“Sturdy beggars” amounted in the eighteenth century to around 20% of the population, and half the population was dependent at one time or another on charity to survive. By the end of that century around 100,000 paupers were incarcerated in nearly 2000 newly established workhouses.
Much later when “you never had it so good”, a combination of high demand, post war governments’ fear of 1930’s style mass unemployment, unions that accepted wage restraint in return for full employment, broad acceptance of restrictive practices, and industry’s high profits, meant the average unemployment in the UK was 1.6%. At this time in the 50’s and 60’s low unemployment was seen as something that should and could be maintained.
Now, in February 2011 even before the bulk of the public sector redundancies already announced take effect in April the unemployment figure is 7.9%.
However since the 60”s that figure of 7.9% is not particularly unusual, although it represents 2.5 million and many economists think it set to rise to 3million, a figure that is comparable to that of the early 80’s when unemployment was 12.5% at its peak. Compare that to the 1.1m unemployed when in 1979 the Conservatives swept to power on the message that "Labour isn't working".
Unemployment has always been a problem whatever its victims have been called, and there seems to be a great deal of name calling in the Tory press. It has engendered fear in society sometimes of revolution, petty crime, sometimes of the weight of financial obligation it brings to parish, or central government, and more recently a fear of a diminution of revenue to the Treasury through spending and taxation.
So what is it that should make us particularly concerned now? A jobless recovery is one of them. Unemployment is up and employment is down. The labour market held up relatively well during the depths of the recession as employers cut hours rather than jobs. Now businesses are increasing the hours of existing staff and not hiring.
In the UK there are now over 420,000 less jobs than when employment peaked around 29.5m in April 2008. The number of full-time jobs is nearly 900,000 below its peak, because job creation has been overwhelmingly confined to part-time employment.
Around 1.2m are working part-time because they cannot find full-time jobs, the highest total since records began.
The situation will worsen as Tory-led Government cutbacks hit the public sector and slow the economy. Some fear we may just have to get used to higher permanent unemployment of around 8% as companies get used to fewer staff and slower growth.
Never mind a jobless recovery some are warning of a "job-loss” recovery. The biggest losers are already emerging - the young. However ironically one of the main mantras of “cut the deficit in one parliament" approach is the awful legacy the older generation is leaving to future generations. There seems to be some contradiction here.
Unemployment of 16-24 year-olds is at 20.3% the highest since comparable records began. This is around 950,000 young people without work. although some estimates put those not in education, employment or training closer to 1.4 m.
These figures do not tally with the Tory-led Government’s policy to abolish the educational maintenance allowance (EMA) without a clear replacement. They do not square with the raising of tuition fees. We face the probability of a whole generation or more who will be blighted by this Government. The figures are there for all to see, but this Government has abandoned the young. Would half a million signatures and a concerted campaign get them to not only change minds, even make a u-turn on EMA? It seems we are more concerned with our trees than the lives and ambitions of the next generation. Perhaps we should be pleased about the forests, as future sturdy beggars will still have somewhere to hang-out.
I agree especially with the last bit. I signed that petition and sent a letter but felt slightly uncomfortable doing it. Although I could see that it was the most likely way to motivate people to act against the governments stupidity , I at heart didnt care about the bloody trees.
ReplyDeleteThe issues that you talk about here are much much more important but unfortunately , they are issues that effect the disenfranchised of our society.not the middle classes.
I am trying to find a way to be active in this area, but I am becoming disillusioned , the only things people are interested in are these frivolous topics, while a wrecking ball is being taken to the welfare state.
I can imagine it is a useful step to show what people can do. but I fear that the only voice the government will hear is that of there core voters (cons not libs)
Dominic
Dominic, our natural heritage is not a frivolous issue. Sorry if you think it is, but many, many people, not just Tory voters think differently.
ReplyDeleteEMA... an idea that seemed stupid to me at first (paying kids to stay at school??), without any knowledge of it, but I came to realise that without it so many kids would not be able to train for employment, that is, attend college. Cutting it will destroy teenagers' vocational training in parts of the country, and I am thinking about rural areas specifically.
Are there any figures that tell us how many of our own Devon based teenagers rely on EMA for transport costs etc? And come to think of it, with the axing of so many rural bus routes either happening or going to happen, EMA would have been the transport lifeline for so many students. Perhaps this could be added to the agenda at the next CLP meeting?
I should say Dominic that I understand your frustration though. It sometimes seems as if the only thing rural folk care about are rural focused issues, but ALL the cuts are rural focused issues.
With many villages becoming second-home ghost towns (particularly in the Westcountry), and far too many locally born people being forced to move away from rural areas due to low employment prospects and the high cost of housing (young people again), it is a wonder that far more aren't flocking to anything other than a Tory standard. I guess, pardon the pun, many can't see the wood for the trees...
I'm about to read 'Labour and the Countryside - The Politics of Rural Britain 1918-1939' (Oxford University Press) by Clare Griffiths, in an attempt to understand why the rural vote is invariably Tory. I mean, look to the Peasants revolt and the Tolpuddle Martyrs; started within agrarian communities. This country has a long history, pre-20th century, of rural... uppityness! And let's face it, the ConDem cuts will ruin some farmers. I think.
I know the Labour Party was born of the industrial revolution, but surely the origins of the Labour Movement in rural communities must count for something? The trick I suppose, is translating the major issues into rural settings, something I don't think the Labour Party have been too good at so far.
I was put off Labour by Tony Blair, I'll be honest. The New Labour project seemed so far removed from my roots, my experiences, that I simply couldn't identify with it. Rural voters, by and large, must feel the same, so go with the traditional line that the landowners and local grandees feed them in the absence of a relevant option.
Maybe a few straw polls of people in local pubs, fêtes etc will open up a chance for showing how very relevant the major issues are to rural life? Rather than trying to explain from ones own point of view, the issues that are most important, perhaps leading people into a subtle discussion of their own circumstances will provide openings.
Do you attend local CLP meetings Dominic? I'd like to talk with you about this subject, because it interests me to :)
Anyway, I'm tired and have had a rubbish evening.
Hi Jen ,
ReplyDeletesorry you have had a rubbish evening thats never good. Thankyou for reply I enjoyed it and am very pleased to have this conversation. I can come to the CLP meeting to talk with you that would be nice and by the sound of it informative.
I have been involved with this Forrest campaign , which as you say is not frivolous . but to be honest it is not one I would normally involve myself with.
Today we face , working class people being financially excluded from education. The destruction of the national health service despite its healthy condition. Working people relying on Foodbank donations , (in rural okehampton) People on benefits being treated as criminals if they refuse to take agency jobs, which if they take can be stopped without notice, leaving the victim to start a fresh claim, lose a months income they are not in a position to loose, loose there housing benefit, and council tax benefit, and then face the very real possibility of becoming homeless. And talking of housing benefit , this is the real rural issue, much as we like to imagine its all hedges and tractors, the cost of housing in Devon is on a parr with London and if the Tories slash housing benefit there must and will be a exodus of the poor from both areas.
And it is for these reasons that I called the sale of our ancient woodlands frivolous . Of course its not , and its not even finically viable, and also Im disgusted that a u turn has occurred without any comment on how much money has been wasted on this ridiculous scheme.
but in comparison with the kind of misery that this government is causing to the people that arnt organised and dont have a strong voice it is . And it is these people that Labour should stand for, the others can talk for themselves.
As for the opinion from my local, well there lies the problem for me. To be honest if I was a farmer I wouldn't vote Labour. It would be stupid as Labour (Tony Blairs Labour) has systematically reduced the power of the agriculture act since the day it took power. The Farmers have waited patiently though knowing that the Tories will restore it as soon as they came back. This is the act passed after WW2 to save Briton from famine. The 'patriotic' farmers threatened mass starvation if we didnt pass this disgusting bill, that holds Briton ransom to endless and open subsidise to the farmers.
On foodbanks. I volunteered for a while at a Christian centre (run by Da Meffs, the URC and the Baptists). They began a foodbank, but I left before it began operation. Before this they used to provide poor people, and we should not be afraid to use the damn term, with veg bags, kind of like big stew packs but with baked beans etc in them to. They were immensely popular. This was of course in the city of Plymouth and was utilised by the homeless and working people.
ReplyDeleteOne of the reasons, as I see it, why so may working people are not able to feed themselves properly is of course the casualisation culture that has stripped work, perhaps I should say labour, of its stability and ability to provide. As you point out Dominic, part time work has grown exponentially, especially casual work (also known as agency work) which has left so many working class people out of pocket and out of food!
I used to use agencies to try and get regular work. It never worked. Full-time jobs, of which I got one, was very rare, and then subject to immediate change if the company profits nosedived, as they did. As for the rest, although I managed to negotiate a decent hourly rate, I still had part-time cleaning as my mainstay for months. I wish I had never left the Royal Navy, or that I had taken full advantage of the resettlement package that was my right by contract. Idiot really.
Your concern about benefits waiting times, especially for council benefits, is very real and ignored by just about everyone. Plymouth City Council, my only experience of being a council benefit claimant, were horrendous. Their waiting times for decisions would take months and months and many unemployed had to rely not just on foodbanks but on the goodwill of their landlords. You know, it reminded me of the situation facing the Irish under British rule. With absentee landlords and a local middle class that simply didn't care. Nevermind the Fields of Athenry, welcome to the Fields of the Westcountry!
The welfare system in this country is not fit for purpose, and badly needs reform, but what the ConDems are planning isn't reform, it's abjuration of responsibility to care for this country's citizens. Slim down the commitment of the state to its wards, like HARTZ IV has done in Germany, and yes, you get people out of the welfare system, but only because they can't even subsist on the benefits. A complimentary rise in wages, to a Living Wage for example, is not on the cards so all IDS is saying is that people will be better off in work because benefits will be reduced in real terms, NOT because wages reward the labour freely given adequately. It makes me so very, very angry, having experience of the horrors of the welfare system.
Tiverton is in Mid-Devon isn't it? Have the CLP heard from local people there? I can imagine there are not a few benefit claimants there.
And Okehampton, who would have thought it? Mention Okehampton to people outside of Devon and images of genteel folk wearing tweed and taking afternoon tea come to mind. Nevermind that the tweed is ragged and the tea a donation from the Quakers!
Rural communities are not what they seem to outsiders, I have come to understand since moving to Lapford. The young folk especially are left out in the cold, what a future this country has to look forward to!
There you go, talked yourself into anger, impotent rage in the face of intolerable injustice. Thats how I feel .
ReplyDeleteCharity is a strange thing, demonstrating the innate goodness of people, like you say usually working class people. But why should a pensioner give something from her trolly as she is worried about a starving kid. This is a country of millionaires.
People who visit america talk about the kindness and hospitality of the people, yet they wont vote for the welfare reforms Obama is desperately trying to push through. Instead the believe in charity.
Well for me food isnt something that should be received as charity, rather something that is your right. we can afford it, and we cant afford the indignity of being a rich western democracy , that cant offer its poor the basic human rights . And that good decent people have to pick up where the state fails.
I really agree with what you are saying about the living wage. There is One thing that is missed on this subject. when UK uncut point out that boots has its accounts base in a swiss po box so that it can avoid paying tax in this country, it highlights a problem but misses the answer. The living wage, if there staff where paid properly , the revenue from there income tax and also there improved spending power would benefit this country. this goes for all corporation and I cant see how they could avoid this form of taxation, as they do with corporation tax.
DOH! Stoopid me! Of course, the big society is already in operation across the pond. I knew there was a reason why we were trying to get people to see how so much more like the United States the ConDems want us to be. Thanks for pointing that out to me, it never even occurred to me!
ReplyDelete'the revenue from there income tax and also there improved spending power would benefit this country. this goes for all corporation'
Nails, proverbials etc. Why doesn't this get through to others? Especially the government? I can think of only one reason; it isn't about the economy stupid, it is about the ideology.
On my own poor effort at blogging (again) I tried to figure out what Labour has given us due to its ideology and what the Tories have. The list is wildly disparate. OK, so I am biased anyway (blog posts ARE opinion pieces after all ), but I think if you seriously weigh up the ideologies involved, Conservative comes away every time as hoping NGOs et al will take up the slack. Small government is just another name for no governance I feel.
I wholeheartedly agree; I draw the honourable gentleman's attention to Articles 23 & 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights;
Article 23
1. Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.
2. Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work.
3. Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection.
4. Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.
Article 25
1. Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.
Does the system of pay and the conditions of employment in this country, in any country (excepting Sweden of course) live up to these rights? I don't believe they do. Perhaps they can be challenged in this way, that the low standard of living "enjoyed" by so many in this country is contrary to the Charter? best get it in before the ConDems withdraw us from the European Convention and institute a Tory Bill of Rights that only recognises the elite.
And yes, I am a fan of Rage Against the Machine.
ahah yes, yes , so right , they are using the prisoner vote to lever us out of that human obligation. Thankyou for quoting this noble charter. I didnt know that this 'right ' was included. We should know what we are in for when we have a government that wants out of human rights .
ReplyDeleteThis is a government thats good at its propaganda , the big society as you say is actually the small society or as it was once called the end of society.
I got it the other day in a flash of understanding. Thatcher told us there was no society, in other words we arnt here to look after you. And that is in effect the big society. Dont ask us, do it yourself. Its very clever. Both result in the end of that beautiful thing, the welfare state. The construct that gave the blind glasses, inoculations to street urchins, the doll to unemployed so as above we dont end up with sturdy beggars.