Cameron has described benefits as a "moral failure"
David Cameron, speaking at the annual Hugo Young Lecture, claimed the Conservatives were best able to deal with poverty. Labour’s “big government”, he said, has failed. Britain’s “nanny state” has done away with personal responsibility, promoting selfishness and individualism instead.
The welfare state has increased poverty by making people dependent on the government, said the leader of the opposition, while benefits – which Cameron described as a “moral failure” - have lowered people’s incentive to work. The gap between rich and poor is greater than ever, and social immobility a by-product.
“The once natural bonds that existed between people – of duty and responsibility – have been replaced with the synthetic bonds of the state – regulation and bureaucracy,” said Cameron.
Does this apparent discontent stretch nationwide? In a monthly political monitor, leading social research company Ipsos MORI showed that opinion is polarised between collective provision of welfare and individual responsibility. However, in terms of state intervention, a large majority leant toward individual responsibility.
So how, as a society, do we break out of the nursery and embrace individual responsibility? Cameron proposes a “big society”.
“In the fight against poverty, inequality, social breakdown and injustice I want to move from state action to social action,” he said.
Social action - according to Cameron - is stimulated by redistributing power and control. Transferring it from the state to individuals and communities, parents, families and charities.
So can the voluntary sector deliver welfare?
“It’s a good idea in principle,” Suzanne Hall, Head of Employment, Welfare and Skills at Ipsos MORI, told Sideways News.
“The most vulnerable groups tend to be more trusting of the third sector. It's often locally based, so rooted in their community, known to them and tailored to the area they live. Also, people with chaotic lives tend to have multiple problems which affect, for instance, their ability to work or capacity to handle their finances. A voluntary organisation can deal with all of these in a more holistic manner.”
To a large extent, we are already relying on the voluntary sector. Research conducted by Ipsos MORI for HM Revenue and Customs in 2007 revealed over one in eight of the UK population (aged 15+) have contacted a voluntary and community sector organisation for help over the last two years. The most popular reasons for accessing these resources concerned Tax Credits, Child Benefit and claiming repayments of tax or National Insurance - issues we would associate with the welfare state.
As a society, we tend to trust the voluntary sector. As Hall points out, it has a face. However, if the government is to rely on the voluntary sector for the provision of welfare, then it also needs to be realistic in providing secure and regularised funding.
If Cameron is serious about “big society”, we need to know exactly how he will make it a reality. He needs to make solid policy that delivers. Or, as Polly Toynbee in the Guardian accuses, he is simply flitting across difficult social questions, “while leaving not a footprint of policy behind him”.
SIDEWAYS News for fresh perspectives
0 comments:
Post a Comment