It's time to think the unthinkable again on welfare reform
4 min read
It's time to recapture the radicalism of Frank Field on welfare reform
The first anniversary of the death of Lord Field of Birkenhead fell last month. Against the current backdrop of benefit changes, it is timely to reflect on the work of a champion of welfare reform. Tony Blair invited Frank Field to “think the unthinkable” after the 1997 election, only for New Labour to adopt a different approach. In 2010, David Cameron asked him to lead a new debate on poverty. This time, Field’s influence was more profound, embedding the need to improve outcomes in early childhood, and introducing new measures of “life chances”. This was a shift away from cash transfers to interventions to improve opportunity.
This critical shift in thinking influenced early social mobility policy in the UK. It helped rebrand the Social Mobility and Child Poverty Commission of 2012 into the “Social Mobility Commission” in 2016. The change of emphasis reflected Field’s view that disadvantage was not just material, and improved long-term outcomes could not be achieved by ignoring families, communities, incentives and choices.
Social mobility policy has lost its focus on these issues, instead becoming narrowly concerned with the socio-economic composition of elites and equalising group outcomes. This approach loses sight of what we call “the truly disadvantaged”.
Field’s ‘unthinkable’ ideas included that means-tested benefits were both inefficient and potentially harmful to individuals in a moral sense. He favoured a contributory principle, rather like a social insurance, which liberated individuals from ‘want’. His vision was, at heart, a self-improvement model, and his view was that the wrong kind of welfare undermined this.
Whether or not we agree about means testing, the idea that welfare should have a clear purpose linked to self-improvement and individual agency is surely worth rescuing. It is closely related to the idea of “self-efficacy” in education – which fosters the belief that an individual can achieve.
This is precisely the raison d’etre which our current welfare system lacks – in part because the idea that money alone is the cause of disadvantage continues to dominate for many policymakers. The Resolution Foundation recently projected a rise in child poverty from 31 per cent this year to 33 per cent in 2029-30. It advocated offsetting this with a spending package worth £8.5bn. While cash transfers can contribute to alleviating poverty, they are never going to eradicate the gap between those who depend on them and those who do not.
An effective system requires more than extra money. Our work at the SMC shows significant differences in outcomes for children within “disadvantaged” groups and the welfare system must acknowledge this. Support must focus on self-improvement – acquiring work, developing skills, learning, and fulfilling individual potential – and addressing the obstacles to this in families and communities.
Yet the evidence is that our welfare system is an obstacle itself. This is not new thinking, and preoccupied Field from the 1980s. But the current system around work capability assessments and inactivity has added a whole new dimension. It means that, on a cursory examination, a person – and over half a million of them are young – is designated to a category that will keep them comparatively poor and undermine their capacity to fulfil their potential.
The government has recognised this and rightly set out a reform programme of practical measures designed to improve assessments and pathways to work. But do they go far enough? The SMC has visited job centres to meet the people there. It is not clear that work coaches are equipped to address the complex problems presented by many of their clients. And public agencies still lack a coherent vision for what the welfare system is trying to do beyond cutting costs.
This is why remembering Field’s commitment to self-improvement, giving people a sense of purpose, agency and control is important. A successful society must allow every individual to change their situation for the better. This is the kind of social mobility the SMC aspires to.
