There will, of course, be much controversy over the Prime Minister’s announcement of plans to scrap Housing Benefit for under-25s and to introduce measures to stem the flow of taxpayers’ money on various other welfare benefits. Whatever he proposes, he is bound to meet strong resistance from his Coalition partners and his parliamentary opposition who seem to regard the State’s funds as an unlimited resource.
The fact of the matter is that the State’s coffers are not unlimited. On the contrary, we are in the grip of a severe recession that shows no sign of abating in the foreseeable future and it makes sense that the State should do all it can to ensure that funds are collected from all available sources and, once in the possession of the State, be spent wisely or preserved to try to keep us out of further economic misery.

That is easier said than done but practically it means that the Government must ensure that those able to contribute do so by paying their taxes (see Friday’s blog) and then try hard to avoid frittering it away whether it be on pointless foreign adventures (Iraq and Afghanistan), by ill-conceived and inefficient domestic policies (too many examples to list) or by throwing it at citizens who have no intention of ever contributing to society. The latter has the Prime Minister’s attention at the moment and whilst there is undoubtedly a sickening culture of scrounging in this country, it must not be forgotten that, as a (relatively) civilized society we have a duty to protect the weak, infirm and severely disadvantaged.

The Prime Minister is right to address the problem of benefit fraud and the culture of getting something for nothing but there has to be a balance. By all means, prevent able-bodied citizens from claiming benefit when they are offered and decline reasonable offers of employment but don’t punish those without the choice or the chance of climbing out of the mire and advancing themselves. Restrictions on the granting of Housing Benefit should undoubtedly be put in place but whether it is right to deny a whole group, such as those under 25, is a matter for careful consideration and debate.