• The post you are reporting:
   
  Near the end of that piece, is the following:
  
  "Jon Cruddas and the Blue Labour camp have interesting ideas on reviving the contributory principle originally championed by Beveridge, making welfare more like an insurance policy: the more you put in, the more you get out. Some want to demand that benefit recipients have to give if they are to get, doing socially useful tasks, whether visiting the elderly or cleaning up the local park. There are dangers: ensuring that these duties are not seen as punishment and don't block jobseekers finding paid work. But surely few would dispute the value of an element of reciprocity.
  
  Such ideas could draw the sting from welfare, visibly defying the talk of skivers who take but do not give. This is the territory Labour has to aim for, neither vainly seeking to tell people the status quo is fine nor doing the Tories' work for them. Fail to find it, and Osborne's smiling face will haunt them long after 2015."
  
  Labour were "outraged" recently when it was suggested that job-seekers take work-placement at places such as Poundland.
  
  This article seems to suggest that "giving, to receive" is the right approach - which I agree with, doesn't everyone ?
  
  
  
  Roger

Report Post

Your Name

Reason