Labour’s welfare cap is a largely symbolic gimmick – but it works as a communication device

6th June, 2013 2:00 pm

It would be easy to be dismissive of Labour’s proposed welfare cap on policy grounds. It would be equally easy to hail it on political grounds, as a brilliant landgrab of populist territory where Labour tends to fare badly. But either of these responses would be missing the point.

Certainly, in terms of its stated objective of limiting ‘structural’ (as opposed to cyclical) increases in benefits spending, the cap is a solution looking for a problem, as there hasn’t been a ‘structural’  increase  for a very long time. The idea that welfare is on an unsustainable upward trend is at best a folk memory from the postwar decades, with zero relevance to current circumstances (see chart).

The decade prior to the last recession saw the longest period of stability in welfare expenditure since Beveridge. Given that this was achieved without the gimmick of a cap, the question naturally arises, what is the point of this policy?

correctedchart.docx 2013-06-09 22-05-50

Source: National Accounts (Blue Book) Central and local government social benefits other than transfers in kind, excluding employee benefits and student grants. [There was a calculation error in the data underlying the version of the chart originally published. Declan has now corrected this. The correction does not change the picture of overall expenditure trends]

But the cap is more about sending a signal on future spending intentions than upgrading the armoury of fiscal discipline. Policy wonks might be well advised not to probe to deeply into the detail of a policy which is essentially symbolic in intent. Whatever fiscal stance Labour adopted were it  to form the next government, the idea that it would not have to make further reductions in spending is implausible. Better to get that message across now, both to the public and the party faithful.

And as a communication device, the cap really can’t be faulted.

If Labour wins in 2015 the choices it will face will not be pretty. It will be almost inevitable that some decisions will run counter to values that are of fundamental importance to party members. But one of the clear messages from Ed Miliband’s speech today is that Labour won’t follow the coalition’s strategy of selling cuts by pretending that everyone who is losing out deserves to suffer. ‘I will tell you that there is a minority who don’t work but should. He [Cameron]  will tell you anyone looking for work is a skiver.’ This reframing of a toxic welfare debate deserves to be warmly welcomed. Less welcome is the unimaginative spinning of the speech in the very terms Miliband rejects – exemplified by today’s Mirror coverage.

Whether the sort of aspirations on housing and the Living Wage set out in the speech are likely to  cushion the impact of cuts by reducing the need for welfare spending is open to question: these are longer term aims which wouldn’t have much effect over the three year welfare cap period (even if successful). But the reasons for shifting focus to inequality before taxes and benefits, as Miliband’s speech aimed to do today, go beyond mitigating the impacts of deficit reduction.

Addressing underlying inequalities is after all a large part of what social democracy is about. It can be argued that the sort of proposals outlined in the speech are inadequate given the scale of the task. But if that’s the case, the imperative is to come up with better proposals, not to dismiss the objective.

  • Hugh

    “The decade prior to the last recession saw the longest period of stability in welfare expenditure since Beveridge.”

    Since you’re talking of welfare expenditure as a proportion of GDP should we therefore assume you reckon that growth in the long run will typically look like the decade prior to the recession?

  • PaulHalsall

    Why did we vote for Ed rather than David?

    As a person with AIDS for 31 years I can never work full time again. Ed has deserted people like me. In fact, if I cannot live, I will take my life as soon as I am done supporting my dad.

    • AlanGiles

      Paul. Please don’t think like that. I am sure your dad would want you to soldier on. I think Miliband, and indeed most politicians don’t understand what chronic illness or pain is. It is not to their credit they don’t listen to people like you, and Sue Marsh who could tell them, but choose to try to ingratiate themselves with the popular press instead to try to obtain power. The fact that he has performed a complete volte face in two years rather shows how shallow he is. I felt he would grow into the job, the last year has proved that he hasn’t and won’t

      To be honest I don’t think there was much to choose between any of the 2010 candidates – they were all out of the same mould, – for all his pleading and posturing on the NHS, Burnham still boasted on Any Questions? about his NHS Global and attempts to privatise the NHS.

      I don’t know where in the country you are, but I am sure The Terrance Higgins Trust could probably help with support, if only for moral support. I would think and hope they would have an advocacy service for people in your situation: a three year limit on claims, as Miliband appears to be suggesting really shows he has no idea.

      I just hope Mark allows my message through quickly, as I am currently in the position of the old BBC World Service being “filtered” in East Germany back in the 80s.

  • JoeDM

    “… but it works as a communication device”

    That sounds like good old Blairite spin to me.

    • http://twitter.com/waterwards dave stone

      Yes, the politically bankrupt have nothing to offer other than perception management.

Latest

  • Comment What leadership and deputy leadership candidates think about the EU referendum

    What leadership and deputy leadership candidates think about the EU referendum

    The Labour Party is a pro-European party and should campaign for a Yes vote in the referendum: that’s the overwhelming view of the candidates for the leadership and deputy leadership who responded to a survey by the Labour Movement for Europe launched earlier this summer. We have had an excellent response from the candidates, with full and positive replies from eight of the nine contenders for the two posts. These responses are detailed, thoughtful and clearly heartfelt. Not only do […]

    Read more →
  • Comment The Blairites don’t know why they’ve lost control of the Labour party

    The Blairites don’t know why they’ve lost control of the Labour party

    If there’s a lesson from the Labour leadership contest, it is that most of its MPs have lost control of the party. Daily pleas from senior MPs to members to choose someone “electable” i.e. not Jeremy Corbyn) seem to be falling on deaf ears. A full scale insurgency is in effect. Blairites sound even more disorientated. Last week the Independent’s John Rentoul blamed Ed Miliband for Corbyn’s rise, claiming that while he was leader, “the party chose as candidates a […]

    Read more →
  • Featured News Unison back Jeremy Corbyn to be Labour leader

    Unison back Jeremy Corbyn to be Labour leader

    Unison have announced that they will be backing Jeremy Corbyn for the Labour leadership. The union has nearly 1.3million members. It has said that this is just a recommendation and that individual union members who sign up to vote as should vote for whichever candidate that think is best. They have said that Yvette Cooper is their second choice. Andy Burnham and Liz Kendall are also in the running to be Labour’s next leader. Unison General Secretary Dave Prentis explained […]

    Read more →
  • News 23 council leaders pen statement endorsing Caroline Flint

    23 council leaders pen statement endorsing Caroline Flint

    The leaders of 23 Labour councils have publicly endorsed Caroline Flint’s campaign for deputy leader today. In a statement, the local government leaders praise the Shadow Energy Secretary for her “radical ideas” and “track record of working in partnership with local government”. The signatories include leaders of some of the biggest councils in London, the North West, North East and Yorkshire. Flint finished second in the MPs’ nominations, and is a close third behind Stella Creasy in CLP nominations – […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Forget vacuous ‘One Nation’ – Labour is missing a global vision

    Forget vacuous ‘One Nation’ – Labour is missing a global vision

    Many things have been written so far about the Labour leadership debate, but one thing that most people agree on is that it has been far from visionary. At exactly the time when people in Labour need to lift our sights and look to the future we seem to be chained to the past, caught debating spending decisions in 2006 rather than mapping out a future for 2020 and beyond. George Osborne’s latest budget pushed the right buttons to ensure […]

    Read more →
Share with your friends










Submit