I have wondered recently if three years opposing a Conservative (and, let’s be honest, that label now applies to both parties) government had somehow immunised me against their worst excesses. I have wondered if my response to their policy developments has ceased to be anger or horror, and was now simply tired frustration. This seemed to apply especially to what was coming out of the Department for Work and Pensions. Of course they would waste millions of pounds on the shambolic IT system for universal credit, caring more about courting headlines than the careful work of government.  Of course they would ignore high and growing long-term unemployment, pushing instead a heavily spun line on job creation, despite official warnings as to its veracity.

And when I spoke to Labour conference delegates this weekend about our coming conference in Brighton, I listened as people angrily shared their experience of Conservative policy. But I wondered to myself, that whilst I shared their passionate frustration, it was no longer a surprise to me that this is a government that places a premium on the political dividing line, at the expense of effective governance.

On the way home however all that changed. I saw this story in the Guardian newspaper. Apparently, the Tory twins in government are seriously considering sanctions for those in low-paid or part-time employment. Of course a leak is not confirmation. But the idea of it made me so angry, I had to catch my breath. At first I wondered if it was April Fools’ Day. But no, this appears to be a serious contribution to the labour market debate.

There are many problems with the idea of intervening in a punitive manner in this way.

I have spent most of the summer campaigning and raising awareness of zero-hours contracts. It is very clear from speaking to people who work on such contracts that for too many the power is all in the employer’s court. If Iain Duncan Smith has his way, would this leave employees trapped between a job centre required to sanction them for low hours at work, and an employer high-handedly cutting a person’s hours with little or no notice?

Added to this is the practical ability for the job centre to carry out these interviews, even if (and we never should) a government wanted them to. I have listened to Job Centre Plus staff who have told me that they are sick of permanent change, and ground down by poor resources and overbearing process. To ask job centre teams to take on this extra task without a second thought as to the operational consequences is sheer madness.

Because of the botched reforms over the past three years – the work programme and more – change will be necessary under the next Labour government.  In the pamphlet that Phil Wilson and I edited for Progress, The Politics of Solutions, I wrote about reform for Job Centre Plus.  It is certainly possible to improve the experience of the public who need help getting back to work, humanising and personalising the process for each applicant.

But for reasons of clear principle – and fairly obvious practical problems – I have regained my sense of outrage at the DWP. I cannot think of any good reason to sanction someone for not working enough hours.  Once a person has the dignity of a job, a foot in the door of the world of employment, the state’s job is to tackle underemployment by making sure there is enough demand in the system to give them the hours they need to support their family.

It is not for government to look inside people’s hearts and ask ‘have you worked hard enough this week?’  It is not for a government that cannot avoid botching its own reforms to financially threaten those who are trying to stay in the workforce whilst they look after their children or an older loved one.

I can see only too well the kind of administrative problems with this. But much, much more, I am deeply angry if the government thinks they have the right to sit in judgement on working people.

Unfortunately these policies seem designed to threaten rather than help, and will only add to insecurity and worry for the average British family. I wrote here about the importance of tax credits and the work Labour did from 1997 onwards to improve living standards. It is possible to make work incentives better, and we can continue to review this.  Unfortunately, universal credit makes work incentives worse. Perhaps this is why the government are considering these draconian ideas? It’s simply too hard to get their own shambolic policy to work, so why not have a go at the low-paid instead?

Decent family life comes not from luxury but from knowing that the necessities of life – food, a home, the children’s school uniform – are taken care of.  Given the chance of a job that provided for this, who wouldn’t take it? There is no need for Iain Duncan Smith or David Cameron to dream up ways to punish people any more. They should focus on doing their own jobs better than they have so far and leave the British public alone.