Ministers out of step on work for dole idea
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.THE GOVERNMENT is considering compelling some of the unemployed to undertake work, voluntary action, training or education in return for benefits, the Prime Minister confirmed yesterday. But Gillian Shephard, the Secretary of State for Employment, and key prime ministerial aides, spent the day repeatedly ruling out any form of universal 'workfare'.
The prospect of work for dole came as Kenneth Clarke, Home Secretary, last night conceded, for the first time according to Labour, a link between unemployment and crime. As well as law and order policies, Mr Clarke said on Channel 4 News, 'we are saying the way to tackle crime is by training, employment and enterprise programmes . . . to give young people opportunities, to give them hope'.
That was in marked contrast to John Major's declaration at the Carlton Club that to blame unemployment for crime was 'insulting to the families who may face all the problems of unemployment and yet do not resort to crime'.
Yesterday on benefits for work he told MPs it was 'right to look at all the radical options and we propose to do so. That may mean offering more opportunities, for example, of volunteering. It may mean extending an element of compulsion.'
It was, he said, 'a vital issue and I believe we need a public debate on it'. The Prime Minister certainly got that yesterday. But after a separate meeting with Mr Major after Cabinet, Mrs Shephard emphasised that the Government was not considering 'any scheme that treated nearly 3 million people in the same way'. She, like the Treasury, is alarmed at the cost of any large-scale compulsory scheme. Costs of up to pounds 700m have been put on schemes that would cover only those out of work for 18 months or more.
The way Mr Major launched the idea in one imprecise paragraph in his Carlton Club speech brought renewed Labour charges of confusion.
John Smith, the Labour leader, pointedly chose not to centre his question time attack on workfare; Labour fears the Government is attempting to portray it as the party that backs the feckless.
How far and how fast the Government will move remained deeply unclear last night - one minister in the field declaring there could not be 'any question of coercion in a climate of 3 million unemployed' but there might be compulsion later when unemployment fell.
US-style workfare schemes are being studied by Lord Wakeham, chairman of the Cabinet committee examining unemployment. But, as early as the time of the Budget, more limited proposals could be made to extend the rights of those on benefit to undertake education, and extended opportunities for community work for the young unemployed and those made redundant in their fifties.
The Prime Minister's press office was at pains to emphasise that any element of compulsory work would have to be targeted 'very carefully', as a possibility 'in certain limited cases'.
The most likely target of compulsion is the long-term unemployed.
Alan Jinkinson, who is to be the leader of the new public sector union Unison, said: 'We are totally opposed to any form of 'workfare'. It would mean yet another cynical manipulation of the already highly fiddled unemployment figures.' Workfare meant exploitation, he said.
Details, reaction, page 3
Leading article, page 18
Andrew Marr, page 19
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments