Debate: After Iain Duncan Smith said he could live on £53 a week, should he have to back his claim up in practice?
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.
What's going on?
Iain Duncan Smith yesterday claimed he could get by on £53 a week - the amount some benefit claimants live on.
The Work and Pensions Secretary currently earns £1,581 a week after tax.
But when asked on BBC Radio 4's Today programme if he could live like that, he said: "If I had to I would," and defended the legion of benefit cuts taking effect this month.
Do you think he should have to back his claim up in practice?
Case for: Experience
If IDS really thinks £53 is a reasonable amount to live on, he should prove it. We want to see a budget outlined with what could feasibly be spent where. It’s easy for someone with no financial concerns to comment – he has about five times this amount every week after tax – but politicians are clearly so far removed on how difficult living on a tight budget is in the current economy (especially during this long cold snap) . Of course you could just eat lentils and sit in an unheated home all day every day. But would he be happy doing so?
Case against: No time
Cabinet politicians spend their careers making decisions that effect other people. There is neither time nor reason for these MPs to pose as benefit claimants or any other section of society in order to justify the decisions they make. Living on £53 for a week would simply be a popularity stunt on the part of IDS; in practice it would distract from his job. What could possibly be gained from the week on benefits anyway? It's highly unlikely IDS would return to the business of government a changed man. He's paid a lot because he has huge responsibility. Let him get on with it.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments