Hackney jobseekers: 11,000 and "entrenched"?

The number of Job Seekers Allowance (JSA) claimants in Hackney rose to 11,043 in May, up from 10,941 in April.

That's 7.3% of the borough's working population.

In Hackney South and Shoreditch, Meg Hillier's constituency, 8.3% of the working population is on the dole. It has risen every month since December 2010 when it was 7.3%.

These look worryingly high in comparison to the London average of 4.2%. Last week the Guardian commented: "Some of those parliamentary constituency areas, like Birmingham Ladywood, and Hackney South and Shoreditch, in east London, already have some of the highest proportions of benefit claimants, suggesting joblessness there is becoming entrenched."

The JSA claimant figure does not include all forms of unemployment - the bulk of which is known as 'Worklessness' and can include anyone from students to people claiming incapacity benefit.

All together 29.8% of working-age people in the borough are not employed (or 70.2% are employed). The break down between Hackney's two constituencies shows 32% of working age people are not employed in South Hackney while in Hackney North the figure is lower at 26.8%.

But it's worth remembering that worklessness figures are not easy to interpret. Despite having had years to look at it - and saying it would do so - the council has yet to explain why the borough's worklessness figures fell so miraculously (Don't look a gift horse in the mouth and Hackney: A worklessness miracle) from 47,100 in 2005 to 26,900 in 2007 - a much faster rate than neighbouring boroughs. The latest figures show the number around 34,000.

Unemployment falls for first time in six months

The number of people claiming job seekers allowance in Hackney as a whole has fallen for the first time in six months. But can it continue as austerity measures bite?

The last time the borough saw falls in JSA claimant numbers the trend continued for four months and fell from a 10,044 peak in February 2010 to 9,406 in June 2010. A fall of 638 claimants.

Predictions that thousands of public sector jobs are likely to be lost - as many as a thousand in Hackney itself over the next four years - could prevent further falls. However the demographics of the borough may protect it from these cuts.

Hackney's politicians have voiced a number of views on how dependent Hackney is on public sector jobs and the effect the cuts may have on the borough.

However the borough's latest economic factsheet shows that the working population is weighted toward managerial and professional jobs:

In 2008:

58% of Hackney’s population were employed in managerial, professional, associate professional and technical occupations.

23% were employed in administrative, skilled trades and personal service occupations.

18% of employees were concentrated in sales and customer service, process plant and machine operations and elementary occupations.

The paper said: "Some 41% of Hackney’s employed residents are employed in professional and associate professional occupations."

At the other end of the distribution, 8.5% of Hackney’s employees are employed as cleaners, security wardens, postal workers and couriers, hospitality workers and elementary sales.

The composition of the borough's working population may make it hard to predict what economic scenarios are good or bad for the level of unemployment in the borough.

The latest figures published by the Office of National Statistics show that 92 fewer people were collecting the dole in Hackney in December 2010 with 9,903 claimants compared to 9,995 in November.

However all the falls were in North Hackney which already has a lower level of unemployment than South Hackney (6.1% compared to 7.3%). The number of claimants in Hackney South increased again for the sixth month in a row, but by just four.

Meanwhile changes in the borough boundaries earlier this year are still throwing up mild discrepancies due to statistical anomalies. This time, if you take ONS data for the individual constituencies - Hackney North and Hackney South - you see a fall in JSA claimants of 90 compared to the official borough-wide fall of 92.

2010

December : 9,903 (6.6%) - (9,903/0.066=150,049) (-92)

November: 9,995 (6.6%) - (9,995/0.066=151,439) (+8)

October: 9,987 (6.6%) - (9,987/0.066=151,318) (+60)
September: 9,927 (6.6%) - (9,927/0.066=150,409) (+136)

August: 9,791 (6.5%) - (9,791/0.065=150,630) (+325)
July: 9,466 (6.3%) - (9466/0.063= 150,253) (+60)
June : 9,406 (6.5%) (9,406/ 0.065 = 144,707) (-210)
May: 9,616 (6.7%) (9,616/.067=143,522) (-47)
April: 9,663 (6.7%) (9,663/.067=144,223) (-183)
March: 9,846 (6.8%) (9,846/0.068=144,794) (- 198)
February: 10,044 (7%) (10,044/0.07=143,485) (+139)
January: 9,905 (6.9%) (9,905/0.069= 143,550) (+162)

2009
December: 9,743 (6.7%) (9,743/0.067=145,417) (-52)
November: 9,795 (6.8%)
October: 9,827 (6.8%)
September: 9,884 (7%)
August 9,826 (6.9%) (+276)
July: 9550 (6.7%) (+242)

June: 9,308 (6.6%) ()
May: 9,377 (6.6%) (+379)

April: 8,998 (6.3%) (+373)

March: 8,625 (6.1%) (+ 471)

February: 8,154 (5.7%) (+ 804)

January: 7,350 (5.2%)

2008

December: 7,245 (5.1%)
November - 7,013 (4.9%)

October - 6,982 (4.9%)

September - 6,942 (4.9%)

August - 6,803 (4.8%)

July - 6,454 (4.6%)

June - 6,440 (4.6%)

Hackney North

2010

Dec - 4,700 (6.1%) - (4,700/0.061=77,049) (-94)

Nov - 4,794 (6.2%) - (4,794/0.062=77,323)(-5)

Oct - 4,801 (6.2%) - (4,801/0.062= 77,435)(+29)
Sept - 4,772 (6.2%) - (4,709/0.062=76,967) (+63)

August - 4,709 (6.1%) - (4,709/0.061= 77,197)(+171)

July - 4,572 (5.9%) - (4,572/0.059= 77,491)(+34)

June - 4,538 (6.0%) - (4,538/0.06= 75,633)(-99)

May - 4,637 (6.2%) - (4,637/0.062=74,790)(-90)

April - 4,727 (6.3%) - (4,727/0.063=75,031)(+391)

March - 4,336 (6.2%) - (4,336/0.062=69,935)(-114)

February - 4,450 (6.4%) - (4,450/0.064=69,531)(+48)
January - 4,402 (6.3%) - (4,402/0.063=69,873)

2009

December - 4331 (6.2%)

November - 4386 (6.3%)

October - 4365

September - 4,338

August - 4,331

July - 4206

June - 4,118

May - 4,081

Hackney South

2010

Dec - 5,187 (7.3) - (5,187/0.073= 71,054) (+4)

Nov - 5,183 (7.3%) - (5,183/0.0.73=71,000) (+19)

Oct - 5,164 (7.3%) - (5,164/0.073=70,739)(+24)
Sept - 5,140 (7.3%) - (5,140/0.073=70,410)(+84)

August - 5,056 (7.1%) - (5,056/0.071 = 71,211)(+185)

July - 4,871 (6.9%) - (4,871/0.069= 70,549)(+20)
June - 4,851 (7.0%) - (4,851/0.07= 69,300) (-108)

May - 4,959 (7.2%) - (4,959/0.072=68,875)

April - 4,908 (7.1%) - (4908/0.071=69,126)

March - 5,510 (7.6%) - (5,510/0.076=72,500)

February - 5,594 (7.7%) - (5,594/0.077=72,649)

January - 5503 (7.6%) - (5503/0.076)=72,407)

2009

December - 5,412 (7.5%)

November - 5,409 (7.5%)

October - 5,462

September - 5,546 (7.8%)

August - 5,495

July - 5,344

June - 5,190

May - 5,296

Hackney unemployment breaks 10,000

Hackney is still the London borough with the highest proportion of its working-age population claiming Job Seekers Allowance (JSA).

Figures released on March 17 2010 ( Regional Monthly Data - March 2010) - and which refer to February - show that there are now 10,044 JSA claimants in the borough. In February Hackney saw another 139 people sign on compared to 162 signing on in January.

This now means that 7% of the borough's working population is claiming job seekers allowance.

In addition, the Office of National Statistics reports a nationwide decrease in employment levels and an increase in economic inactivity (highest since 004). Also the number of people unemployed for more than 12 months also rose and is at its highest level since 1997.

The figures do not break down these changes to local authorities or constituencies so it is not yet clear what may have happened to Hackney's economic inactivity levels.

Will levels of 'worklessness' in the borough have changed dramatically since June 2009 when 24.2%, or 34,000 of borough's working population, were economically inactive?

Levels of long-term unemployment in Hackney fell from 47,100 in 2005 to 26,900 in 2007 - a much faster rate than neighbouring boroughs.

But the reasons for this large drop in economic inactivity remains unexplained (Worklessness miracle). In addition to last months rise in national economic inactivity levels there are some other reasons to suspect that worklessness levels may be picking up. Some of these are discussed here: 42% of Hackney households on benefits

Hackney JSA claimant count:

February: 10,044 (7%) - next highest is Tower Hamlets with 6.7%
January: 9,905 (6.9%) - next highest is Tower Hamlets at 6.6%
December: 9743 (6.7%) - next highest was Tower Hamlets at 6.5%
November: 9,795 (6.8%) - next highest was Tower Hamlets at 6.7%
October: 9,827 (6.8%) - equal highest with Tower Hamlets.
September: 9,884 (7%)
August 9,826 (6.9%)
July: 9550 (6.7%)

Divided into constituencies: - Diane Abbott (North) and Meg Hillier (South) -
Meg Hillier Vs Diane Abbott on unemployment (I did ask where Diane got her figures but have had no reply)

Hackney North
May - 4,081
June - 4,118
July - 4206
August - 4,331
September - 4,338
October - 4365
November - 4386 (6.3%)
December - 4331 (6.2%)
January - 4,402 (6.3%)
February - 4,450 (6.4%)

Hackney South
May - 5,296
June - 5,190
July - 5,344
August - 5,495
September - 5,546 (7.8%)
October - 5,462
November - 5,409 (7.5%)
December - 5,412 (7.5%)
January - 5503 (7.6%)
February - 5,594 (7.7%)

Hackney unemployment deteriorates fastest
Minister: Hackney unemployment nothing to complain about.

Hackney: slowest employment recovery

Hackney has the highest percentage of unemployment of all London boroughs despite making a slight recovery. The figures for December (published this month) show that 6.7% of the borough's 140,000 workforce are on Job Seeker's Allowance.

The next worst borough is Tower Hamlets which has 6.5% claiming JSA. The gap between Hackney and Tower Hamlets widened in December.

December (published in January) - 9743 (6.7%) - next highest was Tower Hamlets at 6.5%
November (published in December) - 9,795 (6.8%) - next highest was Tower Hamlets at 6.7%

In October Tower Hamlets and Hackney had equal highest percentage claiming JSA. But Hackney has been the slowest to recover.


December: 9743 (6.7%) - next highest was Tower Hamlets at 6.5%
November: 9,795 (6.8%) - next highest was Tower Hamlets at 6.7%
October: 9,827 (6.8%) - equal highest with Tower Hamlets.
September: 9,884 (7%)
August 9,826 (6.9%)
July: 9550 (6.7%)

Divided into constituencies: - Diane Abbott (North) and Meg Hillier (South) -
Meg Hillier Vs Diane Abbott on unemployment (I did ask where Diane got her figures but have had no reply)

Hackney North
May - 4,081
June - 4,118
July - 4206
August - 4,331
September - 4,338
October - 4365
November - 4386 (6.3%)
December - 4331 (6.2%)

Hackney South
May - 5,296
June - 5,190
July - 5,344
August - 5,495
September - 5,546 (7.8%)
October - 5,462
November - 5,409 (7.5%)
December - 5,412 (7.5%)

BBC - Half of young black people unemployed
Diane Abbott comments on this in the Guardian -

Meg Hillier Vs Diane Abbott on unemployment

Earlier this month Diane Abbott wrote a comment piece for the Hackney Gazette, (Page 16, November 5)

She said: "We are going through tough economic times and unemployment rates have been rising all over the UK but this year Hackney North and Stoke Newington has seen one of the lowest rises in unemployment in the country."

I'm not sure where that figure comes from. As far as I can tell the Hackney North and Stoke Newington's JSA count has been at, or above, the London average. This month Hackney North and Stoke Newington was showing a 1.7% increase between October 2008 and October 2009. This was just above the London Average of 1.6%.

If Diane was looking at the previous month's figures she wouldn't have done much better. The increase was 1.7% (September 2008-September 2009) last month too, equal to the London average and in August it was 1.9% (August 2008-August 2009), well above the 1.7% London average.

However it is certainly lower than Hackney South and Shoreditch where the annual rates have been 2.3% (October 2008-October 2009), 2.4% (September 2008-September 2009) and 2.5% (August 2008-August 2009).

According to Diane, the low levels of unemployment in Hackney North are: "Thanks to a number of projects targeted at getting people back into work, including job fairs, pre-employment training and recruitment drives for big companies like Marks and Spencers and Sainsbury's.

"Employment is a key issue for me and a great deal more needs to be done, but when the Labour Party came into power in 1997 my constituency had the fourth highest level of unemployment in the country.

"Now we have the 66th highest level of unemployment. So nobody can say that we have not made progress."

These policies don't seem to have been so effective for her fellow Hackney MP Meg Hillier. Hillier's constituency, Hackney South and Shoreditch, presumably with access to the same initiatives as Diane's, has seen a large increase in unemployment. This month the borough has the highest proportion of JSA claimants of all London boroughs.

Diane's claims could relate to the borough's worklessness problem which has improved but these figures are only available up to March 2009 and are still above the London average.
Or they could be in the same category as the unexplained drop in the borough's level of worklessness - unknown.

Links to Blood and Property stories on unemployment:
Hackney has joint highest job seeker count
42% of Hackney households on benefits
Job Centre reorganised: can it cope?
Hackney crime figures - the only way is up
Hackney women losing jobs faster than men
Hackney: a worklessness miracle
Don't look a gift horse in the mouth
Unemployed in Hackney: The lull before the storm
Will Hackney return to 17% on the dole?

42% of Hackney households on Housing Benefit - and rising

Hackney has the highest rate of households claiming Housing Benefit in the UK - 41.9%. This is nearly four percentage points higher than the next highest London Borough - Tower Hamlets 38.1%.

In 2007 DWP figures for Hackney showed 38.9% of households claiming, in Tower Hamlets the figure was the same as now, 38.1% (The previous DWP figures for Housing Benefit were for 2007 and All tables in Microsoft Excel format)

The Department for Work and Pensions said that the recent nationwide increase in working age claimants was "consistent with the increase in the number of working-age people claiming key out-of-work benefits."

Could this be bad news for the miraculous "worklessness" figures in the Hackney? (Don't look a gift horse in the mouth and Hackney: A worklessness miracle).

In August the Office of National Statistics figures for Hackney showed that the population of economically inactive residents shrank. It fell by about 2,900 people (from 28.7% of the working population to 26.6%). The figures are more dramatic over a longer period. The level of long-term unemployment in Hackney fell from 47,100 in 2005 to 26,900 in 2007 - a fall of 43%. A much faster rate than neighbouring boroughs.

The Housing Benefit figures come from the Department for Work and Pensions - Click here to access the complete set of Housing Benefit and Council Tax Benefit Tables or for the general release click here.

Hackney is the worst in the UK - well above the UK average, 17% and the London average, 23%.

It also appears to be getting worse:

Housing Benefit claimants in Hackney: (Nov,08) 35,540 (Dec,08) 35,600 (Jan09) 35,830 (Feb,09) 36,050 (March,09) 36,320 (April,09) 36,620 (May,09) 36,860 -

From November 2008 to May 2009 the number of claimants has risen by 3.7% in Hackney.

Housing Benefit claimants in Tower Hamlets: (Nov,08) 32,210 (Dec,08)32,500 (Jan09)32,940 (Feb,09)32,760 (March,09) 33,010 (April,09) 33,480 (May,09) 33,490.

From November 2008 to May 2009 the number of claimants has risen by 3.97% in Tower Hamlets.

In a statement the DWP said: "There is wide Local Authority variation in both Housing Benefit recipients and Council Tax Benefit recipients as a proportion of Households, ranging from 5.9 per cent to 41.9 per cent for Housing Benefit, and 7.8 per cent to 39.9 per cent for Council Tax Benefit."

Both of the extreme limits are in Hackney.

The proportion of the population claiming Housing Benefit in Hackney:

LONDON 23.2%

Inner London
Camden 26.1%
City of London 22.6%
Hackney 41.9%
Hammersmith and Fulham 26.9%
Haringey 33.9%
Islington 33.5%
Kensington and Chelsea 19.0%
Lambeth 30.4%
Lewisham 27.7%
Newham 36.9%
Southwark 30.1%
Tower Hamlets 38.1%
Wandsworth 19.6%
Westminster 22.1%


In terms of Council Tax benefit claimants the percentage falls - down to 39.9% and the gap with the next highest claiming borough, Tower Hamlets (37.1) is narrower, but Hackney still has the highest proportion of its population making claims.

LONDON 23.6%

Inner London
Camden 24.1%
City of London 8.0%
Hackney 39.9%
Hammersmith and Fulham 24.7%
Haringey 32.6%
Islington 32.3%
Kensington and Chelsea 16.9%
Lambeth 27.2%
Lewisham 26.8%
Newham 35.8%
Southwark 28.3%
Tower Hamlets 37.1%
Wandsworth 17.1%
Westminster 18.5%

The previous DWP figures for Housing Benefit were for 2007 (All tables in Microsoft Excel format )


Inner London - East
Hackney 38.9
Haringey 32.3
Islington 35.2
Lambeth 27.4
Lewisham 26.0
Newham 35.7
Southwark 30.3
Tower Hamlets 38.1

Hackney - a worklessness miracle?

Earlier this month the Office of National Statistics published Hackney's worklessness figures.

They weren't too bad - the unexplained miracle continues. The workless of Hackney still seem to be finding their way back to work at a surprising speed.

All this during a period when the rest of the country was on the brink of financial collapse with jobs being lost. In contrast, figures show that, in Hackney the population of economically inactive residents shrank. It fell by about 2,900 people (from 28.7% of the working population to 26.6%).

The recession, it seems, has had the opposite effect in Hackney as it has in most other parts of the UK. This seemed to be further confirmed by the publication, yesterday, of the workless households figures ( Work and worklessness among households Statistical Bulletin - August 2009 and 26/08/09 News Release - Half a million more working-age people in workless households).

These show that the North East has over-taken Inner London as the place with the highest rate of worklessness - it now has 23% of homes with all employment age residents out of work. Meanwhile Inner London's level of workless households is 22.9%, the second most concentrated are of household worklessness in the UK. This is down on the same time last year (Work and worklessness among households - August 2007 ) when 23.9% of Inner London homes were workless.

Nationally, the ONS figures for workless homes are the worst they have been - possibly since records began - showing that one in six UK households is unemployed - at least that's according to this interpretation provided by the BBC yesterday.

But not in Inner London, and it can only be supposed that Hackney has bucked the trend here too. Back in 2007 Hackney had the second worst level of workless households of all inner London Boroughs (26%). Worse than Newham (27%) and equal to Tower Hamlets (26%) and, unexpectedly, the next worst was Kensington and Chelsea (23%) - (That's according to (Table 2(iii) Working-age people by region and combined economic activity status of household)

So is Hackney like China? Powering ahead and "decoupling" from the rest of the developed world? Not according to Cllr Guy Nicholson, cabinet member for regeneration and the Olympic Games:

"In terms of Hackney’s economic development strategy, the borough has not ‘decoupled’ from the UK’s, and specifically London’s economic direction of travel. Hackney Council will continue to ensure the growth and dynamism of a range of economic sectors within the borough. Key sector are: Servicing for the City, High Value Manufacturing, Retail, Hospitality and Entertainment,Creative Sectors."

He said: "The recession has impacted upon Hackney in terms of an increase in JSA claimants. However, the borough has not been affected any more than the UK as a whole. Since September 2008, the proportion of the population of Hackney claiming JSA increased by 1.7%, compared to an increase of 1.6% in Britain as a whole. However, Hackney started from a considerably higher baseline in terms of the proportion of the population already claiming JSA.

"As discussed above, Hackney’s employment rate has increased significantly over the past few years. The gap between London’s and Hackney’s employment rate has decreased from 15.1% in Q4 05/06 to 3.4% in Q3 08/09. This is a significant achievement in the context of the high levels of multiple deprivation which continue to exist in Hackney. Due to the time-lag in the employment rate data, it is as yet unclear how the increase in JSA claimants will impact upon the employment rate in the borough."

Don't look a gift horse in the mouth?

It is odd that a huge drop in the level of long-term unemployment in Hackney remains largely unexplained. In 2005, 2006 and 2007 the total working population of Hackney was constant at around 140,000. Over the same period the level of long-term unemployment fell from 47,100 in 2005 to 26,900 in 2007 - that is a fall of 43%.

The extraordinary thing about this drop is that the people who appear to have gone back to work were the people who had, for years, not even been looking for a job. This section of the unemployed population has even been rebranded and is now described as suffering from "worklessness".

So, getting 20,000 of these sufferers of "worklessness" back to work in a three year period must have been a huge achievement. But for some reason this feat remains unexplained. This is strange because the blight of "worklessness" was highlighted as the council's top priority earlier this year. As such, a staggering, unprecedented even miraculous fall in the borough's long-term unemployment rate might be worth explaining.

Luckily you don't have to take my word for the significance of the fall in 'worklessness' - it comes from two documents which rely on Office of National Statistic figures (ONS). One is the October 2008 "Economic Profile" of the borough - which I have failed to find online - the other is the earlier May 2008 “Labour Market Statistics Update Briefing" - which I can't find online either.

The May 2008 “Labour Market Statistics Update Briefing" raised questions about the cause of this fall in 'worklessness'. It said: “Hackney now has the highest level of employment and lowest rate of economic inactivity of any year for which data are available, and the improvement is far steeper than anything experienced by any of Hackney’s statistical neighbours.”


And it asked: “So what might have happened in Hackney to explain (or support) the trend shown in the APS figures?"

It emphasised the size and potential significance of the data: “The difficulty is not explaining the direction of the trend, but the scale of it."

And it suggested that the answer may not be straightforward offering demographic changes or "sampling variability" (the figures from the Office of National Statistics were from a narrow survey but ONS said that it stood by the results) as possible explanations for the change.

The May report suggested that it would be sensible to find out what had happened: "Options for carrying out further analysis, including with partners such as Jobcentre Plus to analyse benefits data and trends, could be explored in order to cross-check the trends shown in this paper and to shed more light on what is happening in Hackney’s labour market – particularly if we are to help ensure that the trend continues.”

The later October report made no mention of these questions but pointed out that the trend had not continued. It mentioned that the employment rate had risen to the "highest rate on record (64.3%), significantly closing the gap between Hackney and London" but pointed out that it fell back to 63.1% in December 2007.

At the moment it seems as if this dramatic fall in worklessness and rise in employment - not seen in any other borough - remains a mystery.

The fact that it remains a mystery is odd because, in January 2009, the council said that 'worklessness' was a top priority.

The Community Safety and Social Inclusion Scrutiny Commission’s “Growing a Local Economy” report, approved in January, said:

“The review revealed the key challenge the borough continues to face in tackling the problem of worklessness. We heard evidence on the scale of this problem and on the range of interventions being led by partners such as Job Centre Plus.

“The contribution of enterprise growth to tackling worklessness was explored and we as a Commission have agreed that “Tackling Worklessness” merits greater attention and therefore, it will form the subject of our next review, which will commence in October 2008.”

It is not yet clear whether the mystery of the 43% drop in 'worklessness' has already been answered or if it has been ignored by the council's economics department. Will Hackney Council answer these questions?

Diane Abbott: Church is only bastion of order in Hackney

A Parliamentary debate on knife crime (9 June) was mentioned in the Hackney Gazette last week. Like this report from the London Echo the Gazette focused on Diane Abbott's comments about educating mothers, not sending them out "to stack shelves".

In her speech she also raised concerns about the ability of mothers from some communities to parent effectively when not surrounded by their extended families. She also said that the church was sometimes the "only bastion of order" in inner-city boroughs.

Her views not only appear to conflict with government policy, but also with Hackney Council which is attempting to tackle its huge 'workless' (unemployed and not seeking a job) population. Hackney now also faces rapidly rising numbers of dole claimants.

The speech went down well with Conservative David Davies MP for Monmouth (Not David Davis former shadow Home Secretary): "It has been a pleasure to listen to the debate. I am sorry that the House is so empty at the moment, because the hon. Member for Hackney, North and Stoke Newington (Ms Abbott) made, without doubt, the best speech of the afternoon; indeed, it was one of the best speeches that I have heard in this place."

Davies later said that he had visited areas like Hackney and felt intimidated by gangs of youths: "Frankly—I am sorry to have to say this—my thought on returning from one of those visits was, “Thank God I don’t live in that area and my children don’t go to school there.” That is just being honest."

Diane Abbott's response was: "I see the same groups on my way home, as I live in my constituency. I would say this to the hon. Gentleman: if you were a middle-aged black woman
and looked them straight in the eye, you might find that they took a step backwards."

(Diane may have learned her technique on how to handle difficult customers here: technique devised for keeping werewolves at bay)

To which Davies replied: "If the hon. Lady looked me straight in the eye in a venomous way, I would probably take a step backwards as well."

For a link to Diane Abbott's speech click here but scroll down the page to the speech.

Turn to the church?

In one part of her speech Diane Abbott made this surprising statement about the role of the church in areas like Hackney: "The answer to those problems is long-term; there is no question about that. We have to look at our policies on work, and look at how we support parents. We have to look at how we work with the Churches. I admit that I am not a regular church-goer myself, but often the only bastion of order, values and boundaries in inner-city areas is the Church."

The problems she was talking about were that mothers from communities which have a tradition of extended families are not equipped to deal with parenting on their own. She said that this had contributed to the rise in gang culture but she also pointed out that that it was possible to find top performing students and criminal gang members in the same family.

Abbott said: "In the summer holidays, when I took my bus pass—I am not a driver—and took my son to reading schemes in the library, or youth projects in museums, or whatever a person could take a little child to on a bus, I would often find that I was the only ethnic minority parent there. It is not that other minority parents in Hackney do not care for their children, but their notions of being a parent are limited.

"They perhaps come from cultures where the child would have been brought up collectively by aunties and grannies. Instead, they are isolated on some estate, and the aunties and grannies are not within reach. The parents are thrown back on to their own knowledge, which is limited.

"I take the view, I am afraid, that my Government’s emphasis on putting single-parent mothers out to work is wrong. Some of those single-parent mothers need first to be taught to be decent parents. Once they have been taught to be decent parents who are at home when their children come home from school, it will be time to talk about sending them out to work to stack shelves."

Abbott's view on educating rather than employing mothers not only conflicts with the government, it is also appears to conflict with Hackney Council's leadership which has made tackling worklessness a top priority over the last few years - lone parents get a special mention on Team Hackney's introductory page on the borough's economy)

Team Hackney provided further detail on plans to tackle worklessness in its Team Hackney Worklessness Model which "sets out the priority groups and associated targets relating to worklessness" with a "the primary focus" on workless 18 – 24 year olds but also adds that "Other priority groups include lone parents, people on incapacity benefits and those that are economically inactive."

On 10 June the Mirror picked-up DA's story about few Hackney unemployed getting jobs on the Olympic site. London 2012 Olympics: £1.1bn cost but just 115 jobless locals taken on

Will Hackney return to 17% on the dole?

In December 2007 there were 2,514 people claiming job seekers allowance in Hackney South and Shoreditch. By last month, May 2009, this had increased to 5,296 people.

In December 2007, the 2,514 people claiming JSA represented 4.7% of Hackney South’s working population. The 5,296 people now making the claims represents 7.4 per cent of the working population in Hackney South and Shoreditch.

To check the figures here's a link to the Office of National Statistics webpage on regional JSA claimants.

There is no sign that this trend is weakening and considering that this recession has been described as most extreme in several decades, is there a possibility that JSA claimant levels could exceed the 17% of working population seen in the 1990s?

The last detailed report on the borough’s economic situation was published in 2007 ( Hackney's Economy EDP Paper 2007 ) at a time when the level of claimants was falling faster than the national average.

The report said: “Since the early 1990s unemployment claimants have fallen from over 17% of the economically active population to below 6% in 2006. This has been consistent with the economic trends witnessed in London and England and Wales, although the decline has been steeper in Hackney.”

This now appears to be in the process of a sharp U-turn. Earlier this month the Office of National Statistics released the May figures for people claiming Job Seekers Allowance. In Hackney South 7.4% working population is now on the dole, up from 7.1% in April and 6.8% in March, 6.4% in February and 5.8% in January 2009. In December 2007, the level of JSA claimants was 4.7% of the working population.

The TeamHackney report also outlined the challenges facing the borough.

The biggest of these, and one which still dwarfs the levels of claimants in the borough, is the issue of 'worklessness'. There are more recent figures but this document on the borough's worklessness policy( Team Hackney Worklessness Model) provides this outline: "Hackney’s employment rate is currently 55.7%, which is almost 13% lower than the London average. With nearly 63,000 people of working age residents either unemployed or economically inactive, Hackney’s worklessness challenge is huge. Indeed, for Hackney to improve its employment rate to that of the wider London economy, a further 18,000 residents need to move into sustainable employment."

This is where the council's attention has been focused for the last few years - on the people in the borough who aren't looking for work.

In contrast to TeamHackney's concern about worklessness, the view on Job Seekers Allowance claimants suggested that high levels of claimants didn't mean that there weren't any jobs: "The raw data on claimant unemployment masks what appears to be quite considerable amount of churn within the labour market. Between March 2003 and February 2006, over 10,400 people have left the claimant register as a result of finding employment and a further 6,500 have moved into accredited training or education. This suggests that Jobcentre Plus and other employment initiatives in the borough (such as Working Links with 2,289 job outputs in 2004-6) are relatively successful at finding employment or appropriate training.

"However, given the relative stability of the total number of claimants it would suggest that many people are entering into short term or unstable employment and soon return to the unemployment register. This is supported by recent research undertaken by Jobcentre plus. A random sample of 730 clients claiming JSA benefits confirmed that overall 64% of the sample had claimed JSA benefits at least twice during the analysis period of one year."

This was the view when claimant levels were falling and the biggest issue was the number of people who did not want to work. Now people who do want to work are losing their jobs and not finding new ones.

Some related issues:

There is evidence that the level of entrepreneurship in the borough is declining: Hackney's entrepreneurs are disappearing.

Diane Abbot, MP for Hackney North and Stoke Newington, and others are also concerned that Hackney residents are not benefiting from employment opportunities that were expected to come with the Olympics: details and links can be found in this blog: Election fraud epidemic: More to come.

With some misfires: Diane Abbott's muddled crusade for the unemployed

Last week the Evening Standard singled-out Hackney South and Shoreditch in story about rising levels of unemployment pointing out that more than 10% of men in the constituency are unemployed.

A number of candidates for the European Elections answered questions about Hackney's economy in the three previous blogs:

Candidate 8: Labour promotes ghettoisation
Candidate 3: EU won't allow Hackney workers to be undercut

The Socialist Party of Great Britain candidate said that areas that had seen rapid increases in employment levels in the good times would be see equally rapid losses when things get bad.