The coalition Government is drawing up controversial plans to relocate the unemployed to areas of the country where there are jobs, it has been revealed.   Work and Pensions Secretary Iain Duncan Smith said he would be bringing forward proposals to make the workforce "more mobile".   The comments, in an interview with the Sunday Telegraph, echo the words of then-Tory minister Norman Tebbit in 1981 when he suggested the unemployed should "get on your bike" and look for work.   Mr Duncan Smith, the MP for Lord Tebbit's former parliamentary seat of Chingford, said ministers wanted to encourage jobless people living in council houses to move out of unemployment blackspots to homes in other areas, perhaps hundreds of miles away.   He insisted millions of people were "trapped in estates where there is no work" and could not move because they would lose their accommodation. The proposed scheme would allow them to go to the top of the housing list in another area rather than giving up their right to a home.   "We have over the years, not us personally but successive governments, created one of the most static workforces in the western world," Mr Duncan Smith said.   "In Britain now we have workforces that are locked to areas and the result of that is we have over five and a half million people of working age who simply don't do a job.   "Often they are trapped in estates where there is no work near there and - because they have a lifetime tenure of that house - to go to work from east London to west London, or Bristol, or whatever is too much of a risk because if you up sticks and go you will have lost your right to your house.   "The local council is going to tell you that you don't have a right to a house there, the housing association is not going to give you one. We have to look at how we get that portability, so that people can be more flexible, can look for work, can take the risk to do it."   The coalition is believed to be looking at providing incentives for workers to relocate, rather than compelling them to move.                                                                                                                                                                               

  If a job comes up in a nice area in Pompey I'll go, as long as the government pay for all my costs. I'm poorer than a church mouse.                                                                                                                                                                                 

And a free pushbike Kwak!                                                                                                                                                                              

I'd like to know which parts of the country have more vacancies than unemployed                                                                                                                                                                             

hmmmmm worrying bunch this coalition, especially that lot who gave away their principles for governement power                                                                                                                                                                              

I wish people would stop complaining and bending the words of politicians.   I don't think they're going to FORCE anyone to move away from family and friends!  What if you have family who need you care?   They're simply saying... IF you want to move to another borough, you will now have the ability to get a house over there.   It's a great opportunity for those struggling to find work!                                                                                                                                                                             

I agree Matt ...... might move again myself soon lol not that they will help me lol                                                                                                                                                                              

Let's not bend the words then, let's us look at just some of the implications.
Anyone that's in social housing has security of tenure. If there's to-be a real incentive that must-be maintained.
If you maintain that, to make it fair to owner occupiers then incentives must-be introduced so they're not disadvantaged by a move to what's likely to-be a more expensive area.

There's no area in the country that has a job surplus, what we're looking at here, to make a move realistic is a skills shortage in that area.

Answer, don't address that in that area but move the skills from somewhere else!

Result, you end up with one area that's underpopulated and low on skills and another that's overpopulated and high on skills.

A north/south divide type reintroduction?

You must remember pms dont have a brain that's why they are pms.management that worked on the shop floor wasn't any good that's why they got into management.most of them are full of hot air  and don't think of us and what it means.

I have a friend who was unemployed and had even said to the jobcentre, can you find me work in other areas of the country, the answer was NO, we are NOT obliged to do that, moving wouldnt of been a problem as he private rents anyway... so here's hoping that if they do bring this in they bring it in at point of contact.. i.e. the flippin job centre ! Luckily he has found a job now, not what he is skilled in but as he says "any job is better than no job"

*You must remember pms dont have a brain that's why they are pms.management that worked on the shop floor wasn't any good that's why they got into management.most of them are full of hot air  and don't think of us and what it means.*

Wow happy what an attitude to management and the whole reason companies like BA will end up on the scrap heap! I worked on the shop floor as a perfectly good tradesman but decided not seeing the finished product in place made my work seem pointless so I moved to site work and eventually doing what I do now which is keep 20 tradesmen in a job through tough times! If any one of them could get more work in and do a better job they'd have a position tomorrow but they're happy doing what they're doing and we all get a crust every week. Without management there wouldn't be any companies so how do you see a way of getting rid of management or MP's and running a country or earning a living??                                                                                                                                                                              

so what do you people want then??????????????? to sit around waiting for a job to come to them?????????   And in the mean time get paid more on benefits than a working person......  Labour had made it more beneficial to a lot of people to stay unemployed...of course you are not going to get a job if it pays more to be unemployed....   and over a million jobs have been taken in the UK buy immigrants that was also a smart move by Labour,just letting them in in the first place, 1 in 4 kids born in the uk to day are from immigrint families, it all costs money, schools, hospitals, jobs, social....so all don't start bleating about labour wouldn't have done this...... they would proper end this country....like they nearly do after every few terms in government....   ok as for sitting on social not looking for work....I know that doesn't apply to everyone before the masses start bleating.....but look at it this way....you know as well as I do, that people play the system.......so come on, try and tell me you don't know anyone who isn't and I'll say don't talk bollocks!!!!!!!   I know people on shite pay who still manage to survive paying rent and food for kids, single parents etc but refuse to give up work to go on benefits as they want to work.....   all they are saying is if you are fed up of being out of work and you are willing to move to find work then they will help......end of dit..                                                                                                                                                                                   

Quite obvious you can't get rid of either RK, but they're talking about spending money for what?
It's obviously not to create jobs, coz anyone with any sense wouldn't spend that sort of money on "cheap" headlines.
If you create jobs you can look at a net cost and you wont with this scheme.

Running a country like this and it's all parties, is just stupid.

Well said johnny 

There's a minimum wage now and foreign workers take the jobs because our lazy fu**in scroungers would rather sit on their fat arses believing they're entitled to a better standard of living. Trouble for them is the government have decided to make it more difficult for them to find an excuse for sitting at home. If they all want to work, why are there any vacancies left after 5 pm every day??

Some people have no choice through genuine circumstances, some we have to pay millions for to catch fiddling the system                                                                                                                                                                              

Johnny this simply isn't creating any EXTRA jobs, so apart from spending money what's it achieving.

If you pay to move someone to do a job, the person that could've done that job who was local is now on benefits!
                                                                                                                                                                             

LTGTR I think the money is to help genuine people stuck in a rut to get out of it and i'm sure as decent human beings we'd all help our neighbours if we could. Some will take advantage of the opportunity and they'll have a fresh start in life, some won't because they can't and some won't bother because they've got a cushy set up! The spotlight will fall on the latter for means testing and exposure if they're fiddling. That means less cost to the tax payer in pursuing them and that can only lead to more savings for the country as far as i'm concerned                                                                                                                                                                              

To genuinely help people long-term you create jobs and make those jobs a lot more attractive than being on benefits financially.
You don't move people to jobs someone-else could do.
Unless you're saying there's no-one genuine there?

for gods sake our benefits system is the cushiest in the world, why should I work all my life pay taxes so some lazy f--king fat smoking, drinking arsehole can go down the pub and go to the bookies and spend his social money.....   ...again before people start bleating..no not everyone but again we all know a lot of people like it...... these couples who have never worked in their life and have kid after kid..... my parents worked all hours to put their 4 kids food on the table and clothes on their backs...ok it wasn't designer labels but we were happy enough...they wouldn't go on social through principil as ( he is 84 and fought in the 2nd world war)( mother died at 64) ....my point is that they came from a generation where it was an embarrasement to go on the social if you were capable of work....now it is the norm to see what .....well what you can squeeze out of the welfare....   Don't get me wrong my heart goes out to people who have worked all their life and due to resession jobs have gone...but guys and gals the same (labour) party you want in were the ones who had a large part to play in the state of affairs we now find ourselves in......   All they are doing is saying ok....those that say if they were in another area they would find work, then we will give them the opportunity to try......   Also you go look at the job centre, at closing time there are always jobs left there......WHY because it is more beneficial to be be on the dole...this country can no longer afford that system......and no amount of if's and buts will change that......                                                                                                                                                                             

I agree with you John..... And if those jobs in other areas are there and you wanna go then helping 1 person to get back into work is good,

If the local person wants it and is better qualified he/she will get it. But ask yourselves one question if the vacancy is there how come..... surely if you wanted to work you would have already applied.

*To genuinely help people long-term you create jobs and make those jobs a lot more attractive than being on benefits financially.*

Easiest way to do that is cut the benefits