Every time I write about welfare scroungers or fraud I am accused of being a heartless, pampered Tory boy by a range of deluded lefties. I just do not understand this. For starters I am not a Tory. When they stopped believing in low taxes, a small state and started cowering to every EU diktat I gave up on them. Secondly I have worked for everything I have, I am not a beneficiary of inherited wealth. And thirdly if being heartless means objecting to those who work hard having to support either thieves or those who opt not to work hard, sure I am heartless. I believe in a welfare system that acts as a safety net but not in one that becomes a lifestyle choice. To me it is heartless to take away money in tax from those on low incomes to redistribute it to criminals or those who opt for idleness. Het I am not Scrooge but equally I do not see why all those who have been naughty should get Christmas presents paid for by those who have been god. Do you?
There was a damning statistic or two out this week. Firstly we learned that one third of the money collected in income tax is spent on welfare payments. That is an extraordinarily high number. And it is calculated that c 7% or 8% of those payments are made to fraudulent claimants. More damning still was that 43% of those claiming benefits and not working had in fact never worked in their lives. They are on a career of welfare dependency.
There will be those on the left who say “there are no jobs” thanks to the wicked Tories/banksters and of course Margaret Thatcher. That is simply not true. You do not have to speak with an Eastern European accent to work in Starbucks, MacDonald’s, etc. It just seems that way. The reason that this occurs is that whereas you are better off working in Starbucks UK than having a better than MacJob in Poland, we have created a welfare system in the UK and a moral climate where there is no shame in being welfare addicted so many native born Brits folks opt to stay on welfare rather than take a MacJob.
When RMPC advertised for a waitress a year ago we had 100 applicants. A handful were from British born applicants. We shortlisted one Brit. She failed to turn up for an interview. So we have a lovely, hard working Polish waitress. We offered a good job in a City where there are 200,000 potential British applicants currently claiming benefit. But they are not interested. Every day you hear stories of folks declining jobs because they might have to start at 8 AM or travel a few miles.
This sort of indulgence might be considered sustainable in a land where the Government was not running a huge budget deficit and borrowing beyond its means. But the UK is not in that sort of position. As a country we have to make big cuts in the amount our Government spends. And frankly I’d rather see those cuts being made on forcing those on welfare to accept jobs they do not like or want and so starting to pay taxes rather than just bleed the system, rather than on, say, closing my local Hospital. Is that so unreasonable?
If we wish to reduce the welfare budget it is not hard. And whilst it might cause resentment among those who believe, erroneously, that they have a right to a life on welfare, the 29 million of us in employment feel rather differently. I say it is not hard. It is not. Here are four easy steps.
1. As of tomorrow any new applicant for welfare (wherever they were born) will not receive a penny unless they have paid five years NI contributions.
2. In two years time no-one will receive welfare unless they have paid 5 years NI.
3. The thresh-hold at which anyone pays income tax should be increased to £20,000. That makes taking low paid work far more attractive.
4. Housing benefit payments should be capped at a level equating to 75% of the average rent bill in the UK. This will force some claiming vast amounts to live in London to move. That will in turn remove an artificial stimulus to rent ( and housing prices) in London so making housing more affordable. At the same time any Local authority house or flat left unoccupied for more than 2 months should be sequestrated and auctioned so that it joins a growing private sector rental market. Councils are just inefficient landlords. An efficient and low cost private rented sector in housing will allow greater labour mobility so those in the Grim North who claim there are no jobs can get on their bikes to move to where there are jobs.
5. Those found guilty of welfare fraud should have all of their assets equivalent to 150% of the amount stolen removed and they should receive a lifetime ban on receiving any state benefits at all. No custodial sentence is needed. My solution offers the chance of financial recompense for the taxpayer and would, I suggest, act as a real deterrent to the fraudster.
Easy. Welfare would remain a safety net for those between jobs. But it would cease to be a career path. Welfare crime would not pay. It would be simpler to move to find work and lower paid work would be financially far more attractive than they are now. And the taxpayer would be far better off.
Is this heartless or just common sense?
This article appeared earlier today in my bi-weekly Tomogrpah newsletter which contains links to my his articles on 10 leading UK and US financial websites plus original exclusive content.
Click HERE to sign up for this free bi-weekly Tomograph newsletter where the midweek edition also contains a free share tip.