Wyre Forest MP 'not complacent' on improved job figures

Wyre Forest MP 'not complacent' on improved job figures

Wyre Forest MP 'not complacent' on improved job figures

First published in News Kidderminster Shuttle: Photograph of the Author by , Reporter

WYRE Forest's MP has warned against complacency after figures revealed another fall in unemployment.

Numbers released on Wednesday by the Office for National Statistics show the number of people without a job and claiming Jobseekers' Allowance in the district fell by 41 last month (Dec 2013) to 1740 - 3.6 per cent of those in or looking for work.

It compares to a rate of 4.7 per cent in the West Midlands region and 3.8 per cent nationally. Year -n-year the number has fallen by 448 since December 2012.

Conservative MP Mark Garnier said: "Yet again we have seen another drop in the unemployment rate in Wyre Forest, highlighting improvements in our local economy. The Wyre Forest unemployment rate is consistently lower than the national rate and the West Midlands region.

"While this is encouraging, it does highlight the importance of local events such as the jobs fairs. While I am pleased this trend is continuing, I cannot be complacent, there is still more work to be done. I will continue to organise local events such as the jobs fair and the business forum, which is being held on February 28 to provide advice to small businesses vital to creating jobs."

National statistics showed the number of people in employment in December rose by 280,000 to 30.15 million and the number out of work in the three months to last November fell by 167,000 - the biggest drop since 1997.

Comments (14)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

7:49am Sat 25 Jan 14

stour67 says...

Are these full time jobs as 2 people i know are working part time 3 jobs each which means they cannot get on buying a house etc.
Are these full time jobs as 2 people i know are working part time 3 jobs each which means they cannot get on buying a house etc. stour67
  • Score: 3

11:41am Sat 25 Jan 14

DOEPUBLIC says...

But failed to support the Lord's changes to the 'gagging'. law. Convenient use of the media. As to previous, I agree there is no indication of the quality of job received by the 41 people. Smoke screens and mirrors are obviously being conveniently employed.
But failed to support the Lord's changes to the 'gagging'. law. Convenient use of the media. As to previous, I agree there is no indication of the quality of job received by the 41 people. Smoke screens and mirrors are obviously being conveniently employed. DOEPUBLIC
  • Score: 3

11:44am Sat 25 Jan 14

DOEPUBLIC says...

This could also happen if the 41 had transferred to ESA. Therefore, it does not necessarily indicate an employment increase. Merely the employment of stats
for convenience.
This could also happen if the 41 had transferred to ESA. Therefore, it does not necessarily indicate an employment increase. Merely the employment of stats for convenience. DOEPUBLIC
  • Score: 3

11:51am Sat 25 Jan 14

John Herbert Smith says...

Cue Labour to bang on about zero hour contracts and the cost of living crisis...

Jobs are better than no jobs! This government is taking the lowest paid out of tax and plan to increase the minimum wage. Labour would introduce the living wage, which would just create more unemployment as companies lay off staff they can't afford to pay.

Labour need to face that their economic policy is in tatters. They abandoned a whole poor generation to a life on benefits whilst importing millions of people which drove down wages and put pressures on housing/NHS.

This government are investing in infrastructure, which grows the economy, creating real jobs so people who want to work hard and get on are incentivised to do so.

It's a long way to go, but the recovery is starting and Great Britain will be in a better place with less debt, better infrastructure and more manufacturing.
Cue Labour to bang on about zero hour contracts and the cost of living crisis... Jobs are better than no jobs! This government is taking the lowest paid out of tax and plan to increase the minimum wage. Labour would introduce the living wage, which would just create more unemployment as companies lay off staff they can't afford to pay. Labour need to face that their economic policy is in tatters. They abandoned a whole poor generation to a life on benefits whilst importing millions of people which drove down wages and put pressures on housing/NHS. This government are investing in infrastructure, which grows the economy, creating real jobs so people who want to work hard and get on are incentivised to do so. It's a long way to go, but the recovery is starting and Great Britain will be in a better place with less debt, better infrastructure and more manufacturing. John Herbert Smith
  • Score: -11

1:52pm Sat 25 Jan 14

Europeanist64 says...

J H Smith, be under no illusions. This government is correcting the deficit at the expense of the poorest and most vulnerable in society. If you are a higher taxpayer, like myself, you will have been much better off under the Tories. this has been funded by attacks on the poor and lower income earners. Worst of all was the attack on the benefits paid to cancer sufferers.

The poorer souls have had the Bedroom Tax inflicted upon them, designed to force them to move to smaller accommodation, when none is available.

What use is work, if it does not afford people a standard of living which includes: housing, clothing, food and heating?

As for immigration, we were quite happy during the Labour shortages of the 1990s to accept immigrants to do the menial and unskilled jobs that the indigenous population wouldn't do like: cleaning, care worker jobs and bar/restaurant work.

Strange that we are in a deficit and the government keeps subsidising private schools (mainly populated by rich kids)

Join the real Tory world JH, where people have to work to be poor! Today's teenagers will be the first generation since the 1870s to have lower living standards than their parents.

JH what we are going through is a mechanism to disconnect the economy form society. The economy gets richer and people get poorer. Sad that so many like you are swallowing the Tory poison.
J H Smith, be under no illusions. This government is correcting the deficit at the expense of the poorest and most vulnerable in society. If you are a higher taxpayer, like myself, you will have been much better off under the Tories. this has been funded by attacks on the poor and lower income earners. Worst of all was the attack on the benefits paid to cancer sufferers. The poorer souls have had the Bedroom Tax inflicted upon them, designed to force them to move to smaller accommodation, when none is available. What use is work, if it does not afford people a standard of living which includes: housing, clothing, food and heating? As for immigration, we were quite happy during the Labour shortages of the 1990s to accept immigrants to do the menial and unskilled jobs that the indigenous population wouldn't do like: cleaning, care worker jobs and bar/restaurant work. Strange that we are in a deficit and the government keeps subsidising private schools (mainly populated by rich kids) Join the real Tory world JH, where people have to work to be poor! Today's teenagers will be the first generation since the 1870s to have lower living standards than their parents. JH what we are going through is a mechanism to disconnect the economy form society. The economy gets richer and people get poorer. Sad that so many like you are swallowing the Tory poison. Europeanist64
  • Score: 9

2:52pm Sat 25 Jan 14

Wagtail59 says...

Do you remember when the Tories said introducing the national minimum wage would cost over a million jobs so much for their economic competence.
Do you remember when the Tories said introducing the national minimum wage would cost over a million jobs so much for their economic competence. Wagtail59
  • Score: 5

7:40pm Sat 25 Jan 14

DOEPUBLIC says...

John Herbert Smith wrote:
Cue Labour to bang on about zero hour contracts and the cost of living crisis...

Jobs are better than no jobs! This government is taking the lowest paid out of tax and plan to increase the minimum wage. Labour would introduce the living wage, which would just create more unemployment as companies lay off staff they can't afford to pay.

Labour need to face that their economic policy is in tatters. They abandoned a whole poor generation to a life on benefits whilst importing millions of people which drove down wages and put pressures on housing/NHS.

This government are investing in infrastructure, which grows the economy, creating real jobs so people who want to work hard and get on are incentivised to do so.

It's a long way to go, but the recovery is starting and Great Britain will be in a better place with less debt, better infrastructure and more manufacturing.
John Herbert Smith says.....
"Jobs are better than no jobs"
Of course they are. One individual will be 100% happy to have their job, if it is security for them. My point is that Mark Garnier is taking advantage of media opportunity to cherry pick publicity. Gagging the facts. As a person who chooses not to place a 'X' next any candidate on the ballot paper, I do not find myself snookered by your criticism of the Labour Party. In addition, having experienced professional employment and ESA, I am capable of recognising political attempts to cover incapacity. Especially, in a week when the Health minister felt wise enough to plan to tell the doctors of the discovery that when we present ourselves to a physician, a person sits in front of them, not just body parts.
[quote][p][bold]John Herbert Smith[/bold] wrote: Cue Labour to bang on about zero hour contracts and the cost of living crisis... Jobs are better than no jobs! This government is taking the lowest paid out of tax and plan to increase the minimum wage. Labour would introduce the living wage, which would just create more unemployment as companies lay off staff they can't afford to pay. Labour need to face that their economic policy is in tatters. They abandoned a whole poor generation to a life on benefits whilst importing millions of people which drove down wages and put pressures on housing/NHS. This government are investing in infrastructure, which grows the economy, creating real jobs so people who want to work hard and get on are incentivised to do so. It's a long way to go, but the recovery is starting and Great Britain will be in a better place with less debt, better infrastructure and more manufacturing.[/p][/quote]John Herbert Smith says..... "Jobs are better than no jobs" Of course they are. One individual will be 100% happy to have their job, if it is security for them. My point is that Mark Garnier is taking advantage of media opportunity to cherry pick publicity. Gagging the facts. As a person who chooses not to place a 'X' next any candidate on the ballot paper, I do not find myself snookered by your criticism of the Labour Party. In addition, having experienced professional employment and ESA, I am capable of recognising political attempts to cover incapacity. Especially, in a week when the Health minister felt wise enough to plan to tell the doctors of the discovery that when we present ourselves to a physician, a person sits in front of them, not just body parts. DOEPUBLIC
  • Score: 3

7:43pm Sat 25 Jan 14

DOEPUBLIC says...

...... as a proud British born, European.
...... as a proud British born, European. DOEPUBLIC
  • Score: 4

12:25pm Sun 26 Jan 14

John Herbert Smith says...

Oh dear - some of the comments on this website do make me worry about the future of this country.

Poorer people ARE better off if they are working - the personal allowance has been raised, taking people out of tax all together.

There is no such thing as the bedroom tax - please stop calling it that. Why should the rest of us - many of whom do not have spare rooms ourselves, pay for other people to live in a house that is to big for them? The spare room subsidy has got to end.

You do not make the poor richer by making the rich poorer! If you want an economic recovery, you don't tax the people that generate the wealth of the country as you then have less money to spend on the poor. Labour would rather the poor were poorer just so the rich are poorer (although of course, most Liebour politicians are champagne socialists who are as rich as any Tories).

Regarding immigration, as far as I remember, coffee shops were staffed and the cabbages were picked before the influx. One difference was that youth unemployment was lower, fewer families lived on benefits and our services weren't being strecthed.

The government don't subsidise private schools! And private schools are not just populated by rich kids. Their parents work very hard and sacrifice a lot to send their kids to those schools. Why? Because there are no state grammar schools in Worcestershire, and they want their kids to have a decent education! Why do Labour/Torys not support Grammar schools? Probably because most of their politicians are now public school educated (or went to "comprehensives" which select via the back door e.g. CoE/ Catholic schools). Of course, Harriet Harperson sent her son to a GRAMMAR SCHOOL. What a hypocrite.

20+ years ago, the front bench of all parties mainly Grammar school educated so you had working class prime ministers such as Harold Wilson - who was WORKING CLASS, went to a GRAMMAR SCHOOL, went to OXFORD and became PM!

There's nothing wrong with upper class prime ministers such as Tony Blair, but it would be nice to see a mix. But that won't happen with comprehensive schools - were every child has a right to an equally bad education.
Oh dear - some of the comments on this website do make me worry about the future of this country. Poorer people ARE better off if they are working - the personal allowance has been raised, taking people out of tax all together. There is no such thing as the bedroom tax - please stop calling it that. Why should the rest of us - many of whom do not have spare rooms ourselves, pay for other people to live in a house that is to big for them? The spare room subsidy has got to end. You do not make the poor richer by making the rich poorer! If you want an economic recovery, you don't tax the people that generate the wealth of the country as you then have less money to spend on the poor. Labour would rather the poor were poorer just so the rich are poorer (although of course, most Liebour politicians are champagne socialists who are as rich as any Tories). Regarding immigration, as far as I remember, coffee shops were staffed and the cabbages were picked before the influx. One difference was that youth unemployment was lower, fewer families lived on benefits and our services weren't being strecthed. The government don't subsidise private schools! And private schools are not just populated by rich kids. Their parents work very hard and sacrifice a lot to send their kids to those schools. Why? Because there are no state grammar schools in Worcestershire, and they want their kids to have a decent education! Why do Labour/Torys not support Grammar schools? Probably because most of their politicians are now public school educated (or went to "comprehensives" which select via the back door e.g. CoE/ Catholic schools). Of course, Harriet Harperson sent her son to a GRAMMAR SCHOOL. What a hypocrite. 20+ years ago, the front bench of all parties mainly Grammar school educated so you had working class prime ministers such as Harold Wilson - who was WORKING CLASS, went to a GRAMMAR SCHOOL, went to OXFORD and became PM! There's nothing wrong with upper class prime ministers such as Tony Blair, but it would be nice to see a mix. But that won't happen with comprehensive schools - were every child has a right to an equally bad education. John Herbert Smith
  • Score: -11

1:38pm Sun 26 Jan 14

Wagtail59 says...

Vive L'ancien regime.
Vive L'ancien regime. Wagtail59
  • Score: 4

2:42pm Sun 26 Jan 14

Europeanist64 says...

John - If a job does not afford a person a relative standard of living, then it IS morally and economically worse than no job!

On the issue of the spare room subsidy, what is more disgraceful than a penalty tax aimed at gouging poor people from their homes, when alternatives (smaller accommodation) is not available. I have over £70,000 of equity and two spare rooms in my house, yet no-one is taxing my wealth and I'm getting richer and those living in council accommodation are being hammered. Inverse taxation! A real slap from a government that sees taxation as wrong! Evidence that the poor are not being removed from taxation.

I was educated at a comprehensive and my life blossomed as a result. It was very different to my forebears. My ancestors were coal miners. My parents left school (secondary modern) at 15 and my grandparents at 13. All straight down the mines. My own children were educated at local comprehensives, which are far from bad. My son is now working in business in London and my daughter hopes to soon attend the Royal Veterinary College in London. I am very grateful to the comprehensive system.

Private schools ARE subsidised by taxpayers, through charitable status tax relief. That's lost revenue to the government, made up by taxpayers. If private schools had to charge to cover their costs without the subsidy, (£1.4 billion since 1997 btw) many would just close, because parents would not be able to afford full market fees.

Nothing at all wrong with rich, successful people. they should pay their fair share and don't expect ordinary working folks and the poor to subsidise them.
John - If a job does not afford a person a relative standard of living, then it IS morally and economically worse than no job! On the issue of the spare room subsidy, what is more disgraceful than a penalty tax aimed at gouging poor people from their homes, when alternatives (smaller accommodation) is not available. I have over £70,000 of equity and two spare rooms in my house, yet no-one is taxing my wealth and I'm getting richer and those living in council accommodation are being hammered. Inverse taxation! A real slap from a government that sees taxation as wrong! Evidence that the poor are not being removed from taxation. I was educated at a comprehensive and my life blossomed as a result. It was very different to my forebears. My ancestors were coal miners. My parents left school (secondary modern) at 15 and my grandparents at 13. All straight down the mines. My own children were educated at local comprehensives, which are far from bad. My son is now working in business in London and my daughter hopes to soon attend the Royal Veterinary College in London. I am very grateful to the comprehensive system. Private schools ARE subsidised by taxpayers, through charitable status tax relief. That's lost revenue to the government, made up by taxpayers. If private schools had to charge to cover their costs without the subsidy, (£1.4 billion since 1997 btw) many would just close, because parents would not be able to afford full market fees. Nothing at all wrong with rich, successful people. they should pay their fair share and don't expect ordinary working folks and the poor to subsidise them. Europeanist64
  • Score: 7

3:28pm Sun 26 Jan 14

stour67 says...

Funny ,if the wealthy create the wealth for us poor people why are we the crap,oh yes the rich bankers ,not the poor as the Tories try and tell us it was not labour that caused this as they try and tell us.
Funny ,if the wealthy create the wealth for us poor people why are we the crap,oh yes the rich bankers ,not the poor as the Tories try and tell us it was not labour that caused this as they try and tell us. stour67
  • Score: 7

4:23pm Sun 26 Jan 14

DOEPUBLIC says...

The subsequent Punch & Judy, after my previous comment, clearly shows why the non-voter is choosing alternative ways of community engagement, than the usual pantomime. Having proudly supported the giving of a percentage of my salary to NI, tax, professional associations and charities for 30+ years. I now find that Insurance is an exaggeration of the facility available, giving limited assurance. Also, an incapacity of the the able to comprehend the predicament of the disabled. Recent political discoveries of the words compassion and person being two cases in point. Also in the name of liberty the herding of groups with strings attached. The able and vested interests profiting from the incapacity of others. Not everything that fits in a box is a box. 1% on a spreadsheet could be 100% a person's life. A compassionate community can only function when myopia, sectarianism and party spirits are refuted. Engaging appropriately with duty of care towards each other.
The subsequent Punch & Judy, after my previous comment, clearly shows why the non-voter is choosing alternative ways of community engagement, than the usual pantomime. Having proudly supported the giving of a percentage of my salary to NI, tax, professional associations and charities for 30+ years. I now find that Insurance is an exaggeration of the facility available, giving limited assurance. Also, an incapacity of the the able to comprehend the predicament of the disabled. Recent political discoveries of the words compassion and person being two cases in point. Also in the name of liberty the herding of groups with strings attached. The able and vested interests profiting from the incapacity of others. Not everything that fits in a box is a box. 1% on a spreadsheet could be 100% a person's life. A compassionate community can only function when myopia, sectarianism and party spirits are refuted. Engaging appropriately with duty of care towards each other. DOEPUBLIC
  • Score: 2

1:27pm Tue 28 Jan 14

Shibdrift says...

Lies, damned lies and statistics!
Lies, damned lies and statistics! Shibdrift
  • Score: 2

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree