The DWP would justify all of that of course, I'm not sure how because I'd stop listening the moment that IDS opened his frog-like mouth but I'm sure it would be something like "...helping these people back into a work based frame of mind, blah, blah, blah, valuable experience, blah, blah, improves their CV and their chances of gainful employment, blah, blah, gets them off the unemployment figures and makes me look good".

No actually he wouldn't say that last bit but he'd be thinking it.

Please continue your rant because now B&M haver been highlighted for reducing the contracted hours of staff by up to 50%, the remainder is filled with DWP Workprogramme personnel. The upshot is: you go to Jobcentre Plus and tell them you're now working only 10 hours per week, so they give you a slip to send you back to B&M to work the other 10 hours for free.

I wouldn't shop with those 2@s in a month of Sundays

Looks a good budget on the whole and one that should continue to reduce the deficit and make it more attractive for people to work rather than rely on hand outs. The excellent Chancellor is finally free of those naive LibDems and can now get on with the Conservative plan to return the country to economic health - just as they were elected to do.

The pleasant surprise was Osbournes purloining of the "Living Wage" franchise and while his version is not quite what a "Living Wage" was pitched at, at least its a decent hike in the NMW and goes some way to removing the employers subsidy where employers shamelessly exploit existing Working Tax Credit rules to obtain and maintain cheap labour, I expect more squeals of anguish from the likes of the CBI and the rest as well as threats of reducing hours to compensate etc, but ultimately if a cheap shoddy supermarket wants to stay open while paying far less than what is considered to be an average UK salary to the people who keep it open, then they will have to pay whatever Osbourne requires, or close earlier.

One other thing to pitch in with - free childcare to increase from 15 to 30 hours per week where both parents are in work.

Sounds good - but I was at a client Day Nursery in a deprived area of Greater Manchester (certainly no leafy suburb and an area of largely immigrant families) three weeks ago and just happened to mention this in passing to one of the managers as it was a leaked possibility for the budget.

Now I had had the same conversation with the owner about 18 months previously about the 15 free hours and she complained then that the rate that was paid by the government was nothing like what she would normally have charged and that a lot of local families were using it as a a free 15 hours per week to get rid of the kids, a parent only has to work 8 hours in order to qualify so you'd get a mother working one shift per week and getting two free days childcare paid for, the owner was slightly miffed by this but accepted it because at least some of the families added to the 15 hours by paying for additional care especially after their child liked the experience.

Three weeks ago the attitude was pretty much the same, but worse, for now they would be having to offer 30 hours at government rates with little chance to top up on extra hours at what they considered to be their correct rate, they were actually quite fearful of it happening because they could be looking at closing if too many local families qualified and in their area most of them would.

I've noted in the press statements from their trade association that the government rate will be reviewed and increased, but at the moment there is no decision on this, so again we have a budget announcement that on the face of it looks to be good news aimed at getting parents into part time work, yet has a sting in the tail in that it "could" be unworkable for many nurseries - almost exactly like the old NHS vs private dental healthcare of ten or so years ago where dentists in their tens of thousands abandoned NHS rates because they were unsustainable for their business.