Labour must go for contributory welfare, not more means testing

4th June, 2013 5:30 pm

£100 million may not be an awful lot of money in the scheme of things – around 0.05% of the welfare budget – but Ed Balls’ announcement yesterday that Labour would means-test the winter fuel allowance was an important political moment.

First the good news. Putting pensioners’ benefits up for discussion is a positive step. David Cameron was wrong to promise to protect them all, regardless of circumstances, at the last election and Gordon Brown was wrong to back Cameron into a corner in the live debates. Pensioner benefits account for around 40% of all welfare spending, so protecting them has put huge pressure on the working age welfare budget to bear the burden of austerity.

The bad news is there are problems with means testing both in principle and in practice. In principle, we should aim for a welfare system that helps people in need, but also encourages honesty and rewards work and saving. This is what Maurice Glasman calls ‘incentives to virtue’. Means testing tends to do the opposite of these things and is unpopular as a result.

In practice means testing complicates the system and requires more bureaucracy to check exactly who is entitled to what. All for just £100 million. The real reason pensioner benefits are so expensive is that we are all living longer. So the question we should be asking is whether it is right that people can claim the winter fuel allowance as early as age 62, not whether means testing could save a small fraction of the overall spend.

More generally, Labour needs to get its story straight on welfare. What is the big idea? Focusing scarce resources on the most needy, as yesterday’s announcement suggests, or strengthening ‘the old principle of contribution’ as Liam Byrne promised not so long ago? Labour would do well to focus more the second of these two approaches, especially if it wishes to restore the public’s faith in working age welfare. The international evidence shows that the most generous welfare states are also those with stronger contributory elements.

This week Demos publishes proposals on how to do this. The government could create a two-tier system, with higher benefits for those with strong work records – around £95 per week job seekers allowance, compared to the £71.70 that everyone gets at the moment, regardless of their employment record. This would be paid for by cutting spending on Support for Mortgage Interest (SMI). SMI is a benefit specifically for homeowners: it covers the interest on up to £200,000 of loans or mortgages when people are out of work.

There is a principle behind this proposal: taking on a mortgage is a choice – and people should take responsibility for insuring themselves against the risks associated with that choice. To that end, people should be automatically enrolled into mortgage payment protection insurance (MPPI), providing those customers with the chance to opt out of such insurance. This would mean that anyone not insured against their mortgage interest costs would have actively made that choice. All others would be insured at a maximum cost of around £33 per month, less than the average phone bill.

Making these changes would help Labour reclaim the mantle of personal responsibility, with homeowners insuring themselves against risks incurred by their own choices. It would encourage greater social solidarity, by reassuring people that those who have contributed to the welfare system will get the most out of it. And it would not cost a penny more than the current approach.

On Thursday Ed Miliband will make the second big Labour speech of the week, focusing on welfare. Here’s hoping the contributory principle is at the heart of it.

Duncan O’Leary is Deputy Director of Demos 

  • AlanGiles

    ” This is what Maurice Glasman calls ‘incentives to virtue’”

    Thats fine – just as long as their Lordships MacKenzie and Cunningham, and MPs become as virtuous as the people they lecture.

  • i_bid

    So home-ownership is a ‘choice’ and not a right now, and do these proposals include regulating our exploitative and unaffordable renting sector? What do these ‘strong work records’ mean? Living in an area that has been hit hard firstly by de-industrialisation, and now public sector job losses, whilst starved of investment caused by an absurdly distorted economy towards the London South East – it sounds remarkably like heartland Labour territory like this would be punished under these proposals ignoring the scarcity of jobs through no fault of our own.

  • Monkey_Bach

    Whenever anybody is needed to invent a scheme, scam, or ruse to enable Labour to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory Liam Byrne and/or DEMOS are always willing step forward and oblige.

    Eeek.

  • Quiet_Sceptic

    So homeowners have to insure themselves but what about those renting?

    Your argument seems to be that people who buy have a responsibility to insure themselves against homelessness but those who rent should be insured by the state through the housing benefit. system. Why the inconsistency?

    There’s no logic or reason to it, why should the state favour tenants over owners, in effect providing a subsidy to the rental sector?

    What the state ought to do is provide the same level of support regardless of housing type, the owner can use it to pay their mortgage interest, the renter can put it to their rent. Fair and equal treatment of both.

  • Mike Homfray

    I’m not sure if it would be possible at the moment. The reason brown rejected Frank Field’s relatively modest ideas based on contribution in 97 was the sheer cost of establishing the initial level playing field which has to exist to make it at all fair.

    Means testing has many built in problems but I don’t see a very easy escape from it

Latest

  • News The eight people vying to be Labour’s London Mayoral candidate

    The eight people vying to be Labour’s London Mayoral candidate

    On Wednesday the applications to be Labour’s candidate for London Mayor closed. We now have a list of all the people who have put their names forward to be in the running, and alongside the usual suspects there are a couple of other names in the mix. There are eight candidates: –Diane Abbott, the MP for Hackney North and Stoke Newington. She says that she’ll be a genuinely independent mayor, not in the pocket of the party leader. Abbott has […]

    Read more →
  • News Margaret Hodge endorses Sadiq Khan to be Labour’s London mayor candidate

    Margaret Hodge endorses Sadiq Khan to be Labour’s London mayor candidate

    Until she announced she wouldn’t be running, many thought Margaret Hodge had a chance of being Labour’s next London Mayoral Candidate. When she declared that she wouldn’t enter the race, she said that she would like the next mayor to be a person from a minority ethnic background. There was a brief moment when it seemed David Lammy was her choice, but now she has revealed exactly who she thinks is the best person for the job. In an interview […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Don’t narrow our leadership bid

    Don’t narrow our leadership bid

    As the Labour Party licks its wounds after our worst General election defeat for 100 years we could be about to step into an abyss. Labour MPs have the power to stop this happening. Under the new leadership rules Labour MPs’ final vote in the election of a new leader have (quite rightly, and one of Ed Miliband’s key reforms) only the same weight as any other member’s vote. But where MPs really have the chance to shape the choice […]

    Read more →
  • News Details of first TV hustings for Labour leadership announced

    Details of first TV hustings for Labour leadership announced

    Harriet Harman said she wanted the public to play a crucial role in the leadership election at the start of the week. Now making good on this promise, Labour have announced the details of the first TV hustings for the contest. It will take place on the 17th June on BBC Newsnight at 19.00. The hustings will be broadcast live from Nuneaton and will take place in front of a studio audience. It will be presented by Laura Kuenssberg.   […]

    Read more →
  • Featured News London mayoral survey results: Jowell in the lead but Khan isn’t far behind

    London mayoral survey results: Jowell in the lead but Khan isn’t far behind

    At the moment a lot of Labour news is focussed on the leadership and deputy leadership contests. But in London, there’s another race going on. The applications to be London’s mayoral candidate closed on Wednesday (we’ll be publishing the full list of all who applied shortly) but we asked our readers which of the declared candidates they wanted be Labour’s candidate. And this time, as with the leader and deputy leader candidates, we gave readers the option to suggest an […]

    Read more →
Share with your friends










Submit