I don't specifically work within welfare benefits law anymore, and haven't done for a few years, but I know enough to understand how it all works. And I have to say I'm getting rather frustrated with the way the debate on welfare reform is going. It pains me to say it, given that I think Iain Duncan-Smith has absolutely no moral compass whatsoever, but many of the reforms actually make quite a bit of sense.
My view is that the welfare state should be a safety net, and what that safety net should provide you with depends on your circumstances. Those too ill to work should get enough to support themselves comfortably. Those who have usually worked damn hard, but have fallen on a brief spell of unemployment, should be supported in a similar fashion, maybe for about eighteen months or so. Those who've never worked meaningfully should get enough to stop them starving, and that's about it.
The system as Labour left it was extremely wasteful. Tax credits were paid out based solely on income. Have a low income, e.g. through self-employment, but have massive savings and you still got the support. Get off your arse and earn a bit more, even if you're living hand-to-mouth every week with nothing to spare, and you got nothing. Income support was paid to single parents until the youngest child was 16, even though parents would have precious little to do during school hours. Housing benefit for local authority tenants was pegged to the rent you paid; live in a four-bed council house by yourself and it's paid for in full. Housing benefit for private tenants was far more restrictive, effectively meaning that council tax payers in private houses were subsidising those in council houses. Nobody can put their hand on their heart and say that is fair. And if you were lucky enough to get a job you'd have 4-6 weeks with no money until your first wage cheque came through, even though you'd have no money to start as all benefits were paid weekly.
Universal Credit is supposed to change some of this. Savings will be treated as income, which is entirely fair- people save for a rainy day, and being unemployed is such a day. It'll be paid in the same way you'd get wages, so you won't have the gaps in income if you find work. Housing benefit will be capped, the so called "bedroom tax", where people in massive council houses will have to pay for the privilege or move. All this is entirely fair and proper and reasonable.
In my time at various advice centres I saw my fill of people gaming the system, of people who have never worked and have no intention of doing so. Earning their own crust seemed too much like hard work, affecting their ability to go to the bookies or the pub, so they didn't. It pissed me off then, and it pisses me off now. I loved helping people who'd been screwed over- usually the honest ones who didn't want to grumble about their illnesses and poverty- and hated helping the ones with the massive sense of entitlement. I especially hated anyone who called their benefit payments "pay day" or "their wages", as though they'd somehow earned it and deserved it.
But even with all that, I have grave misgivings about the way so much is being implemented. We can all name a scrounger or ten, but we can also all name ten people who have been shafted. I hate the way that anyone who needs to be supported is labelled as a scrounger. I hate the way they're trying to muddy the water between the can't works and the won't works. I hate the way they're putting the most honest people through hell. Above all, I hate the way they're encouraging people to lie. If you're someone who gets on with life and says "mustn't grumble" a lot, even when faced with severe disability, then you get nothing. Whinge and whine like Jim bleedin' Royale and you'll get your benefits still.
I can't decide whether the people doing these changes understand this or not, and I can't decide whether malice or incompetence is worse. I'm generally siding with the view that it probably is malicious; if you don't have poor people you can't have rich people. The gap between rich and poor is shocking. Working no longer pays because it isn't in their interests for it to pay. But they need people to work to continue to fund the corporate junkyism; if nobody works, there's no tax income to spend on filth like Serco, Atos and Crapita.
I know I am angry about the fact that I am on a very good wage yet I can only afford a flatshare in London. I am angry about the fact that nearly 50% of my wages goes on various taxes every month, and I am angry about the fact that I get piss all back for it. I am angry that there are people being paid to live in houses far bigger than what they need, when I have to share a small flat. I am angry at freeloaders.
But I'm also angry at the way the Government are only trying to present one group of people as freeloaders. MPs are apparently not freeloaders, despite the fact they've all made £50k profit from the housing bubble by getting me to pay their mortgages for them. Private landlords are apparently not freeloaders, despite the fact they get someone else to pay their mortgages for them and then use the profits to inflate the property bubble, making sure more people are forced to pay their mortgages for them. The big corporate conglomerates are apparently not freeloaders, despite not paying tax and demanding massive incentives to build new factories. The CEOs of these conglomerates are apparently not freeloaders, despite awarding themselves 30% pay rises after sacking 30% of their workforce.
The baby boomer pensioners are protected through all of this too. Welfare cuts don't apply to them, tax increases don't apply to them, above-inflation bus fare increases don't apply to them. Throughout their entire lives they've had everything for free- free NHS, free University education, free care homes, free bus passes- yet we're supposed to believe that they somehow deserve it all as they "worked all their life". Newsflash: so have I. And I'll have piss all to show for it, mostly because my Travelcard is so expensive to pay for your bloody Freedom Pass, a card most of you can afford to pay for more than I can.
I don't like the way the welfare system currently operates as there's not enough incentive to work, and there's not a suitable way of punishing the lazy without making the vulnerable and disabled destitute. I really don't like the way the Government try to use this to distract from the real truth though: that the baby boomer CEOs and MPs have stolen everything from us and that is why we're destitute. The current political system has been described as a "kleptocracy", and that hits the nail on the head. Everything about this country is essentially stealing from the defenceless to pay for the fat cats to pamper themselves.
And yes, that beeping you can hear is my high blood pressure alarm.
