which he would place very carefully next to the kerb. Back in his car, he would drive slowly up the blocks into his drive. Tommy and his wife were council tenants, like us. For me, they epitomise even now everything that is decent about working-class values: hard work, respect and pride in one’s home and achievements. Owning a car then was a sign of doing well in life.
Those values haven’t changed. Most people have been proud to build successful, fulfilled lives around hard work, but the 2008 recession hit hard and those who lost jobs were severely disappointed with the support they were offered by the welfare state. Those who had never worked, on the other hand, were seen to get everything on offer. And voters blame us, the Labour party, for what they see as an unfair system which rewards idleness and penalises effort and aspiration.
This situation has arisen partly due to major social change. In 1938, 70 per cent of the population lived in rented accommodation, with 30 per cent owner-occupying. Now, 70 per cent live in owner-occupied homes. The percentage of women working in 1951 was 27.5 per cent; now it’s close to 70 per cent. At the beginning of the 20th century, 49 per cent of the workforce was either semi-skilled or unskilled; at the close of the century that figure had reduced to 28 per cent.
All this means that working-class families have moved on, determined as they have been to enjoy higher living standards and greater rewards for their efforts. But it also means that there is much more to lose when things go wrong, as of course they do in a global economy where economic problems materialising in one country reverberate around the world. Add to that the very different structures of employment that we experience today, with no such thing as the ‘job for life’, and it is easy to see why people feel insecure and resentful of the long-term workless.
Sadly, our response to this has been rather slow, and consequently we have ceded control of the welfare debate to the Tories. We can and must rectify this situation, for surely Labour is the only party that can properly reform issues around social security in a way that is progressive?
But what would a progressive solution look like? Essentially, it would go back to first principles. While some of the structures engineered by Beveridge still hold good, he nevertheless designed his system almost entirely around the concept of the safety net. It has served us well, and while it works today for those who have little aspiration, it fails those who don’t want to suffer permanent damage to their living standards through no fault of their own. We need to move on from the safety net to focus on the concept of the enabling state, one which is focused much more clearly on doing whatever is necessary to support individuals at all stages in life in securing independence through work. This would involve significant extra investment to tackle the range of issues involved, including of course a realisation of the concept of lifelong education and learning and better financial support for those losing their jobs. The contributory principle should be at the heart of any welfare system built on the concept of the enabling state, as indeed should the principle of responsibility, as outlined by Lisa James and Tim Nicholls on LabourList. Above all, an enabling state should be as flexible as possible, recognising for instance that disabled people can work, if they are properly supported and if the need for flexible working arrangements are recognised.
One of the big ideas underpinning Labour’s return to power should be a fresh approach to welfare. We need a new welfare settlement, perhaps as dramatic as the one offered by Clement Attlee’s government in 1945, a settlement which offers a vision of how best to support the aspirations of working people in the 21st century.
oh well cheerio and good luck Labour I am leaving the party sadly because of Karen Buck’s backing for Crossrail at Kensal which will only further deliver up to developers our neighbourhood and completes the Tory stranglehold import of appalling yuppie values so beloved of Kensington and Chelsea.All their rhetoric on urban deprivation which I have had to point out for years for example to stop cuts at Holland Park Comprehensive and over nursery funding;and when improvements arrive – straight into the hands of developers like Sean Mulryan and those yuppie new build grant recipients from out side the community .Speculators will buy at Wornington Green for example,if there is to be a get to the city quick station,nothing to stop them and punt high rents which will of course have knock on effect in establishing all rents in public housing.Wrong decision guys ,you will see.
An unsatisfactory take on things and a blame the plebs for our failures article. I was looking the other day at the school I went as a child in the North of England, it was a time of social decline along with the economy. Nothing has changed in thirty years, Angela we need to raise this game this is not good enough.
Give me back my legs and I’ll return to work, little wonder labours gone and long may they stay out of power, as for these so called career politicians god they make me puke, the Eagles both of them are about as Labour as Cameron
Disabled people can work agreed, totally 100% agreed, then why is it after ten years of going to numerous of new labours work providers the job center seeking work my self I cannot even get a bloody interview. One of the worse employers of the disabled is the government Parliament with only 2% of workers having a severe disability. I have done everything since labour phoned me up and asked me to do a radio interview on disability issues. What a joke that was, question do you want to work…yes. Then why do you not get a job. because a tube from my penis to a bag on my leg, a wheelchair and the smell of my nappy seems to turn people off, I’m paraplegic, nobody is interested. Ms Smith who was chosen by Labour on an all women short list seem to think more of Animals then humans, another of the new labour tribe.