Changes to the Welfare System part I

The news has been dominated by changes to the welfare system. I have so many thoughts I shall have to post a number of blogs.

Before I start I like Ian Duncan Smith. I spoke to him once after he had given a speech that included him describing that he was disillusioned with the effect politician can have, he realised that most politicians live in the Westminster 'glass bubble' and therefore were unable to really change the social injustices in our society. I asked him when did he come to this conclusion expecting him to answer "after I had been party leader" he actually said "before he became party leader". He realised what many of us know, that the hundreds of communities of people offering local help were more effective at really changing lives.

So here is my responses so far to the coalition's welfare changes.

1. I do not get the Big Society concept. I know that it refers to the thousands of smaller charities and community groups doing fantastic work. But whilst during the May election, it provided profile for some groups I am at a loss to know how the coalition is meant to develop 'big society', the obvious answer is resourcing big society, financially and people, but there has been no mention of these things and this is not what i would expect from a conservative government. So whilst promoting big society as the answer to significant public sector job cuts sounds like economic sense to some - why pay someone when volunteers will do it for free - the reality is that big society is never promoted from national profile, it is about local people feeling compassion and responsibility for others. Therefore I don't think government is able to promote the concept. I lead a charity that would be under the 'big society' umbrella and it makes no difference to us. We are still the same, needing good people to give much (time, energy and resources) and striving for financial stability.

2. The Child Benefit change announced about a month ago made a great deal of sense. I remember many years ago Phillipa Stroud, who now works in the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) with IDS, explaining how surprised she was that child benefit was available to all. I do not understand why the previous government had not made a similar change to this benefit.

So whilst this change makes sense I fear that it has been implemented in a rushed way like most of the "austerity cuts" and welfare benefit changes . And then when you add the media scrutiny it means that once an announcement is made politicians cannot change their minds, they would fear for their jobs. This is daft because surely public consultation and wisdom in reflection brings a positive balance to planned changes. In this case it is the odd cut off point. If one person in a household is earning over £44K there is no benefit but if 2 earners earn £40K each (i.e. £80K) the household will still get the benefit.

Perhaps the pensioners winter fuel payment should be the next to be linked to need!

More to follow.