Today’s event on Welfare Reform is perhaps a good time to place in full my recent letter to the regional papers:
Dear Sir/Madam:
I was disappointed to receive a note from the usually excellent NICVA advertising a forthcoming event on welfare reform by highlighting the “potentially negative consequences” for people in Northern Ireland.
Change to the system is indeed cause of great and legitimate concern for many people. I myself am on record as saying the whole thing is being implemented too quickly and communicated too poorly. Nevertheless, the notion that the consequences will be entirely or even primarily “potentially negative” must be instantly challenged.
The current system traps people in poverty, restricts their choices, and treats them as if they have nothing to offer. If properly implemented, the reforms will tackle this. In addition, they will end extortionate rents charged by landlords paid for by the taxpayer; they will ensure those who choose to work are supported and rewarded for so doing; and they will also give assurance that benefits are only paid to those in need of them (in so doing returning an increasing amount up to £300 million each year to the NI Executive over the reform period for expenditure on public services). Which of these is “potentially negative”?
Northern Ireland has comparatively high rates of child poverty and economic inactivity, but we forget that half of poor children grow up in working families and that work is the single most important pathway out of poverty. Therefore reforms which reduce the squeeze on working families and support more people into work will particularly benefit Northern Ireland.
We may also note that the reforms are designed to last through several economic cycles, and cannot thus be judged solely against the currently pervading economic conditions.
The key lies with the implementation of the reforms and change is never easy. However, absolutely to the contrary of what NICVA implies, welfare reform offers a particular opportunity in Northern Ireland to reward work, limit the squeeze on working families and reallocate more money to real services – all of which is surely “potentially positive”.
Yours etc
