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 Labour leadership hopefuls pass judgement on Osborne’s Sunday trading proposals

    Labour leadership hopefuls pass judgement on Osborne’s Sunday trading proposals

    George Osborne has announced that shops in England and Wales may be allowed to stay open for longer on a Sunday. Labour’s leadership candidates aren’t impressed. As it stands, the law permits smaller shops to stay open all day, but those bigger than 280 sqm are only allowed to be open for 6 hours. Osborne’s proposals would change this, giving elected mayors and local councils the power to relax laws in their area. However, it seems Labour’s leadership candidates who’ve commented […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Labour needs to speak the language of ethnic minorities if it wants to win 2020

    Labour needs to speak the language of ethnic minorities if it wants to win 2020

    What does 20% mean to you? On it’s own it is nothing – a mere solitary figure – but when put into context of the general election it’s the ethnic minority swing from Labour to Conservatives. It shows that the Labour Party have completely missed the messages we should be delivering to the ethnic minority communities across Britain. We’ve totally missed it on the economy, mental health and immigration, remaining as committed and steadfast towards the descriptor “party machine” than […]

    Read more →
  • News Remembering 7/7: tributes from Labour movement

    Remembering 7/7: tributes from Labour movement

    Today is 10 years since the 7/7 terrorist attacks in London, in which 52 people were killed and hundreds were injured. We’ll be collating words and tributes from across the Labour movement today. Ken Livingstone who was Mayor at the time and gave a moving speech which you can read here, has said the following: Thinking of those killed and hurt 10 years ago and the brave people who helped London respond. London did not let the bombers succeed. — […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Don’t just moan – moderates need to organise if they want their voices heard in trade unions

    Don’t just moan – moderates need to organise if they want their voices heard in trade unions

    It did not come as a surprise that Unite nominated Jeremy Corbyn for the Leadership of the Labour Party. There had been a high likelihood this would happen from the moment Jeremy made it onto the ballot paper. The absence of surprise doesn’t make it any more palatable a moment though. Unlike some commentators I am not moved to frenzy by this. Jeremy won’t win the leadership because you need 50% of the votes after transfers to do that, and […]

    Read more →
  • News Labour’s next leader needs to get older voters back on side, urges Liam Byrne

    Labour’s next leader needs to get older voters back on side, urges Liam Byrne

    Liam Byrne has urged Labour’s next leader to get “the silver majority” back on side. Or he warns the party will be left “on the sidelines” at the next election. In an article for the Telegraph (£), the Shadow Minister for Universities, Science and Skills writes the Britain’s “silver majority” – those aged over the age of 55  – might for the first time “make up the majority of voters in the 2020 general election.” Byrne argues that the Tories won […]

    Read more →
Share with your friends










Submit