Labour’s Welfare Reforms: A Tough Necessity for the Future
24/03/25
Embedded Files
LIZ KENDALL, SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WORK AND PENSIONS , IMAGE: GOV.UK
On Tuesday the 18th of March, Work and Pensions Secretary, Liz Kendall, unveiled a series of major welfare reforms. They were met with cries of outrage from both left and right, with the former calling them immoral and the latter bemoaning the fact they don’t go far enough. I disagree with both of these criticisms; if the current trends continue, we will be spending £70 billion a year on health and disability benefits by the end of the decade, with 4.3 million people claiming these benefits. It is imperative that those of us who believe in the welfare state do not allow this to happen and ensure the public has confidence in the system long into the future.
While most of the attention following the announcement of these reforms was on cuts, it is worth spending time on the systematic reforms that the government is introducing. Removing the often bemoaned work capability assessment should be applauded given it was based on a false binary of ‘totally able to work’ and ‘never able to work’ when in reality, very few disabled people fall into either category. Furthermore, the so-called ‘right to try’, where disabled and ill people are allowed to try working without fearing a dramatic change in their benefits arrangements, could be revolutionary, removing a significant barrier to many who want to work. On top of this radical change, the government also committed a further £1 billion to boost support for disabled people getting into work, a move that should be welcomed across the political spectrum. Finally, the removal of reassessments for those who are permanently disabled is phenomenal news. The indignity of having to be re-assessed for a condition you know will never improve should have been left in the distant past and is rightly now being corrected.
KENDALL AT A MARCH FOR THE NHS, IMAGE: DALISCAR1
The less pleasant aspect of the welfare reforms was the £5 billion worth of cuts also announced by the government. These cuts will mainly come from the change to the eligibility criteria for the Personal Independence Payment (PIP). These reforms will make it more difficult for people to claim this benefit successfully; however, for those who are most severely disabled, this will have little impact. As someone who has been through the PIP application process, I can attest to the fact that these changes are deeply reasonable, and the vast majority of those who should be receiving this benefit will continue to do so. Of course, these reforms will not be perfect and there may be those who need it who become unable to claim it, and that is why I would encourage anyone who is in that position (or knows someone who is) to fill out the government consultation when it opens so these reforms can be as flawless as possible.
The rest of the cuts will come mainly from changes to Universal Credit, where the top rate will be cut, and the health supplement will only become available to those over 22. These reforms do have logic behind them. They aim to stem the flow of young people going from education to health-related benefits, which has become particularly prevalent since the pandemic and is depriving so many young adults of the fulfilment of good employment. Furthermore, while the top rate of universal credit has been cut, the standard rate has been increased above inflation for the first time. These decisions are typical of the difficult decisions that governments must make, and while I understand the criticism they have received, I think they are reasonable choices that were not taken lightly.
Overall, however unpleasant some people may find them, these reforms are paramount in securing the welfare state’s future. They show clearly that the government is serious about securing both economic growth and preserving social safety nets. They will be unpopular, and they will be imperfect, but they are a step forward compared to the inaction that we have seen in recent years as we have watched this crisis of the economically inactive approach with ever greater severity. These decisions will not have been taken lightly; no minister (least of all a Labour one) would want to cut benefits, but to preserve one of Labour’s greatest gifts to the British people, they are essential.
Google Sites
Report abuse