BY SHELLIA KENNEDY
LONDON - "Thinking the unthinkable" is British prime minister Anthony Blair's catch phrase for a deepening assault on the social wage, targeting the benefits received by the disabled, single parents, unemployed youth, and pensioners. On March 26 the Labour government issued its initial proposal to "reform" the social security system. The proposals are the latest step in a political campaign that began under the previous Conservative government to undermine support for social entitlements and place more of the burden of social crises on individual workers and their families.

Right after the election of the Labour Party government in May 1997, Blair appointed Frank Field as the second-in- command in the social security ministry. Field is a Labour member of Parliament well known for arguing that the so- called welfare state enacted in 1945 is "unsustainable," and should be scrapped. He describes workers and youth receiving benefits as a "dependency culture" and proclaims that means- tested benefits are "morally bad, discouraging self-help, taxing honesty, rewarding claimants for being either inactive or deceitful." He calls for "remoraliz[ing] welfare." Field has since been anointed Minister for Welfare Reform.

Blair calls the current plan to slash 3.2 billion (1= $1.69) from social benefits and impose draconian restrictions a "new deal." Around 9 million people are now living in households that receive income support, of whom 3 million are single parents, 2 million are aged 60 or over, 2 million are unemployed, and 1.4 million are disabled. Millions more working people depend on other types of social security benefits.

Some 13.3 million people - about a quarter of the population - are living in families whose income after housing costs is less than half the national average. In 1979 fewer than 10 percent were below this line.

The most prominent part of the so-called new deal involves the scapegoating of unemployed youth as lazy freeloaders who need to be forced to work. Young people under the age of 25 who have been out of work for more than six months and are not single parents will be forced to choose among four "options" or risk losing their benefits. The options include going to school full-time, signing up for six months of work for a volunteer agency or "environmental taskforce," or finding a job with a company that will receive a 60-a-week subsidy for employing them for up to 26 weeks.

An article in the April 1 Guardian described this plan as follows: "In the words of Cabinet Ministers, [beneficiaries will] no longer have the option of lying in bed all day while claiming the dole. Instead, they will be called in for interviews with their local employment service, where a `personal assistant' will, wherever possible, offer them four choices. Anyone who fails to take up those options will see their benefits removed for two weeks on first offense and for four weeks on the second. It's not quite `jobs or jail,' the favored American term, but Labour is putting a new emphasis on the work ethic."

Blair declared that the new deal would also provide free alarm clocks, so job seekers would get up for interviews. These are to be issued by the "personal advisers."

Some big-business papers have harped that 20,000 of the young people pushed into the "new deal" have criminal records. When the grocery chain Tesco announced that it would be taking on 1,500 such employees, the right-wing Daily Mail shouted, "Tesco lets criminals work at checkout." Tesco will receive a 6 million subsidy for hiring these workers.

Along with threats of loss of benefits if young people don't accept the "new deal," the Education and Employment Committee - a cross-party group - have argued that "disaffected pupils" should start work at 14 years old. Nicholas St. Aubyn, a Conservative member of the committee, said, "Some children are already prepared for the adult world at the age of 14 and can cope with life in the workplace or a further education college."

Unmarried women with children are another political target. One measure recently adopted will cut benefits for lone parents by 5 per week. The Blair government is also pushing "welfare to work" schemes for those receiving this benefit, but so far on a "voluntary" basis and without the same sanctions levied against youth. One suggestion ministers have floated is an "availability for work test" when the youngest child starts the second term at primary school. While the government hasn't been confident enough to propose it yet, Minister for Welfare Reform Field opined, "Sanctions could be a useful signal of intent and need to be a part of the new deal."

A recent conference of Black women's organizations discussed the fact that single women of oppressed nationalities, who face discrimination in hiring and wages, will be especially hit by these cutbacks.

The government also proposed limiting the length of time that claims of social security benefits could be backdated to one month, instead of three, in the name of shaving 57 million from the government budget. This scheme, which would affect anyone who didn't immediately apply for benefits when they become eligible, has been withdrawn for now. Patricia Hollis, junior social security minister, commented, "It is not sensible to make changes to the backdated rules in isolation."

The British rulers are making more cautious probes against disability benefits. These include the Incapacity Benefit, claimed by 2.4 million people; Disability Living Allowance (DLA), claimed by 1.8 million; and Attendance Allowance, paid to 1.2 million people over the age of 65. Attacking these payments is deeply unpopular. The government has floated the idea of means testing or outright cutting, saying it needs to reduce the 23.5 billion that is spent.

The proposals pushed by the new Labour government, continue an offensive begun under the previous Conservative government. Many workers don't see much difference in approach to social benefits by either government. The Tory Social Security Secretary, Peter Lilley, had warned of the supposedly unsustainable growth of benefits spending and claimed that almost a third of the projected increase in benefits costs to the year 2000 would come from sickness and disability allowances. He argued for "the value of making unemployment benefits conditional and providing active help to people to return to work" and said there should be "no reason in principle why people should not...opt to make provision for themselves privately rather that through the state system."

These cuts are coming at the same time that industrial production is on the brink of an official recession. Government figures showed 0.5 per cent fall in output from all production industries in February. The quarterly figures showed industrial production down 0.6 per cent in the past three months compared with previous quarter. Marian Bell, the Royal Bank of Scotland head of UK Treasury research, said manufacturing would officially be in recession if the March figures showed a further decline in output.  
 
 
Front page (for this issue) | Home | Text-version home