To think pre-paid benefits cards are a stigmatizing, punitive scheme?

[ArsenicFaceCream]

Just announced at the Conservative Party conference.

They will initially be 'voluntary' for claimants with addiction issues, apparently.

But of course the intention is to roll it out.

Universal Credit is going national in February so this could get interesting, given that UC will be paid to working claimants as well as those not working.

Leaving aside the moral question, those who are making the argument from the point of view of 'the taxpayer' and not wanting money to be spent on things which it ought not to be, should absolutely NOT support this scheme. It is so ill-thought out that it will COST 'the taxpayer' more money in the long run (rise in crime, increased levels of social inequality leading to poorer health and the consequent burden on the health system, and so on).

If you want to approach this from the position of self-interest (as a 'taxpayer', that is), you should reject this on the grounds that it will only push up the amount you'll need to contribute to the state, picking up the pieces of an increasingly fragmented society.

What's more, all those 'hard-working taxpayers' who support this scheme are effectively endorsing the siphoning off of their - public - money into the hands of private business interests (since this money may only be spent in certain locations - anyone care to guess where?). Margaret Thatcher, that saint of conservatism, even John Major, were the kind of Conservatives who - allegedly - supported the 'average' person, the middle classes, the petite bourgeoisie. This kind of move flies completely in the face of that brand of Conservatism. This would be neo-Con theft on a grand scale, and 'true' Conservatives - those who claim to represent middle England, to be the natural party of government - should reject it.

This is also an entirely empty ideological gesture: on the one hand, it satisfies a certain paternalism (tut tut: people spend money on things we disapprove of and we want to stop that), and on the other, it appeals to that streak which seeks to stigmatize and - just as insidiously - control the poor, and persists in seeing the poor in Victorian terms (i.e. the deserving and undeserving, but both 'poor' by some kind of natural law).

The kind of Conservatism which I might begin to respect values freedom.

This proposal is rooted in un-freedom. As such, it is entirely alarming.

Nomen the Libdems are the freedom people, conservatives are kind of opposite. Freedom from paying tax, through contol of welfare budgets, freedom for those who are able to pull themselves out of poverty but not liberty for all. So this is true to form for Tories, they are going back to their roots.

NomenOmen don't forget the actual cost of implementing and running the system .

The money this would cost would be better placed being put directly into helping people with addictions and supporting them so starting up groups where they can be helped to meal plan and budget on a weekly basis on a more personal level so it works with what a family needs and can do rather than sticking everyone in a box and telling them they have to do this this and this with no real idea of whether that would work in their particular circumstances.

I disagree, DaughterDilemma. There is - historically and philosophically - an important strand of Conservatism which advocates freedom (this article by Scruton is a useful abbreviation: [[http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9106192/the-right-way/]]. And it's the face of Conservatism which 'middle England' (that fabled creature!) supports, in general. Mrs. Thatcher knew this.

Well, quite, jacks365.

Apologies. Link fail.

Let's try again.

How would one save up for Christmas? To spend on toys for their children?

Nomen that article is the glossy sparkly eyed version of conservatism as described by a conservative. Most parties consider the state to be the 'means' and not the 'end'. This writer is picking all the best aspects of society and claiming them to be conservative.

It is highly subjective, talking about conservatives as 'we'.

@ Scruton as glossy and sparkly-eyed. Yes, of course that's an idealized version of Conservatism. But is also one which has - historically - had resonance with the voting public. The voting public, if they want to vote Conservative, need to recognize that they're being sold a pup with the current bunch, and need to insist upon a reshaping of their party.

I'm trying to engage in this from a 'rational' point of view, so to speak, rather than deploying the ding-dong rhetoric of tribal politics.

For the vast majority of claimants I am with OP. Awful idea.
However, for those with documented histories of addictions they are a brilliant idea and should be mandatory.

The welfare state was set up to support people when they fall on hard times until they get back on their feet, however there are many who have made it a lifestyle choice (and I admit they are a minority).
Those people may suddenly find themselves wanting to go back to work when they suddenly find that their benefits can no longed be spent on fags, booze, drugs, big TV's and sky subscriptions.

maninawomansworld compulsory workfare, serious levels of job hunting having to be proved etc or you get sanctions should sort out those who try to make benefits a lifestyle. We won't even get started on the fact that someone just needs to choose to go back to work and a job will be there waiting for them. Instead of trying to punish people can we try to help them instead by removing the barriers to working including lack of jobs.

Hi,

First time poster.

Well i'm a guy, and I never thought I would see the day that I would be posting on Mumsnet tbh.

Anyway I watched IDS the other day - and felt compelled to "Google", "Pre-Paid benifits cards"... Came across this active thread and have been hooked - it's pretty good in all truth.

Here is where I am in my opinion of it all. I am 36 and unemployed. I claim ESA (employment & support allowance)... I have been in and out of work since i was approximately 21. I have been a civil servant (Inland Revenue), Engineer, and various different types of lower paid jobs over the years.

Thing is - in that time frame i have suffered serious bouts of depression which comes and goes. I have been out of work longer than in work in total since i was 21 if i'm honest - because i wasn't mentally (and in turn) physically able to work every day. Which doesn't bode well for long term employment/career and putting money away for a rainy day (retirement) or helping my five year old son through university if he should ever wish to go down that route. I come from a "largish" family who all own their own homes, cars etc etc - and whom have never been a day out of work their entire lives except the to be expected odd sick day off work here and there. I'm what you could probably call the "blacksheep" in the family - lol. I don't own my own home, cars, go on holidays whenever i feel like it, or any of that "usual" stuff.

Anyway i have the feeling (as many others do on here) that dictating to the people who have proven drink or drug, or gambling issues. Which is only basically a glorified US food stamp - is only the very beginning.

Why should i have any dignity taken away because of the politically correct nonsense of a few people who feel the need to be seen to be doing "the right thing" for the sake of some people's up views on how human beings who don't happen to work should be treated.

The Tories were always dangerous - right back to Thatcher (and before that) and the miners. And yet again with this picking on the 'needy' in general - because of a few bad apples - as seen in recent television documentaries etc etc, etc.

UKIP, Labour, whoever.

But the Tories need to G2F - period.

I think instead of this 'job hunting' should be 'work'. In that, instead of going to sign on the unemployed should have an 'office' to go to Monday-Friday, full time working hours, like most jobs with computers they can use, all the help with CVs/applications etc that they need. Even smart interview clothes and bus fare to interviews provided and the 'office', a kitchen with free tea/coffee and somewhere they can make their lunch if they want.

If people have childcare or other caring responsibilities, hours job seeking should be reduced accordingly.

I know that this would be an expensive option, but it's not just about the money. If people are in an office they are using the state's resources, pens, stamps etc, heating and electric instead of their own. They are receiving loads of help finding a job and if they haven't worked for a long time/never worked they are learning to get up in the morning.

Maybe this option should only be voluntary unless somebody have been unemployed for six months + because even though the last thing I would want it to be is stigmatising, the fact is it would be. People shouldn't be able to languish on the dole for generations though, it's not good for them, it's not good for their children, it's not good for the tax payer, it's not good for anybody.

Ya know... I'm genuinely interested in this and have no axe to grind but I'm getting heartily sick of the posters who come up with tripe like, "Put out your hands and accept your welfare assistance humbly...". It's not helpful it's silencing of posters who have other views and is well, a bit stupid really.

It's a reference to an attitude that some people have. How is it silencing? It's no more stupid than the assumption that people on benefits have no dignity.

Well i'm a guy, and I never thought I would see the day that I would be posting on Mumsnet tbh.

Anyway I watched IDS the other day - and felt compelled to "Google", "Pre-Paid benifits cards"... Came across this active thread and have been hooked - it's pretty good in all truth.

Glad you think so Stuart. Mothers are just people, you know

Why should i have any dignity taken away because of the politically correct nonsense of a few people who feel the need to be seen to be doing "the right thing" for the sake of some people's up views on how human beings who don't happen to work should be treated.

It's scary. Someone upthread made reference to 1930s Germany and I didn't get a chance to respond. I agree that there are similarities. It is a stripping of humanity from people.

Pragmatically, it is also a deskilling, a form of institutionalization (albeit without walls). The opposite of preapring people for work.

^preparing

I think it's long past time there was a mind-shift in the way we think about "benefits."

Rather than prattling that benefits come out of taxes, accept that we all pay into a National Insurance scheme and we are fully entitled to claim on this policy for as long as we need. Frankly, I pay plenty of NI and, if I ever need to, I will happily receive benefits because that's what it was paid for. I accept that the payout level is low, but I hope I wouldn't have to be reliant on the policy payout for long (and to people who have no choice but to live on this money long-term).

It'd also be nice if politicians remembered that they're public servants and that we remembered that too because the current government's efforts to turn us against each other is disgraceful. They should be more answerable to us/their bosses.

Not that relevant, but I rewatched IDS's speech and that patriotic little englander thing at the end made my skin crawl. So he met some random Russian and told him loads of ridiculous reasons why we should be proud of this country? I'm actually ashamed of it, if his attitude is the prevailing mindset.

ken dodd the learning to get up in the morning thing would be all fine and dandy if all jobs were 9am to 6pm. But guess what.....er they are not My hours in my night job 12 years ago were 5pm to 3am.

I went from signing on JSA to straight into this job. This is just one of the problems with the stupid system The "system" still thinks that everyone works 9 to 5 Its fucking stupid and its a childish bureaucratic temper tantrum!

Absolutely ArsenicFaceCream...

Mothers are people too. What i meant is that Mumsnet wasn't necessarily a forum i thought i would be interested in posting in. Although the mother of my son is an avid follower of Mumsnet.

Guess I've got IDS to thank for this opportunity then - rotfl.

And the way it's going with IDS and the elitist Tories - undoubtedly it will be the only last thing i ever thank them for.

Now or in the future

Oh everything gets discussed here.

e-petition only has one signature so far. It wasn't started by me , but I think it sums up the issue pretty well.

Arsenic, yes, it is institutionalisation without walls. Sums it up brilliantly.

Hmm, that was odd - lost some words.

This e-petition....

Kendodd, and how are you going to accommodate 3 million people in these fantasy offices? Who pays the rent, bills, cleans the loos, they will need lunch, supervision, coffee machine, Bring it on I say.

Have you ever been to sign on? Every fortnight you and counless others queue for a 5 minute slot to do so. If they all stayed there, all week, it would be interesting to say the least.

It'd also be nice if politicians remembered that they're public servants

I won't hold my breath

I think what ken is describing used to be called 'job clubs' didn't they?

I've signed it.

I'm pretty sure most adults don't need to "learn how to get up in the morning".