logo
Labour's benefits reforms are absolutely necessary and long overdue

Labour's benefits reforms are absolutely necessary and long overdue

Telegraph13-03-2025

One overcast Saturday morning in 2002, I was holding an advice surgery for constituents in Castlemilk, the poverty-stricken housing estate in the south-east corner of my Glasgow Cathcart constituency.
It was a relatively quiet session, but a visit by two young men has remained in my memory ever since. They were about sixteen, had just left school and one of them (his mate was only there to offer moral support) wanted to know how to claim out-of-work benefits.
The boy was explicitly looking for long-term financial support that would excuse him from the task of ever having to seek work or full-time education. When I asked him what physical ailment prevented him from getting a job, he replied with a knowing smirk towards his friend: 'Bad back.'
I didn't ask if any of his own family members were claiming what was then known as Incapacity Benefit; I didn't have to. There were few families in the area, then or now, whose income didn't rely at least in part on the largesse of the state, despite the fact many members were of working age.
Even before I became an MP, I had toured my local constituency Labour Party branches urging members to support the Blair Government's efforts to reform the system.
I probably used many of the clichés and blithe assumptions that Labour MPs use today to defend their support of the Work and Pensions Secretary, Liz Kendall, and her plans to institute genuinely radical reform: that Labour is the party of work, not of benefits.
The clue in the name! Many people on out-of-work benefits want to work; they just need more support to do so.
Neither of these statements is strictly true. Yes, Labour was founded to represent the working classes in Parliament. It's also true that one of its founders, Keir Hardie, had little time for those who chose worklessness over employment.
But culturally, today's party is dominated by middle class activists to whom the prospect of a Labour Government forcing benefit claimants into work is anathema. And while the claim that 'many' might prefer work to benefits is in some degree true, it is far too small a degree to make much difference to the economic necessity of reform.
And that is the fundamental challenge that Kendall and the Government face: if Britain is to be transformed in a way that will radically reduce the numbers claiming out-of-work benefits, it will need to disappoint – nay, enrage – many of its supporters.
It will need to annoy a large proportion of the people within the party itself, and also a considerable number of (well-paid and productively employed) media commentators and other stakeholders.
There is, of course, an economic case for reducing the cost to the state's finances. And this is especially crucial now because the excuses people come up with are getting more absurd.
In previous decades the preferred excuse of my young constituent and many others for claiming benefits was 'a bad back'. This is a conveniently unevidenced malady. But today more psychological – and therefore even less provable – ailments have become more popular among those hoping to leave the burden of honest labour behind them for a life of watching daytime TV.
The numbers claiming to suffer from stress, depression and even PTSD (which, oddly, affects many who have not served in the Armed Forces) has swelled the claimant numbers.
Britain simply can't afford to continue to fund a situation in which a large proportion of the population is allowed to claim benefits rather than earn a living and pay taxes. This is a truth that can either be faced now, when there remains some opportunity to address it, or in the future, when the rot will have gone too far to stop the country from sliding into national decline and bankruptcy.
Which is where the moral case for Kendall's mission comes in. Labour's Left-wing has been most vocal in its opposition to reform, which is only to be expected: what is the point of being on the Left at all if you don't seize every available opportunity to broadcast your morally superior concerns for poor people that callous Right-wingers, even in your own party, don't care about?
But there is no moral case for living off the hard-earned taxes of those who actually have a job. And there is nothing noble about allowing those who suffer from a range of mental illnesses to remain at home when you know that having a job and working side-by-side with colleagues will do far more to improve their mental health than the status quo ever could.
These are hard truths that previous Governments, including the Labour Government I served, managed to avoid. Electoral considerations always prevailed over the optimistic rhetoric of ministers. This meant that reform was downgraded to a mere tinkering at the edges of the benefits system.
Kendall's appointment as Work and Pensions Secretary was one of Keir Starmer's most astute decisions. She is ambitious and supremely capable. But more importantly she understands what is at stake if she fails. She is far from the heartless caricature that her opponents in the Labour Party describe. In fact she could well be the saviour of countless working class communities that have been scarred by generations of political failure.
But that success depends on difficult short-term decisions that will be drastically unpopular and which will have some painful consequences for some people. It would be easy for the Government to abandon this project for the sake of electoral advantage and popularity. That would be more than a mistake: it would be a betrayal of the very people the Labour Party claims to represent.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Civil Service workforce up 2,000 to almost 20-year high, figures suggest
Civil Service workforce up 2,000 to almost 20-year high, figures suggest

Glasgow Times

time19 minutes ago

  • Glasgow Times

Civil Service workforce up 2,000 to almost 20-year high, figures suggest

A total of 550,000 people were employed in the Civil Service as of March 2025, according to new data from the Office for National Statistics (ONS). This is up from 548,000 in December 2024 and a rise of 1% year-on-year from 544,000 in March 2024. Headcount fell to 416,000 in June 2016, the month of the EU referendum. Since that date, the total has risen steadily, driven chiefly by the impact of Brexit and the Covid-19 pandemic. The Government announced in April this year that it planned to cut around 2,100 staff from the Cabinet Office, as part of a plan to shrink the Civil Service and reduce the cost of bureaucracy. Some 1,200 roles will disappear through redundancies, while 900 will be transferred to other departments. The latest Civil Service headcount of 550,000 is nearly a third higher (32%) than it was in 2016, or an increase of 134,000. Of the 550,000, almost 443,000 are full-time roles and the remainder are part-time positions. The last time the quarterly headcount was higher than the current figure was in June 2006, when it stood at 553,000. The total was on a downwards path during the second half of the 2000s and this trend continued into the 2010s until the EU referendum in 2016, after which the headcount began to climb. It grew by 40,000 in the years between 2016 and the start of the pandemic, as thousands of people were recruited to manage the complex and lengthy Brexit process. There was then a further jump once the pandemic was under way, as the Government hired staff to oversee huge projects such as the furlough scheme, testing for Covid-19 and the rollout of the vaccination programme. Headcount increased by 56,000 between March 2020, when the first lockdown began, and March 2022. By June 2024, just ahead of the general election on July 4, the total had reached at 546,000, since when the figure has increased by a further 4,000. Chancellor Rachel Reeves said in March that Civil Service running costs would be reduced by 15% by the end of the decade. As well as abolishing quangos such as NHS England, ministers have committed to increasing the proportion of civil servants working in digital and data roles, creating a workforce 'fit for the future'.

Winter Fuel Payments details of who is eligible confirmed
Winter Fuel Payments details of who is eligible confirmed

Western Telegraph

time21 minutes ago

  • Western Telegraph

Winter Fuel Payments details of who is eligible confirmed

The payment, worth up to £300, will return for millions this winter, the Chancellor has announced. To be eligible for the winter fuel allowance, a person will need to have reached state pension age by the week starting September 15 this year. Devolved authorities in Scotland and Northern Ireland will each receive a funding uplift so they too can meet the new threshold. Payments will be restored to the vast majority of pensioners who previously received it because anyone with an income of under £35,000 a year will now get the payment automatically Those with an income above this threshold will also receive the payment, but it will then be reclaimed from them in tax. Pensioners who do not want to receive the payment will be able to opt out, according to the Treasury. The decision to limit the winter fuel payment to only those who claimed pension credit was one of Labour's first acts in Government, aimed at balancing what was described as a £22 billion 'black hole' in the public finances. This meant the number of pensioners receiving the payment was reduced by around 10 million, from 11.4 million to 1.5 million. But Sir Keir Starmer announced there would be a partial U-turn on the policy in May, after it was thought to have contributed to Labour's drubbing in the local elections. The Treasury claims the new arrangement will cost £1.25 billion in England and Wales, while means-testing winter fuel will save the taxpayer £450 million. Chancellor Rachel Reeves said: 'Targeting winter fuel payments was a tough decision but the right decision because of the inheritance we had been left by the previous government. 'It is also right that we continue to means test this payment so that it is targeted and fair, rather than restoring eligibility to everyone including the wealthiest. 'But we have now acted to expand the eligibility of the winter fuel payment so no pensioner on a lower income will miss out. NEWS. Winter Fuel Payment to be reinstated for all State Pensioners this winter, but then clawed back via tax system for all who earn over £35,000 (roughly average earnings). This is a big improvement. Full instant analysis video coming with all the details in a minute.… — Martin Lewis (@MartinSLewis) June 9, 2025 'This will mean over three-quarters of pensioners receiving the payment in England and Wales later this winter.' Some two million pensioners who earn more than £35,000 will see their winter fuel payments clawed back via the taxman, the Treasury estimates. Kemi Badenoch, Leader of the Opposition, claimed the Prime Minister had 'scrambled to clear up a mess of his own making'. The Conservative leader added: 'I repeatedly challenged him to reverse his callous decision to withdraw winter fuel payments, and every time Starmer arrogantly dismissed my criticisms. hr /> Recommended reading: What is the energy price cap and does it need a smart meter? 'This humiliating U-turn will come as scant comfort to the pensioners forced to choose between heating and eating last winter. The Prime Minister should now apologise for his terrible judgment.' Liberal Democrat Leader Sir Ed Davey said: 'Finally the Chancellor has listened to the Liberal Democrats and the tireless campaigners in realising how disastrous this policy was, but the misery it has caused cannot be overstated. 'Countless pensioners were forced to choose between heating and eating all whilst the Government buried its head in the sand for months on end, ignoring those who were really suffering. 'We will now study the detail of this proposal closely to make sure those who need support actually get that support. The pain they went through this winter cannot be for nothing.'

Ex-watchdog chair warns of loss of public trust over business appointments
Ex-watchdog chair warns of loss of public trust over business appointments

Western Telegraph

time23 minutes ago

  • Western Telegraph

Ex-watchdog chair warns of loss of public trust over business appointments

Lord Pickles, who until April chaired the Advisory Committee on Business Appointments (Acoba), told MPs he is concerned that a lack of focus on cases which do not fall under the committee's remit because they involve less senior roles could lead to a major scandal. Acoba's work involves independently advising the Government, former ministers, senior civil servants and other crown servants on the rules around taking employment after leaving their jobs. Echoing previous criticisms of the current rules, Lord Pickles described them as 'dead in the water, next to useless, pointless and in need of reform' during an appearance before the Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee. He added: '(Acoba) only deals with top civil servants and less senior officials are the responsibility of the board at different government departments. 'That is the area that I'm most concerned about. I was concerned when I went in and I thought the last government were extraordinarily lucky not to have a scandal operating. 'The churn in the civil service is around 40,000 a year… it is of that magnitude. 'It would not be unreasonable to look at those people who had responsibility for procurement, for awarding contracts, and if you designated those posts and put them through a similar process.' When pressed further on the issue, he added: 'If there was to say one thing that I would really like (the committee) to pursue it is that, because it will blow and given the confidence that the public has in politicians and the system, I think it might well be fatal.' Lord Pickles repeated concerns about the focus on ex-ministers rather than Whitehall officials, some of whom he said are reluctant to engage fully with a process designed to maintain transparency. The Advisory Committee on Business Appointments provides guidance to former ministers and senior civil servants who are taking jobs in the private sector PA) He added: 'I think it is really important to understand that everybody concentrates on the ex-ministers because they've heard of them. 'But the real action is taking place among civil servants and there has become, I think, a degree of entitlement that is deeply worrying – both at Acoba level and below. 'There is a kind of a cohort effect taking place, in which the existing cohort looks after the exiting cohort in the assumption that that new cohort will look after them.' He also questioned the ethos of some politicians and senior civil servants over their commitment to the seven Nolan Principles of behaviour in public life, adding 'everybody believes in the seven principles of public life until it applies to them'. Lord Pickles said: 'If you look at the number of problems that we've had over the past five years, it can be neatly summed up in that people say: 'You know, the rules aren't for me because I am completely impeccable.' 'So far as the seven principles are concerned, the runt of the litter, the one that everybody ignores – the one that actually should be the most important – is leadership. 'I think those who engaged in public life in terms of moving towards propriety, they should set an example. 'In the recent years, I have been threatened with judicial review. I have been threatened with various lawyers and the like. 'If you are looking to take in lawyers, if you are trying to sort … you've entirely missed the point of the government business rules.' Lord Pickles said the advisory process should be adjusted to focus on cases with the highest level of risk rather than applications in all circumstances. He added: 'The business rules should be changed to just remove the flotsam and jetsam out of the system altogether and go to a kind of exemption regime and move it much more on a risk basis so you can really focus in on the exact risk and can be much more transparent with the public.' Labour's manifesto pledged to establish a new ethics and integrity commission, with an independent chair, to 'ensure probity in Government'. Lord Pickles said there is limited time for the Government to establish the commission through legislation, with delays for proposed amendments likely. He added: 'I have got no objection whatsoever to it being put on a statutory basis. 'I'm just worried that the practicality is the Machiavellian nature of this building will conspire to ensure that it doesn't matter.' Isabel Doverty, who was an independent member of the committee since 2021, has been appointed as Acoba's interim chair until December 31 2025.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store