In the late winter of 2000-2001, I was back living with my
parents, having finished University and just returned from adventures in Turkey
to a sense of directionless confusion. I
was, as is often the way when little else offers itself, tending bar in the pub where I was born, but had little idea what I wanted to do with the rest of my
life.
I have a cat now, but growing up I was a dog-boy. When I was seven years old, I remember
spending hours one Cornish afternoon throwing stones into the sea for a passing
Collie. Not a stray, just a local dog. In and out of the cold water he rushed, and I
was utterly smitten with his enthusiasm to endlessly play and the way his eyes
appeared to be telling me something. It
was, apparently, that moment when my parents decided to acquiescence to my
pestering for a dog of our own. A few months
later, for my eighth birthday, we acquired Sally.
Sally was a mongrel, rescued from the Dog’s Trust. She wasn’t a fancy breed; a nothing special
dog, fuelled by an insatiable greed (demonstrated by a tendency to slavishly
drool), disposition to honk of sweaty socks when wet and a cantankerous
aggression towards any other dog which ventured into a square mile of her
presence. But she was fiercely loyal,
adoring and grateful for her home. She
was always keen to play, go for a walk or simply hover while I bemoaned
whatever minor crisis my small world was enduring, head cocked seemingly
listening. I loved her to bits.
Thirteen years later, that post-Turkey winter, she was
deafer, fatter, less mobile and missing one toe, but still devoted to her owners. She’d had a good day. She’d been for a decent walk, long pink
tongue slavering the way round, argued with a neighbour’s dog and chased an old
tennis ball around the hall, the rebounding scuffing marks onto the freshly
painted skirting boards. She was fast
asleep, sprawled on the lounge rug when she began to fit. A series of sharp convulsions and an almost
silent whimpering.
She’d had a stroke, but survived, of a sort. A shadow of nothing. In the morning, my Mum and I took her to vet,
knowing she wouldn’t come back. I was
almost twenty-two years old and inconsolable.
It was those feelings which returned when I read about the Red Setter “murdered” at Crufts last weekend.
Whoever is responsible is, presumably, involved with dogs. They must know what they mean to their
owners. All that grief, just for a petty
trophy. Some people have lost all sense
of perspective.
Iain Duncan Smith is another man who has lost his sense of
perspective.
A few years ago Duncan Smith had a much reported epiphany in Glasgow. It was – he said at the time –
a Damascus moment. The media held it up
as compassionate Conservatism. This was
how the party had changed. It could hold
Tory values, but still want to help the most desperate in society.
Instead, it seems to have been a disguise. Duncan Smith has been at the spearhead of a
concentrated assault on the poorest people in the country, those most in need
of our help. He must be one of the few
politicians to lead a consistent maligning in the press of the electorate while
holding major office. An eroding of
benefits, ending in the absurdity of the so-called spare bedroom tax, have seen
the government gleefully embrace their reputation as the nasty party. There has been no pretence; their role has
been to kick those already down.
Glasgow seems to not have helped Duncan Smith to realise
that the death dive circle of economic hardship makes it even more imperative
that the state support those in need. Instead he seems to have seen people who would
be only too willing to help themselves if only the government would stop giving
them money and leave them to buck their own ideas up.
He seems to have fundamentally misunderstood what life on
benefits is like and who makes claims.
Most people want to be in work and are actively looking for work. Duncan Smith wants an end to the so-called “life
on benefits”. He assumes that there are
people who see making claims as an alternative lifestyle and they will be given
short shrift. The right wing media
paints a picture of whole areas of inner-cities and run down rural communities
awash with people putting their feet up and waiting for the cash to
arrive. But, in 2011 of the 1.5 million people
claiming jobseekers allowance, only 4,220, or 0.3% had been claiming for five years
or more (stat courtesy of Polly Tonybee and David Walker’s Cameron’s Coup).
The Tories want to reduce the benefits bill but refuse to
acknowledge the two major elephants in the room. By far the largest proportion of social
security funding goes on pensions and related costs, free TV licences, free bus
passes, etc. The demographic most likely
to vote Conservative has, unsurprisingly, had their benefits protected.
Of the remaining benefit pot, the biggest pay out is for
housing benefits – again, unsurprisingly as this is most people’s largest
expenditure. Housing benefits payments
have spiralled massively over the last thirty years thanks to right to buy
reducing the social housing stock and pushing people into the unregulated,
over-inflated private rental market, increasing the cost to the tax payer and
decreasing the security and standards of living for many.
A Conservative government is never going to instigate
significant social housing construction nor sufficiently incentivise developers
to build real affordable housing – as opposed to the sort that grudgingly does so to comply with planning regulations and installs a separate entrance for theless desirable tenants. An increase in
housing stock would move young high earning professionals who can’t scrape
together a deposit because all their money goes on rent into ownership, but the
lack of supply of housing is one of the factors pushing the prices ever
upwards, especially in London. It’s
sustaining the whole false economic recovery Austerity Osborne is betting the
election result on.
The so-called spare bedroom tax is absurd. Leaving aside the very sensible reasons
people may have for requiring a spare room and that their housing benefit
payments may or may not be long term, it completely ignores the importance of
people’s communities and assumes that there is an abundance of choice to be
made in housing. There have been stories
of people being relocated to one bedroom flats in different cities because
nothing is suitable in their current one.
Can you imagine how destructive to confidence and life it must be to be
forcibly uprooted in this way, moved away from family, friends and a
familiarity with the infrastructure which those already struggling need to help
get them through it all?
The assumption here is that the state prevents people from
working by offering them an alternative, but the real data doesn’t back this
up. Instead of opening up labour markets
and incentivising people to go to work, all this government has managed to do
is kick people when they’re down. It has
eroded away the support we offer those at their weakest, lowest moments. People having gone through the shock and awe
of being made redundant no longer have the benefit of getting their head
straight for a couple of weeks with the state looking after them. They have to go straight back out to seeking
work, even if that work is a poor use of their skills. Ten years experience in digital marketing and
just laid off? Never mind, here’s a zero
hours contract for JJB Sports, now piss off.
Meanwhile Universal Credit stutters towards hugely expensive
delays, another ludicrous government IT system no-one really understands nor
necessarily needs. Plus it assumes that
you’ll have a computer and an internet connection at home. Those are going to be sacrificed before food,
I reckon. Job Centre staff allegedly have secret targets to remove claimants from the benefits register for the most
spurious of reasons. The mantra piles
down: we don’t care; we shouldn’t care; let them sort themselves out; they’re
better off alone.
All this ignores the fact that national insurance, into
which we all pay, is an insurance policy for when we’re down and out. We are entitled to make a claim on it. That’s how insurance policies work.
For someone who abhors claimants of aid as much as
Duncan-Smith does, perhaps he should think twice before submitting a £100
expenses claim for wet wipes. Unless
they’re provide sanitation for Cameron as he hides out from the country’s
media, and refuses to enter into televised debates he insisted become part of
the national discussion.
Back in the autumn of 1964 Sir Alec Douglas-Home, the
Conservative Prime Minister, could hold on no longer. In audience with the Queen he asked for
permission to dissolve parliament and seek election by the public. The Conservatives’ thirteen years in power
had hardly been smooth. From Churchill’s
bumbling towards retirement, showing himself to be ill-suited to peace time
leadership, Eden’s disastrous rose-tinted Imperialist invasion of Egypt and
while MacMillan may have been one of the most cultured, intellectual and moderate
Tory leaders, even he couldn’t survive the Profumo scandal. Douglas-Home had taken the reigns barely a
year earlier and had been trying to generate a resurgence since the
Spring. It wasn’t coming and he was out
of time.
Harold Wilson didn’t exactly romp home to victory, though. A Labour majority of four was not to help him
drive through reforms his predecessors had instigated in 1945, but a win was a win;
power, however tempered, is still power.
Two years was enough to create a feel good atmosphere and a majority of
98 in the snap election of 1966.
The curious thing is that, like in 1997, Labour came to
power at times of adversity – when the world looked, at least, politically,
bleak - and steered the country through periods of social reform. When outdated morals and misguided opinions
are loosened. While the notion of an
uber-cool swinging society was mainly confined to London, in 1964 the rest of
the country resembled something more akin to the Nottingham of Saturday Night,
Sunday Morning. A grind of back-to-back
terraces and manual labour, interrupted by heady drinking and simple distractions. As the decade progressed, the world lit up.
We approach 2015 in a similar state, only rather than an
ill-informed view of pop music, the young, drugs or homosexuals the current
government has fostered a hatred of the poor.
If we let them keep going, we we’ll have regressed back beyond 1964,
back before national insurance was introduced in 1911 and to a time when being
out of work meant being on the streets, being unable to pay your debts meant
going to prison and being disabled meant you were better off dead.
Governments are like dogs.
They’re supposed to do what we tell them, but always insist on heading
off in their own direction. And the ones
you have the longest leave the most lasting impression. Let’s leave this tied up on the motorway hard
shoulder.
No comments:
Post a Comment