Responding to an Ethos Journal article on the Government’s welfare-to-work programme, Work and Pensions Committee member Kwasi Kwarteng MP defends the aims and successes of the scheme.
Somewhat unsurprisingly, the welfare-to-work scheme aroused criticism in some quarters when it was first announced. The furore, however, didn’t gain much traction and quickly evaporated. The scheme has had its teething problems, which was to be expected, given its scope and ambition. Generally though, it has been a very good and popular idea.
In 2010, the Government inherited a welfare state that, to put it bluntly, had grown out of control. It was costing £196bn and looked nothing like what William Beverage first envisioned after the Second World War. Beverage championed the creation something altogether smaller, a safety net that would look after those that fall on hard times and really could not work.
Most people do all they possibly can to find work and work very hard when they do. By 2010, however, a culture had been created whereby it became quite possible and - some would say - even acceptable to opt never to work. This wasn’t right. The Government had to ask questions about the nature of welfare provision. The decision to focus on getting people back to work was a good one. Everybody recognises that employment makes for a much healthier and more productive society. The most important determinant of your standard of living is whether or not you have a job. I am not just talking about how a job puts money in peoples’ pockets; studies have also shown that being employed is better for your health and happiness. Having a job gives you a sense of self-worth, a greater sense of purpose and direction. The welfare-to-work scheme has now helped more that 250,000 people into work since its inception. This is a great success.
It is important that we take a step back and look at what parts of the scheme have worked best so far and which parts need improving. We should listen to the work programme providers and those who are involved with it on the ground. Some people want to widen the criteria of admission to the work programme. They want job centres to have more discretion to refer people who are at risk of becoming jobless long term. This sounds like a good idea in principle and needs to be considered. Anything more that we can do improve peoples’ chances of getting back to work can only be a good thing.
Kwasi Kwarteng is a member of the House of Commons Work and Pensions Committee and Conservative MP for Spelthorne.