The initiative he is speaking of is to change the priorities for social housing to give a greater benefit to those who are in or actively looking for work. The real problem with this is that it creates a perception of the deserving and undeserving poor when in reality there are those who are in desperate need of assistance, those who do need it but can get by without and those whom it would make things much easier. The changes would skew the system away from those less able and in greatest need for help because they don't "deserve it".
'Red Ed' said in his speech at the Labour party Conference:
I think that Mr Miliband is completely wrong on this count. I said this in my analysis of his speech:
"We (should) give to the people with the greatest need and not just the people who some bureaucrat thinks are worthy! ... Yes it should always pay to work, but we should protect the most vulnerable, not just those who've managed to do charity work/keep their lawn tidy!"
The same goes for people who've managed to find a job. The welfare system wont catch people if one of the holes to fall through is if you answer no to "are you employed?"
I completely agree with George that this rhetoric is making me angry!
I have to say that my primary source of political motivation is being angry about something. In fact, this has just motivated me to go round the Labour voters in my patch and let them know exactly what Labour means when they claim to be "a friend to the poor".
ReplyDeleteI completely agree - it is a lot easier to have the motivation to try to change things/influence things when you see something that you fundamentally disagree with to the point you are angry!
ReplyDeleteHopefully some of them will listen to you!