Frank Field reviews the week in politics
One of the toughest periods for families is the early years of each child’s life. Many mothers feel driven back to work by sheer economic necessity and, whatever their views before the birth of their first child, they deeply regret leaving their baby to the care of others. I would be very surprised if the mother who described how she wept each day as she went to work was an exception. Likewise the mother who commented that every working mother she knew felt guilty about doing so during the first years of her child’s life.
So why don’t we have a grown-up debate on when families would like to draw a chunk of the support taxpayers provide for each family’s wellbeing? Child benefit and tax credits now amount on average to almost £100,000 of tax-free income for each child. For starters, why not let families take a quarter of this, i.e. £25,000, over, say, the first two years of a child’s life if a parent wishes to hold back from resuming their old job?
Individual freedom would be increased with no impact on public expenditure over the longer term. This would be an option with no one forced to participate. But the idea of welfare would begin to be revolutionised, with taxpayers drawing down part of their share when they most need it. And might not the freedom many more parents would have on deciding when they resume work also be in the best interests of nurturing their children?
Groups of families accessing their share of education expenditure is the second example of extending freedom while safeguarding collective provision. Thirty years ago, in 1978, the year before I became an MP, I edited a book for the Gulbenkian Foundation in which I advocated for Britain the Little Danish School model. In Denmark, 300 parents can take the state education budget for their children and set up their own school. One quarter of all Danish schools are now run along these lines.
The then boss of the Inner London Education Authority objected to the idea. Reactionary working-class parents would seize the opportunity to run schools with children sitting in rows learning their tables by rote and likewise how to spell. Thirty years later, even the progressives are signing up to this ‘reactionary’ model, but only after playing havoc with the education particularly of poorer pupils.
More articles from: Frank Field | this section
Post this entry to: del.icio.us | Digg | Newsvine | NowPublic | Reddit
Advertisement
Irwin Stelzer reviews the week in politics
Charles Moore's reflections on the week
Tamzin Lightwater's unique take on the week
The Spectator features more of the nominations for the Readers' Representative award
Spectator readers respond to recent articles
Charles Moore's reflections on the week
The Spectator on Gordon Brown's conference speech in Manchester
Dylan Jones on his year with David Cameron, and his trips to India and New York
James Forsyth reviews the week in politics
Fraser Nelson reviews the week in politics
Sky TV & free broadband packages available from £16 a month. Choose from a standard free sky box, sky plus or sky hd.
Sky TV & free broadband packages available from £16 a month. Choose from a standard free sky box, sky plus...
PORTA METRONIA, ROME Standing high on the top of one of the seven hills of Rome- the Coelian- this unique
ROME and PARIS: over 350 holiday rentals apartments listed: visit www.romanreference.com and www.parisreference.com or call +39 0648 903612.
Goldsmiths by Design Welcome to Ruffs! You have found a company of Goldsmiths that specialises in the manufacture, amongst other
Spectator Business | Apollo Magazine
Corporate | Advertising | Privacy | Terms
Spectator, 22 Old Queen Street, London, SW1H 9HP
All Articles and Content Copyright ©2008 by The Spectator | All Rights Reserved
DougS
April 10th, 2008 3:23pmMr. Field: I thought you were going to actually propose something really useful like cutting extremely high taxes and really “decentralize” decision-making by allowing individuals to contract for services they need.
Shouldn't be surprised: outside of a few areas you're still a socialist, and at your age especially it's difficult to change.
The problem is the Labour Party, and the problem is socialism in contemporary society. There are, shall we say, "internal contradictions": It just doesn't work, and as we get further and further away from the kinds of large, basic industries and mass society that characterized Britain up through the 1970s that's becoming increasingly evident.
So . . . the "progressives" have turned to such nonsense as political correctness, pacifism, bizarre educational experiments -- you name it.
Your Labour Party governs in the name of the working class but harms, not helps, them; all the while it secretly despises many of their perceived qualities.
And . . . it gets along with the kinds of PC, trendy, luvvy nonsense that makes its middle class politicians/activists/rulers pleased with themselves.
All of this has been a disaster for Britain domestically and internationally, as this once-great country sinks ever further into the mire. Oh, I won't rehearse all the statistics about those on disability, how government debt has soared to pay for this government's programs, how education is a wreck, how multiculturalism in all its destructiveness is now so entrenched that it will be difficult to turn around, how wide-open immigration is changing the culture for the worse . . . and on and on and on.
You're still very much socialist and Labour, Mr. Field, and while I know you're conservatives "pet" Labour PM you're up to your 60+ neck in the waste and destruction that is slowly but surely being revealed in Britain.
In fact, it's seemingly (partially) sensible people like you who give a gloss of reasonableness to Labour as a party of government. It isn't; never has been and in all likelihood never will be.
Madeleine Sparkes
April 10th, 2008 6:58pmGreat suggestions. It would be interesting to hear if Frank Field has any knowledge at all of what Gordon Brown thinks of these proposals.
Ian
April 11th, 2008 12:24pmWhat about the unintended consequences of offering £25K child support for the first two years? If I was a teenage girl, bored with school and with no career ambitions, I think single motherhood would look really rather attractive.
John Bull
April 11th, 2008 3:35pmFrank Field once again demonstrates his ability to think and act as that most unusual of creatures, the 'honest politician'.
I cannot claim that I am by natural instinct a follower of Franks leftish tendencies, but openly admit to admiration for his clear thinking.
Gordon is unlikely to espouse Frank's serious proposals - that would require some form of decision-making which appears anathema to Gordon.
Likewise David 'call-me-dave' Cameron will be fearful of grasping an idea patently 'old labour' even though its positive concept should appeal to any progressive mind.
That perhaps a huge number of teenagers will abuse such a system for all it is worth, is to be expected, but given careful documentation and used as case-examples to educate the younger ones, their stupidity can at least become the foundation of learning common sense if not mathematics !
Worth following up Frank - well done !
Mitch
April 12th, 2008 7:47amAs a working class bloke with no kids(my choice) I object to being used as a cash machine to finance your governments hare brained schemes.Why should people be paid to breed? if you cant afford em dont have em.
Pete
April 13th, 2008 1:26pmIan's right.
It's an incentive to breed. Might have mileage if it was restricted to those who were married though - but that would doubtless infringe someones "human rights" or be discriminatory against the feckless and irresponsible.
Anyway, once the feckless teens had spent the £25k on booze, drugs, fags etc. (to no benefit to the child), they'd come cap- in-hand back to the state and, how could the state not help innocent babies? We'd end up paying once more.
David
April 14th, 2008 8:52amWhat makes me feel so depressed is that far to many witless dolts (eg Mrs. Ian Dale) think that Frank Field is a tory at heart.
Frank is still just a commie tool stealing and spending other peoples money.
Mike T
April 14th, 2008 9:21amMr. Field,
As a working class Tory, I see very little wrong with your proposals, a de-centralisation of the state to communities is long overdue.
Your proposals though, radical for a centre-left party in the UK, should be meat and potatoes to a centre-right party like the Conservatives.
Together with the social justice work being defined by Iain Duncan Smith, this represents the best opportunity to improve our society in a generation.
However, I am puzzled, Mr. Field I find you to be a rare politician one of conviction, clarity of thought and honesty.
Why don't you cross the floor and join the Tories?
Ian C
April 14th, 2008 11:32amFrank's solutions sound good but they are little more than a sticking plaster to the problems. They are treatment of bad societal symptoms not, which is what Cameron has to come up with, long term cures that will result in such palliative measures eventually being unnecessary. That is where the debate needs to be Frank, this is shutting the stable door. Yes, there are immediate problems that need resolution and some of your ideas are better than current practice, but we have to have far more radical thinking on how and what government provides and what is reasonable to ask the ever-decreasing productive part of the economy to pay for.
TDK
April 14th, 2008 1:10pmThe idea of generating some sense of personal responsibility by creating a fix sum of welfare that is flexible in its consumption is merit worthy. The test of success will come when the first person, who has misspent all their entitlement comes back and asks for more. they will no doubt have a plausible sorry tale. For your policy to succeed you need to turn them away.
I can't believe that any socialist would actually do that.
Talia
April 14th, 2008 1:34pm"benefit and tax credits now amount on average to almost £100,000 of tax-free income for each child"?
Excuse me will I puke
john
April 14th, 2008 1:49pmI have long admired Frank Field's level-headed dedication to social policy, but with one political constituency voting for public waste and the other for private greed, has our culture ever had any room for constructive thinking?
Craig R
April 15th, 2008 7:31pmI'm with Talia on this one. £100,000 per child? Well that explains where my pay cheque keeps going each month.
That said, I wonder if there is some sense in som of thse ideas. As people have picked up, the maternity one is the most controversial, but could you tie entitlement to the option to contribution, so it was only an option if you'd worked for a couple of years first?
Of course, if he was really keen on individual ownership, he'd advocate raising the personal tax threshold and removing the labrynth of tax credits and complications. Then we could actually keep some of our own money and decide how to spend it, rather than having the state do that for us. But that's why he'll never cross the floor to the Tories, he places too much emphasis on "state programmes"...
Harry Osbourne
April 19th, 2008 12:57amFrank
The party that takes its hand out of my pocket, and stops its arrogant and overbearing belief that it can spend my money better than I can, is the one that will earn my vote.
Steve Lee, London
April 30th, 2008 2:32pmMr field, can you not see that the vast majority of all violent offenders in this country are children born to products of the Welfare State – handing over a bounty to Women (often no more than Children themselves) for having a child just further encourages those least equipped to be parents to out-breed everyone else. The welfare state IS the problem – is has converted the working class into the welfare class. The so called middle classes are now the working class – they live hand to mouth with no savings thanks to the crippling taxes in this country – all the while being robbed, burgled and beaten up by the very people they are taxed to death to support. Time to scrap the welfare state replacing it with generous income tax allowance (transferable to MARRIED partner) of say 15K. Think the unthinkable? I can – can you?
Herbert Thornton
May 3rd, 2008 12:39amBrown must "forge" a new tax contract with the voters?
Judging by the contract with the voters to hold a referendum on Europe, isn't the word "forge" absolutely apropos?
I wonder if Frank realised that when he wrote it?
Ray morris
May 3rd, 2008 10:58pmMr Field. You were very quickly got rid of way back in the early days of Tone' because you suggested that people had to be responsable for thier actions. Now ...if you are asking Flash to move away from just throwing the mulla about and a bit of thought go into how we go about it then I am afraid you have got as they say NO CHANCE
Flash doesn't live on our planet and hasn't got a clue about ordinary working poeople's lives. how can he have? Brought up in Scotland for a start then never having done a job.How do we vote for these people?? Dave' is a bit the same but I'm voting for them because he dose seem a bit more like one of the human race