Benefit claimants should volunteer, says Blue Labour peer |

Thursday 29th September 2011 | 07:30

Benefit claimants should volunteer, says Blue Labour peer

By Isabel Hardman

Benefit payments should be conditional on a claimant attending support groups or volunteering in the community, an influential adviser to Ed Miliband has suggested.

Maurice Glasman, a Labour peer and founder of the 'Blue Labour' movement, revealed in an exclusive interview with PoliticsHome that he was formulating plans for a reform of the welfare system that he believes will empower claimants rather than leaving them reliant on state help.

On top of a contributory-based system where claimants who have paid more in taxes might receive more in benefits, which is already being considered by the party's policy review, Lord Glasman also suggested that the welfare system should “bring people together”.

This would involve claimants being required to join support groups or visit vulnerable people, he said. “For example, a parent claiming benefit for a child with autism might join a local group supporting autism, or someone else might visit an old person,” he said.

The peer, who frequently advises Mr Miliband during debates held at the Labour leader's home on Sunday afternoons, told PoliticsHome that his proposals, which he expects to feed into the policy review, would work particularly well for those with mental illnesses, who he described as “isolated and disappointed”. He said connecting claimants within the community would deal with this sense of isolation and better empower them to change their lives.

He said: “You have to place a way to build relationships and situate them in the welfare system. This is going to have a very strong democratic element: this is not about philanthropy at any level, which was about the deserving and undeserving poor. There is no responsibility without power.”

The party's Shadow Welfare Minister Karen Buck gave a cautious welcome to the suggestions, saying: “Maurice Glasman has some interesting ideas. Let's put it through the policy review process.

“But it is not going to replace the fundamental principle of social security when people have no money.”

But backbench Labour MP Kate Green, previously the chief executive of the Child Poverty Action Group, dismissed the idea as “patronising”. She said: “The idea of more conditionality for benefits is wrong. We have got the most conditional system in Europe.

“I think it is patronising and unsettling actually. I think Maurice Glasman is wrong about that.”

Ms Green said claimants already had meetings that they were required to attend in order to prepare them for a return to employment, and dismissed suggestions that those suffering from depression would benefit from what she described as “being forced to go and meet people”.

Anthony McCaul, Senior Media and Campaigns Officer at Family Action, said: “A lot of the families that we work with have very very complex problems themselves, if there is a parent with a disabled child, there are huge time pressures already in terms of caring, so to add that level of conditionality for them to get their benefits would be very difficult for many of them.

“Many families with disabled children are already part of groups that support them anyway, and it also suggests that perhaps they are bad parents. This proposal from Blue Labour would make families see red.”

Leave a comment...

Ron Graves

10:37 |
29 Sep 2011
Recommended
6

I have been in receipt of disability benefits since 1986 when, after struggling for years - I've been disabled all my life - it finally became, at the age of 42, impossible for me to work any longer. Currently, I am housebound and waiting to die, a process that is likely to be as prolonged as it will be painful. For the record, I was struck by lightning in 1983, which did a huge amount of physical and CNS damage; in 1985 I developed ME (in reality, probably really lightning damage), and in 1996 I was diagnosed with severe COPD (currently GOLD Stage 4), having had its precursors, asthma and bronchiectasis, since age 2. Recently I have been diagnosed with aortic valve calcification and heart failure, which is likely to reduce my life expectancy dramatically (the 2-year survival rate is 50%, and I'm already a year in), as well as making me increasingly disabled. I also have widespread and severe osteoarthritis, dating from the age of 32, despite which I was an extremely active rambler and backpacker - until 1983. Would this cretinous peer like to tell me exactly how I, and people like me, can possibly attend support groups (and which one would I pick?), or volunteer in the community? Actually, Lord Numbnuts, I have been working for the benefit of others for some years, via my blog, providing help and advice for those trying to navigate the treacherous shoals of the benefits system - something I am now too ill to continue with. I can't wait for the next lunatic idea from Blue Labour. Maybe I should use my powerchair to get a paper round?

NotJarvis

10:45 |
29 Sep 2011
Recommended
4

"The peer, who frequently advises Mr Miliband during debates held at the Labour leader's home on Sunday afternoons, told PoliticsHome that his proposals, which he expects to feed into the policy review, would work particularly well for those with mental illnesses, who he described as “isolated and disappointed”" I'm sorry this shows how little the peer understands mental illness in particular. Sufferers of mental illness are frequently isolated because they feel uncomfortable around people they do not know well, and/or have difficulty mixing with people in general. Forcing them to mix with people is not a good solution for this, as placing mental health patients in a position of discomfort always risks exacerbating their condition. Following the statement about mental Health with "He said connecting claimants within the community would deal with this sense of isolation and better empower them to change their lives." Makes me think he's a person who views Mental Illness as some sort of lack of moral fibre. And if mentally ill people just got out in the fresh air they would be fine.

Notjarvis

10:46 |
29 Sep 2011
0

Sorry - the above post seems to have lost all its formatting. Now it just looks like a wall of text....

Jane

13:56 |
29 Sep 2011
Recommended
6

I agree with Kate Green - this is patronising nonsense, which sounds good until you think about the implications. It's deeply depressing that Labour is jumping on this 'deserving' and 'undeserving' poor bandwagon. The causes of benefit dependence and deprivation are complex, people's lives are complex and anything like this just makes disabled people feel even more despair - is there no mainstream political party who will wake up to reality?! How can someone who is severely disabled from birth notch up enough tax/NI contributions to benefit from a proper income? The lack of realism in this is chilling - especially when you consider how much influence Maurice Glasman has on Ed Miliband. Scary and chilling for all disabled people who are only valued in terms of our financial contribution...

Als

05:24 |
30 Sep 2011
Recommended
2

I left the following comment on the other version of this story so I might as well just copy it across: What about those people with mental health problems which are made worse by any compulsory activity? I mean worse to the point where they will start actually stabbing people. Yes, I am talking about myself here. Why don't people actually think before spouting off about welfare reform? Ridiculous.

Notjarvis

11:51 |
30 Sep 2011
0

Exactly my point. This peer appears utterly clueless as to what Mental health issues mean for people

ed davies

17:10 |
03 Oct 2011
0

This guy is weird is this the legacy of Robert Owen, Robert Tressell, R.H Tawney, how can you force people to volunteer ? It is a contradiction.How can you make people to meet people - very dangerous Weird

Username:
Password:
Remember Me
Forgotten details?

The Live Wire

+What we do...

+Sections

+Explore

+PRO

+On the Go

Find your MP

PoliticsHome News

Live as it happens