to not be surprised that Labour are now echoing the Tories tough talk on benefits?

[Orwellian]

"Unemployed must be 'working and training, not claiming', says Labour".

www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/jan/04/labour-welfare-unemployment-benefits

Why is that unreasonable to be working or training in order to claim benefits?

I'm not surprised, they've probably done a few focus groups. It's not exactly harsh. If you are over 25 and unemployed for over 2 years you must do a 6 month placement.

It's not unreasonable at all. But to all those Mumsnutters who think that Labour are somehow going to reverse all these benefits cuts, there is your answer, or as Labour's Liam Byrne so quaintly put it in a note to his Tory successor - "There is no money left we spent it all "

What Orwellian said.

The difference is that they would at least be paid the minimum wage.

I see no problem with the unemployed being trained and supported into working, both parties are right on that issue, but they should be paid the MW at least if put in a work placement not just £71 per week.

Where the ConDems and Labour are starting to differ is the way that the ConDems are targeting those who are sick and disabled, making them work for their benefits through Workfare or removing their benefits.

Before the MNers that think all benefit claimants are fraudsters and scroungers start bleating their bile do understand that genuine claimants hate those who abuse the system more than you!!!!!!!!

If you are working you should be paid a decent wage for it, no ifs or buts.

I don't see the problem, labour have just come to finally realise common sense.

The idea of making unemployed benefit claimants do some work wouldn't come in until they have been unemployed for two years. That's more than enough time for someone to get a proper job if they are going to.

If people are going to have to work for their benefits,won't that mean there are fewer proper jobs around?

I mean why pay someone a wage if you can get them for free?