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.

    • dave stone

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


  • Featured News Labour figures react to death of Denis Healey

    Labour figures react to death of Denis Healey

    Labour figures are today reacting to the news that former Chancellor Denis Healey has died at the age of 98. We’ll keep this post updated as more come in. Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn: “Denis Healey was a giant of the Labour Party whose record of service to his party and his country stands as his testament. “He distinguished himself with his military service during the Second World War and continued that commitment to the British people as a Labour politician […]

    Read more →
  • Featured News 10 of the best Denis Healey quotes

    10 of the best Denis Healey quotes

    Denis Healey passed away today, aged 98. He was a giant of Labour politics, sitting in Parliament for 62 years until his death, having become a peer in 1992. He once told a reporter: “A statesman is a dead politician. I am in the home of the living dead which is betwixt and between: The House of Lords.” He will be remembered as an eloquent and quotable politician – here’s another 10 of his best lines. “First law on holes. […]

    Read more →
  • Featured News Denis Healey passes away aged 98

    Denis Healey passes away aged 98

    Denis Healey, who served the Labour Party as both Chancellor and deputy leader, has died at the age of 98. He was an MP for forty years, having being elected as the member for Leeds South East in 1952 and Leeds East in 1955, and standing down in 1992. He then became a peer later that year. Throughout his forty-year career as an MP, Healey served as Secretary of State for Defence (1964-1970) under Harold Wilson, Chancellor of the Exchequer (1974-79) […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Tory ministers have failed to act on the emissions test scandal

    Tory ministers have failed to act on the emissions test scandal

    When the VW emissions scandal began to unfold last week, I said that the problem might well end up being far wider than the 11 million vehicles we had been told about. Sadly, this has turned out to be the case. As the scandal gathers pace, many more diesel cars within the VW brand, including Audi, Seat and Skoda have been found with the defeat device that cheats emissions tests. What’s more, cars built by Renault, Nissan, Hyundai, Citroen, Fiat, […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Why Corbyn’s Labour should support the Cities Bill

    Why Corbyn’s Labour should support the Cities Bill

    Anyone looking for definitive policy commitments at Labour Party Conference this week would have left Brighton feeling disappointed. The new Labour leadership deliberately eschewed any attempt to pin the party down on a whole range of specifics, announcing instead a series of major reviews into big institutions like the Treasury and the Bank of England, and into particular policy areas, like housing and devolution. But when Parliament resumes in two weeks’ time policy decisions will be required, not least on […]

    Read more →
Share with your friends