 |
| http://news.bbcimg.co.uk |
I've never been a big fan of reality
television, but Iain Duncan Smith (IDS)'s latest claims on his
welfare reforms have given me a great new idea.
Interviewed on Radio 4's 'Today'
Programme, the work and pensions secretary was challenged as to
whether he could realistically live on the basic daily benefit
allowance, amounting to around £53.00 per week- the lowest rate of
Job Seekers Allowance (JSA) given to an adult under 25. In response,
IDS argued that 'he could if he had to'.
That's a pretty bold statement,coming
from a wealthy career politician who these days seems more out of
touch than Norman Tebbitt. In fact, the Mirror's very own Fleet
Street Fox says it best when she
notes just how much IDS has cost the state even before he entered
Parliament.
But wait a second- IDS
claimed benefits for a brief time , so surely he must have a
good insider's knowledge, as some sympathetic to him argue. Perhaps
the grudge against people 'claiming benefits out of choice' might be
justified after all. Future biographers may note that his time in the
dole queue those many decades ago may have also been the time needed
to sew the seeds of his coming cultural revolution. Mao Tse Tung, eat
your heart out.
Most commentators on both Fleet Street and Twitter have responded to the claims in much the same way. Asserting that the senior minister is still talking hot air, recalling his paltry justifications on previous welfare reforms, they propose a challenge: “Prove It!”. In fact, there's even a petition for it (I encourage you all to sign). But why not make this challenge even more interesting?
I propose that some clever television producers draft plans for a new reality show. Originally, I wanted to call it 'the welfare challenge', but in the twitter age that's not particularly catchy. Instead, it could be called 'Shirkers', or '#Shirkers', if you want to be pedantic about it.
The premise is simple- much like the Big Brother House, Politicians across parties are given a month inside a council house, where they are provided the basic requirements needed to survive. Much like many job seekers from poor families, they’ll have an old bed, a tattered room with inadequate heating facilities, and around £53.00 per week to spend as they wish. They'll have to ration that money when paying for food, heat, electricity, and other necessities- and by that, I don't mean exotic fruits or nights out at the theatre. Of course, all of this will be filmed and broadcast to the general public, who I imagine will be more than happy to partake in the programme. Moreover, I'm sure Owen Jones would be a great presenter of its supplementary analysis programme : “#Shirkers- The Striver's Say”.
And while I hope this hasn't got any budding TV producers too excited, an idea like this might actually be what's needed to repair UK politics. The problem with our current debate on welfare benefits and social security is not that the method of distributions are grossly extortionate, bur rather that it is currently framed either through mundane statistics, or over-emotional hyperbole. Not only has this paralysed the Left in their avocation of a better welfare system, but it has also allowed right-wing zealots cheered by an insidious press to label those out of work as scroungers off the state. Both of these approaches ultimately do little to objectively explore the lives of those living off benefits, and in turn, has done little to affect policy making.
Examining the effectiveness of the welfare system from this approach- whereby those in the driving seat first experience the lives they are responsible for, may produce a more reasoned understanding of benefit claimants, beyond the caricatures used to score political points. It might also give politicians more legitimacy in enacting reforms, with their proposals based on their own experiences, rather than an abstract set of figures. Reality TV producers just might be able to radically transform the welfare state more effectively than any policy think tank or parliamentary adviser. Even if I'm wrong, I imagine the sight of George Osborne waiting for a cold pasty at Greggs would be priceless.
Most commentators on both Fleet Street and Twitter have responded to the claims in much the same way. Asserting that the senior minister is still talking hot air, recalling his paltry justifications on previous welfare reforms, they propose a challenge: “Prove It!”. In fact, there's even a petition for it (I encourage you all to sign). But why not make this challenge even more interesting?
I propose that some clever television producers draft plans for a new reality show. Originally, I wanted to call it 'the welfare challenge', but in the twitter age that's not particularly catchy. Instead, it could be called 'Shirkers', or '#Shirkers', if you want to be pedantic about it.
The premise is simple- much like the Big Brother House, Politicians across parties are given a month inside a council house, where they are provided the basic requirements needed to survive. Much like many job seekers from poor families, they’ll have an old bed, a tattered room with inadequate heating facilities, and around £53.00 per week to spend as they wish. They'll have to ration that money when paying for food, heat, electricity, and other necessities- and by that, I don't mean exotic fruits or nights out at the theatre. Of course, all of this will be filmed and broadcast to the general public, who I imagine will be more than happy to partake in the programme. Moreover, I'm sure Owen Jones would be a great presenter of its supplementary analysis programme : “#Shirkers- The Striver's Say”.
And while I hope this hasn't got any budding TV producers too excited, an idea like this might actually be what's needed to repair UK politics. The problem with our current debate on welfare benefits and social security is not that the method of distributions are grossly extortionate, bur rather that it is currently framed either through mundane statistics, or over-emotional hyperbole. Not only has this paralysed the Left in their avocation of a better welfare system, but it has also allowed right-wing zealots cheered by an insidious press to label those out of work as scroungers off the state. Both of these approaches ultimately do little to objectively explore the lives of those living off benefits, and in turn, has done little to affect policy making.
Examining the effectiveness of the welfare system from this approach- whereby those in the driving seat first experience the lives they are responsible for, may produce a more reasoned understanding of benefit claimants, beyond the caricatures used to score political points. It might also give politicians more legitimacy in enacting reforms, with their proposals based on their own experiences, rather than an abstract set of figures. Reality TV producers just might be able to radically transform the welfare state more effectively than any policy think tank or parliamentary adviser. Even if I'm wrong, I imagine the sight of George Osborne waiting for a cold pasty at Greggs would be priceless.
No comments:
Post a Comment