

I'm in full time education where I actively need to hunt out information, but this comes well down the list of my internet usage at home.

Why?
Are text searches of journals really easier on paper?

The internet might be handy, but it's not a necessity for learning. What do they need it for anyway?

Libraries of works of fiction might be handy, but they're not a necessity for learning. What do they need them for anyway?

rapid_uphill

i cant believe some of you guys think they should deny disadvantaged kids.
being disadvantaged isnt the childrens fault, you guys really make me wanna puke.
you cant deny them the write to an education.

fast as fupp

theyre only disadvantaged because their lazy fat-arsed workshy dole bludging parents wont get off their fat arses and get a job

doleites breed more doleites

N4PALM

fast as fupp wrote:

theyre only disadvantaged because their lazy fat-arsed workshy dole bludging parents wont get off their fat arses and get a job

doleites breed more doleites

In the same way that stuck up, snobbish, prejudiced, Daily Mail reading bigots breed more of the same.

Dont have kids plsthx!

Big Red S

Please, let's not feed the troll.

If you *have* to, they don't like being force-fed their own excrement. Use reason or somesuch.

redddraggon

fast as fupp wrote:

theyre only disadvantaged because their lazy fat-arsed workshy dole bludging parents wont get off their fat arses and get a job

doleites breed more doleites

+1

nasahapley

What about the people on long term sick, disabled etc. Too ill to work and often forced to stay home, cut off from the world? Why is it that when people think of those on benefits they automaticly think "work shy dole scroungers"? There are also a lot of people in the world stuggling by on minimum wage, single people, particularly single parents. Not everyone is or is even able to work a job that pays in excess of 15, 20, 25+K per year. There are a lot of people out there turning the gears of your comfortable lives for bugger all money. Working all the shitty jobs that no one else wants to do. Minimum wage is only 5.52ph and many people have to work every day of the week in order that they can afford to live on that wage. Rent, food, heating bills all add up and if you and your partner arent working a nice comfortable 9-5 paying decent money you spend all your life trying to just get by. Its not like you can just get a nice cheap place to live either. And dont expect the council to get you a place via the housing register. Many people stay on that register for year and years and years and never ever get offered a home. Oh and dont think you can just go to college and get a better job cos in the real world its not like that. Who is going to pay that rent while your at college? Who's going to pay for the college fee's? Oh sure there is funding, if you meet the stupidly narrow criteria to qualify for it. Maybe you can go to college in the day, and work at night? Sleep is for the weak eh?

Not everyone in the world has a nice comfortable life with all trimmings, it really pee's me off hearing those that do moaning about "their tax money". Judge not til you have walked a mile in their shoes.

Sir, I salute you.

theyre only disadvantaged because their lazy fat-arsed workshy dole bludging parents wont get off their fat arses and get a job

doleites breed more doleites

Sir, you are Richard Littlejohn (i.e. a narrow-minded s**t spilling bigot) and I claim my five pounds.

Jez mon

rapid_uphill wrote:

i cant believe some of you guys think they should deny disadvantaged kids.
being disadvantaged isnt the childrens fault, you guys really make me wanna puke.
you cant deny them the write to an education.

Are you being ironic, or did they not teach you basic English at school

FWIW, a lot of the time dole-ites do bread more dole-ites. In the course of his work, my Father attempted to employ 2nd/3rd generation unemployed poeple in disadvantaged areas. Guess what, BAD business move! They don't turn up to work on time/at all and are basically idle...

Now how do we make sure that the dole-ites don't breed more dole-iltes, I can only think of one possible guaranteed method, and it's not something which I actually support. You would have to remove the influence of the parents.

At the end of the day, society is always going to have a bottom and a top, however, the top must not be too high, and the bottom must never get to low, large social problems result!

st68

some people are genuinely unemployed and the way the economy is going one or two of the people on this forum will probably be soon! so before you get on your f**kin high horses about all people being workshy think.. my brother was layed off two months ago and is struggling to get a job & he isnt fat or lazy!!!

alfablue

There are huge generalisations going on here - so all disadvantaged people are lazy etc? Utter guff! Some are, and so are some employed people, everyone who has ever accessed this site at work should quietly withdraw from the discussion! (Spen? - still, I realise your hobby is to wind us all up with your daily gems of wisdom, usually tongue in cheek!).

So, the wealthy (and that means most of us) require incentives to work harder, and the poor need deprivation to incentivise them!

If any of you have the misfortune to suffer some chronic or disabling illness, and / or face redundancy above the age of 45 you may well find yourselves in the class you so detest.

By the way, we actually need unemployed people, and with the imminent recession our economy will be needing even more of them - they are doing you a favour, don't knock 'em! (Or would you prefer to have full employment, on the proviso that your pay is reduced by a third?).

spen666

alfablue wrote:

There are huge generalisations going on here - so all disadvantaged people are lazy etc? Utter guff! Some are, and so are some employed people, everyone who has ever accessed this site at work should quietly withdraw from the discussion! (Spen? - still, I realise your hobby is to wind us all up with your daily gems of wisdom, usually tongue in cheek!).

So, the wealthy (and that means most of us) require incentives to work harder, and the poor need deprivation to incentivise them!

If any of you have the misfortune to suffer some chronic or disabling illness, and / or face redundancy above the age of 45 you may well find yourselves in the class you so detest.

By the way, we actually need unemployed people, and with the imminent recession our economy will be needing even more of them - they are doing you a favour, don't knock 'em! (Or would you prefer to have full employment, on the proviso that your pay is reduced by a third?).

If you continue to provide more and more to those who don't work the luxuries that those who are in work pay for, then you reduce the incentive for people to work.

There is no necessity for anyone to have a computer or internet access in their home.

computers are not necessary in the way food, shelter etc are.

Who is paying for these items for the unemployed? Yes those who are in employment.

Why bother to work if you get everything you need and luxury items as well for free?


Its interesting how all thosewho attack what I wrote seem to ignore the point I made about providing access to the internet in libraries ( increasing current provision) for those who believe they need such access.

Big Red S

The only real issue I have with the idea of putting these in libraries is that at the current rate there wont be any local libraries left by the time they get round to implementing any of this.

Would be nice if they do go ahead with this to tie it in somehow with the OLPC project. I know it's been a bit fucked over by MS, but surely that'll just make it a more attractive proposition to government?

N4PALM

JSA, or Job Seekers Allowance is only one of a whole number of "benefits" that are available to people.

Income support, Incapacity benefit, housing benefit, council tax benefit, child support benefits... There are many.

Many people recieveing benefits are ill, disabled, carers, single parents, people on low incomes etc...

Why is it that people on benefits are always "unemployed" "workshy" "doleties" etc.?? Where does this misguided belief come from?

if you had any understanding of anything beyond your comfortable little life you wouldnt make such generalisations.

Also something to think about. 40 hours per week at minimum wage is less than £11,500 pa BEFORE income tax and nat insurance. Thats a freakin pitance! Take away tax and national insurance and youre left with maybe 160-170 a week. The rent in my flat is 140 per week alone. At that rate you could probably qualify for housing benefit. Thats another benefit thats not just for "doleites".


Do think before you judge people.

alfablue

Spen, your assertions just aren't true (as a generalisation). Millions of people have, before the advent of the minimum wage, worked for less money than what they would receive on benefits, myself and my son included! There will always be those who are work shy, but generally the work ethic is strong in most people.

As for necessity for internet access at home - this is relative, there is an information divide in this country, the have's and the have nots; there is no doubt at all that having ready and easy access to information via the internet can give one a huge advantage in the commercial, work and educational arena's, and it is not just the internet, it is IT access generally. It may be all very well saying use the library, but computer literacy and access is now expected amongst school children and they cannot feasibly go from school to the library every night. Still many children don't have access to IT and information at home. What on earth does it do to their morale, self esteem, and their chances in life when they are clearly at a disadvantage to their peers in the classroom, and more so when this disadvantage is plain to see by all. I guess you were never one to have the humiliation of free school meals, or the like, but believe me, there is another side to society that is less fortunate than you and it is not all lazy and out to scrounge your tax money (though I am a firm advocate of tax increases!).

Do you really think the next generation of brilliant computer/web/IT workers (or any number of other professions) will come from homes without IT? Yes, the extremely bright or brave can overcome disadvantage, but generally speaking, ones future will be pretty much determined by ones upbringing. If IT in disadvantaged homes helps 20% of those kids to have the resources to do better, then it is well worth the "waste" on the remaining 80% to achieve this.

N4PALM

BTW internet access is already in libraries. Anyone could go down to the library in town and use it for free (I think its free) any time. Provided there are any spare pc's. Its not exactly conveinient. But its great for those people who are on JSA cos they can pop down there, use the internet, do some job searches etc.


But as I keep saying... JSA claimers are only one part of the whole banner of "benefits recipients". I hope you dont ever get seriously ill and have to rely on the system for your money. Boy will you be in for a shock when you realise how little you actually get. Luxury it is not.



One more point JSA claimants get given less than other benefits recipients such as long term sickness, and thats the way it should be. Its only about £60 a week, thats hardly luxury. In fact if you went from employed with all your outgoings to unemployed, you'd still have all your outgoings and only an income of £60pw. Seem like much to you now? Doesnt seem like much to me.

spen666

alfablue wrote:

Spen, your assertions just aren't true (as a generalisation). Millions of people have, before the advent of the minimum wage, worked for less money than what they would receive on benefits, myself and my son included! There will always be those who are work shy, but generally the work ethic is strong in most people.

What assertions?

I never said people wouldn't work.

however, people who work for less than they get on benefits are very rare- why work hard and get less than you would for doing nothing. Use the free time to pursue your pleasures instead

As for necessity for internet access at home - this is relative, there is an information divide in this country, the have's and the have nots; there is no doubt at all that having ready and easy access to information via the internet can give one a huge advantage in the commercial, work and educational arena's, and it is not just the internet, it is IT access generally. It may be all very well saying use the library, but computer literacy and access is now expected amongst school children and they cannot feasibly go from school to the library every night. Still many children don't have access to IT and information at home. What on earth does it do to their morale, self esteem, and their chances in life when they are clearly at a disadvantage to their peers in the classroom, and more so when this disadvantage is plain to see by all. I guess you were never one to have the humiliation of free school meals, or the like, but believe me, there is another side to society that is less fortunate than you and it is not all lazy and out to scrounge your tax money (though I am a firm advocate of tax increases!).

The internet is NOT a necessity- it is aluxury. There are divides in this country. Some people have mansions and rolls royces - others don't. It doesn't make them necessities.

They may be items you desire. They are not under any sense of the word necessities

Do you really think the next generation of brilliant computer/web/IT workers (or any number of other professions) will come from homes without IT? Yes, the extremely bright or brave can overcome disadvantage, but generally speaking, ones future will be pretty much determined by ones upbringing. If IT in disadvantaged homes helps 20% of those kids to have the resources to do better, then it is well worth the "waste" on the remaining 80% to achieve this.

i repeat my original question what is the incentive to work andearn a living if you can get the same luxuries without working.

spen666

N4PALM wrote:

BTW internet access is already in libraries. Anyone could go down to the library in town and use it for free (I think its free) any time. Provided there are any spare pc's. Its not exactly conveinient. But its great for those people who are on JSA cos they can pop down there, use the internet, do some job searches etc.


But as I keep saying... JSA claimers are only one part of the whole banner of "benefits recipients". I hope you dont ever get seriously ill and have to rely on the system for your money. Boy will you be in for a shock when you realise how little you actually get. Luxury it is not.



One more point JSA claimants get given less than other benefits recipients such as long term sickness, and thats the way it should be. Its only about £60 a week, thats hardly luxury. In fact if you went from employed with all your outgoings to unemployed, you'd still have all your outgoings and only an income of £60pw. Seem like much to you now? Doesnt seem like much to me.

You seem to forget the free prescriptions, free dental care, free school dinners, housing benefit, council tax benefit, cheap travel in London at least reduced rates to use council facilities eg leisure centres etc.

£60 or so is just the cash per single person to spend on food etc

spen666

N4PALM wrote:

JSA, or Job Seekers Allowance is only one of a whole number of "benefits" that are available to people.

Income support, Incapacity benefit, housing benefit, council tax benefit, child support benefits... There are many.

Many people recieveing benefits are ill, disabled, carers, single parents, people on low incomes etc...

Why is it that people on benefits are always "unemployed" "workshy" "doleties" etc.?? Where does this misguided belief come from?

if you had any understanding of anything beyond your comfortable little life you wouldnt make such generalisations.

Also something to think about. 40 hours per week at minimum wage is less than £11,500 pa BEFORE income tax and nat insurance. Thats a freakin pitance! Take away tax and national insurance and youre left with maybe 160-170 a week. The rent in my flat is 140 per week alone. At that rate you could probably qualify for housing benefit. Thats another benefit thats not just for "doleites".


Do think before you judge people.

add in working tax credits, housing and council tax benefits etc as well


However- none of that makes computers a necessity- they are still a luxury and are free to use at your local library

N4PALM

Where u get the 360 number from? No one on jsa gets 360 per month. That would be 90 a week thats way more than long term sick pay.