On BBC News the "freedom pass" was raised, when a journalist mentioned that some of her colleagues who were over sixty travelled to work for free. Now I'm sure these are the exceptions.
Rather than lumping all these benefits together under the "middle class benefits" label, as the Times did, it would be better to consider each in turn. The Times was reluctant to grasp the nettle of Child Benefit. Obviously universal benefits are made to a proportion of the population who are not in need, but Child benefit replaced a tax allowance and was designed to be paid to mothers. Two points need to be made, firstly the benefit should be skewed towards the first child, where the largest costs are involved and towards the early years when many mothers are economically disadvantaged. On the other side should government continue to pay women for every child. Should benefits be used to encourage large families/over population ?
With winter heating payments, there is no doubt that elderly people spend a higher proportion of their income on fuel payments. Whether these should start at age 60 is debatable. There is a very strong case that some of this money would be better spent on insulating the homes of elderly people. It is fair to assume that 40% of heating is lost through inadequate insulation.
Finally the Bus Pass, I'm convinced that this would be a political own goal for the Coalition government. People choose to have children, they don't choose to be old. The Bus Pass is an unreal cost, as many buses would travel with empty seats if it wasn't for the elderly.
I'm sure that this is a philosophical debate that will rumble on in the months ahead. The key issue is what facilities or benefits should a society provide for its citizens ? Should some of these only be granted to the most vulnerable ? Ultimately is it benefits such as bus passes that make Britain a decent country, ? If they were to be abandoned we might reduce a deficit but at what cost ?
No comments:
Post a Comment