Welfare or Well unfair?

Whatever view one takes of Danny Alexander (and I happen to think Harman's remark was an insult to rodents everywhere) one cannot accuse the coalition of failing to be radical with welfare. The ginger Chief Secretary to the Treasury announced a plan at the weekend to force long term claimants of Job Seekers' Allowance (JSA) to perform unpaid work in the community. Such a proposal represents the most politically risky reform attempted with welfare since the state assumed responsibility for social security in 1948.

Already, the plans are drawing sharp criticism from a range of people. The most vocal opponent of the plans is the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams. Dr Williams has suggested that the impact on benefit claimants of being forced into work may lead to long-term depression. Others have likened the policy to criminalising the poor by making them perform the tasks usually reserved for offenders serving community sentences.

My suspicion though is that the general public will broadly agree with this proposal. There is a growing sense of anger - not least amongst the working poor - against people who are perceived to be lazy, work-shy and undeserving of state support. I strongly dispute the allegation that JSA claimants can 'get rich' off collecting their £65 a week. Many of the long-term unemployed live in unenviable conditions of poverty. Nevertheless, it is sadly the case that many recipients of JSA are simply unable to make the transition from being unemployed to working a full-time job. This policy will help to bridge that divide.

I think it's imperative that Labour adopt a position that recognises the concerns of the working poor in relation to a number of issues largely ignored in the New Labour years - I'm talking about immigration, welfare, and economic inequality. This is not just because these people deserve our support and encouragement. The dangers of marginalising people in this social demographic leads only one way: into the hands of far-right extremists.

All that said, however, I do have reservations about the plans. Any legislation would have to be conditional on two factors in my view:

1. The individuals in question must have turned down offers of employment.

2. There must be employment out there for people to take advantage of.

It is on this second point that I strongly challenge the course taken by the Government. These reforms have been announced following plans in the spending review to cut 500,000 public sector jobs. When you include the knock-on job losses in the private sector, the total figure for unemployment as a consequence of Government policy could be 1 million. That's a lot of people on the dole.

In this context, it would seem extremely unfair to subject people to forced labour. The fact that they are in receipt of JSA is no fault of their own. If they could get a job they would. There is no use in trying to re-integrate these people back into working life. Without an available supply of jobs to advertise, these plans serve no purpose and represent an outright attack on hard-working decent people. That is simply wrong.

So while I understand the idea behind the welfare changes, I must say it doesn't strike me that there is much in the way of joined-up thinking going on in Government. Hardly surprising you might say, given the circumstances of the coalition in this country.