Welfare reform is now seen as well fair
Fraser Nelson 11:49pm
I’ve just finished a 45-minute BBC Five Live phone-in with Richard Bacon about Cameron’s welfare reform – me in favour and Lisa Harker from the IPPR (ex DWP) against. I had expected it to be a flak-taking exercise, and perhaps it would have been had it been a Westminster discussion. But most of the callers were very supportive of the Tory proposals. There was a guy who had been on Jobseekers Allowance for months who applauded Cameron’s workfare idea – ie, demand people work for their dole. It makes you feel you’ve earned something, he said. Another text said “I work six nights a week for my family, no one else’s”. Another called to denounce the idea that the state owes anyone a living. Ten years ago, Blair failed to reform welfare mainly because people felt there were not enough jobs for those denied it. Mass immigration has given the lie to this.
This has become a major issue in the real world. I once had a letter from a News of the World reader who told me how he works all the hours God sends and can’t afford to take his family for the holidays which the welfare-dependent family next door to him takes. He felt robbed. And little wonder, when a minimum-wage family with two kids is only £30 a week better off in work than on welfare. Cameron made his case today on compassion, and rightly so. But he is also tapping into a deep sense of injustice out there. Played correctly, his welfare reform proposal could be a real vote winner.







Previous


Comments
Old Hack
January 9th, 2008 8:08amIs it time for Cameron to do a Broon and reach out to Frank Field?
Tiberius
January 9th, 2008 10:23amI'm not sure, Fraser, that it was a perceived lack of jobs that torpedoed this policy ten years ago, even if they were in short supply. Welfare receipts could always have been "earned" by paying recipients, for example, to keep clean town and city streets on the scale that it is done on the Continent. It is more the case that the sensible thing to do is often obscured. This particular sensible policy seems now to have overcome the hand-wringing attitudes, and shed its taboo nature.
Anan
January 9th, 2008 11:10amHmmm, I wonder why most of the news channels didn't even bother to report on the proposals from the Conservatives. All I heard of it on the TV was on the BBC news-ticker! Everything else I know about I picked from websites such as this one.
I wonder why the BBC, Sky etc were so reluctant to report something that has strung a chord with so many of all classes, and is such an important issue in today's UK? Perhaps it's because Labour can't match it (since that would go against their very ideological basis, just like the support of families and tackling social breakdown) so they aren't going to report it because others who don't bother reading papers or political websites will start thinking of voting Conservative/liking Cameron.
Biased press, still want to live in the Labour wonderland.
No matter what they do, no matter how many fake polls they pull out showing the Bowser Brown "bouncing" around like a clown, they are finished. It is inevitable, simply the nature of all things as corrupt as this government.
TGF UKIP
January 9th, 2008 12:07pmMight the reaction you catalogue Fraser actually begin to show them that they don't need to be SocDems and that they can indeed dare to be conservatives. But why still be mealy-mouthed about it and sell it on compassion? "Summat for nowt, ain't right!" That's what your callers and correspondents feel and that's the message they expect to hear from their leaders.
Rohan
January 9th, 2008 12:08pmAnan - didn't you see and hear the blanket coverage the BBC gave it on Monday night? The Tories trailed it on Sunday in the news of the world cameron article (and other sunday papers using an embargoed press release), and it was reported by the bbc and the PM responded during his interview. They then trailed it again on Monday night on the BBC and got 5 minutes second item plus Nick Robinson on the Ten o'clock news and it played 2nd item on most of their radio news bulletins that night. The BBC website covered it in full on Sunday, Monday and Tuesday. Open your eyes and hears you idiot!
David Lindsay
January 9th, 2008 4:47pmWe already have Workfare in this country. It is called New Deal and, as in New York, does not save the taxpayer one penny, although the British version does compel the unemployed to work for fifty pence per hour. David Cameron and Chris Grayling seem not to have heard of it. But then, who has heard of Chris Grayling? Not for the first time (nor, doubtless, for the last), the Tories are very visibly sleepwalking into a fourth defeat, more than long enough away for it to be their worst yet.
Anan
January 9th, 2008 8:47pmYou seem rather stressed Rohan, I guess you are one of these Labour supporting morons working in media outlets that I was talking about. Go back to your editor at the BBC and pass on my complaint. Thanks!
All of Monday the BBC news website had a big picture of that depressing image that is Bowser Brown's face. Neither BBC News nor Sky News even bothered to report on it throughout the day (nevermind Mr Nick I-love-Labour Robinson's 5 minutes). I watched the channels at several times throughout the day, and they paid it only lip service on Monday and Tuesday. Mostly though, it was confined to the news-ticker.
My eyes and ears are open, which is why I noticed the lack of objectivity in most of the media of this country, and made comment on it here.
OF course, since you have your "hears" open (I take it this is some special organ that fools like you have), no wonder you see what you want: a glorious Labour-land for all eternity - and are determined to keep it that way by using any means necessary to distort the truth, censor the third-world level problems inflicted upon us, and somehow keep Brown in power. You will not succeed. Simply for thinking that you will, you are the biggest idiot here.
Richard
January 9th, 2008 9:45pmWhy not have carrots as well as sticks? When is the Tory leadership going to follow the example of John Bercow and Lord Saatchi and start talking about taking the low paid out of taxation through increasing the personal allowance (say up to £10,000?)
Rohan
January 10th, 2008 11:24amAnan. Not stressed just rather amused! Have you no idea how politcal parties trail stuff. They liased with the BBC so that they had video reports ready from Wisconcin and New York. They then provided the BBC (Nick Robinson) with the details of the second stage of their plans exclusively on Monday night for use on the 10 O'clock news that night who gave it a long item (which was very fair to them and didn't interview any wound up disability charities etc). That was followed up by the BBC radio and TV - including the main item Radio 5 Live debate Fraser did on Tuesday. In the same way they gave an article to the NotW on Sunday trailing the first part of their plans on Sunday and got coverage in the other sunday papers with their embargoed press release and some briefing. That was also picked up on by the BBC. All in all I think they did pretty well out of a non-policy announcement (compared with the really radical ideas they obviously indicated to Fraser they were interested in before he wrote the piece in the magazine late last year). Any thoughts Anan?
Fraser Nelson
January 11th, 2008 10:33amGents, can I offer myself as a Blair-style peace mediator? I agree with Rohan in that the Tories did well publicity wise out of this. For what it's worth I bumped into a Shadow Cabinet member at a party last night who reckoned he got - six days of hits starting with the Tel last Sat - and even today (fri) Cameron gets a rare thumbs up from Gaunty in The Sun. Anan has a point to say that, perhapse because it was so well trailed, the BBC et al gave it less coverage when it was announced. Cameron is regaining his old knack of spotting talking points. I wonder how many more of these he has up his sleevs. Answer: not many.
Rohan
January 12th, 2008 12:18pmGood to have your intervention - I think it's interesting that they trailed the 2nd announcements on Monday night through the BBC. Although this thread is dead it's def true to say the Tories have done fabulously given there is very little new in their proposals. They have achieved what Blair used to achieve in opposition - being all things to the righ people without saying anything really. I've posted in the littlejohn/civil service thread about the only new element (which the civil service can impliment easily) but personally and professionally I'm disappointed the Tories haven't been truely radical and given the electorate a real choice.